Choosing Basic 22LR Rifle Help

S

Silentexpanse

New member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Hi all,

I just got approved for my PAL the other week. I quickly grabbed a handgun before they were banned, but now I would like to buy a beginner rifle that I can do some small game hunting and learn how to shoot. I don't want to buy anything too fancy as I would like to save my $$ for a higher Calibur when I know when I am doing.

Right now, I am looking at the Ruger American 22LR. I've watched a ton of YouTube and reviews that all say this gun is pretty much unmatched in the entry level segment except for maybe the Savage Axis II, which only comes in higher calibers. I found one on Arsenal force for $499. One question I have is I noticed that it comes in different barrel lengths. What does that do to accuracy / shooting? Is it more desirable to have a shorter barrel?

I am also looking at the Savage A2.

Or does anyone have any other good recommendations for a good starter hunting/learning to shoot rifle? My budget is probably max $600.

Thanks in advance.
 
Savage mk ll is a good beginner bolt action 22. It will come in well below the American in cost but will still give excellent accuracy
 
I'm basing my suggestion on pricing. If saving money for decent center fire or shotgun, while getting a good quality starter gun, to learn on then you couldn't go wrong with a Savage 64 if you want a semi-auto. It's made in Lakefield, Ontario, Canada and on sale can be had for under $200. While it's not as easy to clean or take down as the A22 it does IMO have a better stock and irons. I really don't like the A22's clam shell stock, it sounds like a drum, and the Iron sites front post is much to large. The 64 beats it on both those aspects. Also the 64 only has 10 round magazines but IMO that's not too big of a deal. For the money it's an awesome gun.

[youtube]SGzxeNDNwqo[/youtube]
[youtube]BdiHS5lTADE[/youtube]
 
Last edited:
Silentexpanse said:
...

One question I have is I noticed that it comes in different barrel lengths. What does that do to accuracy / shooting? Is it more desirable to have a shorter barrel? ...
Click to expand...

I think is perhaps carry over from old black powder days - a long black powder barrel usually has higher muzzle velocity than a shorter barrel - but with smokeless powder in .22 rifle, is all different - I do not recall exact numbers - but sort of around 16" or 18" gets you max velocity - going longer than that actually has slower muzzle velocity - others will correct me if I got that wrong. I hope that we can agree that velocity has very little to do with "accuracy" - is nice to get both with same shot - but nothing says it must be that way.

However, many target shooting disciplines do NOT use scopes - they use a rear aperture sight with a front sight - so is advantage to them to be able to aim better, the further apart those sights are - hence, was a time when "long barrelled" rifle were considered more accurate - but was likely a function of being able to aim it more precisely. I think modern consensus is that a thicker barrel is more rigid - less vibrations - so typically a feature desired in very accurate rifles - that heavy diameter barrel - not to say that thin barrels can not be accurate - their tendency is to heat up faster, though - and that might or might not affect the group that they can throw when that barrel is "hot".

Is very different needs for shooting - hunters typically should focus on their first "cold barrel" shot - that is likely their best shot to get their quarry. On other hand, many target competitions have deliberate "sighters" or "warm up shots" that do not count for score - so they can get their rifle to what they think is it's "optimum" - then shoot for score. A hunter typically can not nor should think he can do "warm up shots" - going to be that cold barrel shot as the best opportunity - so is at least two very different perspectives on what counts as an "accurate" barrel. Again, if I am in error, I will be corrected shortly, I am sure.
 
Last edited:
The Ruger 10/22 and the Savage 64 both look super interesting. I kind of like the look of the 10/22 better so it may be worth spending the extra on that, but the Savage price is pretty unbeatable. I hadn't thought about getting a semi-auto, but there seems to be plenty of good reviews on them.

@Potashiminer thanks for the explanation on barrel length. So, if I am understanding correctly, it doesn't matter that much when using modern smokeless powder that modern bullets come with, unless you prefer a longer barrel to aim with and you are not using a scope.
 
Silentexpanse said:
The Ruger 10/22 and the Savage 64 both look super interesting. I kind of like the look of the 10/22 better so it may be worth spending the extra on that, but the Savage price is pretty unbeatable. I hadn't thought about getting a semi-auto, but there seems to be plenty of good reviews on them.

@Potashiminer thanks for the explanation on barrel length. So, if I am understanding correctly, it doesn't matter that much when using modern smokeless powder that modern bullets come with, unless you prefer a longer barrel to aim with and you are not using a scope.
Click to expand...

It depends on the caliber. Here is a link on some data regarding 22lr, and the different barrel lengths and how it performs. http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/22.html

For the price the savage 64f is fantastic. The $200 saved on a 10/22 could be put into a better quality Center fire rifle not situated in the budget category. And the Ruger 10/22 isn't all that much better then the 64. Both designs are from 1964.

Edit: It seems the cheapest I can find one of these from my store list and what is in stock is about $189.
 
Last edited:
Silentexpanse said:
...

@Potashiminer thanks for the explanation on barrel length. So, if I am understanding correctly, it doesn't matter that much when using modern smokeless powder that modern bullets come with, unless you prefer a longer barrel to aim with and you are not using a scope.
Click to expand...

I think that is correct - but that I know of, there is NO relationship between a long barrel and an accurate barrel, except to the extent that the longer barrel's increased velocity (kind of self defeating with most .22 Long Rifle) might contribute to group size at some target distances. You will note, for example, that Palma rifles - typically 7.62x51 - often had 28" or longer barrels - was alleged to help the bullet, from the standard NATO loading that used to be used - to stay supersonic, out to the 1000 yard target.
 
The very best of the "basic" .22 bolt actions that are still available at a reasonable price are the CZs; Brno No2, 452, 455. Life time rifles.
 
Ribstaylor said:
It depends on the caliber. Here is a link on some data regarding 22lr, and the different barrel lengths and how it performs. http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/22.html

For the price the savage 64f is fantastic. The $200 saved on a 10/22 could be put into a better quality Center fire rifle not situated in the budget category. And the Ruger 10/22 isn't all that much better then the 64. Both designs are from 1964.

Edit: It seems the cheapest I can find one of these from my store list and what is in stock is about $189.
Click to expand...

I assume the highest possible barrel exit velocity is ideal for more accurate shoots?
 
Not always. In 22lr the match and target ammo is low velocity and has always grouped much better than the high or hyper velocity ammo in all my guns. In CF it's all about harmonics and accuracy nodes. Each barrel will be different. Some will like speed others will prefer to be pushed slower for maximum accuracy.
 
I ended up buying a Ruger 10/22. Cabela's had them on sale. I really like the look of that Rifle and box mag. It also has so many aftermarket parts and options to customize it with.

Thanks for all the suggestions and help guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom