Leucoandro
Single-Sixer
revhigh":1ysf12hf said:
Not totally certain, but I believe that Colt set up a contract as an importer of the GSG AR-15. I am pretty sure that Colt had nothing to do with the design of the 22 AR....That was all GSG.
Charlie
Ruger's "Mystery" gun
- Thread starter c.r.
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
Not totally certain, but I believe that Colt set up a contract as an importer of the GSG AR-15. I am pretty sure that Colt had nothing to do with the design of the 22 AR....That was all GSG.
Charlie
Could be Charlie, I didn't really like the Colt because it didn't break down like a standard AR, it was kind of clumsy actually. It seemed like the only one totally (as much as possible) true to the AR design was the S&W. And since the equivalent tacticool model in the Colt line cost close to $200 more, I went with the S&W, even though it had a polymer receiver, which I was OK with since it was only a 22. Plus, all my buddies bought the same one and were VERY satisfied with it.
REV
REV
M'BOGO
Buckeye
sdoyl123":2e27yl6s said:
Back to the point, I concur
mohavesam
Hawkeye
A Single-Six Hunter in .32 (Federal, H&R Mag, Long) has been long absent from the Hunter "series". Even an alloy-framed Blackhawk size 32 Hunter would fill a void...
The SHOT show will be awash in AR-type guns & parts, so Ruger Inc will need something to stand above the commoners. Let's hope for legacy-quality product(s), not novelties, that might do just that!
Again this year, they forgot to invite me to the design&marketing conferences.
The SHOT show will be awash in AR-type guns & parts, so Ruger Inc will need something to stand above the commoners. Let's hope for legacy-quality product(s), not novelties, that might do just that!
Again this year, they forgot to invite me to the design&marketing conferences.
I guess it all depends on whether you want a .22 that looks like an AR, or one that looks and operates like an AR. (I won't be buying either, as I have my .22 AR money tied up in the DPMS I've been shooting for five years.)CraigC":2iaj41og said:
And BTW: What? We're having this conversation AGAIN? :roll:
In speaking with a R&D guy at Ruger after the .22 Hunter came out, the .32 Hunter was brought up. well, due to the different barrel threads used on the Hunters, it wouldn't work on the Single Six frame and would be oversized on the BH frame. Don't see it happening on the medium sized frame either. face it, Ruger has done the .32 mag thing a couple times and it just doesn't have the call needed to keep them in the line-up.
That all being said, I'd LOVE one myself.
That all being said, I'd LOVE one myself.
Snake45":3suaydzt said:
I never saw it the first time ... time for a search I guess !
A few pics .... note in the sight picture how the red dot is co-witnessed to the iron flip-up sights. You can just see the red dot on top of the front sight post. Also note how the 15-22 breaks down just like a real AR without changing/modifying any optics.
Red Dot Co-witnessed to the flip up sights.
Sights Down.
Sights Up.
Break down.
View throught the trigger housing and magwell.
REV
chet15
Hawkeye
revhigh":ctpfob1f said:
Well, how many other companies entered the AR market? Where'd S&W get their idea and why are they building them? How many times can the wheel really be invented?
Its not a joke, its business.
Like when Ruger entered the .22 pistol market in 1949 among the biggies Colt and High Standard?
Or the M77 bolt market among Remington and Winchester?
Or the DA market, along side Colt and S&W
Etc., Etc. Etc.
When you get right down to it, there aren't that many "new" ideas out there? At least Ruger put most of the best features of a particular model into their own hybrid (kind of like the Single-Six, eh?), to also make such a weapon very competitive with the "others" competiton.
From everything I've read and heard in the marketplace, that terrible bad SR556 has made sales of every other AR model drop. Could it be that Ruger has introduced another model that will (at least for the time being) be more accepted than the old standby's?? And cheaper for the $? The consumers seem to be saying yes!!
Pitiful and embarrasing? Tell that to Ruger's shareholders!
I had mixed emotions about a Ruger AR also, entering the market with a myriad of other "COPIES". But from the way it looks, it appears that Ruger's already latched onto a big piece of the marketshare.
Chet15
chet15":1p3369zu said:
That's a pretty tall statement Chet. I'd be interested where you got that information .... I don't know anybody who has thought about one, has bought one, or is even interested in one, in .22 OR .556. 'A big piece of the market share' ? ... I really doubt that. Either way, we were talking about the SR22, NOT the SR556.
REV
chet15
Hawkeye
You're right, got caught up in the word AR and was thinking .556.
