Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

New 10/22s: Junk?

14K views 66 replies 43 participants last post by  Toomany22s 
#1 ·
Guys how are the new Ruger 10/22s? Are they a junk gun cheapened out, or reliable and dependable? As accurate as they used to be? Looking to buy a wooden stock carbine model from Wal-Mart. Thoughts?
 
#38 ·
Based on prices at gun shows, used ones seem to command a premium price. I’ll admit I like the older walnut stocked models better, perhaps mostly from nostalgia.

As others mentioned, you can do a build that’ll be pretty nice, but ends up costing nice too.

All depends on the purpose you want it for. Plinking or target, and accuracy level desired.
 
#39 ·
ruger 10/22 good or bad

I have 2 new 10/22's,:gun4: a stainless take down and a wild hog edition, both shoot as good as my older 10/22's however both triggers were really bad. polished the sears and hammers added spring kits and viola just over 2lbs pull nice and crisp. I think the basic rifles are as good as the old ones with a little trigger work. I can say both shoot better than the 63 year old eyes shooting them. For some real fun put a bushnell TRS 25 red dot on one.
 
#40 ·
I have 2 new 10/22's,:gun4: a stainless take down and a wild hog edition, both shoot as good as my older 10/22's however both triggers were really bad. polished the sears and hammers added spring kits and viola just over 2lbs pull nice and crisp. I think the basic rifles are as good as the old ones with a little trigger work. I can say both shoot better than the 63 year old eyes shooting them. For some real fun put a bushnell TRS 25 red dot on one.
I'll agree the stock factory triggers are pretty dang crappy.
 
#41 ·
I think Rugers are still very good guns. The 10/22 Triggers are rough but a new Trigger group from Ruger and others really upgrade the New 10/22's. There are very few guns that have the Huge After-Market parts than for a Ruger 10/22.

Just my Humble Opinion.

Shoot Safe and Have Fun!!!
 
#43 · (Edited)
The Ruger 10/22 was never a great gun. A very highly customizable one for sure but it never shot great. Its trigger was always stiff. It jammed more than its tube fed competitors. It is more expensive than other US made semi autos. Of course, the 22 rimfire cartridge is not really a magazine friendly design. It feeds better from tubular mags than clip mags. But the 10/22 has design issues.

Some of its shortcomings are due to its design. A barrel held by a bracket at 6 O'clock. Feed ramp AND ejector built into the magazine. Bolt return spring on one side instead of in the center (What were you thinking Bill?) . Overbuilt trigger group (compare to the simplicity of cooey, browning, savage, marlin) resulting in a heavy trigger that loses drop safety if you lighten it. A non intuitive bolt hold system. These are not just my own opinions. A whole industry has come into being to address the faults of this design.

Ruger never made any attempt to improve it. Thomson TCR 22 has added in last shot hold open to the 10/22 magazine design. Others sell triggers and bolts and slingshot bolt releases. Ruger themselves sell an improved trigger group.

I'm not bashing Ruger. They make great guns but they never improved the 10/22. So now others are doing it.

--SSaigol
 
#47 ·
I'm not bashing Ruger. They make great guns but they never improved the 10/22. So now others are doing it.

--SSaigol
I agree completely. I owned an early TD model, that I traded for an Anniversary model, that I later traded toward a 15-22. I couldn't deal with the lack of modern features. It'd be one thing if they were amazingly accurate, to help smooth over some of the shortcomings of the aged design. But in reality, despite all the fuss around 15-22's poor accuracy, mine actually shoots better than either of my two 10/22's did. Now, I'm not stating that the 15-22 has more accuracy "potential," just my experience between these factory stock rifles.

Having said all that, I just received a CSC 10/22. It seems to be a good effort from Ruger to modernize their old design. But most importantly, if mine shoots as small as what others have been posting, I can live without a last round automatic bolt catch. If it doesn't shoot, it'll be sold.

Since it was discussed earlier in this thread... The BX trigger is far better than the standard trigger, but still not a good trigger. Probably adequate for people who don't obsess about gun stuff. Though, not adequate for me (trigger snob).
 
#44 ·
Well I think they are great. From the $200 carbine on up. Old and new , I love them all! I had / have a bunch, never had a jamomatic. Sure there might be some with problems. There made millions of them. It’s a brilliant design, easy to manufacture, easy to work on, easy to modify a thousand different ways. So good that other companies copy them and make a fortune doing so. Out of all my guns the 1022 is the first one out of the safe when I go to the range. It’s fun to shoot, cause it’s easy to use accurate and simple a blast to shoot. My biggest dilemma is which one do I take!

My first 1022 is the reason I’m into shooting. A sale Tupperware carbine with a 2x7 Tasco scope and a case of wolf target and I was hooked. I shot it at the range every weekend for a summer, the next summer I bought a bigger scope, a 3x9 Tasco .that winter I turned it into a bull barrel in a hogue stock with a bigger scope..... and a better trigger.

Wanna make the heavy trigger better, spray it with Hornady One Shot.

Now I’m gonna go put that original barrel, 18 in, on a spare receiver into a Tupperware stock with an oem bolt and trigger , and put that Tasco on it and see what it can do. I used to be able to shoot the zip ties off the target stand at 50 yards with that set up. I got some wolf target again too!
 
#45 ·
Yep, never had one that was a jam-o-matic no mater the age. ALL of them have been utterly reliable with failures always related to poor magazines (plastic feed lip Ram-Line and Butler Creek during the AWB) or an excessive amount of Remington Golden Duds.

The new ones aren't junk. They are just different. As others have said, polymer trigger groups, lots of casting seams, inconsistent anodizing, the birch stocks leave a lot to be desired. They do work but seem a bit more sloppy. Either way, they are IMO lightyears ahead of anything Marlin has put out in the last decade. For just over $200 you really can't do any better. They have simply the best magazine on the market. The magazine, if nothing else, makes them the most reliable autoloader offered now.

I will only buy like new older guns with the aluminum trigger groups. I do have a regimen though. I add a Volquartsen drop in hammer/sear, edge extractor, surestrike firing pin, and a nylon bolt buffer.

Everything else is optional but with those few things I have found you can have a truly superb, squirrel head accurate, handy semi automatic .22 carbine that will serve you well and fill any roll you may need filled by a rifle 95% of the time.
 
#49 ·
I had a Buddy drop off a New one with me last week.. said it had about 20 rounds thru it.. said "the Damb thing won't load a round outta the mag without hiccups.. and then it won't extract/eject even if a round goes in".. I tested it with several mags and sure enough it seems to be a Turd. I had to sight in a couple of other rifles so I took it to the range and sure enough.. it's a Turd. So, I then went thru it.. cleaning/scrubbing everything.. did the Crotchbrite treatment.. radiused the rear of the OEM bolt and replaced the POS OEM charging handle with a KIDD unit.. cleaned it all again and hit everything with Hornady One Shot Dry Lube and proceeded to dry run 50 rounds in 5 diff. mags flawlessly. They do need help right out of the box for sure.. some a little and some a bunch! ;) They are indeed a starter kit. Like a Small Block Cheby engine to a Race Car enthusiast.
 
#50 ·
In my limited experience there is some variability between individual 10/22s and also 10/22 models. I have a Collector's series from 2015 that has a better fit and finish and a nicer trigger than my friend's circa 2010 black plastic stock carbine.
If possible inspect the gun you're buying for sight alignment, barrel alignment etc.
 
#51 ·
For those of you who are 10/22 fans, I do not apologize for the following:

To say Ruger 10/22 rifles are not as good as they used to be is not saying much. I owned one back in the late 70s' for all of one month before I gave it away with a promise that the new owner would never speak to me about it, ever.

I sold them, (or, more accurately I tried not to sell them), for the better part of 40 years and never heard anyone praise their ability to maintain consistent accuracy, and often cursed them for a noticeable lack of accuracy.

