Having owned and still in possession of quite a few 10/22. I think we are seeing a reverse bell curve here as far as quality control is concerned. With the crinkle paint models being at the bottom of the list. e.g. softer alloys in the receiver, sloppy over spray, unsquared bolts, excessive head spacing {.055"}, and loose fitting barrels. After a quick check of a dozen or so newer models 2013 to current. The quality seems to be on the up rise. e.g. Nice square bolt faces, better headspacing {.045"} slightly smoother finish on receivers, tighter fitting barrels, tighter cambers. You can take or leave my opinion but things are looking better. There are only a few things that I think Ruger has strayed away from that they should bring back. Staking the bolts to limit firing pin lift and better quality woods. Although originally not a polymer trigger group fan, I have grown to except them as they are light, strong and manufactured to a more precise tolerance. The metal internals are also easily reworked if one wants to mod. The 10/22 not unlike any other mass produced consumer product will always have a lemon here or there but on average 99% of most shooters or hunters can expect a fun reliable rifle. Cheers
Have 10/22s changed?
- Thread starter ninepointer
- Start date
Oh heck, been a while since I whined about my POS should have never left the factory floor QA'ed by an inbred drunk with tourettes 10/22...
I did get it working reliably, eventually, after filing off the overcast splast from inside the receiver. Got it accurate enough to hit the broadside of a barn, so long as I'm shooting from the inside, after tightening up the v-block and sanding down the barrel channel (which looked like it had been hacked out with a flint chisel and stone hammer by a tribesman after he'd gotten at the firewater).
I bought it about, oh, 3, 4 years ago? It was at the height of the gun buying panic south of the border, and I think Ruger just cranked the factory into high gear and chucked QA out the window to pump out rifle-like-objects to make a quick buck off the trend.
I keep it because once in a blue moon it's fun to take out and spray out a couple of the GSG 110 round drum mags. But as for doing anything useful, I have a bunch of 22's that actually hit what you point them at.
If you watch this entire vid, they go off on Ruger a couple of times about their quality control issues. And both of these guys are normally pretty big fans of Ruger, so I was a bit surprised to hear the bad-mouthing.
My advice:
I think Ruger still makes good guns, but don't buy one if you can't inspect it. Their QC is non-existent.
I did get it working reliably, eventually, after filing off the overcast splast from inside the receiver. Got it accurate enough to hit the broadside of a barn, so long as I'm shooting from the inside, after tightening up the v-block and sanding down the barrel channel (which looked like it had been hacked out with a flint chisel and stone hammer by a tribesman after he'd gotten at the firewater).
I bought it about, oh, 3, 4 years ago? It was at the height of the gun buying panic south of the border, and I think Ruger just cranked the factory into high gear and chucked QA out the window to pump out rifle-like-objects to make a quick buck off the trend.
I keep it because once in a blue moon it's fun to take out and spray out a couple of the GSG 110 round drum mags. But as for doing anything useful, I have a bunch of 22's that actually hit what you point them at.
If you watch this entire vid, they go off on Ruger a couple of times about their quality control issues. And both of these guys are normally pretty big fans of Ruger, so I was a bit surprised to hear the bad-mouthing.
My advice:
I think Ruger still makes good guns, but don't buy one if you can't inspect it. Their QC is non-existent.
grimreefer
Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
If they want to change something, maybe start with that stupid bolt lock. Amirite?
I have a 10/22 Takedown I bought very late in 2015 from Cabelas. I don't have an earlier model to compare it to, but I can tell you that I've never had a single jam using the factory rotary mag. This is regardless of ammo used; match grade federal, CCI mini-mag, green tag, winchester white box, etc. I don't have the number of rounds cataloged, but it was enough that I spent several hundred dollars on ammo and had to cancel my vacation to Mexico. My girlfriend was pissed, but at least the gun worked well 
grimreefer
Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Do you mean ex-girlfriend? Lol
- Location
- West Quebec
I found the rotary's to be the innovation they have added to the 10/22I have a 10/22 Takedown I bought very late in 2015 from Cabelas. I don't have an earlier model to compare it to, but I can tell you that I've never had a single jam using the factory rotary mag. This is regardless of ammo used; match grade federal, CCI mini-mag, green tag, winchester white box, etc. I don't have the number of rounds cataloged, but it was enough that I spent several hundred dollars on ammo and had to cancel my vacation to Mexico. My girlfriend was pissed, but at least the gun worked well
I LOVE those little things. Ten rounds is plenty for hunting use, I can carry like a million in my pockets (give or take a few if I'm dressed for warm weather
) and it fits flush with the gun; no snags and it's easy to shoot in any position.
saskgunowner101
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- near Prince Albert
You can do the mod at home with a small file and sandpaper, or order the part and drop in. Better half hated that on her 10/22.
rugersuperstore
New member
- Location
- Mobile Alabama USA
When Ruger changed it's receiver from alum to plastic it caused some minor fit problems. But as to the entire rifle, everytime I buy one (new or used) I always make the following improvements:
1) trigger (either a simple Volquartsen hammer or a Ruger bx drop in, or a Kidd ONLY if using it is competition)
2) bolt release plate either mod it myself, or get a yellowjacket or volquartsen drop in auto bolt release plate)
3) stock...I usually do NOT replace, but I do remove the barrel band and then sand the barrel slot so it free floats)
4) replace the extractor with either a yellowjacket or a volquartsen to prevent jamming.
This turns a $200 cheapo rifle into a real gopher killer for under $100!
grimreefer
Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
I've already done the mod on my takedown, but just wonder why that isn't stock? Would also be nice if the bolt locked open on an empty mag!
My newer 10/22 works flawlessly. The plastic trigger group does not bother me, it is very light weight and there is no need for steel. I recently added a Green Mountain barrel and it still works flawlessly.
My brother has a 10/22 and SR/22. He had a magazine/feeding issue with his SR/22 which was corrected by Ruger and now both run flawlessly with any ammo.
I do occasionally have issue with my Butler Creek magazines where the next round does not come up high enough for the bolt to grab it.
My brother has a 10/22 and SR/22. He had a magazine/feeding issue with his SR/22 which was corrected by Ruger and now both run flawlessly with any ammo.
I do occasionally have issue with my Butler Creek magazines where the next round does not come up high enough for the bolt to grab it.
A few weeks ago i had 3 Ruger 10/22's side by side, 1969, 1993, 2013 I would have taken a picture but they were all pretty much the same
2013 - Compact model, beech stock, plastic trigger unit with long mag release, glossy receiver coating
1993 - International model, beech stock, metal trigger unit, matte receiver coating
1969 - Walnut stock, metal butt plate, Lyman rear sight, metal trigger unit as well, semi gloss receiver coating
I borrowed the 1969 from a friend thinking it would be much better but its more or less the same. The sights are Lyman but other then the stamp you wouldn't know the difference from ones made today, the wood is much nicer and the metal butt plate kind of neat but not much different then the plastic really. Its a heavier gun but that's about all.
The trigger is just as heavy as any of the ones built today so don't think they were better by any means.
The 1993 is pretty similar to the 69 but don't like the receiver finish as much as its pretty flat and shows scratches better, still has metal trigger group
The 2013 to me has the best receiver finnish but has the plastic trigger guard which some people dont like but many companies like Beretta and Glock have been using plastic on their guns for years so dont really see an issue, I am not a fan of the extended mag release though.
I didnt find one gun in particular to be more accurate then the other or function to be different at all. Same action, same design, same heavy trigger through the years.
Both of my guns have aftermarket trigger parts, or work done and i replaced the trigger unit on the 2013 as i had a metal one that was already modded, if i had new VQ parts on hand that worked with the plastic trigger i propbably would have kept it, but my friend who loaned me the 1969 is just fine with his. When i mentioned tuning his trigger with some spare parts i had he didnt really seem all that interested. Thought being its a hunting gun the trigger is supposed to be heavy. So if you are really looking for that old Ruger quality really all you need to do is swap stocks for a walnut one.
2013 - Compact model, beech stock, plastic trigger unit with long mag release, glossy receiver coating
1993 - International model, beech stock, metal trigger unit, matte receiver coating
1969 - Walnut stock, metal butt plate, Lyman rear sight, metal trigger unit as well, semi gloss receiver coating
I borrowed the 1969 from a friend thinking it would be much better but its more or less the same. The sights are Lyman but other then the stamp you wouldn't know the difference from ones made today, the wood is much nicer and the metal butt plate kind of neat but not much different then the plastic really. Its a heavier gun but that's about all.
The trigger is just as heavy as any of the ones built today so don't think they were better by any means.
The 1993 is pretty similar to the 69 but don't like the receiver finish as much as its pretty flat and shows scratches better, still has metal trigger group
The 2013 to me has the best receiver finnish but has the plastic trigger guard which some people dont like but many companies like Beretta and Glock have been using plastic on their guns for years so dont really see an issue, I am not a fan of the extended mag release though.
I didnt find one gun in particular to be more accurate then the other or function to be different at all. Same action, same design, same heavy trigger through the years.
Both of my guns have aftermarket trigger parts, or work done and i replaced the trigger unit on the 2013 as i had a metal one that was already modded, if i had new VQ parts on hand that worked with the plastic trigger i propbably would have kept it, but my friend who loaned me the 1969 is just fine with his. When i mentioned tuning his trigger with some spare parts i had he didnt really seem all that interested. Thought being its a hunting gun the trigger is supposed to be heavy. So if you are really looking for that old Ruger quality really all you need to do is swap stocks for a walnut one.
Have they changed? You bet ! Mine changed from my gun safe to somebody else's . It was a reliable gun. I bought it new in the 1970s and had it all this time , but I just never shot it hardly at all in the last 20 years or so. If I take a .22 to the range and want to shoot small groups , I usually take an old Mossberg 146-b topped with a Nikon 3-9 BDC. There was no comparison between the two guns. Don't get me wrong. 10/22s are great dependable rifles. I bought mine to coon hunt at night , so needed something that worked well , and the ruger was perfect for the job. I guess I'm just a bolt action guy at heart. All my milsups are bolt guns too , except for a Chinese SKS. It's another great working gun , that never gets shot. The others get range time though.
