Range Report: Ruger 10/22 vs Savage Mark II

sufficiently stirred

Sorry if I stirred the pot too much. I have looked at the Savages and I don't like the fit and finish, that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it, there is a reason it is a $200 rifle. I think that comparing a bolt to a semi is an unfair comparison. Maybe, just maybe the one group shot that day with the Savage is the best one it will ever shoot. IMO one good group is not indicative of how a gun shoots, do it another 20 times and see if you can recreate that group over and over.
 
Idcurrie said:
Except for the stinger which is odd b/c it's the least accurate ammo made.:
Click to expand...
Again where do you get this from? guns like different ammo , some guns will shoot it and some wont . I cant say for my experiance the stingers are the most accurate bullet , but they sure as heck are not the worst , It depends on the gun .
 
Idcurrie said:
Wow, you attacked me because of my post count or join date? I'm sure you know that means nothing. Obviously I just started in this sport the moment I sighned up for this site :roll:
Click to expand...

No, I attacked you because you call out people without posting facts. You also compare a semi to a bolt, and call it a "range report." Your post/TR also compounds the fact you have no idea what you're talking about.
It seems you have an axe to grind, with the Rugers. I don't care either way, I have Anchutz rifles that are more accurate.
...And you're right, I didn't put anything on it to give it scale. For that, my bad - it was a rush picture, as I was taking pictures of other more important things. I do however have another target, of the Stingers doing the same thing on.

Again... I digress, i'm wasting my time.
 
My oh my! Wow! Perhaps there should really be a 10/22 subforum....and a CZ subforum...and while we're at it, let's do Marlin and Savage subforums too.

C'mon boys, we're just playing with our toy guns aren't we?
 
BCboy said:
Again where do you get this from? guns like different ammo , some guns will shoot it and some wont . I cant say for my experiance the stingers are the most accurate bullet , but they sure as heck are not the worst , It depends on the gun .
Click to expand...

Especially when talking .22's, no one should generalize. My son's CZ just loves Remmy Subsonic ammo. I can shoot dime-sized groups at 50 yds with it all day (except for the odd flyer). The same ammo in my Norc shoots like crap (2-3 inches at 50 yds). My Norc likes Winchester Hi Velocity (talking cheap ammo here) more than any other. I can't remember which CCI's it is (I've tried over 25 kinds of ammo in both rifles), but one shoots moderately well in both rifles, the other opens up to 4-5 in. in the CZ. Why do .22's seem so bloody fussy, I don't know. I don't think I've ever see such wide variances in accuracy from Centerfire ammo.
 
Can someone post some groups shot at 500 yards with both, just curious how much better the bolt gun really is. :rolleyes: This comparison was ridiculous right from the beginning. Why don't you try this.... Fire off as many rounds as you can in one minute, off hand, at 50 yards using irons, with both rifles. Then let me know which has landed the most lead within a 6" circle. Care to take a guess which rifle will perform better here? Some people really seem to have trouble getting it through their heads that this is the type of shooting that the 10/22 was designed for, not long range precision shooting. The beauty of the 10/22 is, if you don't mind spending some cash, you can have the best of both those worlds. This whole comparison is :bsFlag:
 
This is like comparing an AR15 to a Remington 700...completely pointless. I didn't buy a semi-automatic .22 to slow fire half inch groups at 100yards. I bought it to punch a 1" hole made up of 25 little holes at 50 yards as fast as I can pull the trigger.
 
Fire off as many rounds as you can in one minute, off hand, at 50 yards using irons, with both rifles. Then let me know which has landed the most lead within a 6" circle. Care to take a guess which rifle will perform better here?
Click to expand...

In my experience, that would be the Marlin 60.
 
Idcurrie said:
In my experience, that would be the Marlin 60.
Click to expand...

Not with a tube magazine. You'd easily get 35-40 rounds off with a ruger compaired to the marlin. Anyhow.... That should have been the gun you used to show us all how sh**ty the ruger is then, not the bolt action savage. My point from the beginning. :HR:
 
Wow. This thread is just like the global warming arguments I've seen...take a totally biased preconceived notion, get some evidence to support it and then show the results to be irrefutably correct given the science behind them. Oh, and wonder why everyone who disagrees can't open their eyes to the "truth", ridicule them if possible, as well as accusing anyone with counter-evidence of simply lying.

As an aside, I think you cheated with the Savage and sandbagged the Ruger accuracy test (but that's just a guess seeing as there is no such thing as internet proof). Anyhoo...

Not liking the 10/22 is fine. Posting that you don't like the 10/22 is fine too. So why the compulsion to come up with some BS pseudo scientific test to get people to agree with you? Are you saving us from making the wrong decision? Do we all need to think alike? Do you hate Ruger and want the company to suffer? Do you stand to profit from this? Or is it something much, much deeper than any of that?

