ISSC M22 - is it worth the money?


February 16, 2011, 09:42 PM
I thought this one could be fun but I don't know much about them so any feedback is highly appreciated:

-It looks they have the same ergonomics as the glock so muscle memory from Glock could be utilized? Glocks G17/G19 or smaller/larger, same feeling in the hand?
-Anyone with some decent amount of hours behind one of these? I wonder about reliability and what ammo likes best and what ammo is worse.
-Any pros and cons anyone?


If you enjoyed reading about "ISSC M22 - is it worth the money?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 4, 2011, 09:32 PM
Is it worth $300?

March 4, 2011, 09:59 PM
I've heard nothing but good about the M22. $200 at Buds. There's some threads here about it. You should do a search.

March 4, 2011, 10:09 PM
I have had one for 6 months 1500 rounds thru it. Break it in with CCI Stingers for the first 300-400 and mine chews up anything you feed it. If you dont break it in right...Jam-O-matic!

Feels like a Glock19 shoots really nice...sights suck, especially front. I changed mine out to Hi-Viz front and adjustable reat and is real accurate. Easy to clean, just make sure recoil spring is seated correctly. Mags are great and extra ones are 20 bucks


March 4, 2011, 11:16 PM
Thank you guys.
I do weekly defensive shooting with the Glocks so I like the idea to use a new pistol with the same ergonomics controls I am used to so that is why I looked at this one.
The only 3 pistols I fire are the Glocks, the Beretta that shot a lot back in the service, and a colt 1911. So anything new I want to keep it into that line and designs and this seems to be able to provide the same feel as the glock. Obviously w/o the recoil and I have a 50K rounds laying around of 22lr so it is time to start using them.
A friend suggested a conversion kit for one of the glocks I have but I will never fiddle with the systems I carry. I do preventive maintenance, rotate the carry ammo and the mags and I just will not touch them other than training.
22LR is what it is and a dedicated pistol like this seems like a good idea but I didn't hear from them until recently.
Thanks again.

March 8, 2011, 10:00 PM
I went ahead and ordered a new one. We'll see how this goes. Thanks for your recommendations. I might post my experiences for others to see.

March 19, 2011, 12:38 PM
I got the gun. It looks awesome. I will post some pics and targets when I get to use it.
Thanks everyone for your advice.

March 19, 2011, 05:28 PM
I have fired my dads, I had the honor, privelage and P.I.A. of breaking it in for him. He ordered the threaded version which shipped with an adaptor, I ran only 3 mags of stinger thru it before switching to 40 grn hi-velocity, I didnt think the gun was very accurate when compared with my P22, I shot both of them from the bench for comparison, then again, the P22 isnt very accurate compared to my Ruger MKI, so take that for what its worth.
The ISSC and P22 do have something in common though, they both get real dirty real fast, to the point that they will not cycle, this was achieved in only 100 rounds total in the ISSC, including the 30 rounds of Stinger, plenty of FTF & FTE during that 100 rounds too. I will admit that I did not adequately break it in before switching to 40 grn ammo, but the real goal of the day was to have a chance to shoot it suppressed with the limited amount of range time I had that day, which I never had a chance to do due to the failure and no time to properly clean during range session.
I intend to follow up on my testing of the ISSC next chance I get to shoot it, hopefully it will perform to the level expected from it.

March 19, 2011, 05:52 PM
The reviews here and other places scared me off of buying one. Then I went another direction and bought the GSG 1911. I've put about 600 rounds thru it, probably 1 stovepipe per 100. Nearly flawless with cheap Federal and Winchester bulk.

March 19, 2011, 07:44 PM
Thanks for the feedback. I will test it and let you know how it goes. Initially I do not care so much about the accuracy, rather something to 'play' with and the ergonomics of the glock.
Cheers, E.

March 19, 2011, 09:33 PM
I got one a month ago. The first 200 rounds fired flawlessly. The next time out, it was just a jamomatic. I haven't put much time into diagnosing it. I've stripped it and cleaned it, but haven't had the chance to shoot it yet since that, so I don't know if that made any difference.

March 19, 2011, 10:06 PM
Sweet keep us updated.

I'm surprised you haven't posted any pics yet.

March 27, 2011, 10:29 PM
I tested the pistol briefly today. I used stingers but didn't like them too much.
I can see some of the issues folks commented but I believe these will work out.
What load did you guys use to break in?

Here the pics...

March 28, 2011, 12:08 AM
It's got a fairly hefty looking barrel, looks surprisingly well made in that respect.

March 28, 2011, 01:40 AM
How does the trigger compare to a stock Glock trigger?

March 28, 2011, 08:11 AM
The trigger has a longer travel than a glock. It feels like it has a half inch or so of slack travel in it. Then it encounters resistance. Id say it's pull in the 5-6 lbs range. It does have a clear, predictable break though. The trigger having essentially no resistance through that extra travel does make it easy to stage this trigger.

Compared to a DAO glock trigger, I'd call it fair, to slightly less than favorable.

Compared to a SA trigger (which it is), it's kind of a disappointment.

Mine shot great for the first 200 rounds, and now it's jamomatic, and not getting better. I think I know why. I think the slide is painted aluminum. At least, it's a rather paint-like coating. When it was new, and paint in perfect condition, it shot great. Now, the paint is wearing off the rails on the inside of the slide, and the inside of the barrel opening (Basically anywhere the slide rubs on something, the paint is wearing off). Paint on a mechanical wear point is piss poor design, IMO.
Manually racking the slide, produces a strange sound as the slide drags across the machining grooves on the outside of the barrel. It's a really unsatisfying sound. It wasn't present early on, when that wear point was lubricated by the paint on the slide.
At this point, I'm wondering what it will run like when I get it "broke-in" to the point the paint is completely worn off those wearing surfaces.

March 28, 2011, 11:28 AM
I've heard that they are picky with ammo, but otherwise good guns. Keep feeding it CCI mini-mags and it should be fine. I can't stand picky guns, so I won't own one. Yep, gonna stick with my ruger 22/45 that will eat anything.

I'm hoping the new S&W M&P22 will not be picky, but most .22s that are clones of centerfire caliber pistols are.

Manually racking the slide, produces a strange sound as the slide drags across the machining grooves on the outside of the barrel. It's a really unsatisfying sound. It wasn't present early on, when that wear point was lubricated by the paint on the slide.
At this point, I'm wondering what it will run like when I get it "broke-in" to the point the paint is completely worn off those wearing surfaces.

Even when you lube it up?

March 28, 2011, 11:46 AM
I have been reviewing the design carefully and what you say makes a lot of sense. There is quite a bit of resistance as you break in. I think that a good and frequent cleaning of the debris and slightly polishing the parts until fully break in would help.
I also noticed that there is substantial initial resistance to move the hammer so a little polishing and lube will help in the top of the hammer.
Additionally I see the feeding problem with certain bullets in slow motion. The bullets in the bulk Remington pack have a little bit of step up into the bullet grooves and that bullet rim just makes them stop on the top of the barrel. If you see the CCI's also step up but progressively on an angle so there is less change they will get caught going in. See the attached picture.


I think that the design is good but quality control is not there and probably the reason they are cheap. I will make this firearm run like a champ so stay connected for updates and let me know about your experiences.

March 28, 2011, 02:34 PM
I will make this firearm run like a champ so stay connected for updates and let me know about your experiences.

That's the spirit.

March 28, 2011, 02:43 PM
I've been playing with the idea of scraping the remainder of the paint out of the grooves in the slide, and seeing what that does. Half of it has worn away on it's own in about 300 rounds, so it's going to go anyway. If I do that though, I certainly don't want to do it with a tool that would gouge the aluminum. I'm also worried if it would void the warranty if I did that. The same with polishing the barrel with some fine grit emery or sandpaper. It would be nice to smooth it up, but again, is that a warranty voiding issue?

The machine marks on the barrel are too deep and rough for lube to make a difference (I have lubed it generously). I don't know if my particular one is a manufacturing defect, or they all have this poor of an exterior machine finish on the barrel.

1stmarine: I have noticed the hammer drag you speak of. The slide moves much more easily by hand if you hold down the hammer with your thumb to take it's load off. That definitely illustrates how much drag the hammer puts on it (not unreasonable). I haven't polished anything in that area, just lubed it generously. I also think you are right on, that the design is solid, but the QC is poor. I still think it's a neat little gun if I can get it reliable. If I can make it work well with a little elbow grease, I do think I'll still be happy with it (woulda been happier to run perfect right out of the box, tho...)

March 28, 2011, 02:45 PM
1stmarine: how is the finish on your barrel? Drag your fingernail across it lengthwise, do you feel the machining grooves?

