The 10/22 I want. Recommendations?

Orion8472 said:

I am wanting a light weight 10/22, but still with the .920 diameter barrel. .

Click to expand...

I'm guessing that the only way to get lightweight with the .920 barrel is to buy an aftermarket carbon fiber barrel.

here is their Lite model Take down
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/products/1022Lite/models.html

Gordon said:

here is their Lite model Take down
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/products/1022Lite/models.html

Click to expand...

But it's not a true .920 barrel that the op wants.

This is what you want. The barrel splits the difference between light weight sporter an heavy bull barrel. But a with match grade trigger, chamber and rifling will shoot every bit good as the much heavier target barrel. Weight even scoped is about 7 lbs, perfect for carrying and shooting. You're not going to get a lighweight with a .920 barrel and the heavier barrel won't be any more accurate. No one makes what you want from the factory, you'll have do decide which comes closest then customize the way you want. This barrel contour is a good place to start.

http://ruger.com/products/1022Sporter/specSheets/1234.html

My CZ 452 has been collecting dust since buying this one.

Why the .920 barrel ?
A LVT model with the varmint taper or a Deluxe Sporter with the lighter barrel should get you there.
Otherwise pick up a $200 carbine and start swaping parts.
What are you're plans for such a specific rifle ?
If I was going custom a BX trigger I would not.

Are you set on a 10-22? I recall a Marlin detachable box fed rifle that fits your description. My wife almost bought it when she bought her first gun...she got a cheaper version of it that shoots like a dream. I will go look for a link.

Can't find it. It was a version of the 795 I think, but I couldn't find the gun online. My wife's 795 is the most accurate rimfire in the safe, and it's also the lightest. Guess which gun goes squirrel hunting most often... and she doesn't even hunt.

WestKentucky said:

Are you set on a 10-22? I recall a Marlin detachable box fed rifle that fits your description. My wife almost bought it when she bought her first gun...she got a cheaper version of it that shoots like a dream. I will go look for a link.

Can't find it. It was a version of the 795 I think, but I couldn't find the gun online. My wife's 795 is the most accurate rimfire in the safe, and it's also the lightest. Guess which gun goes squirrel hunting most often... and she doesn't even hunt.

Click to expand...

I have a Marlin 995. It's a tack driver. I love all of my 10/22's though.
That would be a few.

FWIW.. The little 10/22 carbine will do everything you describe, right out of the box.
Then, if you get an itch that needs scratching, plenty of "gizmo's" that you can drop yourself,
without the need for a Gun-smith. Just sayin'.

Big7 said:

I have a Marlin 995. It's a tack driver. I love all of my 10/22's though.
That would be a few.

FWIW.. The little 10/22 carbine will do everything you describe, right out of the box.
Then, if you get an itch that needs scratching, plenty of "gizmo's" that you can drop yourself,
without the need for a Gun-smith. Just sayin'.

Click to expand...

I haven't been able to
Get any real accuracy from a carbine barrel 10-22. The nicer rifles are far more gun than a carbine. I'm not one for tactical toys, but I do understand the ability to swap parts easily on the 10-22. Good luck finding your rifle....and look around at the sleeved aluminum barrels. Rigid, big, pretty, and xtremely light for their size.

WestKentucky said:

I haven't been able to
Get any real accuracy from a carbine barrel 10-22. The nicer rifles are far more gun than a carbine. I'm not one for tactical toys, but I do understand the ability to swap parts easily on the 10-22. Good luck finding your rifle....and look around at the sleeved aluminum barrels. Rigid, big, pretty, and xtremely light for their size.

Click to expand...

The OP stated:
" This is basically going to be a less than 50 yards target type gun. No need for super accuracy, hence the iron sights. As for the .920 profile,.....I just like the looks of it better."

I promise you any of my 10/22 carbines will do all that and more.

Based on your post you might want to look at a 77/22, if you want to go big, expensive and super accuracy.. Just sayin'..

I hate to sound like a broken record ("What does that mean, great Uncle -kBob?") ("Hush child. I am being a curmudgeon here.") but get thee hence to RimFireCentral and dive in to their 10/22 section. There are no un wanted parts....just parts looking for the right home, BTW. Also, folks will pay you for those extra and spare parts.

The nice thing about doing your own bedding, free floating, torqueing, barrel swapping, barrel lapping, sights alterations, stock work, and trigger jobs is that you can know and even say to others that YOU are what made the difference.

I did work on stocks and trigger mods while waiting on my kids at their Karate classes, beat reading novels or magazines with the other waiting parents all to heck. I do live in a rural relativley gun friendly area though.

If you just have to have sights on a .920 barrel let me recommend Tech Sites which besides having a slip on and permanent glue front sight with ears like the M-1, M-1 Carbine, M-14 and M-16series rifles,will provide you with a receiver mounted peep. One model provides windage only on the rear with a front sight adjustable for elevation and two rear sights (one "long range" as on the M-16A1) and the other a single rear peep and W&E adjustments in the rear.

-kBob

Probably completely off topic (as I'm not a 10/22 person and don't know exactly what the .920 barrel is, but I can guess), but I just picked up my first 10/22 and it's one of my favorite plinkers.

I got the 10/22 Takedown Heavy Barrel - didn't know it existed until I saw the Takedown Lite (didn't care for either the barrel or holes in the sleeve) and stumbled across the Takedown Heavy Barrel while browsing thru Ruger's site.

I've been interested in the Takedown versions of the 10/22, but could never get past those funky looking banded front sights.

I stuck a Bushnell TRS-25 red dot on it - no problem keeping 'em within a 3" circle at 50 yards.

Now that I've got all that money invested in magazines, I got interested in their 10/22 Tactical Target, but when I e-mailed the CEO and asked why in the heck they didn't thread the barrel on the Tactical Target, they took it off the site - I can no longer find any mention made of it.
I don't know if it's "gone" (didn't realize it had been out there for 5 or more years) or maybe will reappear with a threaded barrel?


It also has a darn nice carry case with full Velcro inside so you can rearange how you store items.

Ran across another interesting heavy barrel 10/22 - apparently too new to find anywhere as Googling turns up little / nothing, and I e-mailed the local shop and they can't find it.
MSRP $499 (available in multiple calibers) - I'll wait and see what the street prices are.
Hey, I've got money tied up in the magazines and have an extra scope, so why not?


The Pelican 1040 case makes for great storage of 10/22 10-rd. rotary magazines.

If it weren't for the need for the iron sights, Kidd's lightweight aluminum sleeved barrels are awesome. Incredibly accurate and light weight.

Maybe you should look into having a custom rifle built? I don't see many bull barrels with front sights installed, so I don't think you're going to easily find that in a factory rifle.

jmr40 said:

This is what you want. The barrel splits the difference between light weight sporter an heavy bull barrel. But a with match grade trigger, chamber and rifling will shoot every bit good as the much heavier target barrel. Weight even scoped is about 7 lbs, perfect for carrying and shooting. You're not going to get a lighweight with a .920 barrel and the heavier barrel won't be any more accurate. No one makes what you want from the factory, you'll have do decide which comes closest then customize the way you want. This barrel contour is a good place to start.

http://ruger.com/products/1022Sporter/specSheets/1234.html

My CZ 452 has been collecting dust since buying this one.

Click to expand...

And my 10/22 sits now that I have a real rifle the 452.

A bigger hunk of junk does not exist over the 10/22....you must spend money on them to make it a functional rifle.

Ok here is mine, built it when nothing for the 10/22TD existed. It has a McGowen Precision .920 bull barrel with target crown, The stock is a Boyds, when it arrived it was inlet for a .920 taper barrel so I had to rework the handguard portion of the stock so it would fit properly. Nikon 3-9 x 40 Rimfire scope with QD mount, and yes it will hold zero. Wouldn't call it light weight.

fpgt72,

"A bigger hunk of junk does not exist over the 10/22....you must spend money on them to make it a functional rifle."

OK, 4 inch plate racks of five plates each at 50 meters for time. 10/22 out of the box with irons verses 452 out of the box with irons.

The OP wants a 10/22. Maybe he wants it for "Action Shooting" at multiple reactive targets. He apparently does not want a crank gun of any brand.

It cost me nothing to remove the barrel band on a 10/22 carbine, free float the barrel, and do my own trigger work. Still not as accurate as your 452 or my little Anshutz, but still goes bang much faster than either and more accurately than it did "out of the box."

-kBob

fpgt72 said:

And my 10/22 sits now that I have a real rifle the 452.

A bigger hunk of junk does not exist over the 10/22....you must spend money on them to make it a functional rifle.

Click to expand...

