New From Henry: A Side Gate Lever Action Rifle

Henry Side Gate Lever Action

Ask and you shall receive! Though it may take a while. Henry has heard requests from its fans, sent in droves over the course of years — many years — and at NRAAM 2019 has heeded the call and released their Side Gate Lever Action rifle in three calibers.

Available in .30-30 Winchester, .38-55 Winchester, and .35 Remington, the Side Gate Lever Action has, you guessed it, a side loading gate. So much faster and more convenient than the removable tube magazine that Henry Rifles rifles have always featured.

That said, if you like your tube, you can keep your tube! The Side Gate Lever Actions retain the removable tube magazine so the rifles can be unloaded without having to chamber any rounds. Nice.

 

MSRP for all three calibers is $1,045.

comments

  1. avatar Alex Waits says:

    Another gun the internet said they would buy, if it came out.

    I’m excited.

  2. avatar Nickel Plated says:

    Took long enough, but they did it right. Add the side gate, keep the tube loading as well. Best of both worlds and everyone is happy. Frankly this should just be standard across their entire line of tube fed rifles.

    Any word on a steel version in 45-70? I’m looking to buy a Marlin, and have heard very good things of the Henrys but the lack of loading gate turned me off. And the brass finish is just cheesy to me. I know, history and all that. It looked crappy in 1860 and it still looks crappy today. Blued steel for me.

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      Wait a bit it’ll come, maybe even in the all weather.

    2. avatar Whoopie says:

      Seriously, Nelson King’s patent probably expired 100 years ago. But it’s like Henry to rush in on some new fangled idea.

    3. avatar James W Crawford says:

      No offense intended to Henry, but I love my Marlin 45-70 in stainless steel.

  3. avatar WI Patriot says:

    It’s about damn time…

  4. avatar No one of consequence says:

    About time.

    Release it in .357 Mag or .44 Magnum and I’ll likely get one.

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      This is a sincere rather then rhetorical question. What don’t you like about it in .30-30?

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        I can’t speak for No one of consequence, but as for me — I’d buy this rifle in .38/.357 for cowboy action shooting.

        And I’d buy it in .30-30 for white-tail hunting.

        So then I’d have to buy two. Curse you, Henry!

      2. avatar hal_greaves says:

        Maybe he already has guns chambered in those calibers? 🙂 Basically the situation for me, lol. I already load 44, why add another chambering to the collection when I don’t have to? Makes life easy when I only have to stock up on 5 different calibers across my collection.

      3. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        The only reason I wanted a side loading gate Henry .357 is to add a threaded barrel and suppressor.

      4. avatar GunnyGene says:

        You need to understand the ballistics of the different calibers. We’re talking about energy on target here. 30-30 is a sub 150yd round. The 38-55 is good up to about 300 yds and the 35 Rem is about in the middle.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          .30-30 is a 150 yard deer rifle if you’re using 30 year old ammunition. Hornady’s LeveRevolution puts 1000ft/lbs out to 300 and there’s a couple other loads that will do that at 200 yards. The way I look at it the .30-30 is perfectly adequate on deer at any range most hunters would have any business shooting at with iron sights. Add light recoil and universally available and reasonably priced ammo and it makes a lot of sense.

      5. avatar Tim U says:

        Well, since I’m in the similar boat as the original comment about wanting one in .44 or .357 mag, the best answer of what I have against .30-30 is I don’t own any other guns that use it. I do, however, own a .44 mag revolver and would really like one of these in .44 if it came out.

      6. avatar No one of consequence says:

        I have a lever gun in .357 and in .44, either of which (for different reasons) I’d gladly trade for one of these. It would be, for me, a “safe space neutral” event.

        I have no gun in .30-30. So that would not be “space safe neutral” and would be a new caliber … both of which would have me further encroaching on Mrs. C’s half of the armory…

      7. avatar Widdler says:

        Cause a GP 100 doesn’t eat 30-30.

    2. avatar don says:

      If you hunt deer in Ohio you have to use straight-wall ammunition. I have 4 Henry’s now and would like a side gate for my next Henry.

  5. avatar GREGORY L KNOX says:

    I have to say it … why the oddball calibers? Make them to match other calibers most have, like the 357 mag, 44 mag, 9mm, 40 cal, 45 cal, how about a .556?

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      .30-30 is hardly “oddball”.- unless you are pretty young I suppose.

    2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      They make the long ranger in .223, if you meant side loading gate 5.56 you don’t lever action.

    3. avatar Steven says:

      Because you can’t load 223/556 in a tube magazine. Pointed bullet to primer is a receipt for disaster.

      1. avatar Jeff O. says:

        Well you CAN, it’s just a really stupid idea.

    4. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      .30-30 “oddball” in a lever gun?

      (Snork).

      I’d recommend you check out the numbers of WInchester 94’s, Marlin 36 and 336’s that have been shipped over the years. More deer have been put in the freezer by .30-30 lever guns in America in the last 100+ years than perhaps any other rifle.

      1. avatar Stephen says:

        38-55 ammo seems too expensive.

  6. avatar rt66paul says:

    I want mine in 7.62x25mm.

  7. avatar Cea says:

    I’ll take one in 7.62×39, please. It will go nicely with my CZ 527 in that caliber.
    That, or 357 or 44.
    It would be my first Henry. I never liked the front/tube feed system.

    1. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

      Those pointy bullets contacting the primer in front of them might be a problem during recoil.

      1. avatar Cea says:

        Well, I load all different kinds, and weights of bullets for my bolt gun. There are tons of .308″-.312″ bullets out there. Some have soft, round noses too.

        1. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

          Save yourself some heartburn then. Just shoot a 30-30.

        2. avatar Cea says:

          I do shoot a 30-30. I load for it too. Why not shoot and enjoy the 7.62×39 too?

    2. avatar Nickel Plated says:

      I’m sure the long ranger will come out in 7.62×39. But to me the aluminum receiver is a no-go on a lever. I’m a traditionalist, keep that shit on the ARs and Mossbergs.

      And trust us, you don’t want THIS in 7.62×39. You might still need working hands for a few more decades.

      1. avatar Cea says:

        What do you mean by the need my hands comment? Pointed bullet issues? See above.

  8. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Y’all complaining about Henry not offering this model in pistol calibers, just need to be a little patient. This is a market test to see how well it will do in competition with competitors. If it does well in taking market share, then they will expand the design into other models and calibers, including the BBS and color case models. Give it a year or 2.

  9. avatar RGP says:

    It looks like an improvement but it won’t make me give up my Model 71 or my 1886’s.

  10. avatar NORDNEG says:

    What ever Henry makes, its gonna be good, I have two Henry’s & their both great pieces.

  11. avatar PWinKY says:

    Dammit Henry! We had one request, and then you go and release it in 1 Fudd caliber and 2 random calibers no one uses. I’ve never even heard of .38-55. You had one job!!! Just do this right, in .357, for the love of all that is holy.

    I love my Henry .22 but loading from the tube is annoying. Would love a side loading Henry in .357. I would buy that as soon as it came out. Guess I’ll hold onto my money a little longer…

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      Maybe you should expand your caliber horizons to something beyond the common stuff. You might be surprised at what’s out there and available, and far better than the usual big box ammo.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        With less than mainstream calibers you very quickly discover the joys of reloading to get passed limited availability and expensive ammunition.

        1. avatar PWinKY says:

          I know I should, I just won’t. I have children and other life stuff; keeping the amount of calibers that I’m currently using stocked is challenging enough. I prefer practical choices and I’m sure as hell not going to spend my time reloading. Maybe after my youngest goes off to college, but that’s a long time from now.

          Currently .22, .223, .30-06, .357, .38, .45, 9 mm, 7.62×39, and 12 guage are enough for me. I do not need a 10th.

    2. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Your ignorance is not a reason for Henry to change their marketing research, much of which probably indicated that they would find a good uptake of their rifle in .38-55 among cowboy action shooters.

      One of the things that exasperates me most about teaching people about guns today is the inability of youngsters today to learn anything about what came before plastic guns. Kids today look at anything that isn’t tacti-kewl as superfluous and “fuddly” and treat guns, cartridges and knowledge from 100+ years ago with the open contempt you see displayed here.

      But since I’m a man of patience, I’ll teach you a thing or two here, Junior.

      The .38-55 cartridge was introduced in 1884 or so (if my increasingly aged memory serves) by the Ballard Rifle Company. It was used in their single-shot rifles for awhile, then Marlin used in in 1893 for their lever-action rifle, and Winchester used it in the 1894 as the first cartridge for that rifle.

      You read that correctly: The first cartridge used in the 94’s was the .38-55, not the .30-30, which was introduced a year later. Want to know the origins of the .30-30? OK, I’ll tell you:

      You take a .38-55. You trim the case length a bit, neck it down to take a 150 grain .30-caliber bullet, and there you go: the .30-30. Wildcatted from the .38-55.

      Is Henry’s choice of cartridges starting to make any sense to you yet? Probably not, but to people over the age of 40, it is coming into view.

      Where can you see the .38-55 today? Look at Schuetzen rifles, or accuracy rifles of the falling-block type (eg, Sharps, Ballard, Remington rolling block, etc). The .38-55 is one of the more inherently accurate rimmed cartridges out there, and there are more than a few long-range BPCR shooters here in the west using the .38-55 in newly constructed falling-block custom rifles starting at $4K and going up, up, and up in price. Why? Because if all you’re doing is punching a hole in a paper target or ringing a gong, why beat up your shoulder (and your wallet) with a .45-70 (or .45-90, or .45-100+) when the .38-55 will do what needs to be done, more cheaply, with less wear and tear on your shoulder?

      I could pull up all manner of guns-for-sale postings of .38-55 rifles for sale at prices of $4K and up right now, but TTAG’s spam filters send any such postings I make into the penalty box forever, so I’ll tell you to go do it yourself.

      Now, if you’re a gun company, who do you want to sell guns to? People who bitch, piss, whine and moan every time the price of a gun goes about $500 or $1000, or people who lay down $3K and up for a rifle gladly and quickly?

      1. avatar GunnyGene says:

        Nice short history lesson for the young’uns. Fun reading it. 🙂

      2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Don’t know if it will help with the antifuds but you could point out that a .30-30 is 50% more powerful than a 5..56.

        1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

          That sort of factual revelation is cruelty to the tacti-kewl crowd. They’re so convinced that the .223/5.56 is a “high power” rifle round that they’ve convinced themselves the .223/5.56 needs muzzle brakes and all manner of recoil reduction gadgets.

          The real humiliation starts, tho, by handing a youngster a Trapdoor carbine in .50-70 (with steel buttplate) and five rounds of the military ammo from the days of the Indian Wars. Suddenly they gain some understanding of why we “Fudds” sneer at the notion of a .223 having “recoil” at all.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Now who’s the Fudd – the guy who hunts and isn’t into the whole tactical crap everyone’s selling or the guy who’s so ignorant of firearms he doesn’t know that the 5.56 is one of the lightest centerfire rifle cartridges out there?

        3. avatar PWinKY says:

          Let’s not pretend that just because I called the .30-.30 a Fudd caliber, which it is, I don’t understand its power. Let us not, without evidence, assume my post claimed anything at all about .223.

      3. avatar PWinKY says:

        Lol I humbly accept the lesson; I usually love reading your longer posts that delve into firearms history and this one was no different. I’m in my 30s so you were dead on with your age statements.

        I will say that, even though you explained who uses the .38-55, I’ve never even seen the round on a shelf. I’m sure it’s because I’m not looking, but I know dozens of gun owners of all ages and not one has ever mentioned that caliber. While I now know more of the history behind it, obviously one chambered in .357 would sell way more.

        I’m perfectly happy waiting a couple years until they get this going in my tacticool .357 though. Keep plugging away because there’s plenty of us listening!

        1. avatar GunnyGene says:

          A major reason you don’t see it stocked by many dealers is the price. Buffalo Bore carries it for $71/20. This is not cheap range/plinking ammo. Neither is .35 Rem. @$63/20 . You can get it somewhat cheaper from other on-line sources, but it’s still going to be around $2.50/round.

          Pays to reload at those prices. 🙂

      4. avatar jwtaylor says:

        The challenge with the 38-55 (and Lord I loves me a middle-bore) is that it is a heck of a challenge to put a correctly sized (.380) cast bullet into a traditional case and chamber the gun, at least in chambers built to traditional specs. Paper patching an undersized bullet (.377) fixes this problem, and I suspect is the way it was originally done. With a bullet so built, this cartridge is well known for it’s exceptional accuracy.

        I’m a proud member of the Cast Bullet Association. They let me know about Starline brass, who makes a thin necked version of the 38-55, which allows for the .380 sized cast bullets.

        But now I can’t find a mold that lets me size to .380! If anybody knows of one, I’d very much appreciate the heads up.

        As far as this rifle goes, I’ll likely buy one in 38-55 for some black bear hunting, but I really wish it was a rifle length barrel. I’m sure I can find a peep sight for it.

        1. avatar 🙂 says:

          I don’t cast my own bullets yet but wouldn’t it be possible to to have a custom mold maker machine a mold that is pretty much exactly what you’re looking for? Granted I understand that would come at a premium vs a mass production mold but if it serves the intended purpose of what you want it should be worth it in the end. Again I don’t know for sure but rather just a thought.

        2. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Yes, and a custom mold really isn’t that expensive. But considering how many people shoot it, a .381 mold and a .380 sizing die must exist, or a .380 mold.
          It’s been a few years since I looked in earnest.

      5. avatar 🙂 says:

        Thanks for the history lesson, some of it I knew while some of it I did not. The origins of the 30-30 was actually a bit surprising. I figure the 30-30 was an original design rather than a a wildcat. Although given how many cartridges that we have today that started as wildcats is why it is only a bit surprising.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          I didn’t know its true origin either — and I LOVE the ol’ .30-30.

      6. avatar jwtaylor says:

        DG, of course that begs the question of why Winchester would shorten the case for the 30-30 in the first place? I mean, it’s not like they couldn’t have left it alone and just set the bullet down a little, placing the crimp groove farther forward.

        M.L. McPherson, hand loader and author extraordinaire, makes the case that Winchester originally made the 30-30 by fire forming the necked down 32-40. Considering they didn’t know how popular the 30-30 would be at the time, it makes some sense.

  12. avatar MojoMedicineMan says:

    I could’ve swore that I posted here.
    Was it deleted or etc?
    Maybe somewhere else?
    Let me know “staff”, thanks.

  13. avatar Sean G./The Rookie says:

    “.30-30 Winchester, .38-55 Winchester, and .35 Remington”

    I confess I’m only familiar with the .30-.30. Are the others popular in cowboy action shooting, or are they historically associated with lever guns?

    Just curious.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      .38-55 Winchester and .35 Remington are commonly associated with lever action rifles.

      1. avatar Sean G./The Rookie says:

        Ah, that’s it then. Thank you!

    2. avatar N8thecowboy says:

      .35 Remington also has the distinction of being the caliber of rifle Ronald Defoe Jr. used to murder his family which ultimately led to the Amityville Horror book/movie/legend. Though he used a Marlin rifle.

  14. avatar ‘liljoe says:

    Is there a 30-30 Creedmoor?

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      That would be the ultimate round for hunting furries in west Texas.

  15. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

    Make it in .357 or .44 and I’ll take one.

    1. avatar Hush says:

      Make it in .357 or .44 and I’ll take one.

      There must be an echo in the comments!

  16. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

    The only cowboy gun I own is a Colt SAA in 38-55. I have never been a cowboy gun person even though when my dad was 13 , he and his 3 older brothers plus his oldest sisters husband drove a herd of cattle from Torrington Wy to Denver. That was 1934. It must have been one of the last real cattle drives. My dad passed at 90 in 2011. He was the first of us born in this country, my grandparents having left Austria in 1919.

