|
^^^^ Kudos Milehigh14, really like it. Parts list so I can build my own please! 
|
| # ¿ Sep 18, 2009 22:15 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2013 16:45 |
|
|
Fantastic, thanks. 10/22 is my next purchase and I'd like to make it look nice like that one. I like the charging handle quite a bit!
|
| # ¿ Sep 18, 2009 22:18 |
|
|
Are there any 10/22 books worth getting or is pretty much all the info available much easier on the internet? I was thinking of getting Customize the Ruger 10/22. I don't have a 10/22 yet but I was thinking of building my own from a bare receiver up.
|
| # ¿ Sep 6, 2010 17:44 |
|
|
So after waffling back and forth a bit it almost seems I'm deciding on getting one of those newer 10/22 target tacticals. I know, I know, tacticlol and all that, but it has some things I like:
The one thing I don't like as much is the lack of option for iron sights, unless I get that slip-on endcap for the tech sights but I have my doubts about a front sight base fastened in place with loc-tite. Not that it will take a pounding, just seems a little cheezy. So does that still sound like a ridiculous idea despite all that? I'd probably slap on my red dot sight at first then eventually get a decent, inexpensive scope (sweet 22 perhaps?). Plus the GunBlast guy seems to like it! Originally my plan was to get a regular carbine and replace the bits and bobs as I go to build something pretty similar but it'd probably cheaper and easier to just buy off the shelf like this..
|
| # ¿ Oct 31, 2010 05:18 |
|
|
TACTICAL isn't really what I'm after, that's just the silly name for it. Really the sr22 would be their AR-a-like. I prefer something rifle stocked. It's true that the price is a little high for a 10/22 but I could see it costing easily that much to pimp out a regular carbine to be similar. And the targets have the longer barrel etc. The pricing also probably doesn't seem quite as nutty to me being in Canada and all..
|
| # ¿ Oct 31, 2010 05:57 |
|
|
Now I feel bad because I changed my mind yet again and picked up a regular carbine today  Gonna put tech sights on it! Didn't go with the target tactical just because I'm planning on getting a bolt action .22 down the road for my "tack driver", but the target tactical looks like a really nice shooter too so it definitely is not a bad choice.
|
| # ¿ Nov 7, 2010 03:00 |
|
|
I took out my 10/22 today, and I think my eyes are broken. I can't focus on the front sight for poo poo! Weird. I don't have this issue with my other rifles, and I'm planning on getting some tech sights next week to slap on there. Hopefully this'll fix it. Still fun as hell to shoot despite some woeful accuracy. (due to me)
|
| # ¿ Nov 7, 2010 23:21 |
|
|
frunksock posted:I'm also interested in tech sights. Do you mean the ones here? http://www.tech-sights.com/ Or is it a more general term or a type of sight and not the specific brand? Yeah those ones exactly. I've heard really good stuff about them from folks here so I'll hopefully be picking a set of the TSR100s up from a guy next weekend. I'm in Canada and unfortunately they don't ship here so some enterprising souls occasionally load up in the states and bring them north to sell at a bit of a markup. Also think I'll be investing in a new stock fairly soon because the LOP of the carbine is way, way too short for me to be comfortable. Thinking something like the hogue overmolded one, I'd kind of like the ghillie tan version. Possibly a m1 carbine conversion kit instead though..
|
| # ¿ Nov 8, 2010 17:04 |
|
|
No prob, I was debating on it for a while too. I figured having the dual apertures to switch between would fit the shooting I'd be doing more, not to any great range or anything. And one can always adjust the front sight post height if need be. The 200 seemed a little more hardcore than what I'd need, basically. Still a great choice though! Also if I do feel the urge to go that way later there is a kit to replace part of the rear sight of the 100 to make it a 200..
|
| # ¿ Nov 8, 2010 17:22 |
|
|
So I stripped down my newish 10/22 carbine for cleaning (first time out I shot about 300+ rounds through it and it was a little dirty), apart from it kind of being a little annoying having to drift out a bunch of pins to take it apart it's a neat little break down. I took apart the trigger assembly completely, do people usually do that when doing a good cleaning? There was some gritty bits in there that needed a wipedown. Got it back together ok though thanks to some step by step guides on the net, wasn't that difficult. Hopefully everything works as it should!
|
| # ¿ Nov 15, 2010 18:16 |
|
|
Professor Awesome posted:I've never taken my trigger packs apart, I just blast them out with brake cleaner and then re-oil everything every great once in a while That makes sense, it wasn't excessively hard but it would be a bit fiddly to do every time one wanted to give it a clean. I need to file down the bolt release nubbin thing with a dremel or round file I think.
|
| # ¿ Nov 15, 2010 18:40 |
|
|
charliebravo77 posted:Almost all of my pins fall right out when I remove the receiver from the stock. The gun then vomits all of it's guts onto my workbench. It was an interesting surprise the first time I took it apart. Despite the apparently loose tolerances on the pins and everything, there's no noticeable drop in accuracy that I've noticed. Sure it's a drat shotgun compared to my MkII-BV, but it's well within reasonable for a stock mass produced semi-auto. Strange, mine were in there pretty good and took some convincing with a punch and a rubber headed mallet! At least it's not really an issue when it's in the stock, the pins aren't going anywhere then. Looking for a place selling the Ghillie Tan Hogue overmolded stock for standard barrel, preferably able to ship to Canada. Once I get that and a set of tech sights the rifle will be great.
|
| # ¿ Nov 15, 2010 18:45 |
|
|
The prob I've heard with the cutting the dovetail for the front sight mount is that some of the bull barrels are actually a steel barrel that is encased in aluminum on the outside. These are the ruger factory barrels anyway, not sure if Green Mountain etc does that. Anyway this'd be too soft to do a proper dovetail mount on from what I understand. Found this for a pic of the bull barrel with sleeve: http://gallery.photo.net/photo/4544009-lg.jpg I was thinking about going this route too but in the end I just decided to stick with the standard barrel and put tech sights on it. Once I get ahold of the sights, anyway.
|
| # ¿ Nov 20, 2010 21:33 |
|
|
I put the 10/22 rail on last night, is it a good idea to use loc-tite or does it matter? I made sure not to overtighten the screws lest they crack the receiver. Slapped a cheapy red dot on there, much better than the stock sights.
|
| # ¿ Dec 17, 2010 19:34 |
|
|
MisterOblivious posted:Yeah, use some loctite. Don't be a goober like me and drown the screws in it. The firing pin is right under the holes so if you subscribe the the "more is better" newsletter take the bolt out before mounting or you'll end up with a jamming, slamfiring 10/22. That's kind of what was concerning me, looking thru the holes and seeing the bolt sliding about.. I guess a little dab of the sticky blue type would be ok.. It seems fine and solid without it though, I'll keep an eye on it for now..
|
| # ¿ Dec 19, 2010 04:36 |
|
|
I haven't had any issues with the metal lips magazine and I put it in with bolt closed, open, whatever. The thing's ran like a champ since I got it, love shooting the 10/22. Especially with the red dot so I don't have to use those drat default sights.
|
| # ¿ Dec 19, 2010 22:56 |
|
|
Just a small flathead screwdriver works, they are just little screw "plugs". They come out quite easily. Probably want to disassemble the ruger (take out the trigger group and bolt) before doing it just for ease of use and so any of the crud doesn't fall into the mechanism. When taking them off a lot of the parkerizing or whatever that is comes off around the screw head and can fall in there. Probably wouldn't hurt much but it's not hard to take it apart anyway. Cheap red dots on the 10/22 own, I have a cheapy bushnell on mine and it's awesome fun.
|
| # ¿ Jan 3, 2011 23:12 |
|
|
I thought FA 10/22s were not terribly unusual in places that allow that?
|
| # ¿ Jan 4, 2011 04:37 |
|
|
I dunno if the RCMP will really twist themselves into knots over a probable jamtastic (so I hear) FA 10/22 compared to an actual potentially FA assault rifle. Still it's dumb. they should just charge people who make the mods not ban anything that has the potential to be modded. Also like they say in the article, almost ANY semi auto could be modified to FA with the right tools and know-how. priznat fucked around with this message at Jan 4, 2011 around 04:49 |
| # ¿ Jan 4, 2011 04:47 |
|
|
thermobollocks posted:You'd have to find a trigger pack that was registered as a machine gun before 1986. I want to say they run north of 10 grand. Wowsers. I have seen quite a few youtubes of FA 10/22s so I'm rather surprised to hear how much they are. Then again I'd probably film the hell out of it and saturate the internet with videos too if I had one
|
| # ¿ Jan 4, 2011 05:35 |
|
|
Dogbrisket posted:What, you think all those FA guns on Youtube are legal? I've seen plenty of videos of hillbillies with FA AK and AR variants that I seriously doubt are legal and transferrable. My personal fave was the guy shooting the Krinkov off the hood of his pick up, shortly followed by some text declaring the gun "proudly made in the USA". If there's one thing I've noticed about the internet over the years, it's that there's no shortage of people willing to brag/show off otherwise illegalitems and behaviors. Yeah, I have no idea about the legalities of it, I had just thought in the states as long as you pay the $200 fee or whatever you were good to go. Didn't know there were a regulated number of trigger packs selling for thousands of bucks. At least the gun laws in Canada are less confusing. They definitely suck a lot more, but generally less confusing . There are also lots of idiots in Canada putting videos online of themselves firing guns with prohib magazine sizes too, so at least the level of idiocy is fairly consistent.
|
| # ¿ Jan 4, 2011 21:22 |
|
|
Question: would it be ok to put a stock for a .920" barrel on one with a standard barrel? I'm thinking about the potential of doing piecemeal upgrades from the regular carbine to a bull barrel target plinker. Mostly just for fun and interest in tinkering. The stock would probably look a little weird but I don't see how it would be a problem with the larger channel for the thicker barrel, correct?
|
| # ¿ Jan 25, 2011 21:14 |
|
|
Can those drums be loaded with one of those butler creek loaders? Otherwise, ow.
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2011 19:21 |
|
|
Oh that's good.. still must take a while! I like the butler creek loader for 25 rounders, shake, crank crank, shake etc.
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2011 23:17 |
|
|
They should have kept the same doodads that are on the butler creek mags that allow them to be clipped together! 
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2011 21:21 |
|
|
Wow I really like that Troy one. Neat! The Bell and Carlson one is really slick too, I like the Anschutz style stock.
|
| # ¿ Aug 31, 2011 05:05 |
|
|
Miso Beno posted:I like the bell calrson target/varminter. If I had plans for a geerqueered up 10/22 Id be all over that one. Yeah I'd probably go that way too. It looks more correct whereas the troy one will just look a little off. Too spendy for me right now, regardless.
|
| # ¿ Aug 31, 2011 05:09 |
|
|
That rules. I want to do the same, but sadly no cans allowed 
|
| # ¿ Nov 6, 2011 19:24 |
|
|
Looks like an ace stock?
|
| # ¿ Nov 6, 2011 19:26 |
|
|
Nordic components looks like. http://www.cactustactical.com/osc/n...-c-412_457.html There are a few kits that look like that, though. NEA also makes one.
|
| # ¿ Nov 6, 2011 19:33 |
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2013 16:45 |
|
|
widefault posted:Ruger sells one very similar as the SR-22 Yah I think that's the Nordic part. Pretty nifty!
|
| # ¿ Nov 6, 2011 20:06 |
|
