[emilianoksa]

I know how much these guns can be customised - to the extent that they no longer have any Ruger parts in them - but I assume that most people just keep them stock.

Am I wrong?

[Krazy]

I have 2 stocked ones.. and i plan on modding one of my rifles and keeping the original rifle, original..cant go wrong with that!

[Jguy101]

Mine's stock, and only partly because it came in Mossy Oak Break-Up from the factory and would look like a frankenrifle with most aftermarket accessories. I'm thinking about adding an aftermarket extended mag release (it's from '04 and has the steel trigger guard), but so far it's a pretty good plinker as is.

[Pocket Rocket]

I left mine stock but I have the target model (stainless bull barrel with laminate stock). It's a great shooter and I find the aesthetics to be really nice. I did replace the extractor and recoil buffer with Volquartsen parts but those totaled maybe $15 so I don't really consider that to be modding it too much.

If I were to start a 10/22 build, I think I would go for the cheapest model and work up form there. Of course, since a build would cost me as much as a Volquartsen, I might just go for one of those at that point. :D

[millertyme]

I put a scope on my 22" and almost immediately put dime-sized ten shot groups together at 25m

[madcratebuilder]

Two are modified and one is stock (International model) except the rear sights. The newer models that have the mag release oem don't need much other than trigger work.

[loadedround]

I only own one Ruger 10-22 and the only thing I've done to it was replace the birch carbine stock with the classic walnut stock with the cut checkering. Being a big guy, it fits me much better and looks like a 1000.00 too. :)

[viking499]

Mine is stock except for the scope. Everything else is still OEM.

[bikerdoc]

Stock since 1974

[KDS]

I have 2. I put a scope on one but other than that, totally stock. I love them both but I am contemplating getting another one and bulding a custom rifle.

[CajunBass]

I've got five of them. Other than scopes and slings, the only thing I've done to them is install bolt buffers. I wouldn't have done that except someone gave them to me.

[DougW]

Stock, with Bushnell 3X9. No reason to hot rod this one. It shoots way too good as it is.

[hey_poolboy]

I have 2. One is stock, the other is only slightly modified. It only has a vol. hammer. It is the oldest one I have too, and should really have the barrel replaced.

[frankge]

i upgraded my kids to look more tactical with the tapco stuff, he's starting 2-gun - pretty soon hell be costing my money!

[68wj]

Mine is stock. I put an extended mag release on the wife's. That thing works so well I am kicking myself for not doing it to mine sooner. Good to see that Ruger finally took the hint and is doing this now too.

[mongo4567]

I put an aftermarket barrel on mine with 1:9 twist so I could shoot heavier bullets; it is the standard sporter profile. I also swapped the hammer and trigger for a lighter pull. Everything else is stock.

[SaxonPig]

Bought this new in the early 1980s. Had it over 25 years without nary a bit of customizing. Why change anything? Damn thing shoots 1/4" groups at 50 yards.


http://www.fototime.com/E8F5499015E4A03/standard.jpg

[Rembrandt]

How many of you keep your 10/22s stock?

Sold it.....kept the barrel and action for a project.

[CraigC]

With the millions sold since 1964, I'd have to assume that the vast majority are stock or close to it. I kept my stainless laminate carbine stock for a while. Then built it up with a heavy barrel and laminated thumbhole, because it was the thing to do. It was highly accurate but handled like a railroad tie and was too heavy for field use. Parted it out and returned it to stock for another ten years. Until two years ago when I built it into my tacticool midnight marauder blaster.


it's from '04 and has the steel trigger guard
It's aluminum.


Damn thing shoots 1/4" groups at 50 yards.
Hate to call anybody out but if true, you have a one in ten million carbine. Most folks have to do some tuning and add a decent barrel to get a half inch at 50yds and that's with good match ammo. Getting a quarter inch requires a premium barrel like Lilja, KID, Shilen or Clark and a lot of tuning with match ammo.

[dakotasin]

i've had mine since the early 90's, built in or around 1972, and with the exception of scope or no scope (currently no scope) it is unmolested.

trigger pull is probably around 8-9 pounds, and on a good day it will do 1" or so at 50 yards with federal bulk pack ammo.

the gun has been rode hard and put away wet, no doubt. but it has always been reliable and has killed, probably literally, a ton of game.

don't shoot it much anymore, but i think i'll keep it around.

