Ruger 10/22 assistance!

supernova said:
How about getting 10/22s to cycle subsonics? Or my '89 10/22 that still had burrs to polish? Or taking 10/22s that had constant stovepiping issues and getting them to run very reliably by polishing? Kind of like my other post.
Click to expand...

Supernova, I already said that polishing is not a bad thing, as it will generally improve function (and it's easier to clean). The various 10/22s that have been in my possession have all been sufficiently polished that they reliably cycled subsonic ammo.

But the OP is talking about an ejection issue that varies due to magazine type. Since the magazine is part of the ejection system, I say that the magazine might be the core of the problem.

Increased bolt velocity is certainly not a bad thing. However, if the increased bolt velocity simply masks a problem with the mechanics of the ejections system, then I don't consider that to be a complete solution. If/when the rifle gets sufficiently dirty, ammo gets underpowered, whatever, it will fail to eject properly. If the mechanics are working as they are designed, the rifle will be more reliable in difficult conditions.
 
He mentioned that this happens with all his mags including the BC mags. In my experience bolt velocity is everything for good reliable ejection. A slow moving bolt will not have the round hit the ejector as hard which causes the stovepipe. The polishing I mentioned gets the bolt zipping along much quicker which is not much help with a good round but the odd light one picks up the extra speed to help it eject reliably. Same thing if the feed lips happen to rub the bolt or as things get dirty. It just keeps the rifle much more reliable in my experience to the point I don't bother with aftermarket extractors anymore unless the barrel has a match chamber. I agree the mags are still causing issues (FTF for first 3 or 4 rds) and that making sure the feed lips are clearance are important steps to moving forward but the polishing takes a decent 10/22 to amazing.

alpining said:
Supernova, I already said that polishing is not a bad thing, as it will generally improve function (and it's easier to clean). The various 10/22s that have been in my possession have all been sufficiently polished that they reliably cycled subsonic ammo.

But the OP is talking about an ejection issue that varies due to magazine type. Since the magazine is part of the ejection system, I say that the magazine might be the core of the problem.

Increased bolt velocity is certainly not a bad thing. However, if the increased bolt velocity simply masks a problem with the mechanics of the ejections system, then I don't consider that to be a complete solution. If/when the rifle gets sufficiently dirty, ammo gets underpowered, whatever, it will fail to eject properly. If the mechanics are working as they are designed, the rifle will be more reliable in difficult conditions.
Click to expand...
 
supernova said:
He mentioned that this happens with all his mags including the BC mags.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he said it was much less frequent with the BC mags. So yes, there is probably an overall weak ejection pattern happening regardless of the mags, which as you note polishing will help alleviate. However, changing mags has a big effect on his ejection, so the older magazine's "ejector surface" might be to blame. The first generation of 10/22 magazines didn't have this ejector feature built in to them, so I suppose that's a possibility as well.

supernova said:
but the polishing takes a decent 10/22 to amazing.
Click to expand...

couldn't agree more!
 
To be clear I fully agree the old mag is defective, my comments were aimed at reducing or eliminating the stovepiping with the other mags. I think we can agree on that :)

alpining said:
Yes, but he said it was much less frequent with the BC mags. So yes, there is probably an overall weak ejection pattern happening regardless of the mags, which as you note polishing will help alleviate. However, changing mags has a big effect on his ejection, so the older magazine's "ejector surface" might be to blame. The first generation of 10/22 magazines didn't have this ejector feature built in to them, so I suppose that's a possibility as well.



couldn't agree more!
Click to expand...
 
Hey guys, bolt and guide rod have been polished and there is a noticable diffence in just how easily the bolt slides back now. Sliding the charging handle up and down the guide had a lot of resistance which is now absent. A Dlask charging handle was aslo added and is a very nice little piece however it fits very tightly into the hammer. So tight that reassembly is an utter b*tch. We may a tiny bit of material of it to fit better. The difference between the Dlask and the stock handle was about .12-.13 of an inch in width. I need to take it out as it sits currently and see how she runs. The old mag, as stated, produced many stovepipes (a few or more a mag) compared to the BC mags which were more like one or two stovepipes every 5 or so mags. That could just be a breaking in issue. The first 4 or 5 bullets with the BC mags were yielding failures to feed as opposed to stovepipes. That issue I believe will be solved by breaking in the mags. I dont see a shim for the mag well being necessary as the mags sit nice and securely.
 
What part of the mags aid in ejection? Also as I stated before I was still having a couple failures to feed after the initial 4 or 5 rounds. That occurred with all mags. I only have used hollow point so I need to try some solid round nose and if thats still happening we may chamfer the bottom of the chamber to foster better feeding with all ammo types. This is becoming a very fun little project. My glock, AR etc work too well for me to even need to tamper with them so I like having this as a project gun. I guess thats the beauty of a 10/22. New they work well but there are still improvements that can be made and ones like mine have lots to be done to make them work perfectly!!
 
Have you loaded the mags up and let them sit for a couple days? It sets the spring and usually eliminates the frequent jamming of those first few rds. It has always worked the first time for me. Also check to see if the feed lips catch or rub the bolt. They usually need a tiny bit filed off the top and the top corner opposite the side that the follower is on. If they still stovepipe after that then chamfering the bolt is usually the last straw before uber reliability is achieved.
 
I was having the exact problem you are having with federal bulk ammo and butler creek mags. First 5 rounds don't feed, stovepipe 3or 4 out of 25. I dropped in a Kidd bolt and charging handle with medium spring and the next day shot 200 rounds without a single problem. I should have changed only the charging handle first to see if it was that or the bolt but it shoots the butler creek mags great now.( my old bolt was nicely polished and clean as well)
 
The mags I am already letting sit loaded. I figure that has a lot to do with the first 4/5 round issue. I havent yet checked clearance between the bolt and the feed lips but after about 150 rounds with the BC mags now I dont see any new markings or wear on the underside of the bolt!
supernova said:
Have you loaded the mags up and let them sit for a couple days? It sets the spring and usually eliminates the frequent jamming of those first few rds. It has always worked the first time for me. Also check to see if the feed lips catch or rub the bolt. They usually need a tiny bit filed off the top and the top corner opposite the side that the follower is on. If they still stovepipe after that then chamfering the bolt is usually the last straw before uber reliability is achieved.
Click to expand...
 
Rock Out w/ Ur Glock Out said:
What part of the mags aid in ejection? Also as I stated before I was still having a couple failures to feed after the initial 4 or 5 rounds.
Click to expand...

There are two ejectors in modern 10/22s. The part that's actually called the "ejector" only functions as an ejector when the magazine is not present. Try slowly ejecting a round with the magazine inserted and then without, and you'll see that the cartridge gets kicked out a little later when the magazine is not present. The "ejector" on the magazine is the square shoulder on the left hand magazine lip, right behind the feed ramp.

There's no reason not to carefully put a SMALL chamfer on the bottom of the chamber mouth where the rounds are hanging up, and LIGHTLY polishing the chamber. Feeding is also highly dependent on the "feed ramps" on the magazine lips. They can use some light polishing (superfine emery cloth wrapped around a screwdriver). But supernova is very right in that polishing the underside of the bolt will help a lot here. When the magazine is fully loaded, there's a lot more friction between the top cartridge in the magazine and the underside of the bolt after it has picked up the feeding round.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom