Inexpensive 10/22 Improvement

[Chaps]

Always feel bad for new shooters who have purchased the recommended list, but still have equipment issues on the line, and gunsmithy isn't a required skill. So in the spirit of Isaac Davies, who ensured his folks not only had the right equipment, but that it was of good quality, well maintained, and drilled ... perhaps a few suggestions of inexpensive improvements on the 10/22. These are the obvious ones to me, perhaps there are others?

- Scotchbrite the inside of the receiver with a little Hoppes #9. It doesn't take much, just a few drops and a single green scrubby. Yes, you have to learn how to break down the rifle, remove the trigger, bolt, etc. Probably a good thing to learn for a marksman, in the same manner we expect of soldiers. Rugers newer receivers benefit from this care, and its easy to do, improving bolt function significantly.

- Auto Bolt Release. DIY or buy a drop in.

- Bolt Buffer. Easy DIY improvement, can be bought in bulk for a whole gaggle of shooters.

A couple more that cost $:

- Charging Handle. An aftermarket charging handle/spring set can really smooth the cycling, reduce ammo feed issues, and a larger round knob is more comfortable for some shooters. If you'll spend $60 on sights, or $150 on a scope, $30 seems like not a lot for a drop-in kit. Brands like KIDD, JWH are the premium, and worth it. I use the ones with the veltor (rubber) ring and its far more comfortable.

- Trigger. Those who like quality in their guns have different opinions on how this should be done. Personally, a KIDD single stage drop in kit is not really beneficial to Appleseed for the $. The drop in hammer kits from VQ and Power Custom are an improvement, but for $35 you can get a high quality trigger job that will take the factory assembly down to a sub-3# trigger pull, with clean movement, from folks like Brimstone, etc. I've had a factory Ruger trigger show up at 10#; no fun at all, especially on the reset drills.

I managed all of the above for $75, 25% more on a $300 rifle for a 1000% improvement.

Stock fit is probably the most expensive modification after that - I looked down the line this past Saturday, and only a few out of 20 had a properly fitting stock. Adjustable stocks are popular for kids to reduce the LOP, but most of the stocks I saw were too small; the shooter had an uncomfortable bend in their wrist to bring their trigger finger back from a natural point of rest.

Yes, marksmanship applies regardless of the rifle, and we have many stories of patriots borrowing rifles and making remarkable shots. But a quality rifle fit to the marksman will always produce greater accuracy.

[Charles McKinley]

4 m.o.a. with a Rack Grade rifle and Surplus Ball ammunition. -Stated marksmanship goal of AS.

The following is my opinion.  Please don't take it personally, it is just how I see the world.

One of my favorite things about AS is it is "Run what ya' brung."  I will olny swap out a rifle if it is unsafe or it is causing great frustration and we can't figure out what the problem is and fix it in a reasonable amount of time.

I keep my 10/22(s) as close to as they come from the shop or wallyworld as possible.  I want the student to be able to work the rifle that will come out of the box and all mine with the addition of a sling and scope/sights are more than capable of 210 that way.

De-burring is a good idea. As well as a good cleaning and lubrication.

I teach, "Push up (the bolt release) for the bolt to go up squeeze it back like a trigger to hold the bolt back."  Drill this for about 30 seconds and they can work any 10/22 they come across and can teach others.  If they drop the bolt in prep and dry-fire the bolt release is a non-issue during the AQT.

Been meaning to put bolt buffers in my guns but they are running fine without them.

I have seen and read about more problems caused by oversized charging handles than improvements made by them.

I haven't seen a truly unmanageable trigger.  I have heard of some though.  I believe mil-spec on the M-16 it around 8 pounds, see rack grade above.  Mine are all still factory in the 5-6 pound range.  At the 10 pound range especially as light as the 10/22 is it would be a problem and would offer a loaner.

A full grown man trying to shoot a stock made for a 12 year old boy can be a problem.  Especially for very tall people with long arms.  I did buy the ATI stocks of my daughters and they can be adjusted out for larger people.  Slip on butt pads for shotguns and or foam and vet wrap are expedient fixes on the line.   I have done a lot of stock work to my daughters rifles.

[Chaps]

4 m.o.a. with a Rack Grade rifle and Surplus Ball ammunition. -Stated marksmanship goal of AS.

The following is my opinion.  Please don't take it personally, it is just how I see the world.

One of my favorite things about AS is it is "Run what ya' brung."  I will olny swap out a rifle if it is unsafe or it is causing great frustration and we can't figure out what the problem is and fix it in a reasonable amount of time.

I keep my 10/22(s) as close to as they come from the shop or wallyworld as possible.  I want the student to be able to work the rifle that will come out of the box and all mine with the addition of a sling and scope/sights are more than capable of 210 that way.

De-burring is a good idea. As well as a good cleaning and lubrication.

I teach, "Push up (the bolt release) for the bolt to go up squeeze it back like a trigger to hold the bolt back."  Drill this for about 30 seconds and they can work any 10/22 they come across and can teach others.  If they drop the bolt in prep and dry-fire the bolt release is a non-issue during the AQT.

Been meaning to put bolt buffers in my guns but they are running fine without them.

