Click for embiggenation
The compact model in particular just might be the premier choice for a rimfire rifle. A serviceably short length of pull (12.5"), usable front sight mount, promising trigger, ergonomic safety and magazine release, the uber-dependable and ubiquitous rotary 10/22 magazine, and very reasonable price point are a nice combination of features. If that receiver scope dovetail can permit a ghost-ring rear sight in back and a cantilever Scout scope base up front, one could add those plus a third stud for a Ching Sling, a replacement front sight post, and have a fairly feature-complete .22 Scout rifle.
Yeah, I find that interesting. :-)
Maybe someone at Ruger is listening again. Just recently I met my first SR9, and wasn't prepared for how much good there was in there. It ain't perfect by a longshot, but it's a good deal further along the continuum than anything in the P-series ever was--good enough that if it runs well in hard use, it's arguably a viable competitor to the XD and M&P, which is saying something. Certainly the most compelling original centerfire auto pistol that Ruger has yet offered. And it wasn't too long ago that I ran into Ruger's Gunsite Scout Rifle, which impressed me greatly. And now this.
Good!
Please, fellas: do keep this up.
3 comments:
Did you write this:
the uber-dependable and ubiquitous rotary 10/22 magazine,
I have a 10/22, and love it. But I do NOT love the rotary, box magazine. They are difficult to load, and they fail to feed reliably. They aren't that old, and I have kept them scrupulously clean. I bought two new ones, thinking that would solve the problem. Nope.
Hi ML. I don't presume to speak for anyone else, but I'm sure not aware of any general reputation for unreliability among those magazines. Quite by contrast I'm used to folks talking about them with even more reverence than I use here. :-)
My own 10/22, when I had it, never failed me, with any of the 10 mags I had for it, using...lots of different kinds of ammo. (Just the occasional dud-primer problem you get with .22s.) Working with the rifles of others has always been a pretty similar experience; I can recall one 10/22 that did seem to hiccup a lot, but that was across multiple magazines, which leads me to suspect the rifle itself.
Loading is a bit unusual, for sure, and among my 10 mags I can definitely say that some were easier on the fingers than others. But man, they always worked. My only complaint about them has always been their bulk: a single-stack box is simply much trimmer and easier to pack than the cube-shaped rotaries.
Right now my main .22 rifle is a Henry "youth model" lever action, which similarly has never malfed on me, and which I quite love. I'm now looking to add a turnbolt to the .22 stable, and I'd always figured that I'd go to the 77/22 for that, partly because of the magazine arrangement. (The other possibility, which I still like other than that confounded backwards safety, is the CZ452. Notably, it employs a slim, single-stack magazine, which from a logistics and training standpoint is nice.)
What I'd love to see, really--now that I'm thinking about it--is a feature-complete .22 "Scout Rifle" with available magazine storage in the buttstock; even with a shorty LOP, one could envision onboard storage for several .22 magazines...maybe a cavity in the pistol grip for a boresnake, a collapsible bipod on the fore-end a la the Steyr Scout...
Dang, sounds like another project in the works. :-)
I don't know why the 10/22 magazines are such a pain, but they just are. I get jams frequently from failure to feed.
As for loading them, I suspect that old lady short fingers make that a worse chore than it might be for other folks. :) Just glad I don't have any arthritis.
I have a UpLula that loads most all other magazines, but of course not the .22s. And I bought a 30 round "banana" magazine for the 10/22, which feeds well... but is a total pain to load and I have not figured out how to shoot with it except standing unsupported. It just gets in the way. sigh I can't win.
Post a Comment