Project Appleseed

Here we go again, folks. Please help me make this useful. Thanks.
Good:
Magazines
  No Rusting
  Self Lubricating
Drilled and Tapped for 'real' scope mount
Not the piddly 'Tipoff' style
Can be converted to M1 Carbine 'Look Alike' for reenactors
Lots of After Market parts

Bad:
Bolt Latch difficult especially with gloves
Bolt closes on last shot
Terrible sights
Unreliable out of the box, requires 'tweaking'
Low accuracy
Price too high for all its faults
Difficult to see mag well for 'Safe Rifle',

 I can not agree with most of your "bad" and even some of your "good".   
I can tell you that a 10/22 will rust except for the receiver and needs lubrication.  $200 for a quality wood stock new rifle is not outrageous.  I have found them used for less than $100.  Out of the box the least accurate 10/22 will shoot better than 2 MOA.   The factory 10/22 is very reliable with quality ammo so long as you keep it clean and lubed.  Many 10/22s are coming from the factory with an extended bolt release.
The most popular alternative which is significantly less expensive for a reason is the Marlin 795.   The Marlin comes with a horrible trigger and sights which are not an improvement although the sight radius may be longer.  The mag and bolt release  are more conventional and somewhat easier to operate but this is a rifle where you are mostly stuck with what the factory gives you.   
I have seen many Rifleman scores with both unmodified 10/22s and Marlin 795s with the exception of adding  an optic. 

We've only got 4 of them and I've worked on/modified a couple dozen others.


Bad:
Bolt Latch difficult especially with gloves (no more so then any other. To close the bolt is counter intuitive but cost zero $$ to fix)
Bolt closes on last shot (that's a negitive? bolt actions must really suck!? Automatic ball and dummy drill when they lose count. )
Terrible sights (yep, $30-$70 to fix)
Unreliable out of the box, requires 'tweaking' (Haven't found that to be true with proper cleaning and good ammo, I'd put them at the top for reliability.)
Low accuracy (Haven't seen one yet that wasn't 1MOA or better. There was a magazine article awhile back comparing several .22lr's configured in an AR style, the 10-22 was the most accurate, even more so then the SW15-22 at double the price.)
Price too high for all its faults (the youth model especially)
Difficult to see mag well for 'Safe Rifle', (RSO problem, not the rifle)

I'd add out of the box the mags need corners rounded/flashing removed and rough spots in mag well removed......O.L.

 

But seriously, some good points. No rifle is perfect, but I think that the humble 10-22 is worthy of consideration as an LTR nonetheless, simply because folks have found ways of getting around it's faults, one way or another.

Roland

I think Dave was talking about the magazine when he said no rust and self lubricating - see how those statements where indented?

I watched a Marine score Rifleman with a stock factory sighted 10/22 this weekend.  He figured out his hold offs between different stages after minor tweaks on the rear sight.  He would have been in the 220 range for his score if his buddy had not added six shots on his stage 4 target, negating most of his fives.

It was an eye opener for me and the way I thought about "crappy" rifles.  My own experiences on the road to a Rifleman' score showed me it was more my deficiencies, not the rifles'.

A note on the mag well, stick your finger in it if you are unable to see it (a prob I have noticed wearing sunglasses).

Unreliability out of the box seems more like break-in issues.  I have seen new 10/22s operate with no probs at all over a weekend as long as they are cleaned Sat. night.

My worthless .02    I am not knocking anything the OP listed, just giving my personal observations of the 10/22

+1 for Roland's post

For every "bad" the 10/22 has there is a free or very cheap fix for it all. That is the best good there is about it. The same can be said of no other rifle. The shear amount of parts and variations of the 10/22 make them able to fit anyone from that 8yo girl to the 6' 11" tall man.

I like peep sights.  Some folks don't.  The 03 Springfield didn't have the standard peep sights we use today (yeah, one peep out of what, 4 other rear sighting points on the rear sight).  Think of all the small game killed over the years without peep sights on those .22 rimfires.  Think of those seemingly fantastic long range shots made by the frontiersmen fighting in the Revolutionary War (no peep sights on those muzzle loading rifles either).

After all, how big is a squirrel's head?  My folks (dad, grandpa, great grandpa) only used head shots to take squirrels because they were killing to eat and the head shots didn't damage meat.  Then again, maybe that hearkens back to the days when folks used bigger caliber muzzle loaders to take game for food.  A head shot with a large caliber muzzle loader removed the head where a body shot would destroy some of the meal.  Don't discount the traditional sights as some folks still know how to use them.

I have found the 10/22 to be very reliable out of the box and more accurate than most people can shoot them.  I think the "unreliable" "inaccurate" thing is myth perpepuated by some to compensate for lack of skill or to rationalize spending money on after market crap. 

As Nemohunter showed us @ our last Appleseed - Ruger 10/22 can have "problems" however each of these are fixable. Our 11 yo has the Compact model. She made Rifleman because she was behind the rifle. She didn't know that the "problems" existed - therefore they were not problems for her.

BTW we found the Compact (CRR) on sale in October for about $160( w/ 2 mags and Fiber Optic Sites) replacing her Cricket.

Our clear mags tended to stick until we cleaned them (pics for those who have not yet done so and would like a tutorial). We still have one that "sticks", so we just marked it to be used only in Stage 1 or 4.

My clear mags required quite a bit of filing down of both the mags and the mag well to get them to drop free. Then again, I use an aftermarket stock.

The Goods out weigh the bads,
and the bads
are well known!

 

If I may quote ROLAND:

There is only one real problem with the 1022 and it has zero to do with the rifle - it is the simple fact that the company has never offered to promote Appleseeds and we have "sold" 1000s of their rifles for them since 2007. They should be well ashamed of themselves. 

Quote from: PHenry on December 20, 2011, 06:35:17 PM
There is only one real problem with the 1022 and it has zero to do with the rifle - it is the simple fact that the company has never offered to promote Appleseeds...

Says who?

Ruger/Appleseed connection being worked on as I post...patience and fortitude for the
Ruger 10-22 Appleseed Training Rifle (for want of a better name).
Excelsior,
madMark

Ruger 10/22's coming off the assembly line with adjustable peep sights and 1.25" swivels?  That would be nice.  If they call it the "Appleseed Model", that would be *most* excellent!

- ShadowMan

I appreciate all the comments and thoughts. I wasn't trying to start a 'fight', rather I was trying to share experiences from the field to my fellow instructors.  If a student asks about a rifle, he should get a deliberate and knowledgable answer. Anyone care to start a 'good-bad' article on the CZ? What other rifles are common on the line? dave

the most common rifle is the 10/22 by a WIDE margin. Second place is easily the 795, third is strait up tie between the Marlin 60, Savage 64, Mossberg 702 plinkster, and the S&W 15/22.

every once in a while you run into a bolt gun or an odd semi or lever gun but thats it. At least round here thats it.

I'd have to add a "good" to the 10/22 as it being pretty tough. It's definitely a lot sturdier than the "others" in it's class. 

If I was Ruger and was going to design an Appleseed type rifle, I am not sure I would change much except for the bolt release. I would add sling studs for people to add swivels and I would make the butt stock plate straight instead of curved. In fact I would make it an inch or perhaps 1.5" shorter but add a rubber recoil pad to make it the current length. That way you could simply take off the rubber pad and replace it with a thin one for kids and smaller people. Could Ruger design a suitable adjustable factory peep sight combo? Probably. Would it be better than Tech Sights?  Don't know.

I'm a fan of the factory bolt hold/relase. I do not like the auto release. (Let the floggings begin!)

"I would make the butt stock plate straight instead of curved. In fact I would make it an inch or perhaps 1.5" shorter but add a rubber recoil pad to make it the current length."

Yep, those slick as snot butt plates have to go! Cutting them off and using the slip-ons is what we've done with all of ours....O.L.

Quote from: slim on December 21, 2011, 05:32:00 PM
I'm a fan of the factory bolt hold/relase. I do not like the auto release. (Let the floggings begin!)

I can't exactly say I'm a fan, but it does have it's benefits.
Actually, I could take or leave it.  I'm not sure why some have so much difficulty.
<I took mine outta the box and had 'one-handed' operation down before I cleaned it.>
But the truth is, people do have trouble with it.  That's why I ultimately mod'd mine.
For the loanees' benefit. 

Old-style mag release, on the other hand.....

With the modification it's too easy to release and it ends up hindering removal of the chamber flag or closing before the operator wants it to. Plus, we see a lot of bolts not locked back and just resting on the flag.

That old mag release is horrible! I'm glad they finally got around to extending it.

Ruger could make the "perfect" LTR and people would still complain about it and try to modify it to suit themselves. That is just the way humans are.

A "perfect" LTR would have a pistol grip!

Quote from: slim on December 22, 2011, 09:33:22 AM
A "perfect" LTR would have a pistol grip!

A "perfect" LTR is your MBR.

If only I could afford to shoot it more.