I have seen and read about more problems caused by oversized charging handles than improvements made by them.

I haven't seen a truly unmanageable trigger.  I have heard of some though.  I believe mil-spec on the M-16 it around 8 pounds, see rack grade above.  Mine are all still factory in the 5-6 pound range.  At the 10 pound range especially as light as the 10/22 is it would be a problem and would offer a loaner.

A full grown man trying to shoot a stock made for a 12 year old boy can be a problem.  Especially for very tall people with long arms.  I did buy the ATI stocks of my daughters and they can be adjusted out for larger people.  Slip on butt pads for shotguns and or foam and vet wrap are expedient fixes on the line.   I have done a lot of stock work to my daughters rifles.

Yeah, please don't hear me trying to turn AS into yet another competitive shooting sport where the price tag on the firearms gets higher and higher. I've shot enough other courses of fire, the thing that drew me to AS was the simplicity. However ... some things do make sense, which is why I kept it on the cheap. We're not really a "Rung what you brung" crowd if we're working with Ruger and Marlin to bring to market a pre-assembled LTR with all of the things we suggest shooters add to their base rifle ... which many buy for the first time in order to shoot AS. It is also well within the tradition of the militia, and professional military marksmen, to improve their service rifle when they are able. There will be those Appleseeders interested in making small improvements, so my suggestions were for them.

[FiremanBob]

I agree with Stand. A box-stock 10/22 with a sling and aperture sights is capable of Rifleman scores - I have proved it. That said, all my 10/22s have extensive improvements, because I use them for other competitive events besides AS.

Some of the newer 10/22s suffer from poor quality control, but I have heard of only one that didn't function reliably in new condition (the receiver was out of spec, and Ruger replaced the entire rifle under warranty). The heaviest trigger I have measured was 9.5 pounds - unacceptable for any purpose in a .22 caliber rifle. My newest, an early 2013 production, weighed 5.5 pounds and was nicely crisp.

It is critical for reliability to keep the 10/22 action clean. Not the bore so much, as the breech and bolt faces, the inside of the receiver and the inside of the magazine. A carbon buildup on the bolt and breech faces can lead to FTFs as the firing pin energy is wasted pressing the round into the chamber rather than crushing the rim. Gunk in the receiver can slow the bolt, causing stovepipes. Gunk in the mag can cause failures to feed.

Certain ammunition, especially heavily lubed Aguila or Wolf and the awful Armscor, is so dirty you have the fully disassemble and clean the rifle each night.

There is much misunderstanding about how to operate the 10/22 bolt release, but I will write up the proper method in a separate thread.

[Chaps]

Some choose to shoot "rack grade" for the challenge; some can only shoot rack grade due to $ ... but would gladly have a "service" grade rifle if they could. If for a few $ you can improve your rack grade, if it helps another person access the sport, why not? Do you kick scope users off the course of fire? Of course not; my wife needs the scope to see the targets clearly. One guy is excited he shot Rifleman first time out ... with a full up KIDD custom and high dollar scope. Did he violate the purity of the experience? No ... they recruited him to be an instructor.

No where have I said it is impossible to qualify with a rack grade. But I don't think its necessary we make everyone qualify with a rack grade, if an improved rifle is more comfortable to shoot.

[FiremanBob]

I must still disagree with you, Chaps. Even though all you say is true, think about how it sounds to the student - "Your new rifle is mediocre, perhaps you chose poorly in buying it, you should do all these improvements. Now you can use this as an excuse for poor scores." Especially a beginner who knows nothing about the rifle and came to an Appleseed to learn from Square 1. Remember, it isn't what we mean, it's what they hear that counts.

As far as "run what you brung", the How to Prepare page is quite clear about how to set up the Liberty Training Rifle, which is what we have worked on with Ruger and Marlin. All that does is make the rifle the smallbore equivalent of a rack grade M1.

Only if a student has malfunction issues or truly cannot use his rifle as-is due to size or inability to see the blade sights will I suggest a loaner to replace his own rifle. We just had a very long thread on this topic a few weeks ago.

[Chaps]

Thinking about how it sounds to the student ... perhaps we assume to much then? Because a consistent conversation I've heard/participated in with regards to Appleseed are what are some things I can do to my rifle to help with accuracy/fit/reliability, both on and off the range. But when students are interested, would it not be natural for them to ask the instructors, to browse this site, to ask other Appleseeders? Are there not conversations on this very forum about how to improve trigger, etc.? How about rather than assuming the students would be put off by even discussing the possibility, we make them aware of the possibility, and let them make the choice? After all, as you say, with so many of them new shooters, where else would they go to get that information, and why wouldn't we want to be a part of that conversation.

I can't help but feel like we're afraid of telling the militia that they've invented the rifle for fear they'd be disappointed in their smoothbore musket, when it would be better for everyone if we all had rifles.

[FiremanBob]

It's different when they ask about it, compared to our initiating the topic.

[Caliper]

It's different when they ask about it, compared to our initiating the topic.

