Ruger 10/22 Target Tactical Opinion

[CTGunner]

Is the Ruger 10/22 Target Tactical worth the extra cash over the base model? How much additional accuracy is gained?

 

[ThePunisher'sArmory]

I personally would not get it simply because it only has a 16" bull barrel. I prefer 18 or 20". However on the other hand it does come with their target grade trigger. On the other hand I find the standard trigger to be just fine for me. The trick is to just get used to its pull. On my match grade 10/22 I kept a standard trigger group from a 1970s model carbine (All metal not plastic.) It works great for my use and is well worn in. I see no sence in spending $200 for a trigger group on a .22lr........or for any other rifle for that matter. The only guns i need a good trigger on are my pistols.

 

[CTGunner]

Thanks. That was pretty much what I was thinking. I would rather put the difference in money into a scope and additional mags...if the difference in accuracy isn't extremely significant.

 

[tkopp]

The 10/22 is a fun, lightweight, highly customizable carbine.

It's not extremely accurate.

It can be *made* fairly accurate, often by buying so many expensive parts you're not really shooting a 10/22 any more. And, for the price, you could have just bought a better-made rifle. I have a Savage Mark II with accutrigger for accuracy. It's large, heavy, and carries a chunk of glass. That doesn't mean my Ruger with a small red dot and carbon fiber barrel is any less adept at quick 25y shots with remarkable portability. Different tools for different jobs.

 

[CTGunner]

Any recommendations on a .22lr that is more accurate out of the box than the Ruger but still reasonably priced? I would like to 'hone' my skills before getting into the larger calibers...till now it's been mostly handguns.

 

[AKElroy]

This is a long walk down a dark road. That is certainly a cost effective way to get a decent shooter, but if you are like me, this is what will happen:

1. You will hate the trigger, and spend $200 on a VQ group or other equally expensive option.

2. You will then upgrade the barrel to a Kidd, Hart or Shillin to squeeze out more accuracy.

3. You will realize the stock receiver is not as rock solid for heavy duty optics, so you explore an MR or other such option.

4. You wll realize the standard target stock is WAY to pedestrian for all these upgrades, and you will drop a few hundred there.

I could go on and on, and I have the drained bank account to prove it. Mine's a shooter, though.

Buy a Marlin model 60 & stay away from the money pit, or get seduced to the dark side & get a really good paying job.

 

[CZguy]

Any recommendations on a .22lr that is more accurate out of the box than the Ruger but still reasonably priced? I would like to 'hone' my skills before getting into the larger calibers...till now it's been mostly handguns.

You just can't go wrong with a Marlin model 60, when you consider the low cost and excellent out of the box accuracy.

I have rescued several of them from pawn shops that just needed a good cleaning. That's a pretty good deal for $70 to $60 out the door.

 

[DPris]

I borrowed one to test, stuck a decent scope on it, ended up buying it.
I'm not a huge 10/22 fan, but this one I like.
Mine works best with American Eagle, so far.
Denis

 

[AKElroy]

Mine really likes Wolf match; many on-line sources at decent prices.

 

[juk]

Marlin or Ruger for a semi-auto, CZ for a bolt. I've got both a Marlin and CZ, but only shoot the CZ. The factory sights are awesome, the gun is comfortable, and it's deadly accurate. I had to take the scope off of it. I got tired of hitting everything I aimed at. True story.

Anyway, the Ruger is a great starter gun. It's quick handling, and fairly accurate, making it very fun. The only reason I don't own one is because I have an insatiable urge to tinker. Refer to AKElroy's post. That would be me. lol If you go with the Ruger, I'm sure you won't be disappointed. Just remember that rimfires, especially semi-autos, are picky about the ammo they will cycle and shoot reliably AND accurately. Be sure to try several different brands.

 

[CTGunner]

Is working with a .22 for a while in fact good prep for larger caliber and longer distance shooting?

 

[AKElroy]

Is working with a .22 for a while in fact good prep for larger caliber and longer distance shooting?

None better. When I was 12, my grandfather gave me his Stevens crackshot. When I wore that gun out, I moved up to his Stevens autoloader. I shot the barrel out of that gun, and didn't stop then. I kept going until the sear wore out, causing it to repeatedly double. This was long after he passed away.

The hills around Fredericksburg TX could be a superfund site for all the lead I deposited. More important than long-range skills, the .22, along with my grandfather, gave me constant lessons on gun safety & hunting ethics. We also made some really long shots that no one would believe. He does though.

 

[taliv]

working with a 22 is definitely great prep, but you should consider what you're prepping for.

smallbore is fantastic practice for high-power.
shooting a 22lr from a bench at a 100 or 200 yrd target is a great way to learn to read wind.
plinking with a 22 (bolt or lever) (or better yet, an accurate BB or pellet gun) at dandelions or bumblebees/wasps is a great way to learn trigger control.

 

[hometheaterman]

The biggest reason I don't like the Marlin 60 at all is I absolutely hate rimfire bases that require the rimfire rings. However, they are made onto the Marlin 60 so you have no option other than to use them. I've just had a lot of trouble with the rimfire rings sliding around on the .22 bases like that. I much prefer that on a 10/22 you can get a Weaver style base and use rings with cross slots in them. Other than that the Marlin 60's are more accurate out of the box for the most part, but I just don't find them as fun to shoot as the 10/22's which is why I own a 10/22 not a Marlin 60. They are good guns though, and other than the scope rail being built on, which I'm sure some guys don't mind, they are a great rifle. They are super accurate right out of the box. I just like that with the 10/22 you can customize it to your desires, and like I said, imo it's just slightly more fun as you can get stuff like 25 round magazines and just fun stuff like that to add to the 10/22s.

 

[DukeNukem]

Out of the box, my Marlin 795 was more accurate than my Ruger 10/22.

I haven't really done anything to make my 10/22 more accurate--no upgraded trigger, no upgraded barrel, etc. Never intended mine to be that type of rifle. My 10/22 got the cheapo tacticool treatment--Archangel stock, UTG vertical foregrip, UTG AR type sights, inexpensive Tasco Red Dot sight mounted on a couple of UTG mini-risers, obligatory 25 round magazines. I also put a Tuffer Buffer in my 10/22(not because I thought it needed one--I just wanted to see if it did much.) It's a fun gun.

The 795 got the scope. It's mounted with one of these http://www.amazon.com/UTG-Airgun-Me...VQ/ref=sr_1_34?ie=UTF8&qid=1287303464&sr=8-34. It's a very secure mount and even has a vertical set screw to make it even more secure. I'm not worried about the 3/8" .22 base at all with that mount. That's as much as I plan to do with my 795.

 

[CraigC]

Out of the box it should be a much more accurate rifle than your average carbine version. Having the barrel set back and rechambered, if there is enough length, would dramatically improve accuracy. You can certainly build a better rifle for the same cost but it isn't marketed to folks who want to do that.

The Marlin model 60 is a good rifle for the money and they tend to be more accurate than the standard 10/22 carbine out of the box. However, the 10/22 can be made as accurate as you want it to be. With the Marlin, what you see is what you get and it is a "cheaper" rifle.