Old 10/22 better quality than current production?

That's what someone on rimfirecentral told me. I'm talking about the vintage 10/22s from the 70s-90s. Is this true? If it is, how was the quality better back then?

I vote YES.

Mobuck said:

I vote YES.

Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree.

I have one that I purchased in 1966 that was still going strong when I
"built" it into a much lighter one (carbon fiber barrel, plastic stock). It was
doing better at the start of build than one I purchased a very few years ago.

While in general I tend to agree, Brimstone Gunsmithing opines that the new polymer trigger groups are higher quality. I actually purchased a new polymer trigger group and had them perform a level 2 trigger job for my '79 vintage 10/22. At least in regards to the trigger group, I am inclined to agree with them.

Here's the link: http://brimstonegunsmithing.com/ruger-10-22-factory-trigger-group/

Have had a 10/22 from the late 80's since the late 80's .... abd I love that little rifle. Some of the newer 10/22's Ive seen havent been so well done but I recently picked up a new 10/22 mannlicher with a red buttpad and like it as much as my old one. The plastic trigger still boggles me but they say there better. Ill give it 25 yrs and see what I think

There are some cosmetic changes, and some changes of materials, and I do think the old ones looked better, but the new ones shoot as well and as flawlessly as my old original ones.

I wont say the same for the rotary magazines, however. It's a real pig in a poke discovering one that will operate as intended, and stay operating over the long haul.

My 1968 model:



And it still does this.

I vote for older is better. Wood was better, receivers were anodized not painted, trigger groups were metal not plastic, barrel band was metal not plastic, butt plate was metal not plastic. Fit and finish on new ones is garbage look how bad the stock on the take down fits at the split. Plastic stocks are a bunch cheaper than wood.
Sold my 2 old ones for $200 each and a few months later bought a 50th aniv wood stocked one for $125 - just because I didn't want to give the Marlin I bought on my 18th birthday in 1968 to my grandson.

Well, on the other hand, I've got a 1988 vintage 10/22. It functions flawlessly. BUT, it had a terrible trigger: a creepy, mushy 6 pound break.

I just had Brimstone do a Tier 2 trigger rework. The old 10/22 seems like it's a different gun: now sporting a 2 pound 2 ounce break with zero creep....

I love old Blackhawks and Single Sixes but I don't think the older 10/22's are better. They were only anodized 1964-1968 so good luck finding an anodized rifle that is not beat to hell and back. The polymer trigger housings were an improvement.

I have a 10/22 with the custom Walnut custom purchased in 1972-73. It is a one hole shooter at 50 yards with several makes of ammo it likes. The metal and wood finish is nicer than any 10/22 I've seen in the LGS's over the past 5 years. So my answer is YES.

I suspect the trigger groups on the newer ones are better even though they will still need work to make them actually good... but as for over all quality... there is nothing new that can match the older ones at least in looks.

CraigC said:

I love old Blackhawks and Single Sixes but I don't think the older 10/22's are better. They were only anodized 1964-1968 so good luck finding an anodized rifle that is not beat to hell and back. The polymer trigger housings were an improvement.

Click to expand...

Actually, the anodized aluminum finish was used until Ruger went to the "teflon-coating" c. 1970. The black anodized aluminum buttplates were used until 1976.

I have nothing to compare. Only ever owned one 10/22. Bought it in June of 1967. Shot the hell out of it and it still is in service.

I have a 90's era that didn't shoot for crap with the factory hardwood stock. Receiver fit very loosely in the stock. Found a 60's era walnut stock at a gunshow and refinished it just because I liked the look. This stock fits much tighter and low and behold shoots more accurately. I believe it's because the receiver is bedded better. So to answer the original question? Yes.

I bought a newer SS International some time ago new and was disappointed with the quality of the bolt finish. It had the Ruger logo etched on the face but the surface was so uneven the logo faded out in spots and the bolt surfaces were VERY rough to almost as cast. Bought a KIDD bolt and trigger kit and it is a tack driver.

Fast forward to this weekend and I bought an unfired 1995/1996 vintage SS carbine. All metal construction (except butt plate). Hardwood stock is nice figure and uniform stain. Bolt is smoothly machined. Fit in stock is tight with little movement. Only negative is barrel is a bit loose in receiver. Have not shot it yet so not sure if it is an issue.

Now if I can find a walnut carbine or sporter stock...

MI-shooter

Tighten the two allen head screws that hold the barrel to the receiver before you fire that 10/22 and you should be a happy camper.

Yup, completely torn down and everything cleaned, oiled and tightened up.

MIshooter

I use my modified 1995 10/22 with a Fajen TH stock, Volqartsen hammer group, Midway bull barrel (yup!), and Leupold 3X10 scope to chase golf balls around at 100+ yards in front of a dirt back berm. I cannot speak for mew models.

I have a few 10/22's from the late 80's to early 90's and they're pretty well made. I had one of the first Chargers that came out and I wasn't impressed with the workmanship on it, especially that crinkle coat mess they put on the reciever. I'm not sure if the whole 10/22 line went with the crinkle finish during that period or not. Fast forward to 2019. I bought two Chargers and my buddy got one too. Well, yesterday I disassembled one to do the bolt release modification on it and I was pretty happy with the workmanship on the reciever and the polymer trigger housing looked like a way more precise assembly. I think they're better now in a updated kinda way!