You have to go back a lot of years to find a lever with the fit and finish of a Henry.
Don't get me wrong, I like all the levers, but Henry is Henry. It's in a class of it's own. I find it amazing all the wasted effort in trying to discredit it by comparing it to something different.
I don't expect a savage 110 to be a Remington 700 or a Winchester 70. You simply pick your preference and move on.
While all the arguments exist for the superiority of the savage 99, the Winchester, or the Marlin; the truth is, they don't exist any more. I plan to take advantage of the one American company that can make a quality lever rifle while I can, and not spend all my time trying to make them mimic a failed company.
I don't think people are discrediting it. there are lots of guns actually to compare a henry to, I prefer the 1894's over the big boy in pistol calibers. just because they are lighter and handier, plus I prefer a loading gate. comparing the full size 30-30 to a 336 marlin or comparable henry that is a tuffer call. I really like the henry, but then again it comes to how much you are hung up on the loading gate. if the loading gate doesn't matter the henry is awesome in 30-30 or I will call it full size. but then again there are millions of used 336's out there that can be had for $200 less on the used market than a new henry. So its all factors here just blankely saying henry sucks, is not what I am hearing. What I am hearing is people prefer different guns with different features in many cases. If you like the features on a henry rock on. I think they are a great company that seems focused on america and its unique greatness. I almost want to buy one for that fact alone. I am interested in a 22 lever gun. but there again I think henry uses mim receivers.
