cluttonfred
Member
Has the Chiappa Little Badger folding single-shot .22 started shipping yet? Anyone gotten their hands on one?
Take Down .22LR Rifles
- Thread starter SKILCZ
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,505
The one disadvantage of the Browning SA22 are the springs and plungers it uses for take down and barrel lock-up. They're easy to lose. I made some replacement plungers for two guns. The Remington 24 (close copy) is a bit better as it has only one plunger. BTW, they're neat little guns.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,211
The Browning is the quintessential take down 22.
I would say a AR would be a crummy choice, they cost a lot, have a mag that is built to take up space and would be the most open to grit and grime broken down.
The AR-7 is the lightest but also takes the longest time to put together.
The M6 has the worst "trigger" ever designed. This includes catapults.
There is nothing more versatile than a Savage 24.
If you build an SBR 10/22 the rest will spend a lot more time in the dark. Nothing beats a gun that is more compact than most take downs AND ready to fire at the flick of the safety.
I would say a AR would be a crummy choice, they cost a lot, have a mag that is built to take up space and would be the most open to grit and grime broken down.
The AR-7 is the lightest but also takes the longest time to put together.
The M6 has the worst "trigger" ever designed. This includes catapults.
There is nothing more versatile than a Savage 24.
If you build an SBR 10/22 the rest will spend a lot more time in the dark. Nothing beats a gun that is more compact than most take downs AND ready to fire at the flick of the safety.
Last edited:
DM~
Member
10/22's are also fatter in your hand than a HEE HAW girl after a big supper!! lolStout lockup adjustable for any wear and massive aftermarket parts support.
The Brownings also have a good lock up and adjustment for wear, and they are slim, trim and a JOY to carry and shoot!!
What a GREAT time tested design the Browning is!
DM
WRT to the original guns listed, I've only owned the Papoose. I've cried every day since I let it go, and they are hard to find nowadays. Great little gun, never had any problems with it. I didn't have much, if any, issue with it maintaining zero after disassembling / reassembling it.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,211
The Belgian Brownings have dove tails milled into the receiver the Japanese ones are drilled and tapped for a barrel mount. So if you were going to scope it I think the edge would go to the barrel mount.
I have one of each here and both have a nice fit and finish. The stain is darker on the Japan one I received for Christmass when I was 11 and my Dad took better care of his.
I have one of each here and both have a nice fit and finish. The stain is darker on the Japan one I received for Christmass when I was 11 and my Dad took better care of his.
One that I haven't seen mentioned, and the thread is getting to be pretty comprehensive of what's out there, is the Pack Rifle: http://www.packrifle.com/products.asp.
If weight were a primary concern, I'd bet you're not going to do better than 15.5 ounces.
If weight were a primary concern, I'd bet you're not going to do better than 15.5 ounces.
jgh4445
Member
I have an old Browning take down with the "wheel" rear sight. Its accurate own its own, but with the Federal 40 gr Auto Match ammo run thru a Neil Waltz sizing die its actually scary accurate!
DM~
Member
Ed Ames
Member
ARs make fairly horrible "take-down" rimfires. Yes, technically it is one, and they are decent in that the barrel, sights, bolt, etc all move as a unit so accuracy tends to be consistent ... but they are bulky and heavy compared to a purpose built take-down .22lr.
I have two .22lr rifles that qualify as take-down.
One is an old Remington bolt .22 (s/l/lr) that has a thumb screw for removing the barreled action including the trigger. Taken down it fits nicely in a soft case originally sold for a break-action shotgun. It had a long barrel and peep sights and with the right ammo the loudest part about shooting it is the bullet hitting the back stop, or with other ammo it's more accurate than I am out to 100 yards on a calm day.
The other is my .22lr AR. It's a standard AR that will accept any upper but it was sold as a .22 and is marked .22LR. I usually swap the rimfire upper onto my primary AR because the trigger is so much better.
Between those two, the bolt takedown is better in every way except "matches the controls of an AR". I use it a lot more often than the rimfire AR.
The only AR7 I've handled was very awkward with a bulging stock. I'm guessing they increased the internal volume so it would float but it didn't feel great.
The Brownings are all trashed by the factory, which ticks me off. They could be one of the most beautiful rifles ever made but Browning insists on gangstering them out with gold teeth and "engraving" that reminds a person of ball-point prison tats. I don't know if you can order one through their custom shop where the custom feature is "leave it alone", but short of that it's too much of an Elvis on Black Velvet for me.
I keep looking at the 10/22TD and I suspect if I spotted one of the stainless+flash hider distributor specials I'd buy it, but who knows.
The M6 is just way too expensive.
There is someone who makes a replacement stock and barrel for the cricket kiddie single shots. They form a take-down single-shot that weighs about a pound. That might be cool to have.
I have two .22lr rifles that qualify as take-down.
One is an old Remington bolt .22 (s/l/lr) that has a thumb screw for removing the barreled action including the trigger. Taken down it fits nicely in a soft case originally sold for a break-action shotgun. It had a long barrel and peep sights and with the right ammo the loudest part about shooting it is the bullet hitting the back stop, or with other ammo it's more accurate than I am out to 100 yards on a calm day.
The other is my .22lr AR. It's a standard AR that will accept any upper but it was sold as a .22 and is marked .22LR. I usually swap the rimfire upper onto my primary AR because the trigger is so much better.
Between those two, the bolt takedown is better in every way except "matches the controls of an AR". I use it a lot more often than the rimfire AR.
The only AR7 I've handled was very awkward with a bulging stock. I'm guessing they increased the internal volume so it would float but it didn't feel great.
The Brownings are all trashed by the factory, which ticks me off. They could be one of the most beautiful rifles ever made but Browning insists on gangstering them out with gold teeth and "engraving" that reminds a person of ball-point prison tats. I don't know if you can order one through their custom shop where the custom feature is "leave it alone", but short of that it's too much of an Elvis on Black Velvet for me.
I keep looking at the 10/22TD and I suspect if I spotted one of the stainless+flash hider distributor specials I'd buy it, but who knows.
The M6 is just way too expensive.
There is someone who makes a replacement stock and barrel for the cricket kiddie single shots. They form a take-down single-shot that weighs about a pound. That might be cool to have.
...and they are more reliable, accurate, have better ergos, and are more easily maintained than almost every other "take-down" as well.
It is what it is. Everything is a tradeoff. I don't find a 6-pound rifle (without optics) to be that heavy at all.
Ed Ames
Member
A rimfire AR is no more or less accurate than any other blowback rimfire with the sights mounted on the barrel.
As for reliability, they work the same way. I suppose you can argue that the oversized magwell relative to need could be a problem for the AR. Also, some of the ARs have extraction and ejection compromises (e.g. some count on case pressure for extraction, some use the firing pin for ejection) and the AR provides a well for spent brass to get trapped in, all of which reduce reliability at least in theory.
Ergos of an AR .22 aren't better than a non-AR. There isn't enough recoil for bore line to make any difference. The charging handle is designed for a completely different cartridge and doesn't map well to the rim fire. Pistol grip ergos are different but not conclusively "better".
For maintenance...I agree. I once spent 2 hours trying to figure out how to get a tube-magazine rimfire semi back together and that definitely nods towards the AR.
Six pounds is arguably too heavy for a 3000+ fps .22, which is why you can buy carbon fiber ARs. For an 1100fps .22 it is at least 2 pounds too heavy. The point of a take down rim fire is to have something small, light, and easy to bring along. Two pounds would be nice.
Don't get me wrong...I like my rimfire AR, but the AR was designed for midrange cartridges and when dropped in the pool of designed-for-purpose .22 rifles the best compliment you can pay it is tthat it isn't totally outclassed.
As for reliability, they work the same way. I suppose you can argue that the oversized magwell relative to need could be a problem for the AR. Also, some of the ARs have extraction and ejection compromises (e.g. some count on case pressure for extraction, some use the firing pin for ejection) and the AR provides a well for spent brass to get trapped in, all of which reduce reliability at least in theory.
Ergos of an AR .22 aren't better than a non-AR. There isn't enough recoil for bore line to make any difference. The charging handle is designed for a completely different cartridge and doesn't map well to the rim fire. Pistol grip ergos are different but not conclusively "better".
For maintenance...I agree. I once spent 2 hours trying to figure out how to get a tube-magazine rimfire semi back together and that definitely nods towards the AR.
Six pounds is arguably too heavy for a 3000+ fps .22, which is why you can buy carbon fiber ARs. For an 1100fps .22 it is at least 2 pounds too heavy. The point of a take down rim fire is to have something small, light, and easy to bring along. Two pounds would be nice.
Don't get me wrong...I like my rimfire AR, but the AR was designed for midrange cartridges and when dropped in the pool of designed-for-purpose .22 rifles the best compliment you can pay it is tthat it isn't totally outclassed.
ObsceneJesster
Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2011
- Messages
- 266
I don't have a dedicated .22 AR yet nor do I have a take down .22 yet. I have been thinking about both. I like the 10/22 Take Down but I think the AR's look better than any .22 take down rifle out there. You also have many more accessory options available for the AR platform than you would a .22 take down rifle.
That being said, I think I will eventually have both but I think the 10/22 TD would make for a better .22 take down rifle to have for SHTF. It's lighter and more compact when taken apart.
I wouldn't say one is more reliable than the other. Personally, I think the reliability of all Rimfire rifles is a little lacking and that is mostly due to the crap rim fire ammo being sold. Seems like every rimfire gun I own likes a different kind of ammo.
That being said, I think I will eventually have both but I think the 10/22 TD would make for a better .22 take down rifle to have for SHTF. It's lighter and more compact when taken apart.
I wouldn't say one is more reliable than the other. Personally, I think the reliability of all Rimfire rifles is a little lacking and that is mostly due to the crap rim fire ammo being sold. Seems like every rimfire gun I own likes a different kind of ammo.
Ed Ames
Member
Absolutely on the ammo quality.
My experience on reliability on the AR is ....
A friend, his daughter, and I went shooting. He had a 10/22. I had the two .22s I mentioned in this thread (old bolt takedown, AR). Friend's daughter was blasting away with the 10/22 with bulk ammo. She was hitting duds and cycling the 10/22 action frequently I fired about a hundred rounds of .22 through the AR, then switched to the bolt. My friend's daughter asked to try the AR 22. Sure.
She had trouble with it as soon as she hit the first dud round. To chamber another round you've got to give a good yank on the charging handle so the dud cartridge is thrown clear of the action. She was gentling it and dropping the duds into the action. She did that several times before giving up and going back to the 10/22. I didn't have that problem because for me it's easy enough to pull that charging handle.
I once tried using the AR for some prone practice with super colibris. Torture. Having to yank that handle fairly hard, while prone, for each shot, well I switched to my bolt .22.
My experience on reliability on the AR is ....
A friend, his daughter, and I went shooting. He had a 10/22. I had the two .22s I mentioned in this thread (old bolt takedown, AR). Friend's daughter was blasting away with the 10/22 with bulk ammo. She was hitting duds and cycling the 10/22 action frequently I fired about a hundred rounds of .22 through the AR, then switched to the bolt. My friend's daughter asked to try the AR 22. Sure.
She had trouble with it as soon as she hit the first dud round. To chamber another round you've got to give a good yank on the charging handle so the dud cartridge is thrown clear of the action. She was gentling it and dropping the duds into the action. She did that several times before giving up and going back to the 10/22. I didn't have that problem because for me it's easy enough to pull that charging handle.
I once tried using the AR for some prone practice with super colibris. Torture. Having to yank that handle fairly hard, while prone, for each shot, well I switched to my bolt .22.
CopperFouling
Member
Hard to beat a Browning. My friend's father has one from the late '60s, and it has needed one replacement part (I don't recall what, but it was only a few dollars) in all that time. It's a blast to shoot—points naturally, shoots accurately.
I'd love to own a synthetic Papoose, but they're really hard to find. Even the owner of the best-stocked LGS by me, with something like two thousand firearms in his store, said that he rarely sees them. Seems like a great rifle, though.
I'd love to own a synthetic Papoose, but they're really hard to find. Even the owner of the best-stocked LGS by me, with something like two thousand firearms in his store, said that he rarely sees them. Seems like a great rifle, though.
Ed Ames
Member
The last time I saw an m6 was in '07 or thereabouts so i'm not really current on prices. That was a used Springfield LR/parkerized model a local shop had tagged at $695.
Recently a local shop has had a stack of savage 42s...I think that's the model...for $400-something - about what I paid for my (used) .22lr AR - and I think that's too much for a mass produced break action single shot even if it does have two barrels.
Recently a local shop has had a stack of savage 42s...I think that's the model...for $400-something - about what I paid for my (used) .22lr AR - and I think that's too much for a mass produced break action single shot even if it does have two barrels.
Last edited:
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,211
I don't think the weak link for the AR is cost anyway but the sight height over bore is a big thumbs down on a rifle where you could be shooting small targets, like a snake head at very close ranges then still want a good zero for a target like a rabbit at distances.
Run the ballistic tables using a normal .22 sight height and the normal 2.6" height of the AR, big difference.
If I couldn't have all of them the one I would hang onto would be the Savage 24 in .22/20ga.
Run the ballistic tables using a normal .22 sight height and the normal 2.6" height of the AR, big difference.
If I couldn't have all of them the one I would hang onto would be the Savage 24 in .22/20ga.
Last edited:
chicharrones
needs more ammo
I've seen close range misses at small targets with ARs due to exactly that. I didn't remember it until you brought it up.
- Status