    I’m going to buy one of these. I’m getting sentimental in my old age I think.

    1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      Wrote that way too fast. I meant a Colt SAA in 38-40.

  17. avatar How_Terrible says:

    Sweet, Henry finally deciding to catch up to the 1860’s!!!!

  18. avatar Hannibal says:

    Well, about time. Now the only negative to the gun is the weight, and even that can be some benefit when shooting and not carrying.

    Now just make one in .357

  19. avatar Political gristle says:

    Please, please PLEASE, release one in
    blued-seel and/or all weather stainless.
    Non-octogon bbl. In .357mag/.38sp
    I’ll buy one the next day!
    I love my blued 45-70 govt.

    1. avatar doesky2 says:

      Nope.
      They’re gonna make mine in carbine/357/octogon/case hardened/ and THREADED first.
      Well I can dream.

  20. avatar 🙂 says:

    Waiting for case hardened 45-70 version.

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      You can get one from Winchester right now – 24″ octagon barrel, color-cased receiver, .45-70.

      About $1800 MSRP.

      1. avatar 🙂 says:

        Unfortunately the Winchesters of today are not the same as the old. The quality doesn’t demand the premium in my opinion.

        If memory serves aren’t the Winchester bolt action rifle at least made in the same NC factory that FN’s come out of? It was a very sad day when Winchester stopped being Winchester. Now it’s just a name owned by a conglomerate like most everything else today unfortunately.

        1. avatar El Duderino says:

          Those Miroku-made Winchesters are beautiful, well-made rifles. Too pretty for the bush I’m afraid.

          Happy to see lots of posts about desired calibers in centerfire chamberings that are totally incompatible with a magazine tube.

          I mean, I’d love a Glock 19 chambered in 10 gauge too…but…

        2. avatar 🙂 says:

          For some reason pointed bullet stacked end to end in a confined space in a recoiling rifle just doesn’t seem like a bad idea to some people. Suffice it to say that’s why we have Darwin awards. Cleansing of the gene pool as I like to call it.

          Although I only saw one comment about 223/5.56 and another comment about the long ranger in 7.62X39.

        3. avatar 🙂 says:

          In case your incompatible chambering comment was also directed at me since you did say it in a reply to my comment. Henry as well as Winchester and Marlin produce 45-70 lever action rifles already. Henry makes a 45-70 case hardened model that does not have the side loading gate. Which is why I said I’m waiting for the side loading gate version of the case hardened 45-70. Clearly 45-70 is excellent in a lever gun. I liken them to the hammer of Thor.

        4. avatar Someone says:

          If someone somehow managed to make GLOCK 19 in 10 ga I would pay money to see you shoot it, El D. 😁

        5. avatar 🙂 says:

          With 3 1/2 inch heavy magnum loads. If it didn’t break bones in the shooters hand or at the very least cause nerve damage I’d be surprised.

  21. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    The Force is STRONG in this one. I sense the coming of the one and only. The great Almighty. The “President Theodore Roosevelt suppressed lever gun Edition”.

    There. I said it first. Now make it happen Henry.

  22. avatar Tom Worthington says:

    A Henry with a loading gate in .357? Heck, you would NEVER be able to find one, anywhere, in stock. You’d have better luck finding anti-red flag liberals.

  23. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    I’ve never heard of the .38-55. It actually looks as if it would be a really fun round to make cast bullets and reload for. It’s also straight walled which makes for both easier reloading and legality for deer hunting in some states. Lee makes a couple molds for the 480 Ruger that I wonder if could be pressed into service.

    The other question in my mind is if they are good for higher pressures (e.g. you could shoot .375 Win from one) A “modern” interpretation of this would scoot pretty darn well.

    Overall I’d probably take this over 30-30 most any day. Then again I’d probably take the .35 Rem over it too so maybe I’m a bit biased.

  24. avatar Hemiram says:

    Make a .357 loading gate one and I’m sold. I have a nice Marlin lever in .357, but I like the Henry or Winchester better.

  25. One of the so called gun guru’s said a 30-30 was shortened and necked down 32-40. Wrong it was a 38-55.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email