[The_Pretender]

I redid the stock on mine. Didn't like the original color. Other than that, I've pondered a scope. Nothing more.

[Pocket Rocket]

Do you guys have any sort of optic or bead sight if there's no scope? Mine has no sights so I had to put a scope on it.

[Palehorseman]

The 10/22 is what it is, a good .22 rf work horse. One can put a 300 dollar saddle on a 20 dollar horse, but you still just have a 20 dollar horse.

Wife bought hers about forty years ago for 60 bucks, never made any changes to it and still good as out of the box.

[Naphtali]

I restocked with a Hogue synthetic. I keep my Wal-Mart, checkered pistol grip stock for standard barrels (without barrel band) in case someone needs/wants it.

[SaxonPig]

CraigC- Would you like to see the target? If I recall correctly there is one ragged hole that best as I can measure actually goes .251" (I just say 1/4" because it's faster). I framed that target and had it on the wall for about 20 years. Best group I ever shot at any time with any gun (2nd best was a .502 group with an Interarms "Mini Mauser" in .223 but since that was at 100 yards maybe the two are a tie). Pretty sure it's in a cabinet downstairs if you want me to drag it up and photograph it.

Want to hear the kicker? This was rapid fire. Five rounds in about four seconds. It was the first 5 shots fired from the rifle. When I saw the group I was so stunned I shot several more trying to duplicate it. Came close, but not quite as good. All the groups were under 1/2", which is excellent, but that first one, fired fast, was not repeated.

Remember, the range was 50 yards, not 100. But still way better than I would expect.

That was the last time I fired that rifle at paper. I bought it as a plinker.

One in 10 million? Maybe. I am usually a mediocre marksman at best. Perhaps the sun and the moon and the stars all aligned that day for me.

[paintballdude902]

mines stock but i plan on getting a longer stock for it. i want a little more LOP

[SaxonPig]

I got curious to see if I had it right so I went and found the target. My memory was close.

There are two groups, the first (on left) was 3 shots that I measured at .217". A bit low, I adjusted the scope and fired a 5 shot group that I read at exactly .250". I think I found the 5 shot group more impressive so I tend to forget the first, smaller one.

Unfortunately, I had this hanging in the garage for a couple years and one day I splattered black paint on it explaining the spots. But the paint splatter doesn't resemble the bullet holes so they are not confusing.

On the back (above the 1st group) in pencil (badly faded after 23 years) I wrote:

8/27/87
95 (degrees)
Fresno Rifle and Pistol (Club)
50 yds
Rapid Fire (underlined for emphasis)

I didn't think to have a witness sign it because it never occurred to me that anyone would call me a liar. People who meet me know better than to do that to my face and in 1987 I had yet to even hear of a thing called the Internet.

Targets from the front:

http://www.fototime.com/D8235AABAC64E0C/standard.jpg


Back of targets with notation in upper right quadrant:

http://www.fototime.com/A2EA857D7158CC8/standard.jpg


Detail of notation:

http://www.fototime.com/6D5243AB022D326/standard.jpg

[22-rimfire]

Nice shooting with a 10/22 or any 22 rifle. Did you record the ammo choice? For me in 1987, it most likely would have been Remington Golden Bullets. (Yes, I still have them stored from then.) Need to shoot mine again as it dates from that exact time. I haven't shot it in years.

It is good to see a good shooting stock 10/22 exists.

My one and only 10/22 is pure stock except for the 4x scope. I bought it so that I could park my Weatherby Mark XXII (semi) from general plinking use.

[CraigC]

No need to get personal. I didn't call you a liar. Only stated that what you posted was (and is) HIGHLY unlikely. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck and know what it takes to build an accurate 10/22 and what kind of rifle it takes to shoot quarter inch groups at 50yds. Which you propose to do with a $200 plinker, with what is usually a creepy 7-8lb trigger, that is notorious for shooting no better than an inch at that range. That said, two groups on one day doesn't mean much. It surely doesn't qualify one for what anybody would consider a "half-MOA rifle".

