Project Appleseed

Check the thread here somewhere about old eyes. Lots of good info on scopes there.

The short part of it is simple. A regular rifle scope, not a small, older .22 scope. And not too much power, either. Anywhere from 2 1/2 X to 4X is plenty. A 2-7X variable would be optimum, as you can crank it down to 2X, and it works.

Most scopes that are designed for 22s will have rings with
clamp on mts that fit the grooved receiver.   What Nickle
left out is if you go to 1" tube scope is that the mount must
be the type that fits the smaller 22 base or grooved receiver
and not just Weaver based that is much larger.   Yeah bigger
is better, but for 25 meters, most anything will work well.   An
expensive do anything might be someone's cup of tea, but
reliable inexpensive stuff for this distance is exceptable for this
type of shooting.  If it works well for you, you can always
update it.  If not, you don't have a big investment and ya try
something else.   Years ago, there seemed not to be an inbet-
ween choice with scopes as it was cheap or expensive.

One thing that happened to me several years ago with a 10/22 and standard 22 LR "tip-off" rings is that, although the recoil of a 22 LR is nothing, the cumulative inertia generated by the action and the weight of the scope over time caused my "tip-off" rings to slide forward on the base (yes, they were tight). 

I switched to a Weaver-style base and rings.  With the grooves cut in the base and the cross-pins on the rings this problem was eliminated.  FWIW

Quote from: wcmartin1 on October 20, 2007, 12:30:02 PM
One thing that happened to me several years ago with a 10/22 and standard 22 LR "tip-off" rings is that, although the recoil of a 22 LR is nothing, the cumulative inertia generated by the action and the weight of the scope over time caused my "tip-off" rings to slide forward on the base (yes, they were tight). 

I switched to a Weaver-style base and rings.  With the grooves cut in the base and the cross-pins on the rings this problem was eliminated.  FWIW

A little thread-locking compound (Loc-Tite) applied at the interface of the tip-off groove and the groove in the base of the rings might solve the rings' migration problem.  Make sure to de-grease the surfaces first.

Quote from: raf on October 20, 2007, 09:52:13 PM
A little thread-locking compound (Loc-Tite) applied at the interface of the tip-off groove and the groove in the base of the rings might solve the rings' migration problem.  Make sure to de-grease the surfaces first.

Maybe so, but I like the Weaver-style base/rings better anyway for this application.

Quote from: wcmartin1 on October 21, 2007, 02:22:10 PM

Quote from: raf on October 20, 2007, 09:52:13 PM
A little thread-locking compound (Loc-Tite) applied at the interface of the tip-off groove and the groove in the base of the rings might solve the rings' migration problem.  Make sure to de-grease the surfaces first.

Maybe so, but I like the Weaver-style base/rings better anyway for this application.

Your approach is better, no doubt.  Modern Ruger 10-22s come equipped with a Weaver-style rail that can be attached by the owner.  I mentioned my alternative for those who might want to try a "poor man's" alternative on their older Ruger OR another rifle whose base may only be available in "tip-off' style.  OTOH, if the owner of an older rifle has a Weaver base available, and can afford both the rail and installation, that is surely the way to go.  We will know for sure that Ruger has gotten the word on the LTR concept when the scope rails shipped with the 10-22 are Mil-Spec Picatinny style instead of Weaver.

I somehow doubt we will see that.

Anyone thought about the possibility of working with a FFL to purchase a quantity of 10/22s, the requisite parts (tech sights, Tapco stocks, Volquartsen BHO, extended mag release, etc), and crank out a batch of LTRs that could be sold to RWVA participants? I know there would be some logistics issues to overcome (funding the initial purchase, legal compliance for sales, etc.) but I think they would sell, albeit in small quantities. If we could find a way to purchase in a large enough quantity (the parts, at least, if not the rifles themselves), they could be offered "at cost" (+ approx $20 S&H) or nearly so. What a better way to help Patriots get others into shooting than to give them the ability to purchase a simple, cheap, accurate, reliable rifle at the cheapest price possible? Yes, it might cost slightly more than doing it yourself (though not necessarily if you factor in shipping costs for all the various parts), but even if it does cost more, what is your time worth? Instead of turning a stock gun into a "some assembly required" LTR, you can pay a few bucks more to have one shipped right to your local dealer. Yes, this probably means finding a gunsmith (or a good shadetree gunsmith) to do the parts install (but this shouldn't be too hard for anyone who has ever worked on a 10/22), and finding a trustworthy dealer to handle the sales & shipping. All issues above are potential obstacles, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the concept.

Hope this hasn't been proposed before (not that I care who had the idea, I just don't want to look like an idiot for proposing something that has already been debated and killed), but I haven't been able to completely read all threads on the board so far. It's going to take a while... 

It would be nice Madman, and you're not the first to think about it.

Ruger won't touch it with a 10 foot pole, unless a mass merchant or big distributor asks for it.

Most dealers won't do it, too much headache for so little return. Can't say as I knock my brethren in the business, they've got to eat, too.

I know of one FFL that might bite. He's got an LTR already. The same guy that donated 3 10/22's to the Northeast Region for loaner rrifles.

And, you don't need all the stuff mentioned. I did my triggers and bolt release myself, though the trigger isn't for the new or squeamish.

I could come up with an LTR kit, if there was enough demand for it. And yes, I would be willing to sell it at a reasonable price.

Check page 6 for what would be in it. Those prices are retail, and I may have to boost them slightly to cover everything (unless something gives me enough profit to cover shipping plus a few $). You could simply just order the stuff from those 2 sources and be done with it, tough. Cost you less than buying it from me.

I would do it when I get my shop open(I was actually planning on it as a kind of charity), unfortunately that won't be for at least 10 years I estimate.

I just don't have the money, as I will need to repay these student loans and won't have the reputation to get the business I need to start a shop in the first place.

Muddogg, are you willing to do up trigger groups?

Don't need a shop for that. In fact, folks could send you the trigger group and stock, and you could do the work, and all they would have to do is install the parts and the Tech Sights.

As to me doing it, ask me in just over 3 years. I'll be retired from my regular job, and the Army Guard, and working at my own shop, doing repairs and making ammo (and probably doing beaucoup Appleseeds).

Agreed on pretty much all counts, Nickle. I already have a 10/22 and parts will soon be on the way to convert it to a LTR. I'm not thinking so much of myself, or even specific individuals. Mostly I'm thinking of a way to make it easier to get new folks into this. If we invite friends who don't have a rifle, and loan them one of ours for the weekend, chances are they are going to want to get a rifle of their own afterwards. For noob shooters / RiT (Riflemen in Training), dropping $600-$1k for an AR or M1A may be a bigger commitment than they are ready to make, not to mention the rising price of ammo. Likewise, taking on the task of converting a 10/22 to a LTR configuration may be more than a RiT is comfortable with (at first, anyway). OTOH, for $250 - $300, if they could buy a LTR direct from an affiliated FFL, this would hopefully put a gun in their hands at an affordable price, with ammo that is cheap enough to shoot for a month of Sundays. As John Ross once said (paraphrasing loosely), "If you want to learn how to shoot well, buy a .22 rifle and 10,000 rounds of ammo".

I know (purely from reading here) that several group buys have been arranged for 10/22 mags and Tech sights. Granted, they were not at "fire sale" discounts, but the discounts were still enough to make it worthwhile. If we can find a willing dealer and startup funds (even if it's only one rifle at a time), there's bound to be some interest, some response, and some positive outcome. I'm going to ponder this one a bit, and perhaps lean on my local gun trafficker / gunsmith (who attended the Osage Beach Appleseed and is one of the folks who "gets it") to see if he would help in any way.

Quote from: Nickle on October 19, 2007, 10:45:54 AM
Check the thread here somewhere about old eyes. Lots of good info on scopes there.

The short part of it is simple. A regular rifle scope, not a small, older .22 scope. And not too much power, either. Anywhere from 2 1/2 X to 4X is plenty. A 2-7X variable would be optimum, as you can crank it down to 2X, and it works.

You can get a descent scope without spending a fortune.

My latest purchase was a "BSA Sweet 22".

It's clear enough to see your hits and the parallax adjustment feature enables you to get a clear picture down to 10 yards.



