Worst 22 rifle you've ever shot?

[kwg020]

A Remington 597. I've never been able to get through a magazine without a jam or FTF of some sort. It is really accurate though, that's the only reason I still have it. Maybe one of these days someone will find the cure to problem.

It was my understanding that the 597 had plastic magazines when they first came out and the plastic magazines were junk. I heard they have aluminum magazines now and they work much better. I always wanted a 597 because I heard they were accurate and they have classic lines but the magazine issue scared me off.
kwg

 

[RedlegRick]

RedlegRick,

This new Henry incarnation is looking tempting. Like the new stock design mainly.

BTW I used to wear red socks under my dress blues after I became a 13A. People with Eagles and Stars On Thar's failed to see the humor.

-kBob

I never went that far. Crossed cannons were enough. And I have taken a look or two at the Henry, but so far I've resisted.

 

[hdwhit]

My AR-7 has probably been my least favorite.

I bought it new.

When I took it home, my best friend fell in love with it so I sold it to him for the $80 I had paid for it. Some time later when he was getting ready to get married he asked me if I wanted to buy it back. When he showed it to me, it looked like it had been being used as a boat anchor. Still, I gave him the same $80 he had given me. I took it home, cleaned it up, and refinished it, but it was never quite the same. It would go through a magazine without any problems but started to have FTE problems on the second one. Let it cool down for an hour and it would be okay again.

When I moved out of town for a new job, I left it with my fiance. She called me early one morning (having already called 911) for instructions on how to put it together because someone was trying to break into her apartment. She put it together and spent the rest of the night propped up in bed pointing it at the door. The police arrived, found the guy was one of her neighbors, blind drunk and mistaking her apartment for his own (that's why his key wouldn't work the lock). Ever since, the AR-7 has been HER gun.

So it all worked out.

 

[Paul7]

It was my understanding that the 597 had plastic magazines when they first came out and the plastic magazines were junk. I heard they have aluminum magazines now and they work much better. I always wanted a 597 because I heard they were accurate and they have classic lines but the magazine issue scared me off.
kwg

Do the old ones handle the aluminum magazines?

Over on Glocktalk recently there was a thread about a new Ruger American rifle that was getting over 1.5" groups at 35 yards.

 

[mavracer]

I had a Glenfield model 60 that I don't think ever went 3 consecutive rounds without jamming.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Remington Nylon 10C Mohawk. What a complete POS. A friend GAVE it to me. I'll never accept another.

 

[berettaprofessor]

I read this thread yesterday and thought I couldn't contribute because I've never shot a bad 22....but then I remembered that I sold my Savage Mark II because it would never live up to my expectations, accuracy-wise. No matter what ammo I tried in that rifle, an inch at 50 yards was the best I ever got; I've got both a 10-22 and a CZ452 that shoots rings around it.

 

[dagger dog]

We had a favorite high end 22 thread and a favorite low end 22 thread, how about a least favorite 22 you've ever had?

I'll go first. A close friend of mine in school had a JC Higgins semi auto 22 that we used to attempt to shoot with frequently. Don't remember the model but it looks just like this one. I believe these were sold by Sears in the 60's?

View attachment 777893

It could not hit anywhere in the vicinity of where you aimed and a required tool for shooting was an 8 penny nail to dig out all the jams and stovepipes. It loved to double feed and would often lodge empty cases in the opposite side from the ejection port requiring much swearing, prying, and usually a trip to the barn for a pliers. I recall once him trying to shoot a rabbit about 30 yards and the rabbit sat there motionless as all his sots skittered around it and it finally stovepiped. He turned it around and threw it at the rabbit by the barrel.

Several years later after discovering that when shot from the hip you could see the bullets skittering off into the trees at about 600 fps he tried to clean it and jammed a cleaning rod in the bore. Turns out it was so leaded up there was only about a 17 caliber hole down the center of the bore. A gunsmith he knew removed the rod and cleaned out the bore and gave it back. We were excited after all these years that the ole Higgins would be good as new so we took it out to shoot it. Nope, still couldn't hold shots on a paper plate at 50 yards and still jams every 4 rounds.

Recently we keep seeing them at gun shows for $400 and we just share a glance and chuckle.

That rifle was made by High Standard for Sears, had the rewinding sling in the butt stock, I made the mistake of cleaning my bosses rifle that had belonged to his father took me 2 days getting the retractable sling to work, never again.

 

[Dr T]

Another vote for the Remington 552. The gun belonged to a relative. There was something wrong with the sear (I think). Every now and then it would get a notion that is was actually a BAR and go full auto. It cycled so fast it took a while to figure out. I would line up a few tin cans. Then, I would fill the tube magazine, take careful aim, and shoot the first, the second, the third, and click. It would empty the tube in about three trigger pulls. Granted it was a cute feature, but you couldn't depend on it. And it was a waste of ammo to take it rabbit hunting.

 

[db_tanker]

worst 22 I ever owned...Ruger 10-22...would not shoot with anything approaching accuracy...25 yard targets would look like I was using buckshot.

one of the most accurate 22s I have ever shot...Ruger 10-22

 

[hillman23]

I bought a Marlin 60 that would jam at least once every tube no matter what I fed it and that hit down and the the left from point of aim. Tried to get the malfunctions taken care of. I cleaned it once after the first time I shot it and then detail cleaned it, no change. Tried a few different types of ammo thinking that maybe it didn't like what I was using, no change. Took it to the smith, still no change.

Threw it in on a trade with full disclosure to a guy on something else who said that he could probably fix it and got rid of it. That thing sucked. I once had a .22 rifle from the Philippines that I got for $20 that was better in every way than that thing.

The model 60 my dad got for us kids was so frustratingly unreliable that it would do a better job as a fence post. It could be counted on for one thing: guaranteed jam.

 

[Danoobie]

Mossberg 715T

Just got a Mossberg International "812" in 22MAG. 2-section bolt, had to replace the rear sight to
have windage adjustment; lethargic, sticky, slow bolt, and light firing pin strikes. The mag is balky, and ammo has to get "positioned" to feed.

To add insult to injury,
(because we're not even going to discuss what I paid for this rifle) there is no after-market, at all. Google
searches, even at the Mossberg site, bring up zip, nada, snake-eyes.

 

[Sniper66]

I bought a JC Higgins short--stroke lever action .22 when I was a teenager. The scope mount was a cheap metal bar held on the gun with two screws. The scope rings mounted on the bar like it was a dovetail. The problem was when you tighten the scope it pulled up on the screws and within 8-10 shots, about enough to get a zero, the screws were loose again. Gave up on the scope and just used the open sights. The lever/bolt assembly was made out of cheap pot metal (or something) painted silver to make it look like nickel. But, it was shiny which looked cool to a dumb kid. It was such a bad gun that I don't recall ever shooting anything with it. i only recall the problems. I eventually threw it in the back of the closet and I never saw it again. That was about 55 years ago.

 

[LoonWulf]

Do the old ones handle the aluminum magazines?

Over on Glocktalk recently there was a thread about a new Ruger American rifle that was getting over 1.5" groups at 35 yards.

Yeah, my 597 came with the plastic magazine. When i finally bought spares they were aluminum.


Something id forgotten till now is that my 597 wouldnt run on all the cheap ammo, federal and remington hollow points stand out in my mind as jamming.

Cci blasers, minimags, and stingers ran fine.

Those are my go to rounds now for function testing a malfunctioning .22......

 

[ih772]

It was my understanding that the 597 had plastic magazines when they first came out and the plastic magazines were junk. I heard they have aluminum magazines now and they work much better. I always wanted a 597 because I heard they were accurate and they have classic lines but the magazine issue scared me off.
kwg

Mine came with a metal magazine, so that's not the issue. It will jam with CCI ammo too.

 

[mshootnit]

For me it is the 10-22.
Fat receiver designed to mimic the pistol carbine, instead of being proper dimension like an SA-22 or Model 63.
Terrible trigger, ineffective firing mechanism with multiple failures due to non captive firing pin, and low grade extractor.
Soft aluminum receivers which can easily strip out.
Fat little rotary mags that can gum up.

Bad rifle? It comes to you with the understanding that you are going to replace everything, how's that for a concept.

To me the best 22's are the Win. 63, SA-22 and the Rem 512x.

 

[IndianaBoy]

Friend of mine had a 10/22 carbine. Accuracy was so poor that even hitting a milk jug at 20 yards was a crapshoot. Turned me off to them for years. A have a 10/22 Takedown that is very accurate and reliable, so not a knock on the 10/22 overall. I know they can be quite good.

That one was a turd for one reason or another.

