Ruger 10-22


PDA






Jeff F
October 14, 2008, 09:00 AM
Does anyone know when Ruger started using plastic trigger groups in the 10-22.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger 10-22" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JohnBT
October 14, 2008, 09:52 AM
I first started hearing about it in March of this year. JT

hotlead
October 14, 2008, 11:23 AM
Alot of opinions on this site. Good guys over there.
http://rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=220831&highlight=plastic+10%2F22

DoubleTapDrew
October 14, 2008, 01:58 PM
I think it was around the first quarter of this year. I wasn't too happy about the decision initially but maybe I'll pick one up and end up liking it.

ArmedBear
October 14, 2008, 02:45 PM
Since most people end up throwing away everything but the receiver, why should they make the other parts out of metal?

Do they have the little recycling mark on the plastic?

(The guys at Volquartsen must be dancing a jig.)

mljdeckard
October 14, 2008, 02:54 PM
+1 Armed Bear.

It's been on my list for years, to build a premium 10/22, I have been holding off until I can afford to buy one, toss the stock trigger, and drop-on a Volquartzen group, makes no difference to me.

Having said that, I think you would have to shoot the rifle a LOT to ever notice the difference between metal or plastic.

ArmedBear
October 14, 2008, 03:23 PM
http://www.magnumresearch.com/

I'd just get a Volq' or a MR. I believe either of them will sell a stripped receiver, also.

I shot my 10/22 for a while. Then it sat in my safe, unused. It was unreliable, particularly if not freshly-cleaned, and rather inaccurate. The carbine stock may point well and fit with irons, but the drop is WAY too much if you scope it. Didn't like cheap ammo, either.

I realized that I had two choices: start pouring money into it, or sell it so I could buy something else. I chose the latter.

My Marlin 60 is more reliable, more accurate, more comfortable to load, has a much better comb fit with a scope, and it's cheaper. I have other guns to throw money at. All I wanted was a simple .22 semiauto plinker that would be fun to shoot and work when I grabbed it. The 10/22, for all the custom options it may offer, didn't do what I wanted from it.

That said, if Ruger ever built a rifle with the Mark II pistol action, I'd line up to buy it! My 22/45 is the most reliable gun I've ever shot, eats whatever I feed it, and shoots tiny groups, all without a single tweak or modification.

mljdeckard
October 14, 2008, 03:41 PM
ArmedBear, that's the extreme opposite of my experience with 10/22s.

My dad got one, probably 35 years ago, to be able to go out with his friends and shoot jackrabbits all night, which he did, frequently. When he sold his old Chevy truck, there were DOZENS of crushed brick boxes behind the seat. (Wildcats, Remington, generics I had never heard of.) When I grew up and got my own, I asked him how he cleaned his, and he gave me a blank stere. "Clean it?" (blink blink.) So I took it apart and looked. The entire interior was 'plated' with lead residue. Every nook and cranny was crammed full of little lead crescents from the chamber shaving off bits as they were chambered. I scrubbed it all day, and would up putting it in a parts bath to get it clean. My dad already knew I disagree with his "Clean your guns once after each war" policy, but this was disgusting. I asked him if he ever planned on cleaning it, he said, "Sure, as soon as it jams on me, I'll decide it's time to clean it." Just doing rough calculations on how much he used to go out and shoot, he thinks he probably shot at least 150k rounds through it without cleaning it.

ArmedBear
October 14, 2008, 03:43 PM
My dad got one, probably 35 years ago

Did it have a steel receiver?

I get the notion that the earlier ones were better than mine.

mljdeckard
October 14, 2008, 03:47 PM
Yes, it was all steel. And loose and sloppy.

ArmedBear
October 14, 2008, 03:56 PM
Mine was aluminum, with rough and tight innards.

Maybe it would have been great after a few thousand more rounds, but wasn't about to spring for a few hundred bucks' worth of Mini-Mags to break it in further, when the Marlin will shoot all the bulk garbage I feed it.:) (FWIW the Marlin is a 2007 gun, not an older "don't make 'em like they used to" gun.)

Again, I'd just buy a Volq or MR receiver if my intention was to acquire a contemporary 10/22 for a top-end build.:)

WAID
October 14, 2008, 06:59 PM
factory 10/22 receivers in .22LR have never been steel, unless ruger made a prototype out of it. Only small internals, bolt, barrel, and at one point I believe the buttplate and barrel band where. My old stock is at my parents right now so I can't check that one. The old receivers where anodized aluminum instead of painted aluminum like the newer ones.

mljdeckard
October 14, 2008, 07:41 PM
I thought about that after I posted it. I should have said, "It wasn't plastic."

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger 10-22" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!