And Usagi is a neophyte shooter masquerading as an expert who thinks he knows better how to run the Appleseed program. He only comes out of the woodwork for threads where Marlin autos are not touted as the be-all, end-all of the rimfire world or discussions of Appleseed.
Fact of the matter is that a $150 Marlin will shoot darn near the same as an Anschutz.
Yes, keep drinking that Kool Aid. Thankfully, before too long, benchrest shooters will all realize the err of their ways and trade in their $1400 Anschutz rifles for a crate of 795's. I must find out what kind of magic pixie dust Marlin is sprinkling their barrels with. Gotta be something good to make a $100 rifle shoot as well as one with a barrel that costs twice as much. How many Anschutz rifles have you tested?
Funny - both break the plastic parts at about the same rate. And I'd say this is a new low - arguing on behalf of an out-of-the-box 10/22.
So was it not silly to deride the Ruger for its polymer triggerguard, in comparing it to a Marlin? Ruger uses the same polymer they use in pistol frames. Marlin uses the same cheap plastic they always used.
Reliability?
Durability?
Ability to "eat" more types of ammo without failure?
No need to sink additional hundreds into it to keep it running, or make it accurate?
Seems to me the ONLY advantage the 10/22 has is the ability to be modified into anything you want it to be.
Do you really think the ONE 10/22 you owned that was not reliable is typical of the breed? Seriously, last I checked, there were over 40 variations of the 10/22 in production and they sell every one they make. Do you really think they would sell millions of them if they were garbage??? Do you really think that everybody who buys one turns around and puts several hundred dollars into it??? Yes, delusional.
$600+ Rugers are about on par with Marlins as far as accuracy and reliability.
And how many $600 Rugers have you built or tested? I would love to see a hundred dollar Marlin that shoots 1/4"@50yds. Because mine certainly doesn't.
And the Marlin achieves the same level of function with bulk-grade ammo and CCI (which I consider to be "mid-grade" ammo), whereas most of the expensive Rugers need the match grade ammo to function to the ability you are referring to.
How do you figure that? If I remember correctly, I shot Federal bulk at my first and second Appleseed. I'll shoot Remington Golden Bullets at my third. I'm still trying to figure out where all this money gets "dumped to make it more reliable". Because the only reliability part is the extractor and it is usually replaced so that unfired rounds can be extracted from the tighter Bentz chamber.
"Delusional" is a word you use later, that describes this statement perfectly.
The Ruger is a simpler design. Of higher quality. Better materials. It is easier to work on, easier to clean, easier to disassemble and reassemble and can be modified to take on any form imaginable with common hand tools.
Many of the "tacticool" mods do nothing for accuracy.
Exactly, so how does it make one shoot worse? How does a modification done by a rifle's owner a slight against the rifle???