I hear you there, man alive! I couldn't even BEGIN to count the amount of money I've poured into my carbine. $30 for extra magazines (years ago) and hundreds$$$$ in ammo! And all the times I had to forego the extra brick so I could drive to the bunny fields! I can't remember it jamming, and I'm pretty sure I've hit everything I was aiming at, but yes, the amount of ammo I've dumped through it to keep it running was insane! I definitely prefer the single shot rolling block for the kids, it saves us way more money that way. I wouldn't mind having a rifle barrel instead of the carbine, but gosh, that last cottontail I grabbed over by the shop right after the blizzard BARELY died when I put that bead on his head. Sure am lucky I found more .22 lrs on sale or I'd probably have been stuck with my .223.

kBob said:

fpgt72,

"A bigger hunk of junk does not exist over the 10/22....you must spend money on them to make it a functional rifle."

OK, 4 inch plate racks of five plates each at 50 meters for time. 10/22 out of the box with irons verses 452 out of the box with irons.

The OP wants a 10/22. Maybe he wants it for "Action Shooting" at multiple reactive targets. He apparently does not want a crank gun of any brand.

It cost me nothing to remove the barrel band on a 10/22 carbine, free float the barrel, and do my own trigger work. Still not as accurate as your 452 or my little Anshutz, but still goes bang much faster than either and more accurately than it did "out of the box."

-kBob

Click to expand...

I will give you my box stock 10/22, and we will do the 4 inch plates for time but we need to do it 10 times.....I would win as that hunk of garbage would not run 50 rounds without a malfunction.

he wants Action shooting get an automatic that works out of the box.

fpgt72 said:

And my 10/22 sits now that I have a real rifle the 452.

A bigger hunk of junk does not exist over the 10/22....you must spend money on them to make it a functional rifle.

Click to expand...

Sorry but this is utter BS, bordering on trolling. Are you one of those intellectually lazy types who had a problem with one rifle and used that as an excuse to condemn 53yrs of Ruger rifles? If what you said was actually true, then it would be the only junk rifle that thousands of people use as the basis for a custom rifle.

They function just fine out of the box. People spend money on them to make them better. The fact that they do does not imply that there's anything wrong with them out of the box. It implies that the 10/22 is a better basis for modification than any other semi-auto. For one can spend a little money and have a semi-auto that shoots better than your precious CZ. Mine does, circles, in fact.

fpgt72 said:

I will give you my box stock 10/22, and we will do the 4 inch plates for time but we need to do it 10 times.....I would win as that hunk of garbage would not run 50 rounds without a malfunction.

Click to expand...

This one started life as a standard stainless carbine. It has run about 10,000rds since its last cleaning and I can't remember the last malfunction. Except for a Volquartsen hammer to get it down to about 2lbs and an extended mag release, it's mechanically stock. In 25yrs, I have not had ANY issues with reliability in five different 10/22's.

CraigC said:

This one started life as a standard stainless carbine. It has run about 10,000rds since its last cleaning and I can't remember the last malfunction. Except for a Volquartsen hammer to get it down to about 2lbs and an extended mag release, it's mechanically stock. In 25yrs, I have not had ANY issues with reliability in five different 10/22's.

Click to expand...

Man you can sure tell you have not made any changes to that 10/22....tell me are there any ruger parts left on that tacticool rig?

CraigC said:

Sorry but this is utter BS, bordering on trolling. Are you one of those intellectually lazy types who had a problem with one rifle and used that as an excuse to condemn 53yrs of Ruger rifles? If what you said was actually true, then it would be the only junk rifle that thousands of people use as the basis for a custom rifle.

They function just fine out of the box. People spend money on them to make them better. The fact that they do does not imply that there's anything wrong with them out of the box. It implies that the 10/22 is a better basis for modification than any other semi-auto. For one can spend a little money and have a semi-auto that shoots better than your precious CZ. Mine does, circles, in fact.

Click to expand...

I have been stupid enough to buy two of the stupid things....and both did not run for anything without tossing more money at them.....sometimes as simple as an extractor or other nickel or dime part, but they did need something to make them run.....people spend money to make them go....people buy them because of the huge after market support for them....nope I will go to my grave saying this bill ruger pile of junk is one of the worst automatic 22's in the world....but build it cheap enough so people will not mind shelling out another $30 to have a gun that will run a box of ammo and you can sell buckets of them.....