Does anyone know if AR-7 Industies makes a good AR-7 Survival Rifle

Well, last I knew, the holder of the rights for the AR-7 was Henry. Their's was not a bad production, but rememebr the limits inherint in the AR-7. First and foremost of these, is the lack of accuracy- short range only. If it comes apart easy, it won't be as accurate. Heck, I've seen Browning Buckmarks and Ruger Mk IIs that performed as wel or better from machine rests. <br><br>

AR-7's are crap, pure and simple. you might be able to find a good one but it isn't likely. they don't feed many types of ammunition reliably, aren't inherintly reliable by design, inaccurate, and i find the grip to be uncomfortable. as stated, you'd be better off with a good 22pistol, i prefer the buckmark (but carry an extra recoil spring assembly cause i had one pop apart once), or even a marlin papoose, or M6 scout. + virtually all of the youth model single shot bolt action 22's that i've seen at the range can be broken down and are very accurate. Sorry to rain on your parade though!

Hi Seth,<br><br>Take a look at a modified Ruger 10/22 with the Butler Creek Ruger 10/22 Takedown PACKER STOCK <br>Add a short 16+" Carbon fiber Butler Creek barrel and you have a lightweight breakdown package that will outshoot the AR-7 with both eyes shut and reliability should be no problem with the 10/22.<br><br>I have some thoughts about making the Butler Creek PAcker stock even more "in business" for the outdoors and have send Butler Creek an lengthy email with some proposed modifications for the Packer Stock but haven't heard ANYTHING back from them.<br><br>I proposed making the stock with several cutouts (3-4) where standard 10/22 10 round clips would securely click-in. <br>Also make the stock with a central cutout that would hold a 'closable watertight box that could be filled with "survival" goodies / spare ammo etc. when fitted with the removable goodies box it would form a noirmal closed stock.<br><br>Even a space that would hold a simple cleaning kit / ramrod (even the rope type would be OK) and even small spare parts (extractor/firingpin/spring(s)<br><br>I really think that the above modifications would make that Packer Stock a real Outdoor Preparedness Stock that could boost the Ruger 10/22 into a real nice basic Survival 22.<br><br>Pitty that to Packer Stock probably makes the Ruger into an illegal gun in the Netherlands as it allows for a rifle to break down into smaller pieces to fast :(<br><br>Best Scouting wishes from Holland,<br><br>Bagheera<br>

i much prefer the ruger mark II government to the ar-7, the ar-7 never seemed to fit me right when shoulderd. where as the ruger has been totaly reliable and superbly accurate.

I'll second what Bagheera said. I picked up a Charter Arms version of this rifle back in the late '70s, and it's never been reliable, despite having been worked on by highly regarded gunsmiths twice. It's a "jamomatic", and I don't think I'll ever trust it.<br><br>Every Ruger 10/22 I've fired has been absolutely reliable (they do have other shortcomings- trigger and sights- but they can be fixed, and for survival use, reliability is the main concern). With a carbon fiber barrel and Butler Creek take-down stock, you can have a very accurate, reliable, and small/packable package that weighs about 5 pounds or less. It's the way I'd go. And may.<br><br>I like Bagheera's ideas about the extra magazine wells also. Was that inspired by the Steyr Scout?

>crap, pure and simple<<br><br>For an awful lot of people in the world today, all you have to say, is "it's a Stoner design".<br><br>

I think many have forgotten the key reason the AR-7 was developed, and why it has been successful despite poor manufacturing in the past. The weapon was designed as a simple but effective food gathering and defensive tool. It was not intended for benchrest (match) accuracy; however it was intended as a go anywhere, put together quick, get the job done rifle. One more thing... It floats! How many Ruger Mark II's and Buckmarks can say that? <br>No, it is not an "ideal" rifle, but it is fine for its intended purpose and I am glad I own one.

I own one- I mentioned the pistols to point out the lack of accuracy inflicted by the take down system. <br><br>In a pack, I'd probably carry one of the pistols, as it is slightly more compact than a broken down AR-7. But for an item that would be seperate from a pack, such as in a car or plane, the AR-7 would towards the top of my list. But with the accuracy limits firmly in mind at all time. <br><br>Those limits are also the mechanical maximum. Pistols are harder shoot than rifles, it's that simple. A Ruger or Browning with a long barrel is practically as accurate as an AR-7 is, just because a stocked platform is more stable. Just like (illegally) mounting a 10" barrel and stock on a TC Condender will be as accurate, or more so, than mounting that Contender with a 16" (or even 21") barrel and a pistol grip. <br><br>As to thier lack of reliablity as mentioned by others, I'm almost ready to state that some are just naughty and will never be reliable, while others shoot right. Not very logical or mechanical, but they seem that quirky.

I don't know about the AR 7. However, I have had a Ruger 10-22 since ca 1984. I've fired about 30,000 rounds (guesstimate) through it. It has NEVER malfunctioned in any way. Thus its reliability far surpasses all of my other guns.<br><br>On the other hand, accuracy is mediocre. I guess I have one of those notorious Ruger barrels. Very possibly rebarreling could solve that. Even the longer Sporter stock with a 1" pad added is a little short for me (6'2", 34" sleeve). Bagheera's new stock, hmm? The sights were an easy fix. I scoped it, but have considered putting on a Williams aperture. I have the Williams groove-mounted aperture sights on my Savage 24s and love them. A good gunsmith can improve the trigger pull. My original trigger pull was both heavy and creepy. The gunsmith lightened the pull to about 3# and reduced the creep. <br><br>Overall, I like the gun very much. I just wish Ruger would incorporate the above improvements into a factory gun. I guess I need to remember that we don't get new guns; we get new gun projects.<br><br>John