Ruger .22 Charger thoughts?

[nugi]

Learn to use a sling properly

imgur.com

Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.

imgur.com

What did you use to get a rear sling mount on it?

 

[plumberroy]

Stark makes a grip with a sling mount

AR Rifle Grip

The Stark AR Pistol grip has no integral trigger guard, which allows for installation on any AR rifle, including billet receivers. Shooters who prefer to retain the original trigger guard on their rifle will appreciate this easier to install, lower price grip. As with our StarkOne grip the angle...

starkequipment.com

 

[plumberroy]

Gun is carried under my right arm (I'm a lefty) swing gun up to eye level and push forward until sling is tight. The scope is at proper eye relief and you have 4 points of contact for stability ( rifle scope)
Just about as stable as brace/stock more compact . Not affected by whims of ATF

 

[SterlingBullet]

Looking at a Ruger .22 Charger at RK. Anybody hav experience with this pistol?

My family loves our 22 Chargers. Put a red dot on it and see how easy they are to shoot. They go through twenty 25rd magazines in minutes. Good thing 22lr ammo is dirt cheap compared to any other option. A 500rd day at the range will only cost you about $50 bucks.
They're lightweight, youth friendly, low recoil, high capacity, infinitely customizable, super reliable. 100rd magazine drums are available. Concealable in a backpack. Easy for left handed shooters. A pistol brace blade makes a great set up. They are easy to store in smaller safes.
A good Truck gun, get home gun, easy for travel, possibly a EOTWAWKI choice.

 

[CraigC]

Put a brace on the Charger. It'll change your mind.

Post #4.

Not affected by whims of ATF

No longer an issue on that particular front.

 

[plumberroy]

Post #4.



No longer an issue on that particular front.

When I put it together it was, still makes the gun more compact than with a brace

 

[dogtown tom]

Just about as stable as brace/stock more compact .

No, its not anywhere close to being as stable as a stock.

Not affected by whims of ATF

Wanna bet?
I'm sure given enough time, someone could invent a sling that IS as stable as a stock. So stable in fact that ATF Technical Div might determine that it was in fact a shoulder stock more than a sling for carrying. Something like a flexible, hollow tube that attaches to sling swivels..........but when inflated creates a surface to place against the shoulder and becomes stiff and rigid enough to use as a stock.

Far fetched? Yes, but so were "arm braces" that weren't really arm braces but soft rubber shoulder stocks.

 

[plumberroy]

No, its not anywhere close to being as stable as a stock.

Evidently you have not been taught how to use a sling to help stabilize shooting free hand. It's not taught much anymore. But more to the point since you have never shot my set up how would you know

 

[Varminterror]

I started shooting specialty pistols with “stabilizing slings” in the 1990’s.

No, a sling on a specialty pistol is not as stable as a stock.

 

[jmorris]

The Takedown just gives the options to be able to store it in a more slinder concealable package when needed, or you can keep it in rifle form if you feel your going to need it ASAP for hunting purposes.

No it doesn't. Just makes it more pieces.

 

[Styx]

The Takedown just gives the options to be able to store it in a more slinder concealable package when needed, or you can keep it in rifle form if you feel your going to need it ASAP for hunting purposes.

No it doesn't. Just makes it more pieces.
View attachment 1230342

"No it doesn't," what exactly? You show a picture of the Takedown being in 2 peices, which will make it easier to store. What are you disagreeing with?

As far as the pic is concerned, the top is a pistol length barrel. The middle is the same concept different design. Either way, that has nothing to do with my original comment, so I'm confused. I don't recall saying the Takedown wasn't in 2 peices?

 

[dogtown tom]

Evidently you have not been taught how to use a sling to help stabilize shooting free hand. It's not taught much anymore. But more to the point since you have never shot my set up how would you know

Evidently you don't know what I've been taught. While I know a sling can be used to help stabilize, it in no shape manner or form is anything close to the stability a shoulder stock offers.
If it was, it would be taught more.

Since you haven't told us your secret set up, I wouldn't know. So fill us in on a sling technique that equals he stability of a stock.

 

[dogtown tom]

"No it doesn't," what exactly? You show a picture of the Takedown being in 2 peices, which will make it easier to store.

It doesn't change anything but the OAL and the ability to fire. A Takedown takes up the same space as a regular 10/22.

 

[Glockpride]

I’d like a TD Charger. I think that would be great for small, lightweight and travel well in a bag. I doubt I’d need a .22 for defense, but for hunting it could be a nice addition.

 

[JoeHenry]

Sorry, but I can not see a need for one. I have to many good 22 rifles.

 

[Styx]

It doesn't change anything but the OAL and the ability to fire. A Takedown takes up the same space as a regular 10/22.

