Quality - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-10-2017, 02:43 AM
Scattergun2570
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Oct 2009
Location: 
Long Island NY
Posts: 
226
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quality



Log in to see fewer ads
I have heard on more than one occasion the the 10/22`s are not made as well as they once were. Can anyone tell me if,and what has changed in them?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-10-2017, 03:14 AM
Nick7274
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! GOA Member

Join Date: 
Dec 2016
Location: 
Central Ma.
Posts: 
1,340
TPC Rating: 
100% (3)
I think basically what everyone is saying is that due to the enormous volume of 10/22's that Ruger puts out, they don't use very good QC anymore and that the tolerances for these guns are very loose from the factory. Especially when there are so many companies out there now putting out such great aftermarket parts for the 10/22, it makes you wonder why Ruger can't seem to get it right. It is still a great out of the box gun for plinking, there is a reason why they have sold so many. But if you're looking for sub moa accuracy then you have to at the very least probably upgrade your trigger and your barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-10-2017, 09:32 AM
CardPuncher's Avatar
CardPuncher
US Air Force Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Sep 2011
Location: 
Northern Florida
Posts: 
1,660
TPC Rating: 
100% (6)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scattergun2570 View Post
I have heard on more than one occasion the the 10/22`s are not made as well as they once were...
I've heard that, too. Also about my S&W's, ammo, my cars, my power tools...

"All generalizations are false." Including this one.

Nice thing about the 10/22 - if you don't like the way it was made, you can re-do it the way you think it should have been done in the first place. You wouldn't want to waste an opportunity like that on something that was already perfect.
Reply With Quote
 
  #4  
Old 01-10-2017, 09:35 AM
DRS's Avatar
DRS
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2003
Location: 
Backwoods Of Kentucky
Posts: 
2,290
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Ruger uses too much plastic parts producing their .22 Rifles.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-10-2017, 10:44 AM
Scharfschutze

Join Date: 
Dec 2016
Posts: 
38
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRS View Post
Ruger uses too much plastic parts producing their .22 Rifles.
I agree.... I can forgive a composite trigger guard mostly, but the plastic butt plates? C'mon. They aren't even edge polished.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-10-2017, 10:57 AM
Roadrat's Avatar
Roadrat
US Air Force Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2004
Location: 
Iowa
Posts: 
3,597
TPC Rating: 
89% (5)
In 1964 the Ruger 10/22 Carbine sold for a MSRP of $54.50....

When corrected for inflation that price today would be $424.31

Today the MSRP is $309.........Ruger could not make this possible without making some items of less expensive materials. Granted, the manufacturing process has become more refined - more millions in upgraded equipment, etc.

Ruger puts out a great product to a very low price point.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-10-2017, 11:42 AM
DRS's Avatar
DRS
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Aug 2003
Location: 
Backwoods Of Kentucky
Posts: 
2,290
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadrat View Post
In 1964 the Ruger 10/22 Carbine sold for a MSRP of $54.50....

When corrected for inflation that price today would be $424.31

Today the MSRP is $309.........Ruger could not make this possible without making some items of less expensive materials. Granted, the manufacturing process has become more refined - more millions in upgraded equipment, etc.

Ruger puts out a great product to a very low price point
.
So you're saying that Ruger would rather cut costs and market a crappy .22 Rifle? If you look at the rifles made in the early 1960's, very few had the amount of plastic parts, as gun companies are using today.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-10-2017, 11:51 AM
stevebla
US Coast Guard Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2015
Location: 
Peoples Republic Kalifornia
Posts: 
209
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Mine came out of the box shooting great. I changed it because I could.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-10-2017, 12:31 PM
azjeff's Avatar
azjeff is online now
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! Appleseed Rifleman

Join Date: 
Jun 2011
Location: 
the center of Az
Posts: 
849
TPC Rating: 
100% (24)
The unfired '96 stainless steel carbine I bought recently has a brushed aluminum receiver- not painted, the trigger group housing is aluminum -not plastic, the bolt is polished, the barrel band is aluminum -not plastic. The inside of the receiver needs no polishing or paint overspray removal. I certainly wouldn't trade my 20 year old unfired rifle for a brand new 2016 equivalent even up. Would you?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-10-2017, 12:58 PM
Chaser's Avatar
Chaser
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! UotM

Join Date: 
Aug 2005
Location: 
S.E. Idaho
Posts: 
19,052
TPC Rating: 
100% (73)
Send a message via AIM to Chaser
Good read IF ya have about 2 hours... March '08 ...

http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums...hlight=plastic
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-10-2017, 03:17 PM
ez_lle71
Fire Fighter

Join Date: 
Aug 2006
Location: 
Geary Co. Kansas
Posts: 
771
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRS View Post
So you're saying that Ruger would rather cut costs and market a crappy .22 Rifle? If you look at the rifles made in the early 1960's, very few had the amount of plastic parts, as gun companies are using today.
Remington made Nylon 66's back then and people can't get enough of them now. Everyone i see goes for way more than i think its worth. And they have alot more plastic than the current 10/22. Just sayin
ez
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-10-2017, 05:38 PM
GH41

Join Date: 
Feb 2015
Location: 
SEUS
Posts: 
881
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by azjeff View Post
The unfired '96 stainless steel carbine I bought recently has a brushed aluminum receiver- not painted, the trigger group housing is aluminum -not plastic, the bolt is polished, the barrel band is aluminum -not plastic. The inside of the receiver needs no polishing or paint overspray removal. I certainly wouldn't trade my 20 year old unfired rifle for a brand new 2016 equivalent even up. Would you?
I have never seen a 1022 receiver that wasn't painted. I'd like to see a picture of it. The aluminum trigger housing is actually less desirable to the guys that do trigger work than the plastic one. Ask Brimstone. The barrel band is cosmetic and the fact that it is plastic does nothing to improve or detract from the rifles value. Just because your rifle is 20 years old doesn't make it any better than a new one or worse than one that is 40 years old.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-10-2017, 09:14 PM
azjeff's Avatar
azjeff is online now
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! Appleseed Rifleman

Join Date: 
Jun 2011
Location: 
the center of Az
Posts: 
849
TPC Rating: 
100% (24)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GH41 View Post
I have never seen a 1022 receiver that wasn't painted. I'd like to see a picture of it. The aluminum trigger housing is actually less desirable to the guys that do trigger work than the plastic one. Ask Brimstone. The barrel band is cosmetic and the fact that it is plastic does nothing to improve or detract from the rifles value. Just because your rifle is 20 years old doesn't make it any better than a new one or worse than one that is 40 years old.
I'll take a pic in the sunshine so you can see the brushed pattern in the metal. It is clear coated, so technically it is painted. Is that what you meant?

The OP said he heard they aren't "made as well". That has different meanings to different people.

As to the rest we'll agree to disagree? Yes the barrel band is cosmetic. I see a part that was previously cast aluminum being replaced by injection molded plastic as being a step down in quality, especially when it's cosmetic. I'll keep watching for the nice older 10/22s and you keep buying the new ones and we'll both be happy!

I would be interested in trying one of of the LVTs though.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-10-2017, 09:52 PM
Roadrat's Avatar
Roadrat
US Air Force Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jun 2004
Location: 
Iowa
Posts: 
3,597
TPC Rating: 
89% (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRS View Post
So you're saying that Ruger would rather cut costs and market a crappy .22 Rifle? If you look at the rifles made in the early 1960's, very few had the amount of plastic parts, as gun companies are using today.
That is NOT what I said. IF Ruger did NOT cut costs and continued on as they did in the 1960's the 10/22 would cost you about a hundred or so more dollars that it cost now............AND people would NOT buy them!!

Just like all other manufacturers; they must build to a "price point" that folks will pay. Look at all the postings of people asking for the CHEAPEST, GOOD QUALITY, rifles available.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-10-2017, 10:38 PM
t4daddy
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jan 2006
Location: 
Muscle Shoals AL.
Posts: 
197
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GH41 View Post
I have never seen a 1022 receiver that wasn't painted. I'd like to see a picture of it. The aluminum trigger housing is actually less desirable to the guys that do trigger work than the plastic one. Ask Brimstone. The barrel band is cosmetic and the fact that it is plastic does nothing to improve or detract from the rifles value. Just because your rifle is 20 years old doesn't make it any better than a new one or worse than one that is 40 years old.
The older rifles were anodized, not painted. You can buy poly TGs for around $35-$40 all day, alloy ones are snapped up at $60-$70 in almost any condition. The reason the Brimestone "prefers" poly is because its easier for them to tune, not because they are better. If you don't believe the metal barrel bands and butt plates add value, try pricing them vs the plastic ones. The older rifles had a superior fit and finish.

Last edited by t4daddy; 01-10-2017 at 10:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2000-2015 RimfireCentral.com
x