Any firearm that you need to replace half the firearm to get it to shoot an acceptable group is not worth the money.

For example:

I was on a range a dozen years ago when a Boy Scout troop was trying to get some scouts their shooting merit badges.

One Dad had bought four 10/22s' on the advice of a [Walmart?] employee, and CCI Mini-Mags, and not one of them would shot well enough to make score.

I tried to help by checking bedding, sight alignment, and even shooting my Federal and Eley Match ammo, and still no-go to score for merit badges.

I then let them shoot my 1950s' Martini match rifle, a 1940s' Savage bolt action, and a 1950s' Remington bolt action, with their CCI ammo, and every scout shot the X ring out of their targets.

Nope, there is no way I would ever suggest anyone buy a Ruger 10/22 unless they just want to throw away their money...
 
#52 ·
I have around 50 .22 rifles, including 18 Ruger 10/22s. I like to tinker with my firearms, so swapping barrels, stocks, and triggers on 10/22s doesn't seem like a big deal to me. It would be great if they'd all shoot sub-MOA straight out of the box, but few rifles do.

I guess that I've been luckier than most 'cause I've only had a hand full of really crappy rifles.
 
#54 ·
Guys how are the new Ruger 10/22s? Are they a junk gun cheapened out, or reliable and dependable? As accurate as they used to be? Looking to buy a wooden stock carbine model from Wal-Mart. Thoughts?
For those of you who are 10/22 fans, I do not apologize for the following:

To say Ruger 10/22 rifles are not as good as they used to be is not saying much. I owned one back in the late 70s' for all of one month before I gave it away with a promise that the new owner would never speak to me about it, ever.

I sold them, (or, more accurately I tried not to sell them), for the better part of 40 years and never heard anyone praise their ability to maintain consistent accuracy, and often cursed them for a noticeable lack of accuracy.

Any firearm that you need to replace half the firearm to get it to shoot an acceptable group is not worth the money.

For example:

I was on a range a dozen years ago when a Boy Scout troop was trying to get some scouts their shooting merit badges.

One Dad had bought four 10/22s' on the advice of a [Walmart?] employee, and CCI Mini-Mags, and not one of them would shot well enough to make score.

I tried to help by checking bedding, sight alignment, and even shooting my Federal and Eley Match ammo, and still no-go to score for merit badges.

I then let them shoot my 1950s' Martini match rifle, a 1940s' Savage bolt action, and a 1950s' Remington bolt action, with their CCI ammo, and every scout shot the X ring out of their targets.

Nope, there is no way I would ever suggest anyone buy a Ruger 10/22 unless they just want to throw away their money...
Just simply buy a 10)22 from wherever world..
Send to Randy at CPC..
Done.
Superb accuracy.
Reliable..
And great fun, to outshoot just about everything else out there
 
#55 · (Edited)
i guess i have had good luck, other than accuracy of out of the box stuff. after cleaning, and lube they have all run fine. i have only had 2 untouched barrels over the years that have shot well, one is on a completely stock carbine from 1977, and the other is a stainless carbine barrel i got from 10ring1 a couple of years ago. it shoots great for a stock one, and its been chopped at the muzzle and threaded. as far as reliability, my 1972 made marlin 60 is far more ammo picky than any of my 10/22s when it comes to reliability. that being said, stock for stock, that 60 shoots better (averages .30" ctc groups at 25y with mini mags) than most average ootb carbine barrels i have had, but doesnt shoot as well as a 10/22 carbine barrel that has been rechambered/crowned. and it doesnt shoot as well as that old carbine barrel my buddy has or my stainless carbine barrel.

IMO, no matter what semi auto .22 rifle you are shooting, you probably wont get 100% reliability if you are running cheap ammo. i think that is something most of us already know, and anyone who is going to go pick up a new rifle, and a brick of the cheapest bulk ammo, and go to the range without cleaning it or lubing it properly, they are going to have issues. mostly you hear about it with the 10/22, i would assume because far more of them are sold.
 
#56 ·
If my experience is typical, "No, they're not junk"
I have tinkered with about 3 builds. Found a walnut stocked older model some years back and put a GM .920 on it, trigger, buffer, etc. I just bought a new plastic stocked 50th Anniversary NIB, put a Kidd trigger kit in, crothcbrite the receiver, homemade buffer, and mounted an old Millett red dot. I got crazy lucky and the dot was spot on. That little rifle is great. Yes, I want to put a Magpull on it, but for the money... new ones are just as good as the oldies.....
 
#57 ·
I've had a LOT of 22's. Out of the box, the 10/22's have been the least accurate and least reliable... but especially least accurate. I could take a handful of guns to the range, and they could all reliably shoot empty 12 ga shotgun shells off a fence... except for the 10/22's. And yes, this was with cheap ammo. The other guns seemed to shoot it a lot better than the Rugers.

The 10/22's in question were a 1998 carbine and a 2010-ish stainless carbine. Neither could hit the broad side of a barn compared to a Marlin 60 that was there the same day, as well as an old Savage, a Remington 552 and an old Marlin bolt action... so the Rugers became safe queens.

After a little research, I bought a new ER Shaw 20" Bull barrel for the stainless carbine. This made the gun a LOT more accurate, but would start jamming after less than 50 rounds. Cases would stick in the chamber and not extract. Clean the crap out of it, and it would do the exact same thing.... and it became a safe queen once again.

Found this site and read about CPC. Sent the stainless gun with the ER Shaw barrel to him, and it came back RIGHT! Gun was more accurate than it ever was, and ran like a Swiss Watch! Ended up sending the 1998 carbine as well. He recommended swapping the old barrel for a newer carbine barrel he had there... and it's now super accurate, and runs perfectly.

Out of the box, the 10/22's are the least accurate 22's I've ever owned... but sending them to CPC takes care of all of the issues. Bought four other 10/22's, and sent them all to CPC... some brand new before even firing a single shot.

WHY do I support Ruger in buying inferior guns for more than it costs to buy something more accurate... only to spend another $200 or so to send it off to get everything fixed? I'm still asking myself that same question. lol
 
#60 ·
If you're going to play, you're going to pay. Buying the upgrades brings the performance level to what you get for the $$$$$. Think Cooper or Annie...

You can spend more out of the box and get instant gratification or, tinker with a 10/22, polish on it, figure out what improvements suit your needs and taste (and read) CUSTOMIZE it. It doesn't make them junk. I have had a few of them, and haven't had a lemon.

Maybe the Marlin 60 is a better deal out of the box. Not nearly the options available for them. I don't care for them. Never have. Not interested.

Too many options with the 10/22. You either work with what is there stock, or make it better with the accessories. I may end up with about what I could get for the same money out of the box with some other "higher" grade .22, but tinkering with it gives me the satisfaction of the hobby...

Regards
 
#62 ·
I've owned 5, all five shot good and were reliable as purchased, the only problem with them is the horribly heavy trigger pull. The other stuff we do to them improves them. A trigger job, modify the bolt release and sights and you're good to go. It may not shoot 1" groups at 100 yards(most .22s won't) but more than likely it'll do everything else it should do. A bunny or squirrel's head isn't safe at 50 yards if you are able to make the shot. Of my 5, none ever malfunctioned unless it was bad ammo or filthy magazines. I see a bunch of them at the club and they all seem to work. I'm not saying you can't get a lemon, it can happen but they seem to be the best product Ruger sells today.
I did 2 of the standard carbines on the cheap to use for NRA Rimfire Sporter Matches.
DIY trigger jobs, 3-1/2# min., DIY bolt release, Williams Peep on one, TRS25 Red Dot on the other. Both are more than accurate enough and totally reliable. I did pick up a couple old walnut stocks for them, I hate the beech wood stocks. The oldest one has a Laminated stock, heavy bbl, Volqartsen hammer, spring kit, bolt release and a 100.00 Simmons 4-12 scope. Shoots like a house afire, still didn't cost an arm and a leg. I've prolly got 400 or 450 in it. Built it about 25 years ago.
The latest is a Deluxe Sporter, BX trigger, Leupold 2-7 VX1 Rimfire scope. Love them.
:)
 
