Winchester 9422
I’ve always liked the 9422 and I own three of them. I committed a collector sin of adding tang sights to two of them, but I am not a collector. I believe rifles and carbines exist to be shot and regard few things with more pity than a gun that’s never been fired. Besides, tang sight really helps the 9422 shine accuracy wise without upsetting the lines of handling as happens when you add a scope. (Collectors hate ring marks as well.)
I do have a scope on my 9422 Legacy and it sort of works looks wise on it. It’s something different to shoot.
Absent a scope, the 9422 has superb balance and feel. At 6 pounds 3 oz, it is heavy enough to shoot well and still light enough to carry comfortably in the hand. Accuracy is also good with about 1” at 50 yards and 3” at 100 yards being the norm with a tang sight and standard velocity ammo. Around 4” at 100 has been my experience with high velocity ammo. It’s not a match rifle, but it’s a solid 50 yard squirrel or 100 yard jack rabbit carbine.
Browning BL-22
Over the years I also acquired an older Miroku Grade 1 and a Belgian Grade 2 BL-22. The Grade 1 wears a 2-7x20 scope that lets me shoot it to its potential, but the handling suffers.
I much prefer the Skinner receiver sight I put on my Grade 2. It’s not as elegant as a tang sight but it’s less obtrusive than a scope and it’s the best option for the tang-less BL-22.
Skinner also has an interesting solution for where to put a spare aperture. Much like the Turnbull threaded slot blank for a red dot mount, Skinner threads a slot blank to hold an extra aperture. After I installed it, it was a little snug in the dove tail and I had to chase the threads to round everything back out.
My BL-22s are also 1” at 50 yards accuracy wise. Subjectively however it’s too short and too light for my tastes at 4 pounds 15 oz to shoot well in the field.
But like the 5 pound 12 oz 9422 Trapper it’s light, handy and makes a great youth carbine. In fact I think Browning still offers a “growth insurance” option for their youth version with the option to buy a longer stock at 50% off the normal price in the future.
Marlin 39A
The Marlin 39A has a cult like following, and while I’ve never shared that regard for it, I can see where some folks might.
It’s a rifle pattern with fore arm end cap and a dove tailed hanger for the magazine tube, rather than the barrel bands used on carbines. It’s also the longest and bulkiest of the three with a 24” barrel, pistol grip stock and pot belly hand guard. It weighs 6 pounds 9 oz, surprisingly only 6 oz heavier than the 9422, but it subjectively has more heft probably due to the more forward weight distribution. However it still has nice balance and the forward weight distribution should make it shoot very well off hand.
I have not shot mine yet, but the Marlin 39A has a reputation for excellent accuracy, not just by lever action standards but by .22 LR sporter standards as well. I expect it will be a bit more accurate than the 9422 or BL-22.
Side by side
Left to right, 9422 Trapper, BL-22, 9422, Marlin 39A:
Left to right, Grade 1 BL-22 with 2-7x20 scope, Grade 2 BL-22, 9422 XTR, 9422 Legacy with 2-7x33 scope, Marlin 39A (pre tang sight and hood):
In terms of smoothness the 9422 takes top honors with the Marlin 39A coming in a close second. Both are silky smooth.
The 9422 uses a bolt design more or less copied and downsized from their Model 62 and had ample time to evolve to that level of smoothness.
The Marlin 39A uses a longer lever stroke and greater mechanical advantage but the slightly longer stoke isn’t objectionable or even noticeable compared to the 9422.
The BL-22 is marketed as having a short 33 degree lever stroke, and it is significantly shorter. However it comes at the expense of much less leverage available to cock the hammer. It’s a very distant third in the smoothness comparison.
The 9422 and Marlin 39A are take down designs.
The Model 39A has a captured knurled thumb screw on the right side and is the most practical, with the receiver halves separating when you clock the hammer and then tap the left side of the stock.
The 9422 doesn’t come with a knurled thumb screw but the take down screw located on the left side can be replaced with a saddle ring screw to eliminate the need for a screw driver. The stock, hammer, lever and trigger assembly easily slides out the back of the receiver. The screw isn’t captive but it can be reinstalled in the receiver to prevent loss when carried while taken down.
