the right 22 rifle?

[MyDogsHunt]

orangecat,,,, I missed that pic earlier.
That sir, is a sweet little rig.
Very well done!

PS,,, there are some nice machined trigger guards out there to replace the (IMO) cheap stamped piece CZ uses. That and a metal grip cap would sure finish her off nicely.
I love CZ rifles, but for the life of me I can't figure out why they do some of the things they do.
Here's a 527American with machined bottom metal, shortened magazine, and modified bolt handle to accombodate lower rings.

Started life as a 221FB but rebarreled to 17FB.
I wouldn't trade this one for anything.

Thanks for the pic.
Charlie

 

[kamagong]

...there are some nice machined trigger guards out there to replace the (IMO) cheap stamped piece CZ uses. That and a metal grip cap would sure finish her off nicely.
I love CZ rifles, but for the life of me I can't figure out why they do some of the things they do.

I've seen some of those machined trigger guards. Very nice, but they cost more than 1/3 of what I paid for my rifle.

I agree with you though. My Trainer came with a plastic magazine well; I swapped it out for a steel one. My gun is all wood and steel now, save for the plastic buttplate. It's a forever gun.

 

[MyDogsHunt]

Yea,,, those Trainers are a real sleeper in the rimfire world.
I have a Remmy 504 that's a nice package with a great trigger.

It was more than twice the price of a Trainer, but I doubt that it'll out shoot one.
It's nice for what I use it for though.
Charlie

 

[collecter]

I cut the barrel on my Trainer down to about 16.25" and used a M1 Carbine front sight and recalibrated the rear sight accordingly. I did a write up on it at rimfire central a while back. My good friend has it naw and he says he will give it to my son in a few years. A lot of work went into recalibrated the rear sight. Lots of rounds down range before it was dialed in as intended.

I still believe the adjustable rear sight is overkill. A 22 sighted in for 50 yard zero is ideal imo. In hind sight I would have been better off with a 452 Scout and adding a thicker $20 butt plate to extend lenght of pull. Hind sight is 20/20!

 

[matt123abc]

Ruger 10/22s are great. You can't go wrong either way. IMO what reallymalesa 10/22 is the accersories you put on it. So I'd go with whichever one you can get the best deal on to save money for accessories. Just my $.02...

 

[psychophipps]

I like the 10/22 fine, but vastly prefer my Nylon 66. Not a ton of accessories or anything, but it shoots smoother and straighter than anything else I've shot so far.

 

[daizee]

I cut the barrel on my Trainer down to about 16.25" and used a M1 Carbine front sight and recalibrated the rear sight accordingly. I did a write up on it at rimfire central a while back. My good friend has it naw and he says he will give it to my son in a few years. A lot of work went into recalibrated the rear sight. Lots of rounds down range before it was dialed in as intended.

Hey, Collecter - I suspect yours was the inspiration for mine (also over on rimfirecentral). Nice to see you over here.
Yes, my rear sight required a little re-calibration too. In fact since I prefer cci velocitors, it will never be perfect, but all I gotta do is shoot it every once in awhile to remind myself how the curve relates to the rear markings. Oh, and it's dead-on at 200yd.

Wish I had a good picture.

 

[jaymeister99]

10/22 is the way to go if you want a first 22.

I got a few 22s:

10/22 Target Model - Hands down if I could only have one 22 it would be the 10/22. Its accurate, lots of accessories, and it just feels right. Great all around 22. I added a trigger job and hammer, its now got a crisp 1-1.5lb trigger pull.

39A -A close second. I've had this gun for about 30 years. It always works great, and its pretty darn accurate too.

Marlin 60 -Not too fond of it. I've had quite a few jams in it.

Winchester 22 -I've never shot the one I own, its a commemorative.

AR-7 -A piece of junk. Its neat the way it fits into the stock. But its accuracy is horrendous. If you want something neat then get this, thats about all its good for.

 

[rimfiremike]

... the 10/22 is a good plinker and works well for what you pay.... it is a good choice if a repeater and not out of the box accuracy is the top concern. Don't want to start anything here, but I think most will agree that if accuracy becomes important with a 10/22, you can get it, but will have to spend some extra time/money to get it.

If you don't mind a bolt action, I concur with what many have already said here about the CZ 452's.... very few people are unhappy with the accuracy/built quality for the price paid. Doubt you would regret getting a CZ.

My best 'bang for the buck' has been my Savage MKII... paid $250 new for it (BVTSS model) and it shoots right with the CZ... and within a wisp of my Anschutz model 54.

Man, the Annie is built nicely but those other two nip at its heels for less than a 1/4 the price combined vs the Anschutz.

 

[daizee]

PS. Screw those CZ trainers or what ever their called. Its like my Marlin 39A. You sink a ton of money into them to make them look and shoot really good but then you realize its still only a 22 that is only good for 35 or so yards. A 22 should not look like a big magnum hunting rifle. Its a 22.

I respectfully disagree.
I bought my CZ 452-ZKM (pre-trainer) used, after someone had neglected it in a closet for years.
3/8" group, offhand, 50yds, open sights. Zero mods.
They have TIGHT but smooth bores, which I know from slugging and re-crowining.
These rifles NEED nothing.

And with a shorter 20" barrel (cut CZ or Marlin 39M (the carbine), you'll get an honest 1400+fps with CCI Velocitors with a full 40gr bullet (chrony'd myself).

With a 0.75" sight height above the bore, sighted in a 50yds, that CCI bullet is supersonic to 75yds with only about 1.75" of drop at that distance. That's as much power at 75yds as you'd get from the muzzle of a .22 handgun.
The drop at 100yds is only 5.5" or so, and beyond that most people aren't going to shoot at .22-sized game with open sights anyway 'cause they won't be able to see the target.