March 28, 2011, 03:38 PM
Well there's your problem with the FTF & FTE!!! Your shooting .380's & .223's through it!! Try some .22lr & you should be good. ;^)

Seriously though, it's a $200 .22. Ftf & fte are the nature of the .22 autos. It's gonna happen. You can't expect these little "Plinkers" to be 100%. If you want a 100% .22 you got to go with a (Cant believe I'm saying this) Buckmark, Mk, High Standard etc but even these have their problems sometimes, again it's the nature of a .22 auto. I have 7 S&W 22a & I've done A LOT of fiddling to get them to run constiantly without problems but they can now compete with the others.

I can't believe how many people complain about their "Low End" .22 autos. If you can't realize that the "Cheaper" .22's are gonna take some fiddling with to run good, quit being cheap & save more money to buy a nicer pistol. Don't complain about the fact that you spent $100-$200 on a .22 pistol & it's a Jam-O-Matic or not accruate.

I don't even have a ISSC but Im gonna get one. Not because it runs right out of the box or is accruate, but because I like to "Tinker" with things to make them work better. This is why I like .22 auto pistols. If your not a "Tinker" & want 100% "Bang" everytime pistol I'd say stay away from the .22 autos period or go with a .22 revolver. A .22 auto is a horse of a different color & needs an owner that has a Dremel tool & some "Tinkering"

Also I'd like to say that all you .22 auto guys that buy one, put a couple mags though it then sell it for a loss because it's a "Jam-O-Matic", PM ME!!! I'm a .22 auto freak & always in the market for the "Sweet" deals!

March 28, 2011, 05:07 PM
I have seen good designs fail and bad designs inexplicably work so this is a matter of QC that we now get o do. I personally will do it for fun. I am not worry about warranty and I don't think they can do much for us for the that cost. Anything I do will not be radical and with careful thought. Polishing will be done w/o impact to the tolerances and will only shine what we already have. I will start with things that do not require any modifications and are simple in nature. I am also going to try a different spring and play with it. That is a no brainier. I do this for fun and I will make it run. I have been given systems that were totally unreliable and ended up running pretty well. It might take a while as other fun projects are there too but it will run.

I agree with you guys that 22LR we should expect stoppages due to the nature of the round but in the end I would like this pistol to perform more like a Ruger 10/22 rifle with the occasional and unavoidable case failure.

I am not a big fun of 10/22 but I have 40K rounds that are getting old in the basement and thought this would be a great way to shoot them while preserving some of the muscle memory from the glocks. I shoot glocks for defensive shooting every week and like to stay with the same feel as this one provides some of the similar feedback in terms of shape and controls.

By the way, anyone knows where to get ISSC parts? I think the striker pin needs to come down a bit more so before I replace them I need to make sure they have a replacement kit or something. I am not doing this right away and see what other more obvious things will make a difference.

I forgot to mention when it was shooting the pistol was very accurate. I was hitting orange size targets at 25 yards consistently. I liked that a lot.

I will share my experiences here.

March 28, 2011, 11:05 PM
Seriously though, it's a $200 .22. Ftf & fte are the nature of the .22 autos.

In over 1000 rounds I've yet to have one in my 22/45. Make them right and the only thing that will stop them is normal wear and tear and bad ammo. I haven't had either yet.

March 28, 2011, 11:43 PM
A bit more than $200, but my CZ Kadet runs like a malfunkin' champ, runs with everything, Remington subsonics, Federal bulkpacks, loves CCI and Aguila, all of their hotter stuff I've run through it, it eats it like cake, and you know what?

My Taurus PT-22 runs almost as well. A hair less well, but it is reliable enough that I know I can count on it as a carry gun, even if I can't count on it's caliber as a primary gun.

March 28, 2011, 11:51 PM
Seriously though, it's a $200 .22. Ftf & fte are the nature of the .22 autos. It's gonna happen. You can't expect these little "Plinkers" to be 100%. If you want a 100% .22 you got to go with a (Cant believe I'm saying this) Buckmark, Mk, High Standard etc
I don't think anyone's shooting for 100%. On my last outing, the M22 shot about 50%. That's not acceptable, even for a cheap gun.

I can't believe how many people complain about their "Low End" .22 autos. If you can't realize that the "Cheaper" .22's are gonna take some fiddling with to run good,
That's what's happening here. Problems are noticed, potential causes and solutions are being discussed. One or more of them will probably be attempted by someone, and results reported back That's not complaint, that's productive discussion.