At what range is your Redfield 4x set parallax free? Probably 100yds. Parallax issues would surely creep into a 1/4" group. Enough to so to turn a quarter inch gun into a half inch gun easily.

So I'm sorry if I have a hard time believing that a stock Ruger carbine will do what it usually takes a heavily modified 10/22, Anschutz or Cooper to do.


Perhaps the sun and the moon and the stars all aligned that day for me.
I'll go along with that.

[DeepSouth]

I have one and it is bone stock, not even a scope. I hope to change that (the scope part) soon.

[SaxonPig]

"Hate to call anybody out but if true..."

That strikes me as somewhat personal.

You have seen the rifle and the targets. If you still don't believe that's your choice. I said this was unusual. But there it is.

22-R, I do not recall for certain what ammo I was using but I have always shot a lot of Remingtons. It was not match ammo as I never buy that.

[22-rimfire]

At that time, I wouldn't have considered buying match 22 ammo. Pay 3x the price for what end? The Remington gb's were still pretty good during those days.

Craig, you know you can get groups like that with Savage Mark II's and the CZ's as well as the Remington 541-S or -T (vs Coopers and Anshutz's). But you also know you won't shoot like that every time. If you did, you'd win all the matches or most of them.

SaxonPig, I think we both need to warm up our stock 10/22's and see how they do after being semi-retired. I mostly shot mine at 25 yds as 50 yds was a little uncomfortable with a 4x (Bushnell Banner which was a step up for me at the time) at 50 yds. Seems I never upgrade a scope after I mount one; just buy another rifle. I bought the 10/22 Deluxe for plinking or small game hunting. There were no forums then and until I started reading the foums, I never knew the 10/22 was a poor performer on the target range. I never thought the 10/22 Deluxe was "cheap" at the time, but I understand the comment these days as I have much higher grade stuff now.

[madcratebuilder]

A few random 1/2 moa groups is possible, even a blind pig finds an acorn occasionally. A consistent 1/2 moa from a unmodified 10/22 would be a very rare rifle. Most have to work very hard to get 1 moa from a modified 10/22.

[group17]

I wanted something a little more tactical so I put the folding ATI stock on the cheapest version i could find. Total $300 Already had a fore grip and red dot I put on it.

[AR27]

just ordered an M1 Carbine kit from eabco for mine

[CraigC]

Craig, you know you can get groups like that with Savage Mark II's and the CZ's as well as the Remington 541-S or -T (vs Coopers and Anshutz's). But you also know you won't shoot like that every time. If you did, you'd win all the matches or most of them.
Not with any kind of consistency. At least not with my 541-T or Savage MKII and certainly not without match ammo, tuning, bedding and trigger work. Not with my first Clark-barrelled 10/22 either. Though my new mid-weight 10/22 ($900 without scope!) I believe will do it. Once it cools down I will do more testing with Wolf MT, ME, Federal UltraMatch and some RWS I picked up a while back. I sure as hell won't come close to it with bulk ammo. Except, of course, for the occasional fluke.

Flukes don't count, SaxonPig.

[Maverick223]

Flukes don't count, SaxonPig.Funny thing is he has two flukes, and on the same piece of paper. :rolleyes: Therefore the only plausible explanations are it happened as stated or the target was produced at much lesser distance (which would constitute you calling him a liar).

I kept my 10/22 stock for years before modifying it (even had it chambered for a different cartridge for a while). They are good rifles but honestly I believe there are better options for someone that doesn't want to customize (most notably the Marlin M-60). OTOH they have proven themselves to be one of the best platforms for customization, and often outshoot the competition with the addition of aftermarket parts and when modifications are performed (but at much greater expense).

:)

[stchman]

A stock 10/22 shoots great and looks good. I don't buy a firearm to customize.

[Z-Michigan]

A poll would be interesting.

Mine is 99% stock. I added an extended magazine release, that's it. Still iron sights, wood stock, stock trigger, etc. I wish the factory sights were better and/or the scope mount was easier to attach rigidly.

[Joe Demko]

I replaced the extractor on mine with an aftermarket extractor due to ejection problems. I also installed a buffer while I had everything apart. Otherwise, the gun is the same as it left the factory. My wife loves it and shoots it, mostly.