Curiosity awaits...
 
Just curious if anyone has ever shot Winchester bulk 500 ammo through a Chrony?
Given the velocity variation with the batch I tested I doubt I could put 3 touching at 100 yards on the best day.

Mind you the stainless vangaurd I shot was sure as heck no 1/4 M.O.A rifle either so I guess I'm just not lucky.
 
Curiosity awaits...
Click to expand...

It's just what a day at the range shows. There's no cheating. It's exactly as presented. Hell, I did 15 groups with the 10/22 to get the best possible accuracy and took the best group. It probably doesn't help that the trigger pull on the POS is about 8 pounds. I'm not shooting from a vise, just a rest.

P.S. to all the ruger fans, I've been hearing a lot lately that the newer 10/22s are crap compared to the old ones. Maybe that has something to do with it, it's brand new.

Douglas, actually, I can produce tighter groups with the bulk winchester and the savage. I only took one group though because it was alright as-is.

Re: your weatherby in Stainless. When I shoot the american eagle (federal) through it, it's like a shotgun. It LOVES the Winchester hollowpoints though and will put out 1/4 MOA all day so long as the barrel is cool. It's very picky with ammo.

It kind of sounds like you think I'm putting the Win 500 bulk through the vanguard which is obviously impossible...
 
Comparing a semi to a bolt...the bolt will WIN every time...wtf are you trying to prove here?

Whats next...showing us a AR-15 vs. a bolt .223?

Shotgun with a smooth bore vs. rifled barrel with sabbots?
 
Hmmm. Maybe I need to rephrase the question somewhat, and not put all those other highly distracting words around it...

So why the compulsion to come up with some BS pseudo scientific test to get people to agree with you?
 
Justins1877 said:
My (bone stock) 10/22 does alright.... With a cheap ass $80 3X9 scope. +1 Remington Golden bullets being the WORST ever bullets. Out of the 15 different loads I tested, they were hands down, bottom of the barrel.
184337_10150099808117219_615722218_6597333_2770578_n.jpg
Click to expand...

I am sorry, but those do look like pin pricks to me, if that is a standard sized peice of paper. If not, more pwer to you, but you did get really defensive the second someone said they weren't authentic.
 
Idcurrie said:
It kind of sounds like you think I'm putting the Win 500 bulk through the vanguard which is obviously impossible...
Click to expand...

No doubt why they had a mean average spread of 50 fps difference in muzzle velocity when I tested them.
They must have been rattling down the bore of that Vanguard 25-06 I was using.f:P:
 
DrawBlood said:
I am sorry, but those do look like pin pricks to me, if that is a standard sized peice of paper. If not, more pwer to you, but you did get really defensive the second someone said they weren't authentic.
Click to expand...

I think maybe the red dots in the centre of the blue are what's throwing you off, I looked at first and thought the same, then realized that there's a red mark in the centre, not a hole. Obviously it's not a standard size piece of paper either, time to stop ragging on the guy.
 
DrawBlood said:
I am sorry, but those do look like pin pricks to me, if that is a standard sized peice of paper. If not, more pwer to you, but you did get really defensive the second someone said they weren't authentic.
Click to expand...

Ah... Now I see the problem, you thought it was a standard sized peice of paper.
Well.. It's not.
24''X19''
If I get time later tonight i'll put a dime next to the tightest group. I got defensive because he called my credibility into account, based on zero facts.

The circles I made using the finger hole of a scotch tape. The red dot I added to give me a defined aiming point, nothing more. The Velocitor, Stinger and Mini Mag are still well inside of a penny.
 
Well, I must concur, the mark II is more accurate than the 10/22. I just bought my MKII today, put a scope half sideways on it, took it to the range, and made a bunch of tiny groups, with fliers that I equally blame on myself, and myself putting a half sideways scope on it. At 25 yards, my average fliers out group, was under half an inch. At 25 yards my 10/22 with 5 MOA dot, will group into 1.25 inches, which is pretty much the accuracy limit of the tasco reddot.

Does this mean I hate my 10/22 and am going to sell it? Hell NO! It's a great little blaster, and will put lead downrange quicker than anything else I own. For it's intended purpose, it's amazingly good. Are there better guns? Depending on your criteria, yes, there are many better guns. Does the 10/22 do everything I can fairly ask of it? Yes.

They are both good guns, meant for entirely different purposes. Comparing them, is like comparing an F1 car with a Nitromethane Dragster. Put either one of them in the others race, and it's gonna lose every single time. One is refined, and meant to squeeze out every advantage, .01 seconds at a time, over several hours. The other is for going as fast as mechanically possible, being done the quarter mile under 5 seconds, and putting big silly grins on peoples faces. Yeah, they're both cars, but only a deluded person, would compare them in any meaningful way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom