Optimum barrel length for Ruger 10/22
Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:37 AM
It would be nice to have a stubby 16" barrel that Clark offers (they will modify the barrel for $50), but I don't know if the accuracy will fall off due to decreased velocity at that barrel length. Does anyone know what the commonly suggested optimum barrel length is for the .22LR? And, has anyone who has the short 16" length had any complaints? I have a smooth non-fluted barrel.
Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:25 PM
16" will be fine. IIRC 22.LR reaches max velocity at 12-14". I have a 16" GM barrel. Absolutely no complaints whatsoever about accuracy!
Posted 07 June 2008 - 10:34 PM
Posted 08 June 2008 - 01:26 AM
There was a marked difference between my cousin's 24" Remington 550A, and my little Marlin 60, even with only 2" difference in barrel length. Shooting the same ammo, same box, his rifle was a lot quieter than mine, and scared the squirrels less, so he could get another shot if need be. I never needed another shot, I had a scope dialed in right.
Nowadays, guys use subsonic ammo for the same effect, but all they needed was an old 550A, or a longer tube. Even now, I sure have studied on those CZ trainers with the 27" barrels, just because of my old ears.
Posted 08 June 2008 - 05:02 PM
I have generally found that very long barrels with slow ammo are harder to shoot then the reverse, and give poorer practical accuracy. A 28" match barrel is very accurate in the hands of a skilled shooter using standard velocity match ammo. An inexperienced shooter would get poorer accuracy due to increased barrel time. ~AMMOe
Posted 11 June 2008 - 05:55 AM
As far as increased noise goes, I use earplugs in my rimfires and centerfires, so noise is not a factor if, say, a shorter barrel were to be used. The biggest factor is weight of the gun. Chopping off 5" of barrel (from 21.5 to 16.5 inches) would make carrying the gun (I use it as a carry) would help. But, then again, does the extra weight of the 21" barrel help with any barrel-hop during shooting, or is it not a factor?
Also, does anyone have any pros or cons to report on a product called the Bolt-Buffer?
Posted 11 June 2008 - 06:45 AM
I recommend a bolt buffer for anyone who has a 10/22.
16" is the legal minimum for a barrel (Federal law) in any state (including CA).
Posted 11 June 2008 - 01:20 PM
Posted 11 June 2008 - 09:11 PM
I use bolt buffers in all my 10/22 & 10/17 builds to quiet the action. I have a couple of them from the link you posted. I would not try and order them from WeaponKraft. Reid has suffered major medical problems and is not taking any orders for the last several months. The one thing I don't care for with most buffers is the colors, I have a BC stock that the buffer shows and colors just suck on an all black, suppressed firearm. So I found a web site that sells black buffers and I sold all the others.
Posted 12 June 2008 - 03:04 AM
Federal law on shotguns is barrel lenght of 18" and over all lenght of 28-1/4".
It is also a good idea to check state laws. Especillly if you live in CA, NY, MD, most of the "communistic" style states.
Posted 12 June 2008 - 07:07 AM
Posted 12 June 2008 - 02:28 PM
I have a Clark midweight on a 77/22...I love the thing, and toyed with the idea of doing something similar on a 10/22.
Posted 06 July 2008 - 03:54 AM
The action is very smooth. Trigger pulls smooth as butter with no creep or over-travel. The workmanship appears to be extremely good, although you and I know that this means little unless the rifle shoots well. I have seen rifles that look like a piece of rusty pipe shoot circles around rifles costing as much as a car. Anyway, I feel Clark is the place to modify a rifle at a reasonable cost.
I purchased an AMT rifle about ten years ago for $1,000. It never worked right due to ejection problems, although its accuracy was second to none. If I were to keep the rifle, I would merely mate a new action (not an AMT) to the Hart barrel and would have another 10/22 for my wife, although the AMT is a bit heavy due to the .920 barrel diameter.
This rifle now just sits in my closet. The groups were almost hole in one at 50 yards with Eley match ammo. The rifle killed hundreds of ground squirrels. The Hart barrel has a polished recessed crown and is 18" long.
I don't understand how AMT could manufacture such a poorly made action. They no longer make the 10/22 because that portion of their business went defunct. The gunsmiths who ran that part of the operation were great guys and knew what they were doing. The problem was that they were given some actions from the parent company that were just junk and were told to build the rifles using junky actions. The screw-in barrels were just great, however, and with the McMillan custom stocks made easy work of getting nice groups out of the box.
I bought the Clark Special because it was such a bargain. The 3 x 9 Leupold scope, if purchased new, costs about $350--- over half the price of the rifle itself. It was an offer I couldn't refuse.
Edited by Goofycat, 06 July 2008 - 04:21 AM.
Posted 06 July 2008 - 09:36 AM
I'm sorry to hear that. He's been most congenial in my dealings with him.
I appreciate the report GC. If I get around to doing one, I imagine it'll be on a Ruger action because of cost. I'd probably go with another one of Clarks mid-weight barrels also. I'm gonna to keep an eye peeled for a local used 10-22 on the cheap.
Posted 18 August 2008 - 07:05 PM
so go ahead and buy a 16 inch bbl with confidence!!!! No that it will be louder, though.