Fiddling is for fiddles.

March 29, 2011, 12:21 AM
Oh yeah- I'm with you in not expecting 100% from a .22 auto, though the problems that make me doubt 100% from a .22 auto make me doubt 100% from a .22 revolver or bolt also.

My CZ 452 actually malfunctioned more with Aguila 60 grain SSS ammo than my Kadet or PT-22 did with any ammunition. Actually they both loved the 60 SSS stuff, the 452 had issues ejecting the little brass, I don't think it had enough mass to escape the receiver when cycled.

March 31, 2011, 06:04 AM
Yes Fiddling is for fiddles but complaining is still complaining. You can't compare the trigger from a $200 pistol with a Glock!! Are you kidding me?

As I said before, assuming a $200 firearm should operate like a $600 firearm is just crazy. If you don't want to take the time to "Fiddle" with it to make it better, don't buy it. You get what you pay for. Just because you buy on a whim & because it's cheap, doesn't mean you should call it a jamomatic or complain about the quality when it doesn't operate at or above your expectations. A Kia isn't a Benz, a M22 isn't a Glock. Polish the barrel, smooth up the slide, file down the rough edges. Who cares about a warranty. It's $200!! If you don't have $200 to throw away, shouldn't have bought the gun to begin with.

March 31, 2011, 08:35 AM
The cost/quality relation does not always hold up. There's plenty enough guns out there more expensive and less reliable than glocks to demonstrate that. Yes, generally costlier hardware is higher quality, but generally≠always.

I have no complaints about the trigger. Someone asked how it compares, and I gave an answer. It's irrelevant that the glock is a $600 gun. It's commonality makes it a good standard for comparison. How better to relate one's impression of a trigger than to compare it to the standard?

No one has suggested "a kia is a benz", but they should both start and drive off the lot on their own power when they're brand new. No one here is trying to win a shooting competition with this pistol, just discussing how to make it work better.

I care about a warranty. If the roughness of the barrel is just the way they come, I can polish that myself. If it's because mine is a defect, it should be replaced.

I don't know what your definition of complaining is, so I will share mine with you. Complaining is whining about something someone doesn't like, unproductively, generally by a person unwilling to do anything to solve the problem.
By that definition, you are the one complaining in this thread. If you don't mind whining somewhere else, we were having a productive discussion here about this pistol, and ways we can "fiddle" with them to improve their operation. If you have a productive contribution to make to this discussion please do so, and if not, please don't.

March 31, 2011, 02:55 PM
There you go. You solved your own problem. No need to "Fiddle" with it. Send it in for Warranty repair.

I'm sorry that I've hit a sensitive nerve. I suspect this is the reason you are so defensive. If you had read my previous posts, you'd see I was & did give advice on how to fix the problems with your "Jamomatic". I'm sorry but I don't agree with you in comparing the quality, fit & finish of a Glock with a M22. A fair comparision would be the P22.

Then again all this doesn't matter because as you stated, you have ideas & been given ideas on how to fix your problems but you won't do these because your worried about voiding your warranty. Maybe I read wrong? Doesn't that sounds like complaining by your definition?

March 31, 2011, 05:00 PM
My only concern with the warranty is if parts are necessary for repairs. If it can be fixed without parts, I'm perfectly willing to do a little polishing here or there, or whatever else can improve function. If replacement parts are required, or if making it run reliably is beyond my capability, I'll need to send it in.
I asked in a previous post if someone else's barrel had as rough an exterior finish as mine did. I'm still waiting to see if I get a response. I don't know if that is the way it is supposed to be, or not. If they just come that way, I'll polish it up myself. If they normally come with a decent finish, then mine is defective. I may still polish it myself, or I may send it in.

I'm sorry if I was snappy in my response. I do tend to mostly buy guns on the cheaper end of the spectrum, and I buy them with the expectation it may take a little elbow grease to make them run well. Usually a search or a thread on the subject yields a few good ideas for places to start. Also many times in those threads comes along the guy who just says, "buy a better gun", or "those things aren't worth working on". That's not helpful, it confuses me sometimes what motivates some people to put effort into a post that is not helpful(this comment is not directed at anyone in particular).

You had a point, you have made constructive suggestions in earlier posts. I hadn't recognized that. I'm sorry about that. When next I get a chance to shoot it, and report back my observations, I welcome your further input.