Some dude at rimfirecentral put rounds from his 10/22 through a half-frozen turkey at 300yds a few years back. Figure there isn't much call for that sort of tom-foolery (nor is there a frozen turkey season...), but that 40gr slug carries more momentum than you'd expect.

A 22 should not look like a big magnum hunting rifle. Its a 22.

agreed. If your .22 is 8 pounds and unwieldy, then it's a range toy, not a field gun.

(but I'd take a 15lb Anschutz smallbore comp rifle any day - man, I miss those)

 

[kamagong]

Who sinks a ton of money into tricking out their CZ? These aren't 10/22s we're talking about. Other than a sling, scope and rings, most people don't change anything with their 452; they're good to go and you don't need to put any work into them. I myself have only replaced the plastic magwell with a steel one, but that's because I wanted an all wood and steel rifle.

 

[bladefoolish]

One I haven't seen mentioned is the Ruger 77 22. A little pricey, but I got a good deal on a used one and it's a tackdriver. Uses a 10 round rotary mag similar to the 10-22.

 

[daizee]

The 77/22 is gorgeous, and love that rotary mag.
I wanted one bad, but read too many tales of woe regarding accuracy tuning, and turned my sights elsewhere for the money. Interestingly, though, you almost never see them used. People must hold onto them.

The 77/22 in .22WMR would be totally hawt. (though the CZ452 w/ military sights in .22WMR with the full-length barrel also calls...)

-Daizee

 

[Danbo]

My Remington 541T Heavy Barrel is all the .22 I need. I've got it outfitted with a Burris 4x12 compact scope and it's a lot more accurate than I'm capable of. No lightweight, though.

 

[dugannsport]

Good advice by everybody. My wife has a 10/22 carbine and loves it. However, if you plan on shooting beyond 100 yds, think about a .17 HMR or .22 WMR. the .22 LR trajectory is just horrible after 100 yds or so. BTW you can by a 10/22 carbine at Wal-Mart for about 250.00

 

[22-rimfire]

I own a 10/22 Deluxe that is pretty much factory except for a 4x scope. It is a good rifle for plinking and non-precision small game hunting. I like the heft and the pointability of the rifle which is why I like it for a walk around woods gun and quick small game shooter. It is not highly accurate, but sufficiently accurate for my uses. It is minute of squirrel accurate in most cases, but you won't be shooting out eye balls with it.

The Marlin 60 (semi-auto) is one I tend to favor these days as I prefer the tubular magazine for field use. I also prefer a wood stock to a composite.

CZ makes a great bolt action 22 rifle. If you want a bolt action, both the Savage Mark II and CZ are excellent 22 rifles. They will almost always be more accurate than the 10/22.

If you think you might want to shoot shorts and longs, I would go with a lever action 22 rifle. The Marlin 39A has been the king of the hill for a long time, but their quality has suffered too in recent years. You might look at the Henry 22's. Many really like them.

 

[daizee]

If you think you might want to shoot shorts and longs, I would go with a lever action 22 rifle. The Marlin 39A has been the king of the hill for a long time, but their quality has suffered too in recent years. You might look at the Henry 22's. Many really like them.

I'd prefer a bolt rifle for mixed-length ammo. The levers are a little to geometry-dependent and can produce an annoying jam.

Why do you prefer the tube mag for field use? Personally I prefer to be able to empty the gun completely with ease, but am curious if I might be missing a tube advantage.


-Daizee

 

[MVF]

I just have to add another vote for the CZ. I have the Mil-Trainer and three things make it my favorite rifle (although being a .22 obviously limits its use) - I love the sights, its amazingly accurate, and it shoulders and points better than anything else I have experienced. It is just a real pleasure to shoot. Also, for being such an inexpensive gun, it came with prettier wood than some of my more expensive rifles.

Try to at least get to handle one of these before you make your choice. If you get to shoot one, I almost guarantee this will be the one you pick.

 

[22-rimfire]

Daizee. off the top of my head, I am not aware of any bolt action 22 made today that will take shorts, longs, and long rifles from a detachable magazine.

My Remington 541-S claims to be able to handle shorts and longs, but I have never tried it.

The preference complaints that people have about tube fed 22 rifles versus box magazine ones boil down to: looks, magazine capacity, quick reloads if you have a full magazine, and I guess quick unloads which is handy at the range. For me, 15 rounds (give or take) is plenty and reloads are not a problem. I don't like the idea of loosing a magazine and reducing the rifle to a single shot. If you have the rifle with you, you have the magazine too. Yes, you can bend the tube potentially, but it has not happened to me.

 

[daizee]

Daizee. off the top of my head, I am not aware of any bolt action 22 made today that will take shorts, longs, and long rifles from a detachable magazine.

My Remington 541-S claims to be able to handle shorts and longs, but I have never tried it.

The preference complaints that people have about tube fed 22 rifles versus box magazine ones boil down to: looks, magazine capacity, quick reloads if you have a full magazine, and I guess quick unloads which is handy at the range. For me, 15 rounds (give or take) is plenty and reloads are not a problem. I don't like the idea of loosing a magazine and reducing the rifle to a single shot. If you have the rifle with you, you have the magazine too. Yes, you can bend the tube potentially, but it has not happened to me.

Ah, that makes sense.
I can't legally travel with a loaded rifle (nor want to), or just shoot for fun randomly in the woods to empty the gun, so loading/unloading is a constant way of life.
If I had a big plot of my own land, different story!