 

[kwg020]

worst 22 I ever owned...Ruger 10-22...would not shoot with anything approaching accuracy...25 yard targets would look like I was using buckshot.

one of the most accurate 22s I have ever shot...Ruger 10-22

A friend of mine has a 10-22 that started out accurate and eventually shot very poorly. He said he had not cleaned it for several hundred rounds and when he ran a brush down the throat out popped a ring of lead and wax that had built up around the chamber/throat. I wonder just how many .22's have stopped being accurate because they never got cleaned ??? I can only assume some lead bullets are harder than others and are lubed with wax that may be too soft or too thick. I'd like to have these "problem" rifles just to see why they are inaccurate or otherwise don't shoot well.
kwg

 

[ThomasT]

kwg020 I think you are 100% correct. People think that 22s never need to be cleaned but they are really about the dirtiest smokeless gun you can find. They leave unburned powder, the soft lead bullets will foul the bore and same for the wax coating on the bullets. Nobody would think of shooting their deer rifle like a 30-30 of 270/30-06 300-400 rounds without cleaning it. But folks do that with a 22 all the time.

I have a 77/22 I shot 400 rounds through and until the last hundred it shot pretty good. Then I ran a bristle brush from the chamber forward and pushed out a wad of gunk. Brushed the barrel a few more times and it went right back to grouping. And by grouping I mean 10 shots inside of a 1" square at 50 yards. Time after time if its kept clean.

Other than the AR-7 I mentioned earlier I have never had a bad shooting, poor feeding 22. I guess I have been lucky.

 

[Glockula]

Mine was a stock 10/22 I bought new in 1997. Worst trigger I have ever had. So heavy it was prohibitive to shooting the gun well. A lot of squirrels lived because of that gun. Volquartsen trigger and it's like she is brand new.

 

[bannockburn]

ih772

Mine came with a metal magazine, so that's not the issue. It will jam with CCI ammo too.

Had both the plastic and the metal magazines for the Remington 597. Both were still junk even after doing some recommended modifications to them to try and get them to work right.

 

[Cemetery21]

Mine was a 1890 Winchester pump. But, it was totally worn out. I was in high school and traded a Japanese sword for it, 'cause I didn't know any better.
I didn't know you could wear out a rifle that cosmetically looked decent. The last inch or so of the barrel had no rifling and a loaded shell was smaller than the hole. So, it key holed. Had to have been worn out by a cleaning rod. Well, the front sight sits quite a ways back, so I sawed off about an inch and it shot better. But then, it started blowing gas out of the breech. I could see that the bolt face was rusted/eroded out so I never shot it again. About 50 years ago I left it with a guy who had a good bolt and said he would line the barrel. I think I ended up trading him the rifle because I never got it back.. Anyway, I always liked the look of the old octagon barreled pump and wished I had a good one. Just never got around to it.

 

[fjblair]

I can't give a good answer because I've never owned a .22 rifle that was a problem. On the other hand I know exactly what handgun I would identify as the "worst".

 

[bannockburn]

mshootnit

For me it is the 10-22.
Fat receiver designed to mimic the pistol carbine, instead of being proper dimension like an SA-22 or Model 63.
Terrible trigger, ineffective firing mechanism with multiple failures due to non captive firing pin, and low grade extractor.
Soft aluminum receivers which can easily strip out.
Fat little rotary mags that can gum up.

Bad rifle? It comes to you with the understanding that you are going to replace everything, how's that for a concept.

Sorry to hear you had such a poor experience with your 10/22. I have had mine for nearly 40 years and it has been the most reliable and accurate semi-auto .22 rifle I have ever used. No problems with the trigger, extractor, or any other internal part for that matter. I put a scope on it as I knew it was capable of being more accurate than I could shoot it with the iron sights. Never any trouble with the factory magazines either, even after putting thousands of rounds through them. If it seemed like they were getting a little gummed up I would just spray them thoroughly with WD40 and that seemed to do the trick getting them clean again. Haven't felt the need to replace any parts on it though I do have a Butler Creek folding stock for it when I want to go with a more compact set-up.

 

[db_tanker]

A friend of mine has a 10-22 that started out accurate and eventually shot very poorly. He said he had not cleaned it for several hundred rounds and when he ran a brush down the throat out popped a ring of lead and wax that had built up around the chamber/throat. I wonder just how many .22's have stopped being accurate because they never got cleaned ??? I can only assume some lead bullets are harder than others and are lubed with wax that may be too soft or too thick. I'd like to have these "problem" rifles just to see why they are inaccurate or otherwise don't shoot well.
kwg

I was actually told...TOLD...that I cleaned my 22 too much. I tried letting it go for 200 rounds...no change.
Mebbe I should have gotten an aftermarket barrel for it as I am sure it would have helped. getting a green mtn barrel for it or some such...hind sight is always 20-20.
what I think is interesting...all the reports of AR7's being bad for accuracy...I love mine. I guess its just how the chips fall.