But again, from one distributor and from other market sights, the big Obama gun run is pretty much over for now, so Ruger entered the AR market pretty late in the game. Still, the SR556 is outselling everything else at one distributor. I've only spoken to one about it, but another also pretty much gave the same indication.
On the SR-22...I can't chastise it...I call it good business sense. Seems Ruger is only saving a bit of $ for already engineered designs. Makes sense from the standpoint that for what little is invested they can market a product that uses a magazine that most folks may already have. Cost x availability can be plus for the Ruger model, especially in these days when most people I know are hanging onto most of their dollars tightly.
Will we buy one? Only our #290-00023 when it arrives
Chet15
But again, from one distributor and from other market sights, the big Obama gun run is pretty much over for now, so Ruger entered the AR market pretty late in the game. Still, the SR556 is outselling everything else at one distributor. I've only spoken to one about it, but another also pretty much gave the same indication.
On the SR-22...I can't chastise it...I call it good business sense. Seems Ruger is only saving a bit of $ for already engineered designs. Makes sense from the standpoint that for what little is invested they can market a product that uses a magazine that most folks may already have. Cost x availability can be plus for the Ruger model, especially in these days when most people I know are hanging onto most of their dollars tightly.
Will we buy one? Only our #290-00023 when it arrives
Chet15
Tallbald
Buckeye
I have hopes for a GP100 in .22LR....
revhigh":9z1rqa9k said:chet15":9z1rqa9k said:
No problem Chet ... I have a lot of respect for the 10-22 platform, but a phony 22 AR just turns me off. I have no doubt it's as good as every other 10-22 !! If you're looking for a 10-22.
REV
Like it, hate it...it's all moot really when business is the primary factor. In speaking wth some Ruger reps recently, I was told how when Bill Sr was in the chair, they built and sold what he wanted built and sold. Now it's more focused on what the market, the consumer wants. Even if I didn't like a model, were the demand there, it's a profitable venture to enter that market. This just seems what Ruger did with the SR-22. Like it or not, it's very likely becoming a profitable venture.
Quarterbore
Blackhawk
The SR-22 isn't a bad concept, they just are a PITA to clean and it certainly is not really a new gun... instead it is just a 10-22 with a kit added!
Now, had Ruger spent a little time with their CNC machines and actually MILLED or CAST a new receiver that accepted the 10/22 bolt, barrel, and mags but added the material needed to add a free float tube and AR-15 type stocks and grips then they would have had a FAR MORE impressive design and one that would have been worth a new designation.
I have one of the Norton conversion kits and it does make the 10/22 feel like an AR-15 more but man I hate taking it down to clean it. Just seems to me a there is a better way to make that setup and if I were better with the milling machine I would show it!
Now, had Ruger spent a little time with their CNC machines and actually MILLED or CAST a new receiver that accepted the 10/22 bolt, barrel, and mags but added the material needed to add a free float tube and AR-15 type stocks and grips then they would have had a FAR MORE impressive design and one that would have been worth a new designation.
I have one of the Norton conversion kits and it does make the 10/22 feel like an AR-15 more but man I hate taking it down to clean it. Just seems to me a there is a better way to make that setup and if I were better with the milling machine I would show it!
Quarterbore":1uy7lqgz said:
Doing that would be a LOT more costly too. One key with any 10/22 variation is the modular design of the base gun itself. With relatively a low amount of R&D, little tooling and perhaps some limited outsourcing, a new variation is easy. For the most part, the factory variations of 10/22 are appealing to the consumer that won't be doing any DIY work on them - at least initially. Those that buy one for a build, will buy what is more cost effective to start their build from. These won't be the fancied up variations.
Bottom line, it's business. Those that understand that concept will be able to understand the choices far better than those that don't and those that have no first-hand business mgmnt. Although many times it's seems there's a internet world full of armchair business leaders.
What would be cool would be a genuine AR clone in .22, with the lower set up to use (exclusively) 10/22 magazines. This would accomplish two things:
1. Allow users to use cheap, common, reliable 10/22 hi-cap mags (which many already own several of).
2. Such a gun would probably be allowed in states where CF ARs are banned or tightly restricted but .22s are not, as it could not readily be converted to use regular AR magazines.
1. Allow users to use cheap, common, reliable 10/22 hi-cap mags (which many already own several of).
2. Such a gun would probably be allowed in states where CF ARs are banned or tightly restricted but .22s are not, as it could not readily be converted to use regular AR magazines.