After mounting I found I was too close in the prone position.  Solved that problem with an extend scope base (mounts it more forward than is possible with the Ruger mount).



Sure helps these 73 year old eyes.  Yes I know, some folks think that "Old People" should not be allowed to have guns.  Come to think of it, some people think that no one should own guns, (but them of course).

Quote from: Madman on October 25, 2007, 10:54:53 PM

I know (purely from reading here) that several group buys have been arranged for 10/22 mags and Tech sights. Granted, they were not at "fire sale" discounts, but the discounts were still enough to make it worthwhile.

Just so you know, those mags are at wholesale, plus a little for shipping. And I do mean a little. I'm the FFL buyer for them.

You can get one of those BSA's here:

http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=944096

$56.99 plus shipping.

That looks like the perfect scope for this.  I'm kinda jealous.  Mine was twice the price and doesn't have the target turrets.

That scope is 2-7X, and on 2X would be about perfect.

Now, I'm a fan of old steel tubed Weavers, but I do have a 6-24X BSA Mil-Dot, and for a cheap scope, it isn't all that bad.

One of my LTR's is currently wearing a V8 Weaver, another a T-6 Weaver. I like both of them.

Quote from: Nickle on October 26, 2007, 11:26:36 PM
Now, I'm a fan of old steel tubed Weavers, but I do have a 6-24X BSA Mil-Dot, and for a cheap scope, it isn't all that bad.

Roger that.  I have a 8-32x BSA Platinum mil-dot on a Savage heavy-barrell 22-250 (I leave it set at 10x so the mil-dot are correct, though) and it will hit steel at 500 yards consistently.  As you said - not bad for a cheap scope.

I did have another BSA (4x16 Contender) on a 30-06 that didn't last, though - too much recoil for it.  The factory repaired it and now it sits on my 10/22.

I need to find a range where i can shoot that far

SilverWhiskers Ranting about Cleaning Ruger 10-22's & Mags and other Magazines you can't easily take apart.

Break-Free, Tri-Flow or Tetra Gun will work fine. Some have suggested using spray carborator cleaner. It works fine on blued or stainless guns. Painted finishes or plastic magazines can be another matter. Carborator cleaner is faster. The spray lubes are slower in melting gunk and safer on plastics and paint.

Since this thread is about 10-22's lets use the lubes mentioned above. They will melt gunk if you give them a little while. It helps to use Q-tips intelligently. After you liquify the dirt, carbon and crud, swril around with a Q-tip to loosen the dirt and then all you need to do is spray some more in the rifle or Magazine and the dirty stuff will run out. It may take more than one pass to get it done. Be patient. If you are not patient when cleaning your rifle you probably will not do as good a job as you want to do.

Drilling a drip hole in a magazine sounds OK and probably will not hurt anything. However, why not just turn them right side up for the first wash cycle and upside down for the rinse cycle. Using the dryer is up to you!!! Spray Carborator cleaner works ok on my stock Ruger magazine.

These lubes work the same way in a barrel. Get you favorite barrel squeaky clean and wet it completely with one of these lubes. Wait a week and use a clean patch through it, and out comes more black.

Speaking of cleaning rifle barrels ............ NEVER place it buttstock down and stroke the cleaning rod straight up and down. The buttstocks are cut at an angle. The barrel in most rifles DOES NOT go straight up and down. Some Do go straight but not many. If you forget and stroke the cleaning rod straight up and down it will wear the rifling down at the muzzle crown, just under the front sight. Alway keep your cleaning rod in the middle of the barrel. Notice if your barrel is slanted at an angle because the recoil pad is angled.

When buying a used rifle always look for cleaning rod damage around the barrel crown where the rifling ends, under the front sight. It is the last thing the bullet sees as it leaves the barrel. It isn't a pretty sight if it is rubbed smooth in that one area..  Shooting .22's is a great idea !!!

Silverwhiskers

Here's the LTR I built up three or fours years ago, before it became trendy, and before Tech Sights came out.

1966 10/22, mechanically all stock except for full-floated barrel and a Weaponkraft recoil buffer. I put a real M14 sight up front and an old Redfield peep, found at a gun show, on the rear. It'll put cheap Walmart ammo into about 1/2" at 25 yards, which is way better than I can shoot standing.

