Nathan Frith
Bearcat
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 16
I picked up my Ruger 10/22 "Target" (model 1121) from my LGD on a transfer from Gunbroker, and while I was there, I decided to slap an optic on, and see what it could do in comparison to my 10/22 Carbine (circa 2009). The Carbine has a VQ auto bolt release and bolt buffer, as well as a polished and radiused bolt, and a polished receiver, all done by me. The Carbine trigger is still the gravely, 7 lb pull stock unit. The Target model was unmodified accept for the addition of an optic. Also, I was shooting at 25 yards, from a bench, indoors, with a sandbag on top of a bulk box of .22 LR ammo and my hand under the rear of the stock. The Target model wore a 3-9X50 Tasco, and the Carbine wore a 2-7x32 Bushnell AR/22. All rounds were Remington Golden Bullet bulk! 
Oh, and for a good part of the time I was shooting, some @$$hat a lane over was rapid firing his new M-Forgery with a muzzle brake of some sort. Farking loud, and annoying.
It took a few more rounds than I would have liked to sight it in (my fault, not the gun)
Then I shot my first 10-shot group
Second group (flier is my fault)
Third group (I'll take that)
As I went, I got more comfortable with the gun, and I eventually shot a couple of 3-shot groups that were pretty decent.
All-in-all, I am pretty happy with the gun, it being right out of the box, and unmodified. It shot better than I could, and I think with a more stable bench setup, and fewer distractions, I could improve greatly on the above.
For comparison, I pulled out my 10/22 Carbine, and after sighting in my new Bushnell AR/22 (I went R instead of L initially, so again, more wasted ammo)
I was able to get this
And this
I was expecting a little better from the Carbine, but the trigger really is awful. Speaking of trigger, I found the Target model to be a vast improvement over the Carbine, and I think that accounted for a lot of my accuracy improvement. The Target model's trigger was cleaner, with no "gravelly" feeling, and no uncertainty in the break. The Carbine sometimes has almost a double break of sorts (for lack of a better description), and is really hard to work with for bench accuracy.
Other improvements are obviously the barrel, but as I later found, the receiver fit and finish is much better, and the bolt was finished to a much higher standard than the Carbine bolt. After the range outing, I tore the Target model down, put in a VQ auto bolt release and bolt buffer, and polished the receiver and bolt. The Receiver is definitely hard anodized, versus the powder coated receiver on the carbine, and the 50th Anniversary engraved bolt on the Target was finished to a much higher standard than my Carbine bolt was originally.
Back to the barrel, it is beautiful! I was actually surprised that it was such high quality finish. I admittedly don't have a ton of personal experience with heavy barreled 10/22s, but I have seen a couple up close, and this thing is impressive. At the end of the day, it's all about results, but again, I was surprised I could pull so much accuracy from the gun, pre-cleaning and pre-mods.
The stock on the Target model is also very nice, and overall, despite the heavy barrel, the gun has a nice heft, and with a low-mounted optic, nestles nicely, and feels really natural. My wife remarked that it looked much better in person than the slick PR pictures for it, and I would agree.
Finally, here's the family. Top is a Stevens model 84D (circa 1955 afaik), a Marlin Model 60 (circa 1998), and the two 10/22s in the aforementioned "face-off".
Overall, very satisfied with my purchase, and I feel it is a good starting point to build a low-cost tack driver for punching dime-size groups in paper.
Oh, and for a good part of the time I was shooting, some @$$hat a lane over was rapid firing his new M-Forgery with a muzzle brake of some sort. Farking loud, and annoying.
It took a few more rounds than I would have liked to sight it in (my fault, not the gun)
Then I shot my first 10-shot group
Second group (flier is my fault)
Third group (I'll take that)
As I went, I got more comfortable with the gun, and I eventually shot a couple of 3-shot groups that were pretty decent.
All-in-all, I am pretty happy with the gun, it being right out of the box, and unmodified. It shot better than I could, and I think with a more stable bench setup, and fewer distractions, I could improve greatly on the above.
For comparison, I pulled out my 10/22 Carbine, and after sighting in my new Bushnell AR/22 (I went R instead of L initially, so again, more wasted ammo)
I was able to get this
And this
I was expecting a little better from the Carbine, but the trigger really is awful. Speaking of trigger, I found the Target model to be a vast improvement over the Carbine, and I think that accounted for a lot of my accuracy improvement. The Target model's trigger was cleaner, with no "gravelly" feeling, and no uncertainty in the break. The Carbine sometimes has almost a double break of sorts (for lack of a better description), and is really hard to work with for bench accuracy.
Other improvements are obviously the barrel, but as I later found, the receiver fit and finish is much better, and the bolt was finished to a much higher standard than the Carbine bolt. After the range outing, I tore the Target model down, put in a VQ auto bolt release and bolt buffer, and polished the receiver and bolt. The Receiver is definitely hard anodized, versus the powder coated receiver on the carbine, and the 50th Anniversary engraved bolt on the Target was finished to a much higher standard than my Carbine bolt was originally.
Back to the barrel, it is beautiful! I was actually surprised that it was such high quality finish. I admittedly don't have a ton of personal experience with heavy barreled 10/22s, but I have seen a couple up close, and this thing is impressive. At the end of the day, it's all about results, but again, I was surprised I could pull so much accuracy from the gun, pre-cleaning and pre-mods.
The stock on the Target model is also very nice, and overall, despite the heavy barrel, the gun has a nice heft, and with a low-mounted optic, nestles nicely, and feels really natural. My wife remarked that it looked much better in person than the slick PR pictures for it, and I would agree.
Finally, here's the family. Top is a Stevens model 84D (circa 1955 afaik), a Marlin Model 60 (circa 1998), and the two 10/22s in the aforementioned "face-off".
Overall, very satisfied with my purchase, and I feel it is a good starting point to build a low-cost tack driver for punching dime-size groups in paper.