Almost everyone has shot a glock. It's a pretty efficient way to relate the feel of the trigger to compare it to one a large number of the forum population is already familiar with. I wasn't comparing overall fit and finish of the two guns, as quite clearly the M22 would come up short.

Presently, I've cleaned some of the worn off paint gunk out of the slide rails, and lubed it up good. It's presently awaiting the next range opportunity to assess results. I will post back when I've had the chance to test it out. I wish it was going to be this week. :(

March 31, 2011, 05:36 PM
I will check the barrel finish and let you know. Sorry I didn't get back to anyone sooner as I have been really swamped with work this week.
I think that any comparison with a real glock other than the ergonomics is out of the question. It would be like comparing apples with oranges.
We will continue to cooperate with each other to make this little dandy pistol work. I knew this was not going to be the best purchase I was going to make in my life but it will be fun to do some research and make it work.
As soon as we are open minded and there is a healthy collaborative approach between this pistol's enthusiasts we will do good progress, I am pretty sure.

March 31, 2011, 05:52 PM
It would be like comparing apples with oranges.
They still both make good juice!

I'm in no hurry. It'll be at least a week before I can get out to test what I've done so far. I don't think the barrel finish is contributing to the malfunctions as much as the paint goo in the slide grooves. The barrel finish is just causing the slide to make an irritating (think fingernails/chalkboard) type of sound when manually racked.

March 31, 2011, 05:55 PM
I understand all your saying. I believe the hype of comparing the M22 wiu a Glock is the fact that the M22 was in fact speicifically designed for Glock owners to practice without the cost. The problem people don't understand is the M22 is not a Glock. Not even close. ISSC saw a market in .22lr like most other companies & hired the guy that designed (Cant remember his name) the P22 for Walther, to design the M22. Mistake #1 on ISSC part. Then he based it off the Glock & ISSC ran with it. Mistake #2. Glock sued ISSC on grounds of the Glock "Look" & won. ISSC can not import the M22 into the states until they change their design. This is why the M22 was being sold so cheap.

IMO anything you can do to make your M22 run better, I'd do it. I don't think ISSC is going to be much help in the Warranty work Dept. That's just my opinion though. My advice would be first polish that barrel. If you can chuck it up on a lathe & take the emmery cloth to it. Polish it down to a high sheen. Before grinding off any paint from the slide, put a couple hundred more rounds of CCI mini mags though it after plishing the barrel. I believe if you give it time to break in, the slide & frame will mate together. If it doesn't, put a loaded mag in & while pointed in a safe direction (Not saying your stupid btw) slowly rack the slide & try to figure out where the drag is coming from then with your Dremel polish these areas. I say use a loaded mag for this because it's possible you could be dragging on the top of the next round in the mag when extracting the round chambered.

Hope it works out for you.

April 3, 2011, 12:07 PM
I did check the barrel in mine and I see your point. The finish is rough and probably polished/gloss wouldn't hurt but I don't think this is stopping the pistol from working.
On the good news side I did a few modifications to it and tried one mag yesterday real quickly and cycled through it w/o any problems.
I cleansed the system real well. Slightly removed all rought spots in the feed ramp with the dremel and also created a very small yet effective angle in the top of the chamber with the dremel too.
Also worked in the hammer with the dremel to got out any uneven spots. Used a light machine oil and everything seems to be working way better. Even a feed at slow motion lines up perfectly and I can see how the new recessed angle in the top of the barrel helps with the feed.
I got 2 new springs with different tensions but didn't see a need to test them after the results with the factory one.
Today I will see if I can try it again after skeet practice and see if I can take a few pictures. If it does like yesterday then we know problems have been solved.
I will keep everyone posted.

April 3, 2011, 10:14 PM
Today's tests went really well as I expected.
I had very few failures in 400 rounds and some due to several duds, most courtesy of Remington.
This is a quick summary...

I marked with a red marker the areas that were slightly touched with the dremel and might require some more polishing...

I got the following springs, one shorter and softer and the other harder but could not test them because I FORGOT THEM along with my CAMERA!.
In any case I didn't think that it was all that critical but I will test the softer spring with some loads next time....

Stock Spring....

Softer Spring...

These were the loads tested and the results...