Sigh, I get it. You don't like the Takedown model, but being able to split the 10/22 in half, somewhat the same but slightly different to the Kel Tec Sub 2k, S&W FPS, etc, the Takedown takes up less space in the since that it makes them easier to conceal and store. I fully suspect that even though this is a common consensus and the reason for these types of designs, you will still concoct another argument against the obvious. I can not wait to hear what you come up with next.

 

[Varminterror]

There is photographic evidence only a few posts above which prove the Takedown rifles do not take up less space, making it false to say they are easier to conceal and store, than a Charger pistol.

The takedown Charger is just a transplant of the common receiver into an application where it shouldn't be. I tried hard to like a Magpul Backpacker on a Stamped receiver using a suppressed Charger length barrel, but I still just don't like Takedown rifles in practice. Love the idea, mostly out of nostalgia, but I can't find an application where it brings actual value.

 

[dranrab]

I bought one just because. Typical fun, reliable and inexpensive 10/22. With a red dot and a suppressor, it's a good back porch plinker.

 

[dranrab]

Sorry, but I can not see a need for one. I have to many good 22 rifles.

Need? What does that have to do with buying guns?

 

[CraigC]

I decided that my takedown is going down the road. A braced Charger with a side folder just makes more sense and doesn't have the inherent accuracy issues. Plus I can put any 10/22 barrel on it I want.

 

[dogtown tom]

Sigh, I get it.

Nope.

You don't like the Takedown model,

I see little use in the concept of a "takedown" firearm. AR15's can easily be separated into upper and lower halves. No military or LE agency for good reason.

but being able to split the 10/22 in half, somewhat the same but slightly different to the Kel Tec Sub 2k, S&W FPS, etc,

The KelTec Sub2K and S&W FPS are NOT "takedown" rifles, they are folding rifles. "Somewhat the same" only in they cannot fire when in the stowed position.
The fewer steps needed in manipulation of a firearm to get it to "ready to fire" the better. The 10/22 is a disassembled firearm, needing fine motor skills to reassemble two parts correctly.
The Kel Tec Sub2K and S&W FPS

the Takedown takes up less space in the since that it makes them easier to conceal and store.

Again......no it doesn't. It takes up exactly the SAME SPACE as a nontakedown 10/22 rifle.
Again, what changes is the OAL and the ability to fire.
It's like comparing a 6ft long 2x4 and two 3ft long 2x4's or a gallon jug of milk vs two half gallon jugs of milk. Think that over.

I fully suspect that even though this is a common consensus and the reason for these types of designs, you will still concoct another argument against the obvious. I can not wait to hear what you come up with next.

The common consensus? Uh, did you read this thread?

 

[Styx]

99.9I see little use in the concept of a "takedown" firearm. AR15's can easily be separated into upper and lower halves. No military or LE agency for good reason.

I know that you see little use in the concept. You have beat that dead horse ad nauseum. The fact is that tens of thousands of others believe it's useful in the Takedown, Sub2k, AR15, and many of the other plethora of rifle platforms that have the ability to be easily broken down into two halves (figuratively not literally).

The KelTec Sub2K and S&W FPS are NOT "takedown" rifles, they are folding rifles. "Somewhat the same" only in they cannot fire when in the stowed position.
The fewer steps needed in manipulation of a firearm to get it to "ready to fire" the better. The 10/22 is a disassembled firearm, needing fine motor skills to reassemble two parts correctly.
The Kel Tec Sub2K and S&W FPS

As I pointed out, the concept is the same. I did NOT say they were exactly the same. They all are broken into two halfs, AND they can not be fired in that state. (Yes, I know that the foldable options are still connected with a pin). It's the same concept.

I could see the point in needing a Sub2k or FSP to be ready, as many use them for self-defense purposes; however, that's not the case with the 10/22. You keep pontificating, for argumentative purposes, that the 10/22 needs to be ready within a matter of a split second, but at the very same time, you state that you also agreed that you wouldn't use it as a self-defense rifle. Then you pretend to not be able to comprehend that you aren't forced to keep the rifle in a takedown position when and if you plan on using it.

Again......no it doesn't. It takes up exactly the SAME SPACE as a nontakedown 10/22 rifle.
Again, what changes is the OAL and the ability to fire.
It's like comparing a 6ft long 2x4 and two 3ft long 2x4's or a gallon jug of milk vs two half gallon jugs of milk. Think that over.

the Takedown being in 2 peices, which will make it easier to store. What are you disagreeing with?

the Takedown takes up less space in the since that it makes them easier to conceal and store.

You are an intelligent man, so why are you pretending to not be able to comprehend a simple concept? It's like you're gasping for straws to find silly things to turn into a debate. I state the obvious, which is that the takedown breaks apart into two pieces, which makes it easier to store. I don't understand why this common sense fact that would be the consensus with everyone else is a point of contention with you. It's why the Law Tactical and several other like products are popular. It's why the Kel Tec Sub2k, S&W FPS, Ruger 10/22, Charger, and PC Carbine Takedown models, Chaparral Little Badger, Henry AR7, and a plethora of AR15 accessories exist. They all are using a similar concept to solve for the same problem, which is to make the rifles/pistols more compact for easy storage and concealablity. The fact that you took me stating this obvious fact, and turned it into a silly argument about "comparing a 6ft long 2x4 and two 3ft long 2x4's or a gallon jug of milk vs two half gallon jugs of milk" is ridiculous.

Yes, if it makes you feel better and helps the ego, the physical weight and mass does not change with any takedown or foldable firearms. No one suggested or argued that it did. I believe everyone, but you, understands that when people says the aforementioned break apart and foldable firearms can be made to be smaller and more compact they are referring to being able to fit into a bag and smaller spaces vs a fullsized rifle. They obviously aren't suggesting that the guns physically shrinks.

The common consensus? Uh, did you read this thread?

I have read through it. You're the only one wanting to debate about whether the Takedown model is more compact or not.

Everything isn't for everybody. A feature you don't find useful someone else's might find useful and vis versa. I do know that this is a popular feature that a lot of gun owners want and utilize even if it's not your cup of tea. It's just like some people don't find red dots useful and others do. To each their own.

 

[dogtown tom]

I know that you see little use in the concept. You have beat that dead horse ad nauseum. The fact is that tens of thousands of others believe it's useful in the Takedown,

Tens of thousands bought Yugos too. Fact is, non Takedown 10/22 sales are far more popular than the Takedown versions.

Sub2k, AR15, and many of the other plethora of rifle platforms that have the ability to be easily broken down into two halves (figuratively not literally).

Plenty of rifles can be disassembled onto at least two parts......a Ruger 10/22 rifle for example. one bolt and the barreled receiver is easily removed from the stock.

And again, the Sub 2K isn't a "takedown" rifle, its a FOLDING RIFLE.

As I pointed out, the concept is the same. I did NOT say they were exactly the same. They all are broken into two halfs, AND they can not be fired in that state. (Yes, I know that the foldable options are still connected with a pin). It's the same concept.

So you are saying a 10/22 rifle with a folding stock is now the same concept as the Takedown? Well then we can all write Ruger and tell them there is no difference.
Oddly a Ruger 10/22 with a folding stock CAN BE FIRED with the stock folded. Thats the point I'm making.

I could see the point in needing a Sub2k or FSP to be ready, as many use them for self-defense purposes; however, that's not the case with the 10/22.

"to be ready" isn't just a self defense concept.

You keep pontificating, for argumentative purposes, that the 10/22 needs to be ready within a matter of a split second, but at the very same time, you state that you also agreed that you wouldn't use it as a self-defense rifle. Then you pretend to not be able to comprehend that you aren't forced to keep the rifle in a takedown position when and if you plan on using it.

I would argue that YOU are pontificating, for argumentative purposes, that the Takedown is somehow superior to a regular 10/22. IMO, it isn't and Ive given the reasons.

You are an intelligent man, so why are you pretending to not be able to comprehend a simple concept? It's like you're gasping for straws to find silly things to turn into a debate. I state the obvious, which is that the takedown breaks apart into two pieces, which makes it easier to store.

I'm not the one that wrote "the Takedown takes up less space". As an intelligent man, I know that to be untrue and others have pointed that out as well.
Absolutely, positively, for SURE.........a 10/22 Takedown can be disassembled to the point it could fit in a shorter box, bag or backpack than a regular 10/22......that doesn't make the Takedown smaller. Again, for the third time, it reduces only the OAL of a 10/22.

Thats a feature I don't need nor want to pay a premium for.

I don't understand why this common sense fact that would be the consensus with everyone else is a point of contention with you.

Then reread what I wrote, its pretty clearly spelled out.

It's why the Law Tactical and several other like products are popular. It's why the Kel Tec Sub2k, S&W FPS, Ruger 10/22, Charger, and PC Carbine Takedown models, Chaparral Little Badger, Henry AR7, and a plethora of AR15 accessories exist. They all are using a similar concept to solve for the same problem, which is to make the rifles/pistols more compact for easy storage and concealablity.

You are comparing apples to oranges my friend. There is a difference between folding rifles and takedown rifles. I have no use for many of those, but this thread is about the 10/22 Takedown.

And the Henry AR7? Literally the best takedown "concept" in the history of firearms.....a gun that floats. At the same time the AR7 design is one of the worst in firearms history.