Fully agree.  For most people looking to get to the patch by "fixing" the rifle I would tell them to work on their fundamentals first.  This is not a gear race and thinking that a rifle needs to be specially tuned for the AQT is missing the point.  The marksmanship objective in Appleseed is that a Rifleman can pick up ANY rifle off the rack and be effective with it.  Not just the one with an adjustable 2# trigger, extended this and tactical that.  Sure, we often customize our personal rifles, but that comes later.  Right now, what 99% of Americans need is simply to be effective with their rifles as they are and understand that it doesn't take a race gun to be effective out to 500yd on a 4 moa target.  You'll find the thought all over the internet that a light trigger, custom barrel and action parts, etc, etc are needed for a rifle to be effective.  Heck, just chuck everything but the receiver and build it up from there.  It becomes a crutch.  Is there a purpose to those parts?  Of course.  Will we kick out someone who brings a tricked out rifle?  No, that would defeat the purpose as well.  But, maybe we can show them that they can be effective with less and I think that's a good thing.  Plus, fixing the shooter means that your shooting with all your rifles will benefit, not just the one, so it saves money in the end  

Yes, honestly, the only things I would reccommend for a box-stock 10/22 are tech sights, a GI sling and a second mag.  At that point, the next important thing is to take it to the range, get the sights on paper and be familiar with how to operate it before coming!  Ok, if they had a 10# trigger I'd fix that, but most 10/22's I've seen are around 5# anyways so just let it smooth up with use. 

[Mark Davis]

Of all the modifiactions mentioned, stock fit rings most true.  Sitting position was very challenging.
Useing a standard 10-22, Getting proper contact with cheek, rifle butt in shoulder and trigger hand on pistol grip was impossible. I could get 2 out of three but never all three at the same time. I am 6' 2" with long arms.
My problem was solved when the range officeer walked up and kicked me (in the fiendly way range officers do) and yelled "GET A LONGER STOCK" thinking I knew everything, my response was "but this is a longer stock", he kicked me again and hollered 'GET A LONGER STOCK" back home I added one inch to the stock.
Back at the range my freind gave me a kick and said "GET a longer stock"
After adding another inch he quit kicking.
All this was in prone, some weeks later after going into sitting first time since modifing the stock,  the three points of contact was achiveable.
Cheek, shoulder, and trigger hand.
The fact is, that rifle manafactures make rifles so most people can shoot them, stocks are sized to fit average size people or just a little smaller, not only to allow more people to use them but to save cost of materials.
The front sling swivel should attach to the rifle where the shooter's hand reaches in prone to provide repeatable support.
Nobody makes at (at a price I'm willing to pay) a stock that has 14 3/4" length of pull. Vendors will say you can add spacers.
Yeah...Ugly in it's own premanafactured way.
Wood stocks are much easyer to alter than plastic injection molded stocks
If the stock is to big cut some off, shape, sand, and apply finish.
If the stock is to small you must add material.
Bondo is wonderfull stuff. For major additions use wood and bondo.

[oladcock]

That's why I like the Blackhawk adjustables on my loaner rifles....And prefer the "AR" platform with adjustable stocks on my personal rifles. I'm only 6'4" That said, a person can shoot a rifle that's too short for them much better than too long. Seldom have I seen anyones shooting improve by going longer unless it's to provide proper eye relief for a scope but I've seen dozens improve by going shorter than the generic 14" LOP....O.L.

[FiremanBob]

I have had many students move their scopes forward during Saturday lunch when they find out they aren't supposed to have that tunnel vision. That folding set of hex keys may be the most used tool in my range bag.

[Mark Davis]

That's why I like the Blackhawk adjustables on my loaner rifles....And prefer the "AR" platform with adjustable stocks on my personal rifles. I'm only 6'4" That said, a person can shoot a rifle that's too short for them much better than too long. Seldom have I seen anyones shooting improve by going longer unless it's to provide proper eye relief for a scope but I've seen dozens improve by going shorter than the generic 14" LOP....O.L.

Yes it's true, scope eye releif was involved, many people say that  short is better than  long, I have to agree, but right size is best.
Adding two inches to the rear of the stock of that heavy barrel 10-22 put a huge bind on my standing, by moving center of gravity.
But practie, ammo, and time has brought back confidence in standing.
A-2 ARs fit me nicely, the iron sights being more forgiving of eye relief.
After reading your mention of standard 14" length of pull, I grabbed the tape measure, my rifle that shoots sitting so sweet is 15 and 3/4" not the 14 3/4 I alluded to in the last post. 
Still cannot stomach adjustable stocks and compensate for it buy having Two 10-22 loaner rifles with 4 wood stocks of diffirent lengths, each with five sling swivel studs nuts an inch apart down the forearm.
The sling swivel stud can be backed out and rethreaded where it fits the shooter best.
Rails and sliding hand stops just seem like too much equipment for appleseed.

[olefido]

I limited my 10/22 changes to those recommended by dond. I bought an extended scope mount, auto bolt release, and an extended mag release. I still would like to add a Hogue overmolded stock but that is just for looks for me as the factory wood stock is just fine. The new bolt release and mag release cost me about $10. That is all I really need and those are just for convenience because I am so ham-handed. I think that the more you slap on a rifle, the more that can break on it.