#63 ·
I recently tested a couple of factory barrels. I recently bought an older 10/22T SS barrel. And I had a couple of factory carbine barrels laying around. so i slugged them and assembled the best one to see how it would do.

the carbine barrel was unfired and probably about 2 years old. at 25y with RWS it managed some decent 5 round center to center groups. .204" .305" .403" and .276"

so not bad for a factory carbine barrel. the real impressive one was the 10/22 T barrel. it shot A LOT better than the last 2 kidd barrels i had, it also noses out my feddersen barrel by a little. this was shot with sk pistol match. .106" .180" .174" and .260". i have never had a factory ruger barrel shoot that well.
 
#64 ·
A few year ago a purchased a laminate, standard 10/22 carbine. I have owned numerous 10/22s since the late 1970s. My favorites were the Wal Mart specials in the green laminate.

Anyhow, this blue laminate caught my eye so I bought it.

What a horrible disappointment.

The list:

Rubber trigger group housing.

Rubber Trigger.

Rubber barrel band.

This stuff is so soft, I don't dignify it by calling it plastic.

I thought, "Meh, lot's of guns are polymer. Give it a chance."

It had a terrible trigger and you could actually FEEL the trigger flex when you applied pressure to it. It did run okay, though.

....well, until the sights fell out when I tried to adjust them a wee bit.

The bolt looked like it had been cast, lightly polished for ejection port...and that was it. Rough as a corn cob.

Compared to all of the 10/22s I have owned over the years....this thing was a piece of junk.

My favorite part is how Hoppe's #9 eats into the finish of the receiver when you clean it.

Sooooo, I bought an NOS aluminum Ruger trigger housing and trigger. Got a proper barrel band as a take off from a friend and purchased a take off stainless barrel at a gun shop. I then polished the bolt up a bit and reshaped the rubber mag release to a real nice shape that is mechanically advantageous without allowing you to drop the mag accidentally.

The only thing I need to do now is Cerakote the receiver and barrel band. It shoots great now! I can chase shotgun shells all over the place with it.

I will NEVER buy another Ruger made 10/22 until they get their act together on that gun.

What is very strange is that the Ruger Mk IV, as much as I despise it, is one %%%% fine made handgun. Incredible workmanship.....but those are made at the pistol plant which has a whole different philosophy of manufacture from what I have seen.

If Ruger put as much thought into the manufacturing engineering of the 10/22 as they do the Mk IV instead of just trying to skim profits on us by making the gun 50 percent CHEAPER ( not economical....CHEAP ) without lowering the price, they would have a hell of a gun.

It's a darn shame.
 
#66 ·
i dont mind the trigger housing. as far as hoppes, i wouldnt use it on aluminum either. it is a bore solvent, so i would limit it to use on steel. i use gun scrubber for the trigger housings. on my newest purchase i did a JWH hammer kit for $18. with a little polish and file work on the factory sear, and a little polish work on the hammer i was able to get the pull weight down to 3lbs with factory springs.

at any rate, yes they are a little cheaper, but ruger has to compete with a lot of competitors in the semi auto .22 rifle market. they do make more expensive versions, so it depends on the price point you are looking at, but the carbine is the low cost gun.
 
#67 · (Edited)
Some people are just sour. Every thing is crummy, they don’t make stuff like they used to. Blah blah blah blah blah:mad: Never gonna make them happy cause they don’t wanna be happy don’t know what happy is but just in case I’m wrong here’s a picture, Bone stock except for a plastic Bx trigger that breaks at 2.5 lbs out of the box.Fit and Finnish , perfect.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top