I've fired over 25K of .22 this year, 2,000 rounds of it in this rifle (nearly all from standing), much of the rest of it in other "liberty training" rifles and handguns.

Nice looking .22.  To my way of thinking you've done all the mods. you need.  If it shoots good with the factory barrel and trigger why replace'em.

Quote from: M1A4ME on November 11, 2007, 08:42:23 AM
If it shoots good with the factory barrel and trigger why replace'em.

Exactly. And if you put aftermarket trigger parts in a 10/22, you'll get a trigger that's much BETTER than you can find on any MBR. That doesn't really do much for your practical skills. Learning to shoot the Ruger factory trigger will make you a better shooter.

Being an older, pre-lawyer gun, the pull on this one isn't too bad--somewhere between 3 and 4 pounds and very crisp. I also have a 1985 10/22 whose trigger is much more military in feel.

In addition to the Tech Sights and the Redfield, the Zephyr (http://www.bosesguns.com/product_p/eag2206.htm) is another aperture sight option for the 10/22 -- I haven't had any occasion to use them, yet, so can't give any feedback.

Redfield doesn't make peeps anymore AFAIK, but Williams makes at least three different kinds of peeps that are usable on 10/22.

I'm working on another 10/22 LTR, this one an M1 carbine simulator. I've figgered out how to get a real M1 sight on the back, and think I've got how to get a carbine banded front sight on (using only common household hand tools). Yes, I know about the ERMA/Iver Johnson EM-1. Have one and shoot it a lot. WAY fun gun! Mags, if you can find them, are pretty spendy, though. The 10/22 will take common and relatively cheap hicaps (both the BC Steel Lips and the Ramline doublestack are working well for me).

snake 45,
is that a barrel band I see on your rifle?
how do you fully float a barrel with a barrel band on it?

Quote from: jpf on November 12, 2007, 11:50:36 PM
snake 45,
is that a barrel band I see on your rifle?
how do you fully float a barrel with a barrel band on it?

Hog out the stock with a sanding drum on a Dremel.

Then turn the sanding drum on the upper part of the barrel band, where it touches the barrel.

Neither the band nor the stock is touching the barrel, I assure you.

But it's not that big a deal. In my own testing, some 10/22s shoot better floated, some with just the band removed, and some with the band on and in full contact the way the factory shipped it. THIS one happened to shoot better floated, so it's floated.

snake45,
good deal on the floating of the barrel. is that the original stock? it looks much better than mine.
I'm glad to see you here.
I have read much of your work on the testing of .22 ammo and it is some of the best work on the net!

Ah, you must be an RFCer! Thanks for the kind words!

No, it's not the original stock. A '66 rifle would have a walnut stock. I bought this gun used about 20 years ago for $100 and it came in a Fed Ord "paratrooper" stock I never liked that much. I bought this stock more recently at a gunshow for $20 painted "tactical" black. I shot it that way for a while and then decided wood is prettier. I stripped it with some spray-on stripper from Walmart, made a few subtle mods, sanded it, stained it with Walmart Minwax Red Mahogany, and finished it with spray matte polyurethane. I actually prefer oil finishes but my experience is that stained birch doesn't do well with an oil finish--when you steel-wool each coat of the oil, you end up removing noticable amounts of the color at the same time.

The gun hasn't been cleaned or received any maintenance other than a wipe-down in over two years and is still running fine. This winter I'll strip it completely down for a good cleaning and lube because next year it's going into "heavy rotation" on my shooting schedule, meaning I plan to put somewhere between 2500 and 5000 rounds through it.

Questions for anybody:

What's the status on Tech Sights?  Is there another group buy planned, and when might that happen?  If applicable, what do we expect the price to be?

Has anybody used the XS ghost ring rear/stripe up the center, square-post front?  How'd ya like it?  MidwayUSA has those for 10/22 for about $75 + S&H.

Does anybody bother with the buffer gizzies?  If needed at all, is one brand or type better than the others?  I've used them with M1911 pistols, but nothing else.

Thanks, as you can see, I'm getting antsy for my Winter 2008 project gun.