Is the 10/22 a decent rifle?

"There have been a lot of junk .22 rifles foisted on the price-conscious public over the past 50+ years"

Yeah, and we're talking about one of them.

50+ years, that's about as long as I've been shooting .22s. It's also the problem. I was 13 when the 10/22 was introduced in 1964 and it didn't have anything going for it that we could see. Clunky fat stock, bad trigger and mediocre accuracy. Of course I wasn't at all impressed...I already had a Marlin 39-A Mountie by then. My uncle had a Browning Auto .22 and there were all sorts of guns in the family, and the neighborhood, and the 10/22 simply wasn't an improvement over what we had. Shooting a bunch of ammo real fast was never a goal of anyone I ever knew. We were more of the one shot, one squirrel school of thought.

I'm okay being in the minority.

John

nice rifle

Great Rifle for your purpose.

I bought one 21 years ago , tricked it out with a folding stock, quick release for the mag , Extended mag of course with a 3 by 9 power scope and rings that let you use the iron sights. Dependable and fun. Accurate enough for non competition shooting. Good choice! Would take it over any other semi 22.

Stag

A buddy of mine has one. It seems to be a very good 22

You can get a lot of aftermarket upgrades for it, as well.

Got one 10/22 and love it out of the box as a plinker and for range shooting. I plan to mod it out in the near future to improve accuracy and just for the fun of it!

Top Notch;

I have several 10/22's. One is an ultra-mod, another is bone stock. I've observed many others among friends & family. Here are some generalizations.

Don't be in a rush to replace the barrel. I've seen many stock Ruger barrels deliver outstanding accuracy.

Do, do a lot of ammo testing. Most .22's in general are fairly picky about what they'll shoot best. If you test, not 4, not 12, not 24, but say under 50 types of .22lr ammo, you'll most likely find something it really likes.

The aftermarket replacement hammer is probably the single most effective mod for accuracy improvement.

And last, you'll probably find that several stock magazines stuffed in pockets is a better solution than two mega-mag bananas.

Have fun, they're good guns.

900F

CB900F said:

you'll probably find that several stock magazines stuffed in pockets is a better solution than two mega-mag bananas.

Click to expand...

+1

there's a lot of critters in New Mexico very thankful that I was using ramline mags and only got of one or no shots at them

i love the Desert!!!!

palerider1

I miss the desert. Didnt care for it to much while I was there, it was a major change from living in San Pedro Sula, Honduras, but now that Im here I realize what Im missing.

ive shot my buddies with the expensive trigger job and titanium extractor and other junk, just doesnt make it much better. mines stock inside exept for the bolt buffer and extended mag release. if your gonna spend cash on extras spend it on a scope and bipod, those can be switched over to a different gun when you get tired of em on the ruger. just my 2 cents.

Only thing I didn't like about mine was the buttplate. I replaced the smooth one with a rubber one from cheaperthandirt and love it. Adds an inch or so to the LOP - just looks stupid with a "recoil pad", but if it's stupid and it works.........

I got a new synthetic stock 10/22 as my first rifle with red dot sight and carrying case for $175 brand new. Boy did I think I got a deal. Then I shot it. I guess you could say it was a great rifle except:

- frequent jams
- binding in the magazine to where bullets wouldn't feed
- terrible trigger
- inexcusably poor accuracy

Workmanship is pretty mediocre too, especially compared to a CZ Trainer that was only $25 more, but hey, it's a cheap rifle. Another annoyance: no bolt hold open on last round. Not a big deal, but method for locking bolt open is awkward. Magazine removal could be easier too. Virtually all of the 10/22 faults and annoyances have been addressed by aftermarket suppliers. Of course, if you do all the upgrades, the only thing left with the Ruger name on it would be the receiver.

I spent hours at the range running dozens of different types of ammo through it with little success. It is by far the least accurate rifle I have ever owned. It is a safe queen now, but I plan on giving it to a friend of mine because he wants to do the whole parts upgrade thing.

I talked to a gunshop owner about it, and he said that getting a good 10/22 is really luck of the draw. Some are great, some are like mine. A co-worker has an old beater 10/22 that he picked up years ago for $80 and it shoots pretty darn well. Go figure.

So I guess I too am in the minority on the 10/22, in that I don't like it, and wouldn't have another. There are other manufacturers with similarly configured rifles (Marlin, Savage, and Thompson Center come to mind) that you might want to try instead.

Let us know how it turns out.

Here is a new sighting system that will be available in March 2006.
This might be of interest to 10/22 shooters.




It makes a nice package of the Ruger 10/22. We have more info at
http://www.Tech-SIGHTS.com

kasTx;

Usually, if you stay away from the el-cheapo gooey-lubey ammo, the feed & extraction reliablility is pretty good. If you've run some of that goo through the gun, give it and the mags a good cleaning & have another go at it.

If no ammo looks like it wants to group, the usual fault is the barrel to action junction. Have it checked to make sure that the barrel is properly aligned with the action. If the chamber of the barrel is out of spec, Ruger should warranty it. If not, stock 10/22 barrels are almost literally a dime a dozen these days. Just ask, somebody close to you will probably give you one.

900F

You can't go wrong with a 10/22. They are the best gun for the money you will find. I did about $75 in upgrades to mine and now it is a tack driver even with the factory barrel.

I use Bullfrog Lubricant and Rust Blocker in a spray can and the thing literally never misfeeds. I wipe off any obvious excess lube, but otherwise I don't worry about "over-oiling" the gun as Ruger tends to over-warn you about in the manual.

Hell, they also tell you not to use Loc-Tite on the scope mount.

That works great if you don't mind having your #$@% scope fall off the gun after a couple hundred rounds.

It is possible to get a bad magazine, though. That can cause misfeeds. You can re-assemble it, but I have no desire to do that. Ruger will replace it.

I also clean my magazine by turning it upside down in a mug of Hoppes, then swabbing out what I can with a Q-tip and leaving it upside down to dry. Again, re-assembling it is for people with more patience than I have. It's a plinker, for chrissakes.

JohnBT said:

"There have been a lot of junk .22 rifles foisted on the price-conscious public over the past 50+ years"

Yeah, and we're talking about one of them.

50+ years, that's about as long as I've been shooting .22s. It's also the problem. I was 13 when the 10/22 was introduced in 1964 and it didn't have anything going for it that we could see. Clunky fat stock, bad trigger and mediocre accuracy. Of course I wasn't at all impressed...I already had a Marlin 39-A Mountie by then. My uncle had a Browning Auto .22 and there were all sorts of guns in the family, and the neighborhood, and the 10/22 simply wasn't an improvement over what we had. Shooting a bunch of ammo real fast was never a goal of anyone I ever knew. We were more of the one shot, one squirrel school of thought.

I'm okay being in the minority.

John

Click to expand...

Oh, I'd agree with you, in general. The Browning and Marlin 39 are much finer firearms, along with various others like the CZ 452, and of course the really expensive bolties. The Ruger, though, is a reliable and accurate POS, and that's the whole point of my buying one.

I have the older-model recessed-butt xytel stock that's a lot sleeker than the wooden club, and I bought the gun so I'd have something I wouldn't mind getting dirty, wet, etc.

That's why I wouldn't tell a newbie not to buy one, but I would discourage him/her from dumping a lot of money into it.

Good rifle. I was looking for a 22lr back in the 80's for some squirrel and rabbit hunting. A co-worker wanted to sell his 10/22 deluxe so I checked it out and ended up buying it. I've been shooting it for almost 20 years now and never had any problems. Accurate enough for head shots on squirrels to around 40 yards with my mediocre shooting skill.

I think it's a fine rifle, though I'm sure Ruger inadvertantly issues a few lemons, just like everyone else. Given the mega popularity of the 10/22 -- witness the aftermarket -- either countless people have been getting duped by Ruger for decades, or it's a 'decent' rifle. I think the latter. Mine shoots with 100% reliability, and I'm happy with the accuracy. Trigger feel isn't great, but it gets the job done adequately. I paid $155 for the plain-jane blued/hardwood model, and to me it's a handsome rifle and a good value.

Great rifle....and very fun to modifty check out www.rimfirecentral.com (I'm a member) folks on that site are great and well educated on their passion.

I bought one back in Feb. 2005. I picked it up at a gun show for $125. I brought it home, cleaned it, and refinished the stock. I then bought some 30rd. mags and a 56mm simmons red dot. It is definitely a fun shooter, plus I don't mind burning up tons of ammo. A fun little rifle to shoot and $10 to shoot it all day long IMO you can't beat that.

JohnBT said:

I'd rather have anything else. I know, I'm in the minority.

John

Click to expand...

I would rather have a Marlin model 60. I like tube mag 22's.

My question is, is the 10/22 a decent gun for the money in it's stock configuration?

Yeah, I'd say so. It's not my first choice, but it's not a bad choice. I just don't want to spend $300-400 on accessories for a $200 rifle. Of course, I don't have to, but that's one of the Ruger's selling points. ("Buy this rifle, and you can spend twice as much on accessories!")

jmm