For the comments about whether posters here actually own more than one .22, here's my story:
I own a Marlin 795.
Used to have a 60 - until my wife shot it.
Also have a Ruger 10/22 - serial number says it was made in 1987.
My son has a Crickett bolt action.
I've done the following work on them:
Marlin 60 - trigger job (about 3.5 pounds now)
Marlin 795 - trigger job (about 4.5-5 lbs now)
10/22 - VQ hammer, extractor, and auto bolt-release. (now it is almost as reliable as the Marlins on extractions)
At 25 yards, shooting the rifles from a supported position, I can consistently shoot:
0.5 MOA with the Marlin 60 and the 795 (remember, at 25 yards, 1 MOA = 0.25") with bulk ammo. I have shot .25" groups with CCI ammo.
3 MOA with the 10/22, using CCI mini mags. 4 MOA with Federal bulk & Winchester bulk.
1.5 MOA with the Crickett with either bulk or CCI.
Add 0.5 MOA to 1 MOA when I shoot prone with a sling at the same distance.
At 100 yards, the groups open up, as expected:
The 60 and 795 will shoot 2 MOA with CCI and 2.5 MOA with bulk.
The 10/22 will open up to 8 inch (8 MOA) groups with bulk, and 6 MOA with CCI.
FWIW - I have shot, from a rest with a scope, a 1.5 MOA group at 100 yards with the 60, using CCI SV.
Based on these results, and seeing the same for years, I refuse to feed the 10/22 better ammo. It's like feeding caviar to the swine.
I've shot some 10/22's that belong to friends that have nice barrels on them (one has a GM barrel, and the other is a VQ, I think). They get close to the same performance - often within a half MOA.
Some of the $200+ barrels will get the 10/22 to the same performance level - and I've shot a few. Problem is, these barrels are most often VERY picky about ammo.
So, put it this way:
- $250 for a 10/22
- $40 for a new hammer, springs, and extractor
- $80 for a new stock
- $250 for a good barrel
Total - $620 - Now you have a gun that will shoot the same, or perhaps marginally better than a stock 60 with a 10-minute trigger job. Oh, but it must have high grade ammo (usually CCI at the very least).
Or, pay $130 for a gun that will do the same (or so darn close that 75% of the shooters on here won't be able to tell the difference), and do it with the "el-cheapo" ammo.
Now, I like to tinker, and the 10/22 has the Marlins beat, hands down, in the optional accessories.
Sometimes, it seems like to me that the 10/22 fanboys often like to bash the Marlin based on price point. Never on actual experience. It also seems they often need to somehow justify the fact that the Ruger requires more of an investment ($$$) to equal or beat the lowly Marlin.
That's OK - I'll keep shooting my "el cheapo" and keep getting fabulous results, and that's good for me. Difference is, I won't put down another man (or men... or women) for how he spends his money. That's his choice.
I own a Marlin 795.
Used to have a 60 - until my wife shot it.
Also have a Ruger 10/22 - serial number says it was made in 1987.
My son has a Crickett bolt action.
I've done the following work on them:
Marlin 60 - trigger job (about 3.5 pounds now)
Marlin 795 - trigger job (about 4.5-5 lbs now)
10/22 - VQ hammer, extractor, and auto bolt-release. (now it is almost as reliable as the Marlins on extractions)
At 25 yards, shooting the rifles from a supported position, I can consistently shoot:
0.5 MOA with the Marlin 60 and the 795 (remember, at 25 yards, 1 MOA = 0.25") with bulk ammo. I have shot .25" groups with CCI ammo.
3 MOA with the 10/22, using CCI mini mags. 4 MOA with Federal bulk & Winchester bulk.
1.5 MOA with the Crickett with either bulk or CCI.
Add 0.5 MOA to 1 MOA when I shoot prone with a sling at the same distance.
At 100 yards, the groups open up, as expected:
The 60 and 795 will shoot 2 MOA with CCI and 2.5 MOA with bulk.
The 10/22 will open up to 8 inch (8 MOA) groups with bulk, and 6 MOA with CCI.
FWIW - I have shot, from a rest with a scope, a 1.5 MOA group at 100 yards with the 60, using CCI SV.
Based on these results, and seeing the same for years, I refuse to feed the 10/22 better ammo. It's like feeding caviar to the swine.
I've shot some 10/22's that belong to friends that have nice barrels on them (one has a GM barrel, and the other is a VQ, I think). They get close to the same performance - often within a half MOA.
Some of the $200+ barrels will get the 10/22 to the same performance level - and I've shot a few. Problem is, these barrels are most often VERY picky about ammo.
So, put it this way:
- $250 for a 10/22
- $40 for a new hammer, springs, and extractor
- $80 for a new stock
- $250 for a good barrel
Total - $620 - Now you have a gun that will shoot the same, or perhaps marginally better than a stock 60 with a 10-minute trigger job. Oh, but it must have high grade ammo (usually CCI at the very least).
Or, pay $130 for a gun that will do the same (or so darn close that 75% of the shooters on here won't be able to tell the difference), and do it with the "el-cheapo" ammo.
Now, I like to tinker, and the 10/22 has the Marlins beat, hands down, in the optional accessories.
Sometimes, it seems like to me that the 10/22 fanboys often like to bash the Marlin based on price point. Never on actual experience. It also seems they often need to somehow justify the fact that the Ruger requires more of an investment ($$$) to equal or beat the lowly Marlin.
That's OK - I'll keep shooting my "el cheapo" and keep getting fabulous results, and that's good for me. Difference is, I won't put down another man (or men... or women) for how he spends his money. That's his choice.
Last edited:
