light backpacking rifle advice

S

stewacide

New member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm looking for a light-as possible .22 to extend my long-distance unsupported hiking and canoeing trips. Near as I can tell the AR-7 is the go-to gun for this sort of thing, but just to make sure I asked on another forum (4chan, don't ask :)) and had a lot of (American) users suggest this as an alternative: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/11/24/agp-arms-take-down-1022/

Would this sort of conversion be legal in Canada? I assume the mag is no problem, but the pistol-grip and folding stock probably are. Not sure it's worth it anyway given the cost vs. an AR-7.

Re: the AR-7, I've heard variously to only get the new (Henry) models, or to only get the old Charter Arms version? I would have assumed newer would be clearly better (better materials).
 
...the other that was mentioned a few times was this: http://www.packrifle.com/

Supposedly it shoots better than the AR-7, and is lighter, but more money, and again I'm dubious about its legality in Canada (OMG PISTOL GRIP MUST BE AN ASSAULT RIFLE!!! ;) ...when of course it's probably the least-deadly least-tactical firearm money will buy)
 
As much as I hate to say it because I don't like them much, but because you for some stupid reason can't take a .22lr pistol into the woods, the next best bet is the AR-7. only because you said absolutely lightest, and for hiking trips. It is super light and packs up small enough to put in a pack. A folding 10/22 weighs a fair bit more and is much bulkier. My favorite all time though is a marlin Papoose. I would not count it out although it is carried in a case when taken down. But it's what I take for canoe trips. It is super reliable, and exceptionally accurate. Weighs about 3 lb. And stowes to about 20" in length. Much better than an AR-7, but the AR-7 packs up smaller and a half pound lighter if you are counting ounces.
If you are ok with a single shot take a look at the Thompson center "hot shot".
 
I'm in the same boat, was looking at magnumlite, 3.8 lbs, telescoping stock, or volquartsen superlite around 4lbs, also a take down volquartsen 5lbs, more money, but a lot more rifle, burris fastfire? for optics, still undecided
 
I've heard the take-down Marlin is more accurate but less reliable than the AR-7. And obviously not as compact or quite as light.

And you're right, the 10/22 conversion is 4lbs which hardly seems worth the effort/expense.
 
I have an Armalite AR 7 Camo, it is a very early model, with patent pending on it so I'm guessing early 60's. It is a great shooter, just sayin in case you come across an older one in your search. That take down 10 22 interests me but that handguard needs rethinking, and no sights? Packrifle just seems fishy. :)
 
lwing said:
I'm in the same boat, was looking at magnumlite, 3.8 lbs, telescoping stock, or volquartsen superlite around 4lbs, also a take down volquartsen 5lbs, more money, but a lot more rifle, burris fastfire? for optics, still undecided
Click to expand...

The Volquartsen looks neat, except I can't figure out why it weighs so much. It's .17 HMR I guess, but 5lbs still for a full take-down rifle? What's the point?

https://www.volquartsen.com/products/431-fusion-take-down-rifle
 
There are many rave reviews on the marlin papoose, the ones I've seen indicate they are very reliable, while the AR-7 gets much lower ratings. For me, the norinco backpacker is just fine.
 
stewacide said:
I've heard the take-down Marlin is more accurate but less reliable than the AR-7. And obviously not as compact or quite as light.

And you're right, the 10/22 conversion is 4lbs which hardly seems worth the effort/expense.
Click to expand...

Thats nonesense, the AR-7's are notorious jam-o-matics with average accuracy, and i have never heard a bad review of the papoose. I've owned both and the papoose is much more reliable, and more accurate.
 
mikeystew said:
Thats nonesense, the AR-7's are notorious jam-o-matics with average accuracy, and i have never heard a bad review of the papoose. I've owned both and the papoose is much more reliable, and more accurate.
Click to expand...

It's a real shame they don't try to make it more packable. I hate strapping stuff to my pack / generally keep everything inside, which the AR-7 should allow for by the Marlin definitely not. And if I can't pack it the take-down hardly seems to serve any purpose... in fact, what is this gun intended for?
 
Norinco Backpacker, CZ scout, shorty Stevens, etc. If it's worth bringing a .22 in the first place, bring something 100% reliable and accurate. How many FTF/FTE/mags don't fit/paint is peeling off/can't get it back together after cleaning/trigger is terrible/scope is slipping (etc.) threads do you see on bolt action rifles? I'm not ant-semi, nor have I ever even held/used a Papoose, just puzzled as to why quirky semis even come-up as recommendations for use in remote/bush applications.
 
.22LRGUY said:
Norinco Backpacker, CZ scout, shorty Stevens, etc. If it's worth bringing a .22 in the first place, bring something 100% reliable and accurate. How many FTF/FTE/mags don't fit/paint is peeling off/can't get it back together after cleaning/trigger is terrible/scope is slipping (etc.) threads do you see on bolt action rifles? I'm not ant-semi, nor have I ever even held/used a Papoose, just puzzled as to why quirky semis even come-up as recommendations for use in remote/bush applications.
Click to expand...

Because they are thinner and pack lighter than bolts.....
 
Don't disagree, but isn't weight just one consideration? The "cons" seem to outweigh the "pros" if it's ever going to be a gun you need to rely on. Again, I have no experience with the Papoose or AR7...but have countless hours of time in the bush with bolt actions. Don't miss much with them, and I don't even notice the weight of my Norinco. Every weekend. :)
 
I think that .22's are not as feared in terms of reliability as centerfire rifles are because the .22 semi's are just straight blowback actions. There is no gas tube to corrode, no piston to clean, and no excessive fouling of a direct impingement system. The back pressure of the cartridge firing just pushes directly back against the return spring. Tolerances can be loose for reliability if needed, and if it should fail to cycle on it's own you can just work the action yourself, effectively making it a straight-pull bolt action in that case. Failures to feed or extract in this case are just as likely with a semi as with a bolt action.

I guess it's just because the system is SO simple for a straight blowback like that, it doesn't really take anything away or add much maintenance to make it work.

Red
 
Well... let's be honest here... the only purpose of carrying a .22 in these situations is to take small game if you have to.... it ain't for bear defence... reliability is somewhat of a moot point....lol
 
The basis of my post was that I don't think the semi's are any less reliable for camping/backpacking use than a bolt, because they're basically just as simple, and if something does start to malfunction, often it just turns it into the same utility as a bolt action.
 
I decided to pick up a 10/22 and put one of those cheap ATI 6 position stocks on it I removed all unnecessary parts (cheek rest, rails, ect, ...) it weighs 5.5 lbs. , slings nicely when folded , overall length when folded 26" and is perfect for use as a grouse /rabbit gun when I'm deer hunting, can be shot folded or extended. I wish I did this years ago. It's not a take down , but if that is a must then the papoos has my vote.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom