22lr tube-fed vs mag fed

[Risky buisness]

I grew up shooting tube feds and liked both the added weight out front plus the extra rounds avaliable.
I have since changed my mind regarding tube feds, as an Appleseed instructor and hunters ed teacher we stress muzzle in a safe direction at all times, without training, most of the shooters I have encountered load the tube fed butt on the ground muzzle straight up, like pointing at your head and upper body, even with the action open or a chamber flag inserted the muzzle is still pointed in your general direction, and this breaks one of the cardinal safety rules. I have since converted my personal tube fed rifles to accept magazines for this reason, Not knocking a tube fed just pointing out that the general shooting public may not realize that this could lead to a bad outcome.

 

[henschman]

Since all of my .22s are used as Appleseed Liberty Training Rifles, I definitely prefer mag fed. Much quicker to reload (when you have prepped mags), and much easier to do it in field positions. Also, they are generally easier to mount a sling swivel on the front in a way that won't put pressure on the barrel when slung up.

 

[el Godfather]

Nylon66 Remington

 

[gp911]

My Nylon 66 tube feeds from the buttstock, avoiding one issue, but it's a little awkward. Love mine though, I voted tube-fed. Is there a mag-fed rimfire that can do shorts, longs, and lr in the same mag like some tube fed guns do?

 

[jeepnik]

My Nylon 66 tube feeds from the buttstock, avoiding one issue, but it's a little awkward. Love mine though, I voted tube-fed. Is there a mag-fed rimfire that can do shorts, longs, and lr in the same mag like some tube fed guns do?

I was going to say that the buttstock tube option should be added to the poll.

I'm a .22 rimfire semiauto junkie. Don't ask how many, it's flat embarassing. I have other action types, but mostly semiautos. Frankly I don't have a preferrence, as long as they function.

In that regard, the under barrel tubes do get banged up a bit more than box magazine (the Ruger is really good as it's total enclosed by the action), and butt stock tube magazines.

I must admit that my Nylon 66 is my favorite plinker/small game getter, but for shear elegance, you can't beat the Browning .22 rifle. They are just hands down the finest looking .22 semiauto ever made.

 

[CraigC]

Have several examples of each and love both.

Each has advantages and disadvantages. Neither has a clear advantage over the other overall. I've heard very, very few valid arguments against tube-fed .22's. Most come from folks who are accustomed to box magazines and have little familiarity with tubular magazines.

 

[conhntr]

Craig c i agree. The underbarrel tube with the brass spring assembly inside is pretty tough. I cant imagine smacking a tube fed magazine against something hard enoughnto hurt it that wouldnt also hurt a barrel of a mag fed rifle!

Ps load on sunday shoot all week!

 

[Grunt]

i have both, and the tube fed is definitely the way to go. magazine (clips) are nice in that you can reload very quickly. but a tube fed holds so many more, that you may not even need to reload when you are actually hunting. plus, they make tube fed speed loaders now. so any advantage a magazine fed gun had, is gone.

Huh? Now I don't use shorts (does anybody really use shorts or longs anymore on a routine basis) in my Marlin 39A but IIRC, it will hold 20 or 21 rounds of shorts in the magazine tube. My Ruger BX-25 magazines, CMMG and Sig magazines as well as my HK MP-5 .22 all hold 25 rounds. Some of the old Ramline magazines for my 10/22 will hold 30 and then there are the 50 round drums be it Mitchell, Promag of Blackdog flavor that are out there. Now I know the argument that these are aftermarket magazines will come up so I'll address that before it does, the CMMG ARs, Sig 522 and MP-5 .22 all come with standard 25 round magazines as standard so it's not necessarily a case of aftermarket magazines having this capacity. What capacity the tube fed magazine has is all that it's ever going to have and no more. I also have one of the speed loaders for my tube feed guns and while they are a VAST improvement over dropping in one round at a time, they will still never be faster than swapping out a magazine. I'm not a tube feed hater by any means since a lever action with a detachable magazine is to me just wrong but if you are looking at the designs, the detachable magazine is IMHO, a far better system. Easier to reload, easier to clear when done shooting and if damaged, a replacement magazine is going to be cheaper than a replacement tube.