[CraigC]

Funny thing is he has two flukes, and on the same piece of paper.
Big deal, it's still only eight shots! Show me five consecutive five-shot groups in the quarter inch range from a recent range visit and I'll gladly eat my hat with mustard. Until then, I'll continue using my knowledge, common sense and integrated BS detector.

[Yo Mama]

Stock here, no money to dress her up. It does have a red dot scope unmagnified on it, but I still view this as stock.

[Hatterasguy]

Right now mine is stock, over the winter I plan on changing it a bit.

I want to put on a better barrel and trigger group, and change the stock.

[Col. Plink]

Mine was stock when I sold it; probably still is unless the buyer wanted to hit anything with it...

[22-rimfire]

Flukes don't count, SaxonPig.

Of course they count. They show what the rifle can do like it or not. But consistancy is important too. It's just two targets that were saved because they were exceptional at the time. I save good ones too, but I can't shoot like that all the time nor do I expect to. Match ammo that does well in a particular rifle helps. Those older Remington gb's always shot okay for me at the time. Now..... well, 0.5" groups at 50 yds on a very good day, but more typically 0.5" > 0.75" groups edge to edge which still is not so shabby.

[shootr]

Bone stocker here and loving it!!

[mljdeckard]

I just inherited my dad's old hammered one, and I might replace some of the guts with new premium ones, and get some hi-viz sights. Other than that I don't think I'll mess with it, it's mostly a training tool for my kids, I don't need to spoil them from the beginning.

[madcratebuilder]

Big deal, it's still only eight shots! Show me five consecutive five-shot groups in the quarter inch range from a recent range visit and I'll gladly eat my hat with mustard. Until then, I'll continue using my knowledge, common sense and integrated BS detector.
I don't want to stir the pot here but I have to agree. Five shoot groups and on the same piece of paper, preferably five different groups. Then you have something. For those that haven't tried a series of five shot groups, give it a try, it's very difficult not to have one or two fliers out of twenty five rounds. It

[HOWARD J]

I have a stock unit--picked up from Cabelas this year--it came with a cheap scope but it gets the job done.
The only thing I don't like is the lacquer or whatever coating on the stock.
It chips off very easily.
This gun is very accurate.
500 rds with no FTF or FTE--that won't last..........................:)

[Tim the student]

Mine is stock, except for the scope. I don't like enough to put any money into it.

[MTMilitiaman]

I've had mine customized in the past. At one point I had it in a Boyd's laminate with a 20 inch bull barrel and a 4.5-14x40 Nikon. Any more I keep it pretty much stock. The factory trigger sucked so I added a competition hammer out of necessity. But I find that the rifle is more than adequately accurate with the factory barrel and stock, and it is much lighter and handier than the other setup. With the 2.5-7 Weaver on it, I can head shoot squirrels and keep spent shotgun shells bouncing out past 50 yards, which is all I need. And I like how agile it is with the scope turned all the way down shooting both eyes open on closer, faster moving varmints.

Anymore, I think the Ruger 10/22 is nearly perfect as it comes out of the box. I just hope Ruger has improved the factory trigger pull on them since I bought mine, because that is really the only complaint I had against mine. Love my 10/22...

[meadmkr]

Neither of mine are stock but I bought the cheapest 10/22's I could find (at Dick's) for about $199 each. Both sport Predator T-Rex stocks, Mueller APV scopes; one has a 22lr Green Mountain bull barrel and the other a .17 Mach2 barrel/bolt from Rimfire Technologies. Both will shoot 5 shot groups well under 1/2" at 50 yards with multiple ammo types even with the shoddy stock triggers.
I've been tempted to pick up one "last" one to outwardly leave as stock. I'd likely send the barrel off to Nemohunter on RFC to rework the crown/chamber...

Cheers
Chris

[Al LaVodka]

Stock? What an odd thought!
Al

[sta500rdr]

Mine has a stock receiver. Thats pretty much it. I didn't buy it to keep stock. I guess if I was looking for a stock semi-auto .22 LR, there are other options out there. Its all in what you want.