1-CCI Mini-mag - 100 rounds shot - 1 failure due to a dud.
2-Blazer 40gr value pack - 100 rounds shot - 1 failure to feed and 1 dud.
3-Remington Yellow Jacket - 100 rounds shot - 1 failure to eject and 3 duds.
4-Americal Eagle High velocity - 40 rounds shot - 4 failures to eject but when I loaded mags with only 4 rounds then it shot all the way. This tells me the round is milder and the mag spring is putting too much drag.
5-Federal 40gr solid - 6 failures to eject but when I loaded mags with only 4 rounds then it shot all the way. This again tells me the round is the mildest and the mag spring is putting too much drag.
I will try the AE and Federal with the softer spring next day. I have measured the spring tension and I have no doubt it will help.

This is the gun shooting the CCIs, Blazers and Remingtons through complete mags and w/o any issues. Sorry for the picture quality but I forgot my camera and my phone video sucks.

Shooting CCI.... (

Shooting Speer... (

Shooting Yellow Jackets... (

I hope you enjoy this.

April 3, 2011, 10:41 PM
I have shot around 300 rounds of cci minimag ammo without a hitch. Tried many other brands, but Federal automatch is showing promise, but I've only shot around 40 rounds of it. Accuracy is decent, the trigger hurts my finger. When I broke the gun down to clean, I got that scraping sound you're talking about, as well as a few scratches on the barrell. After many tries, I think I got it together right. I like the gun, but its no Mark 2. I will be happy if the automatch works out, minimags are pricey.

April 3, 2011, 10:55 PM
The Blazzers I have around 25,000 and got every case with 10 value packs of 550 for $17 each. Buy one and see how it goes. I think that the softer spring is going to be great. I will keep folks posted.


April 4, 2011, 10:26 PM
Another pic...

April 9, 2011, 11:14 PM
I was wondering in anyone got a chance to work on the issues and test their ISSCs?

April 10, 2011, 03:56 PM
Thanks for all the information 1stmarine!
Very helpful!

April 10, 2011, 06:30 PM
Where did you get the different recoil springs?

I haven't had a chance to take mine out lately. :( Busy season at work. Lots of OT, but that will mean funds for toys when it slows down :)

April 10, 2011, 07:57 PM
Thanks. I think the design is good and can work well but it comes with some quality issues. I didn't get a chance to test the softer spring but I will next week.
For me a little polishing here and there plus the spring can make wonders even with the value packs.

I said I will make this work like a charm and we are in the right path I think. I also have a call on the suppliers to find critical replacement parts for the 22LR like the striker and the ejector.

Also I will be looking for your feedback so I can learn from your experiences.


April 10, 2011, 08:02 PM
I got them at the local ACE store. Those stores have anything you can think of and even a larger spring can be cut. Just bring the original spring and find something of the same diameter and softer. Most of the recoil tension is taken by the hammer in the first place as it needs to come back for the next shot so the rest is to assure enough momentum to full cycle and chamber the next one.
I will keep everyone posted and after testing I will find the spring reference number and manufacturer as they came in a little plastic bag.


April 10, 2011, 08:03 PM
Needless to say that what works for me might not work for you. If you have concerns consult with an experienced gunsmith. What I am posting here is for reference but it is up to you to decide if you need professional assistance or not. I cannot be responsible if somebody screws up so make sure you are informed before making any changes.

April 15, 2011, 12:09 AM
Any progress/feedback anyone?
This weekend I am going to test a few more loads and the softer spring I forgot the other day. I have the feeling that I am getting close to have a pretty reliable little toy.
I never shot a 22LR pistol before this one. All that I have done all my life is big calibers. It is fun!

June 10, 2013, 11:59 PM
Hi guys. I'm thinking about buying an ISSC M22 this week. I read this thread and have no problem tinkering. Heck, I actually look forward to it. Any updates since 2011? Anyone else have good mod updates that they can share, increasing the reliabilty of the pistol?

Thanks in advance!

June 20, 2013, 12:01 PM
I also got a M&P 22LR and that one swallows anything. Even better than the P22.

June 28, 2013, 10:44 PM
Anyone have a link to a to info regarding full stripping? All I can find is info on field stripping. Thanks.

June 30, 2013, 01:35 PM
Why not try some gun grease on those rails and see if that'll slick her up a bit?

If you elect to polish the rails, you may want to consider putting it in a vice and using a very smooth stone to very gently smooth the rails, I'd go awfully slow and easy on it. Others with more experience can comment on that.

If you enjoyed reading about "ISSC M22 - is it worth the money?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!