 

[CaliCoastie]

Ahhh but your argument is that detachable mags are quicker to reload/change out with a new magazine is really a moot point, you reloaded that mag at some point. From a empty magazine tube/detachable, I would venture to say I could reload my 19lr's faster than my buddies 10/22. But let's all agree to disagree. For me a tubular magazine just works with me, and I never have to worrying about leaving it at home. PS I not damaged the magazine on my tubular mag yet on any of my 22's. And yes changing ammo is allot easier with the detachable mag..people still do use shorts btw, pest control where noise is a factor.

 

[click clack]

An old Marlin model 60 was my first from my dad when I was 14 or so. I dont know what ever happened to it, I think it got lost during Katrina. But i have 10/22 now and they both are just fine. I voted tube fed though.

 

[mole]

I prefer the magazine route and particularly liking the ruger 10/22 flush magazine. Mainly it's the safety issue of have the mag loaded, but not the gun when I want one quickly ready for things such as pest control. That being said, I somehow wound up with more tube fed than mag fed.

mole

 

[alman]

I 'm a Marlin guy so I do prefer tube fed . However ; I did just purchase a Savage 93 chambered for .22wmr which is the first rimfire I've owned that uses a magazine . It has a 5 shot mag and I have no complaints .

 

[Dr.Rob]

They are all useful. I like the magazines but you never can 'lose' a tube magazine.

 

[Usagi]

I own a Marlin 60 (tube), Marlin 795 (box), and a Ruger 10/22 (box). The type of magazine (tube or box) is only a small part of why I like or dislike a rifle. However, I've seen the following advantages of a tube feed:
- Easier on the fingers to load time after time.
- Quite difficult to lose the tube.
- Does not protrude from bottom of rifle. (yes, I know the Ruger factory 10-rd mag doesn't either)


As for the comment of loading the tube and "breaking a cardinal rule of gun safety" (pointing the gun at something you do not wish to destroy) - check out my blog post where I show an easy reload technique that does not violate any rule of gun safety.

 

[Picher]

For top accuracy, I like magazine-fed or single shots with free-floated barrels, but for hunting and plinking, tube-fed are great too.

 

[CraigC]

I like the magazines but you never can 'lose' a tube magazine.

Actually you can and rest assured your best pard will never let you forget it as long as you live!

 

[Lateck]

I own all the above.
I will agree the 10/22 loaders make the mags easer to load. Other wise tube is next.

Lateck,

 

[22-rimfire]

I have both tubular and detachable magazine 22 rifles. In all honesty, I prefer the tubular magazine but they generally don't look as nice on a 22 rifle.

I like the fact that you don't have to worry about carrying multiple magazines with a tube fed rifle. It is possible to bend a tubular magazine, but you can buy new ones from the manufacturer if need be.

 

[conhntr]

Well i just bought 15,000 rounds of 22 from the cmp (2.29c/round). Ill continue testing the various types of 22 magazines!

 

[chute2thrill]

I prefer a mag fed .22, but I voted other because I think a falling block .22 could/would be amazing.

 

[sixgunner455]

I like'em all. I grew up shooting single-shot bolt actions, and when I got one for my kids, that's what I naturally looked for.

I always wanted a Marlin 39, but still don't have one. My dad's two .22lr rifles (lever and pump) are tube fed, brother's two (Marlin 25 and 60) are both tube fed, but me, I have a 10/22, and a Savage MKII. Maybe I'll get that 25 from my brother, though ... it's really accurate.

Loading a tube-fed .22 is perfectly safe - open the action and load the magazine. Thinking is required, yes, but getting a case of the vapors over the tube magazine is a bit over the top.

 

[iLikeOldgunsIlikeNewGuns]

i vote other/no preference. Tube is my preference, but I also enjoy mag-fed

Great question! Really made me have to think it over for a while.


I got lucky with the .22 rifles that I own, I didn't find them they found me. Like many of you, first guns I ever shot were .22s, but not my own (and they were single shot which was great for learning). Got into owning my own guns by starting with black powder, and by the time I decided I wanted my own rifles, a very good friend had to find a good home for his step-dad's two .22 rifles, and I ended up being that very lucky good home One is tube fed and one is mag fed and even now that I've tried most of the other popular makes and models, they are still the first two .22 rifles that I would buy today if I lost all my guns in a terrible boating accident .

I must say I love my friend's Henry Goldenboy (it is SO fun!), and his brother's and dad's 10/22s, but I much prefer my Remington 521-ts bolt action / box mag, and Remington Nylon 66 butt-fed-tube (lol there's gotta be a better way to say that?) rifles. I find myself bringing the Nylon 66 out more than the bolt-action lately, but over the years that I've owned them I can honestly say they've both received a very equal amount of use.
With all my .22s, pistols included, keeping track of my round count, or anyone else shooting my guns' round count, has become beyond a habit, into a natural occurrence. I even will yell out the number of shots in a barrage while watching a tv show or movie with my girlfriend which always makes her laugh, simply because it's ingrained in my mind now to keep track of # of rounds fired. I say all that because it's not so hard and as I said after awhile becomes a natural habit. When shooting my tube-fed Nylon 66 I rarely have to check to know if there's a round left or not (but I always do check to confirm!) Cool thing about that particular gun too, when it is empty, is that you can drop a round over the bolt in the ejection port, pull the bolt back and let it go forward and you now can fire that round, quick simple and easy. The butt has a funnel-shape surrounding the mouth of the tube as well, and the bullet in the round is the heavier end, so I can pretty much pour a handful of rounds (while carefully observing) right in to load 'er up. This gun has been so handy I will never sell it, and will snatch another up any time a good deal finds me.
The bolt action Remington is of course the more accurate of the two, I would imagine due to less moving parts with each shot, which at times makes it the better rifle for the task. I've checked out mag prices though, and have been not so inspired to buy more mags for it when I could buy ammo or whatnot. It's nice to be able to shoot the center of the O in a coke can, but also fun to shoot as fast as I want with the semi-auto, which is also surprisingly accurate. At this point loading the Nylon 66 is down to a rythm for me. After checking the chamber, I place the muzzle on or in my range bag while loading, and can get her ready faster than most would expect.
Having said all that I'd have to say I prefer the tube, but it only wins by a hair of a margin. I do like the 10/22s but don't plan to own one until after a few other guns on my list. I've used the speed loaders and when I do get a 10/22, that will be bought at the same time if not prior.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

This may seem strange, but as I am primarily a military bolt-action rifle shooter I would love to have a .22 with an internal magazine I could load via stripper clips.

 

[MistWolf]

If it were not for lever actions, I wouldn't own any tube fed 22s. (Let me amend that- I would own a Browning with the tube in the butt-stock.) It's also possible that if it were not for the 10/22 or the 77/22, I would not own any detachable box magazine fed 22s.

I prefer the Ruger rotary magazine for a 22. It's easy to load, easy to top off and easy to keep in your pocket while hunting. While not a big deal while plinking, tubular magazines for the 22 are awkward to use in the field and don't lend themselves to being easily topped off after popping off a couple shots at a speeding jackrabbit. With the Ruger mag, simply drop the one from the rifle and replace with a fresh one from your pocket. The one just removed from the rifle can be topped off while strolling. Not so easy to do with the typical tubular 22 magazine, at least not for this klutz.

The lever action has it's charm and is plenty of fun to chase rabbits with, especially jackrabbits. But for me, the 10/22 style magazine is much easier to use

 

[sgtstryker]

All of the rifles mentioned have their own qualities. For .22's, the rifles shootability is what gives it it's reputation and the way it is fed ammo is just the way you load, IMO. Probably everyone over the age of fifty has alot of experience with tube fed rimfires, the Nylon 66 and Rem. 552 for me. Of course, the 1022 has been the workhorse since it's introduction, it's mag fed. The tube fed's will cycle shorts , longs and long rifles, tho. If thats important to the shooter. I like that option. I forgot the Marlin Mountie, it still shoots, too.