In both cases the bolt can be lost if it comes back out of battery, so it’s important to carry them in a case if you want to carry them taken down.
Even if you never take it down, the designs make cleaning easy and in particular cleaning the bore for the breech end of the barrel.
The BL-22 comes apart similar to the 9422, with the screw on the other side. But the ejector and ejector spring will come out and are both easily lost. The bolt can also easily fall off and the locking bolt and the plate covering it can also both easily detach.
Unlike the other two, the BL-22 is a bit fiddly to put back together and you’ll need a pair of forceps to get the ejector spring and ejector back in place in the receiver. You’ll also need a bit of a magic touch to get the bolt aligned with the ejector when you put the halves back together, while pressing in on the ejector through the ejection port. You’ll never complain about a Ruger Mk I-IV again after you reassemble a BL-22.
——
I like them all and it’s unfortunate that the BL-22 is the only one of these great carbines and rifles that is still in production.
I’m hoping Ruger gets around to resurrecting the 39A in a few years, but I am not hopeful. The Model 39A under Remington was farmed out to their custom shop, which was also their acquired Dakota Arms. My understanding is that Remington screwed up big time, moving production and losing most of the skilled Marlin labor.
Based on what I have seen from Ruger, I doubt they have the skilled labor at present to pull off the manufacture of a quality Model 39A given the complexity of mating the two halves of the take down receiver and getting it to work reliably and shoot accurately. Maybe they’ll learn enough with a few years of 336 experience.
Winchester could certainly have Miroku make new 9422s and Miroku could certainly do it to a high standard of quality, but probably not at a price people would pay for a .22 LR lever action.
The BL-22 in grade 1 sells new for around $700, but Henry no doubt sells a lot more of their much lower quality (material, fit and finish) .22 LR lever guns for around $400. Personally, I’d pay $500 or so for a used BL-22 long before I’d buy a Henry.
Along those lines I suspect Ruger is going to have to be able to bring a new Model 39A variant to market for not too much more than the Browning to capture much market share.
My fear is that they will do a 10/22 number on the design and bring out a cheap version of it.
I’ve always liked the 9422 and I own three of them. I committed a collector sin of adding tang sights to two of them, but I am not a collector. I believe rifles and carbines exist to be shot and regard few things with more pity than a gun that’s never been fired. Besides, tang sight really helps the 9422 shine accuracy wise without upsetting the lines of handling as happens when you add a scope. (Collectors hate ring marks as well.)
I do have a scope on my 9422 Legacy and it sort of works looks wise on it. It’s something different to shoot.
Absent a scope, the 9422 has superb balance and feel. At 6 pounds 3 oz, it is heavy enough to shoot well and still light enough to carry comfortably in the hand. Accuracy is also good with about 1” at 50 yards and 3” at 100 yards being the norm with a tang sight and standard velocity ammo. Around 4” at 100 has been my experience with high velocity ammo. It’s not a match rifle, but it’s a solid 50 yard squirrel or 100 yard jack rabbit carbine.
Browning BL-22
Over the years I also acquired an older Miroku Grade 1 and a Belgian Grade 2 BL-22. The Grade 1 wears a 2-7x20 scope that lets me shoot it to its potential, but the handling suffers.
I much prefer the Skinner receiver sight I put on my Grade 2. It’s not as elegant as a tang sight but it’s less obtrusive than a scope and it’s the best option for the tang-less BL-22.
Skinner also has an interesting solution for where to put a spare aperture. Much like the Turnbull threaded slot blank for a red dot mount, Skinner threads a slot blank to hold an extra aperture. After I installed it, it was a little snug in the dove tail and I had to chase the threads to round everything back out.
My BL-22s are also 1” at 50 yards accuracy wise. Subjectively however it’s too short and too light for my tastes at 4 pounds 15 oz to shoot well in the field.
But like the 5 pound 12 oz 9422 Trapper it’s light, handy and makes a great youth carbine. In fact I think Browning still offers a “growth insurance” option for their youth version with the option to buy a longer stock at 50% off the normal price in the future.
Marlin 39A
The Marlin 39A has a cult like following, and while I’ve never shared that regard for it, I can see where some folks might.
It’s a rifle pattern with fore arm end cap and a dove tailed hanger for the magazine tube, rather than the barrel bands used on carbines. It’s also the longest and bulkiest of the three with a 24” barrel, pistol grip stock and pot belly hand guard. It weighs 6 pounds 9 oz, surprisingly only 6 oz heavier than the 9422, but it subjectively has more heft probably due to the more forward weight distribution. However it still has nice balance and the forward weight distribution should make it shoot very well off hand.
I have not shot mine yet, but the Marlin 39A has a reputation for excellent accuracy, not just by lever action standards but by .22 LR sporter standards as well. I expect it will be a bit more accurate than the 9422 or BL-22.
Side by side
Left to right, 9422 Trapper, BL-22, 9422, Marlin 39A:
Left to right, Grade 1 BL-22 with 2-7x20 scope, Grade 2 BL-22, 9422 XTR, 9422 Legacy with 2-7x33 scope, Marlin 39A (pre tang sight and hood):
In terms of smoothness the 9422 takes top honors with the Marlin 39A coming in a close second. Both are silky smooth.
The 9422 uses a bolt design more or less copied and downsized from their Model 62 and had ample time to evolve to that level of smoothness.
The Marlin 39A uses a longer lever stroke and greater mechanical advantage but the slightly longer stoke isn’t objectionable or even noticeable compared to the 9422.
The BL-22 is marketed as having a short 33 degree lever stroke, and it is significantly shorter. However it comes at the expense of much less leverage available to cock the hammer. It’s a very distant third in the smoothness comparison.
The 9422 and Marlin 39A are take down designs.
The Model 39A has a captured knurled thumb screw on the right side and is the most practical, with the receiver halves separating when you clock the hammer and then tap the left side of the stock.
The 9422 doesn’t come with a knurled thumb screw but the take down screw located on the left side can be replaced with a saddle ring screw to eliminate the need for a screw driver. The stock, hammer, lever and trigger assembly easily slides out the back of the receiver. The screw isn’t captive but it can be reinstalled in the receiver to prevent loss when carried while taken down.
In both cases the bolt can be lost if it comes back out of battery, so it’s important to carry them in a case if you want to carry them taken down.
Even if you never take it down, the designs make cleaning easy and in particular cleaning the bore for the breech end of the barrel.
The BL-22 comes apart similar to the 9422, with the screw on the other side. But the ejector and ejector spring will come out and are both easily lost. The bolt can also easily fall off and the locking bolt and the plate covering it can also both easily detach.
Unlike the other two, the BL-22 is a bit fiddly to put back together and you’ll need a pair of forceps to get the ejector spring and ejector back in place in the receiver. You’ll also need a bit of a magic touch to get the bolt aligned with the ejector when you put the halves back together, while pressing in on the ejector through the ejection port. You’ll never complain about a Ruger Mk I-IV again after you reassemble a BL-22.
——
I like them all and it’s unfortunate that the BL-22 is the only one of these great carbines and rifles that is still in production.
I’m hoping Ruger gets around to resurrecting the 39A in a few years, but I am not hopeful. The Model 39A under Remington was farmed out to their custom shop, which was also their acquired Dakota Arms. My understanding is that Remington screwed up big time, moving production and losing most of the skilled Marlin labor.
Based on what I have seen from Ruger, I doubt they have the skilled labor at present to pull off the manufacture of a quality Model 39A given the complexity of mating the two halves of the take down receiver and getting it to work reliably and shoot accurately. Maybe they’ll learn enough with a few years of 336 experience.
Winchester could certainly have Miroku make new 9422s and Miroku could certainly do it to a high standard of quality, but probably not at a price people would pay for a .22 LR lever action.
The BL-22 in grade 1 sells new for around $700, but Henry no doubt sells a lot more of their much lower quality (material, fit and finish) .22 LR lever guns for around $400. Personally, I’d pay $500 or so for a used BL-22 long before I’d buy a Henry.
Along those lines I suspect Ruger is going to have to be able to bring a new Model 39A variant to market for not too much more than the Browning to capture much market share.
My fear is that they will do a 10/22 number on the design and bring out a cheap version of it.
