Ruger 10/22....less than impressed

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MMA1991

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
61
Location
SE Louisiana
I purchased a new Ruger 10/22 for my son tonight for Christmas. I never owned one but have shot plenty and have known many who have and was pretty sure I was gong to get a high quality fire arm.

When I got home I realized the butt plate was - plastic....the barrel ring on the fore end was - plastic..... the trigger housing was - plastic and the trigger was - plastic. And to top it off the "bluing" looked more like black spray paint....really?:(

I own two other Rugers (both pistols) and am very pleased with the design, materials of construction, fit and finish and craftsmanship...guess my expectations for the 10/22 were a little higher than they should have been.

Buyers remorse is beginning to set in and was wondering if others had the same impression.

Sure hope it shoots as good as I have been told....
 
My dad has a newer one similar to your description and I would have to disagree, it is a fine quality and shooting weapon. I learned a lot on that gun years ago.
 
It all makes sense, when you consider the economy of it. All the plastic non stress parts. Good or bad , I guess depends on how they hold up. Check into the 795. I really like mine.
 
Sign of the times. Many things that were once made of metal are now plastic. I have a 10/22 that I bought 25 years ago. It had mostly metal parts.....It's accuracy is nothing to be impressed with though.
 
Glocks are largely made of plastic, as are many other firearms. Shoot it, and see how it works. The nice thing about 10/22's is that they sell LOTS of aftermarket parts to make it what you want. Mine retains the receiver, and bolt only, and that was done when they still made them from wood, and steel back in 1996.
 
^^ Exactly. Shoot it, then come back and let us know of you're still disappointed.

The 10/22 isn't a match-grade rifle by any means, so don't expect that kind of accuracy. What you should expect is reliability and simplicity, an all-around handy rifle or carbine for general purpose shooting, training, or plinking.
 
The plastic trigger housing is "better" compared to the metal ones because it's more uniform.

As others have stated, plastic parts are very common in entry level firearms due to cost savings.

I don't even put a barrel band on my 10/22s and not sure why that is even a reason for your complaint.

If you don't like it...sell it and move on. No sense in complaining about it on forums as Ruger isn't going to make those changes.
 
I've had old and new 10-22s the button plates have been plastic for years The newer versions with plastic trigger groups are much better than the old ones. Ruger has never used steel. Plastic is tougher and much better than the old cast aluminum that all manufacturers nude on budget 22s
 
The big draw for me is the flush-fitting rotary magazine---that's reason enough to own one. I especially like the clear plastic mags that are available. But, yes, I agree with you about the plastic trigger; in fact, I believe that is the first thing a new 10/22 owner typically addresses. The triggers are easy enough to replace or slick up, but I see Ruger's just released this little gem: http://www.ruger.com/micros/BX-Trigger/?r=y . I must admit that I object philosophically to having to replace the trigger on a brand-new rifle, but the factory trigger does work well enough for the average Joe.

I used my 10/22 "Walmart Special" for years before I decided to fix it up a bit, slicking up the trigger, having the chamber and bolt reworked, bedding the receiver and barrel, and topping it with a Mueller AVP scope on a one-piece Dednutz mount. It's incredibly accurate, right up there with the best of them, and functions flawlessly with almost any ammo. Like legions of others, I have no regrets "taking the journey," so to speak, and I think you will too. Enjoy shooting it, and enjoy "making it yours"!


IMG_1184_zps8df8aa69.jpg
 
I bought one on Black Friday and had the same buyer's remorse.

Well, I finally got it to the range and that remorse quickly went away. For the price you pay, there's definitely some plastic.

I'll be changing out a few parts and probably mounting a small scope on it and turning it into a fun little plinker.
 
Every day on here we talk about spending hundreds of dollars for various handguns with plastic frames.

Then we're surprised when what is sold as an inexpensive, basically entry level 22 rifle uses plastic. :confused:
 
Thanks SleazyRider. That's exactly the type of feedback and insight I was hoping to gain from the forum. Your reply was most helpful.

Seems like these rifles have quite a following and I am looking fwd to joining the ranks.
 
Well looks like my initial concern was unfounded after reading the Brimstone article posted above by SilicoSys4.

Will provide a range report after we take her out. As always, this forum provided a wealth of info and is appreciated.