The fact that you took me stating this obvious fact, and turned it into a silly argument about "comparing a 6ft long 2x4 and two 3ft long 2x4's or a gallon jug of milk vs two half gallon jugs of milk" is ridiculous.

Is my math wrong? I used those examples to show why your math was in error.

Yes, if it makes you feel better and helps the ego, the physical weight and mass does not change with any takedown or foldable firearms.

It has nothing to do with my ego.

No one suggested or argued that it did.

Did you forget that you wrote: "the Takedown takes up less space"?
Dude.

I believe everyone, but you, understands that when people says the aforementioned break apart and foldable firearms can be made to be smaller and more compact they are referring to being able to fit into a bag and smaller spaces vs a fullsized rifle.

Again, you use the term smaller. Read what I wrote. I clearly noted the takedown when disassembled has shorter OAL.

They obviously aren't suggesting that the guns physically shrinks.

Again with the strawman. I never wrote anything of the sort.

I have read through it. You're the only one wanting to debate about whether the Takedown model is more compact or not.

Well, look in the mirror. You're the only one arguing that the "the Takedown takes up less space".

 

[Styx]

Fact is, non Takedown 10/22 sales are far more popular than the Takedown versions.

But, they're still popular. There's a reason why they still sell and the functionality has even been added to their newer Ruger PC Carbine.

Plenty of rifles can be disassembled onto at least two parts......a Ruger 10/22 rifle for example. one bolt and the barreled receiver is easily removed from the stock.

And again, the Sub 2K isn't a "takedown" rifle, its a FOLDING RIFLE.

Yup, but the Takedown, Sub2K, and other foldable rifles can be quickly be made to be more compact and put back in shooting condition within 1 second without tools. It's just more convenient.

So you are saying a 10/22 rifle with a folding stock is now the same concept as the Takedown? Well then we can all write Ruger and tell them there is no difference.
Oddly a Ruger 10/22 with a folding stock CAN BE FIRED with the stock folded. Thats the point I'm making.

No, there seems to be a compression barrier between us. I didn't say anything about a 10/22 with a folding stock. If you follow the context of the prior sentences, I was CLEARLY referring to folding rifles like the Sub2k and not folding stocks, but I suspect you already knew.

"to be ready" isn't just a self defense concept.

What does this have to do with the crux of what I stated? Are you now stooping to cherry picking sentences and taking them out of context just to have something to argue over?

I would argue that YOU are pontificating, for argumentative purposes, that the Takedown is somehow superior to a regular 10/22. IMO, it isn't and Ive given the reasons.

No, I think you have reading comprehension issue because I never stated that one was better than the other. I challenge you to quote me saying so without extracting bits and peices to take out of context. Now you're resorting to lying. I only pointed out that I (originally) didn't see the point in the Charger vs the 10/22, and I ONLY mentioned that one could buy a 10/22 Takedown if they wanted something that was easier to store similar to a Charger. My opinion about the Charger vs the 10/22 changed when the velocity difference between a 10" and 16" barrel was pointed out. I conceeded that the Charger made more sense. Then you came along nitpicking after the fact about the Takedown 10/22.

You're better than that @dogtown tom. Why make stuff that I never stated, assignment it to me, and then argue against what you made up?

 

[Styx]

I'm not the one that wrote "the Takedown takes up less space". As an intelligent man, I know that to be untrue and others have pointed that out as well.
Absolutely, positively, for SURE.........a 10/22

There you go again trolling, cherrypicking, and taking stuff out of context on purpose which should be beneath you.

What I said in full was: "the Takedown takes up less space in the since that it makes them easier to conceal and store." I person of average intelligence should know that I'm referring to it being more compact, and not shrinking in mass.

So why leave out the rest of the sentence? How old are you?

You are comparing apples to oranges my friend. There is a difference between folding rifles and takedown rifles. I have no use for many of those, but this thread is about the 10/22 Takedown.

And the Henry AR7? Literally the best takedown "concept" in the history of firearms.....a gun that floats. At the same time the AR7 design is one of the worst in firearms history.

As I pointed out several times already, yes, there is a difference; however, the concepts are the same. The problem being solved for is the same. What's being solved for is making the rifle more compact so that it can fit into a bag and/or be easily stored.

Is my math wrong? I used those examples to show why your math was in error.

No, you used those examples because you're pretending to be obtuse by pretending I was asserting that the Takedown 10/22 shrunk in size. At least, I hope you're pretending.

It has nothing to do with my ego

It has everything to do with ego. You have been taking what I stated out of context on purpose and you have been putting words in my mouth for the sake of being argumentative.

Well, look in the mirror. You're the only one arguing that the "the Takedown takes up less space".

"the Takedown takes up less space in the since that it makes them easier to conceal and store." Is exactly what I wrote. You purposely chopped up the sentence to misrepresent it. It's dishonest and it's childish.