BT
NNNN
 
Last edited:
The disappoint surely stems from the fact that those parts used to be metal. For example, on my 10/22 they are metal. But as discussed being plastic doesn't mean there is anything wrong with them.


*As for comparing to polymer frame pistols, I guarantee the plastic used for those 10/22 parts is not in the same category as the polymer for those pistol frames. Acting as if all plastic is the same is like acting as though all metals are the same.
 
If the plastic is so much better I wonder why they didn't mold the reciever too?
 
jmorris said:
If the plastic is so much better I wonder why they didn't mold the reciever too?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are referring to with the "if the plastic is so much better"? :confused:

How much better, at what, according to whom?
 
I bought one a year or two ago just like the one you bought for your son. The only thing that bothers me is the buttplate is real slick. Besides that its a great gun plastic and all.
 
Yeah, the parkerizing on the newer ones is fine, just not pretty. same with the use of plastic wherever they can get away with it. Likewise - the true walnut stocks are largely gone, even the deluxe models are a birch stock nowadays.

Not all the plastic is bad though. the plastic trigger group was bashed literally off the end of the earth when it came out. but it's held up well, and responds to smithing just as well as it's predecessor.

Ruger has cut a number of costs to remain in the game. However, where it's always counted, they have retained one important thing. Out of the box, the 10/22 remains perhaps the most reliable of the 22 semi-auto rifles ever made. literally anything that you can put into it, goes bang. And while the OOB accuracy isn't going to win "x's" at shooting competitions, a minor investment will remedy that. Should you so desire. even the worst examples I've seen will still toss a pop can at 100 yards with almost boring regularity.

One other thing about the humble little 10/22 I would stake a claim that no other firearm in production has a wide of a variety of aftermarket support. You can make a 10/22 into quite literally anything you can dream up. from precision bench rest, to wall hanger, to woods gun, to a TEOTWAWKI rube goldberg swiss army knife arsenal of picatinny add on doom.
 
Last edited:
Well...

At least those pats won't rust. Were unable to look at the rifles before buying one? That being the case, I guess I'd be surprised but depending upon the quality of the castings - not necessarily disappointed.

Ruger leading the way in so much casting would cast the entire rifle if feasible.
 
I bought the Deluxe . It has a nice walnut stock , blued barrel , rubber butt pad and no barrel ring . It does have the plastic trigger though .

The only complaint I had about mine is , the trigger pull was terrible , over 8 lbs. . I fixed that with a Volquartsen target hammer , for about $40 dollars . It dropped the trigger pull down to about 5.5 / 6 lbs. , good enough for hunting . I don't like a 3 lb. trigger for anything but targets and I would not put in a 3 lb. trigger for my kid .

I did some ammo testing with mine , using a variety of different ammo at 50 yds. . The best group was .603 , with Wolf Target Extra , Winchester Super x .751 and CCI Mini Mags .770 . I also was using a 3x9 Weaver rimfire scope .

I actually prefer the plastic butt pad on low recoiling guns . The rubber grabs my clothing where the plastic slides .
 
FWIW, my more recent polymer 10/22 had a better trigger, out of the box, than the steel 10/22 purchased maybe 15 years ago...

As others have noted, it's almost a moot point for me because I've come to regard the 10/22 as the "Transformer" of firearms. I've outfitted both of my 10/22's with so many add-ons and swap-outs, that they're virtually unrecognizable from their original configurations. :)

.
 
Mine has all the plastic on it as well, and I haven't had any problems associated with but honestly, I don't like it and would rather have metal but I can't change it and I really don't care that much. I have no complaints about the finish, it isn't a high dollar rifle.
 
I have 10/22's from the old to the new models and have always been pleased with the cost/reliability of the guns.
Sure, some may need some tweaking to ring out the best in accuracy but the ones I use on a day to day basis will take a ground squirrel at ranges to 150 yds with ease.
IMO they are the best 22 for the money there is given their reliability and post purchase options.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Ruger 10-22
Replies
12
Views
596
mljdeckard
mljdeckard
H
  • Locked
When did Ruger start using plastic parts on the 10/22?
Replies
14
Views
8K
CZguy
C
A
  • Locked
Ruger American in .30-06 is $20.00 more than a 10/22
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Aragon
A
R
  • Locked
Ruger 10/22
Replies
17
Views
912
RWMC
R
HetchHetchy
  • Locked
Is the Remington 597 now superior to the Ruger 10/22?
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
20K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top