Author Topic: New 10-22 Takedown (Read 3494 times)

Swampman · « **on:** March 28, 2012, 08:37:21 AM »

Pretty cool....

http://www.ruger.com/products/ruger1022Takedown/models.html

ironglow · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2012, 08:43:50 AM »

A good idea for convenience, but if the Marlin Papoose, Henry's take-down or browning's take-down are examples, we can expect some compromise in accuracy.

Blackhawker · « **Reply #2 on:** March 28, 2012, 08:57:06 AM »

Charter Arms makes or made an AR-7 too. All of it fit in the stock and was waterproof (supposedly) and was supposed to float. A friend of mine had two of them and they worked very well.
I once had a take-down barrel kit made by Ram Line way back in the 80's. Together, with a Ram Line collapsible stock, the 10-22 would break down in to a very small pack.
Personally, the rifles that come stock like that were a better idea though.

Swampman · « **Reply #3 on:** March 28, 2012, 09:29:21 AM »

Henry makes the AR-7 now but I have little faith in it. I liked the wood stocked Papoose.

Couger · « **Reply #4 on:** March 28, 2012, 10:03:47 AM »

Quote from: Swampman

Henry makes the AR-7 now but I have little faith in it. I liked the wood stocked Papoose.

I have an older wooden/blued Papoose! Because it is not of the AR-7 design is why I finally gave in and bought it!

The Papoose has a 1 1/4" "flange" or flattened part of the barrel that is VERY SOLID and "indexes" with the receiver well every time! The AR-7/Henry/Explorer design isn't as robust, even if they come in that funky floating stock.

I love the 10/22 and think Ruger will cash in on a certain -niche market! If a person needs a take-down gun with just open sights this new 10/22 should be great! Surprised Ruger is just now releasing this new [take down] 10/22 version!

Personally I'd prefer a nicely-tuned 10/22 with a 16-ish inch barrel on a sidefolding Choate stock (or Butler Creek) with a low powered optic, and open sights for backup.

Still I'll be watching this new 10/22TD to see how well it fares! I hope its a profound success.

Blackhawker · « **Reply #5 on:** March 28, 2012, 10:08:55 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on March 28, 2012, 09:29:21 AM

Henry makes the AR-7 now but I have little faith in it. I liked the wood stocked Papoose.

Ironically, my friend got rid of his Papoose and kept his AR-7's over it. Truthfully, I never saw him have any problems with that AR-7 and he and I used to go through LOTS and LOTS of .22 ammo at one time.
To me, the Papoose looks a lot nicer though.

Couger · « **Reply #6 on:** March 28, 2012, 10:22:36 AM »

Quote from: Blackhawker

Ironically, my friend got rid of his Papoose and kept his AR-7's over it. Truthfully, I never saw him have any problems with that AR-7 and he and I used to go through LOTS and LOTS of .22 ammo at one time.
To me, the Papoose looks a lot nicer though.

I agree. Got my Papoose in blue and wood (I don't like white or stainless guns usually), so I could also modify the stock! When disassembled the Papoose rear half is still "big and wide" and cumbersome. I'm gonna chop away part of the lower inch of the pistol grip - but parallel with the bottom of the stock! Likewise I'll cut of that portion of the butt plate that would now protrude down, but no longer supporting or being supported by the cut away stock. The whole idea I'm striving for a is a .22 rifle as slim as a yard stick! Or nearly so. And since a .22LR doesn't kick to speak of, that tiny portion of the butt stock and abbreviated (shallower) grip will still have the same cheek weld/sight plane when the rifle is assembled. A Papoose would work especially well with a can, but my state doesn't allow them.

Swampman · « **Reply #7 on:** March 28, 2012, 11:18:59 AM »

Jeff Quinn video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMWTN-xQo_g

mechanic · « **Reply #8 on:** March 28, 2012, 11:49:00 AM »

Excellent! I still have one of the original Papoose, bought in the first year of production. I might own one of these one day as well........

Thanks for the update Swampi.

Ben

team101 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 23, 2012, 04:43:19 AM »

I like the TD design, but won't consider a plastic receiver/trigger housing 10/22.

muznut 54 · « **Reply #10 on:** May 23, 2012, 05:42:39 AM »

I like that TD 1022. Dang I just gave away all my 1022 extra mags to the guy that bought my 1022, I wish I kept them now.

Poopers · « **Reply #11 on:** May 23, 2012, 07:02:52 AM »

I have wanted a 'Poose for awhile now but I cant find them new anywhere! I like the idea of the takedown 10/22 but its heavier than I want for my application ( backpacking/opportunistic hunting for lunch )

I think a guy might as well just get one of the Ruger charger models instead... though I hear they arent any good if not shot from a bench

Swampman · « **Reply #12 on:** May 23, 2012, 10:46:13 AM »

Quote from: team101 on May 23, 2012, 04:43:19 AM

I like the TD design, but won't consider a plastic receiver/trigger housing 10/22.

The 10-22 doesn't have a plastic receiver/trigger housing.

Victor3 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 24, 2012, 12:54:52 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on May 23, 2012, 10:46:13 AM

Quote from: team101 on May 23, 2012, 04:43:19 AM
I like the TD design, but won't consider a plastic receiver/trigger housing 10/22.

The 10-22 doesn't have a plastic receiver/trigger housing.

They've been coming with a plastic trigger housing for at least a couple years now.

Swampman · « **Reply #14 on:** May 24, 2012, 02:33:51 AM »

I've never seen one with a plastic receiver...as is implied.

lakota · « **Reply #15 on:** May 24, 2012, 05:49:30 AM »

I have a Henry AR7 and have had zero problems with it but I am thinking that I would much rather have a 10/22 take down.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk

tacklebury · « **Reply #16 on:** May 24, 2012, 04:37:39 PM »

I love my Papoose. I finally wore the clip out after about 25 years, so need a new one of those and the extractor is so worn it's very thin. Still shoots great though and better than most would believe for a 16-1/4" barrel.

I also converted mine to accept a nipple and can use it as a .22 muzzle loader.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #17 on:** July 23, 2012, 08:08:03 AM »

I have seea new Ruger 10-22 take-down. It seems solid. I like it better than the Papoose from what I have seen. It comes with a nice backpack also. It is quicker to put together and take apart than the Papoose. I have 3 10-22's already, but want one of these.

Gunnerd · « **Reply #18 on:** August 08, 2012, 03:48:59 PM »

I have both the Marlin Papoose in synthetic/stainless and the new Ruger TD.

The Ruger appears to be a solid gun and there is no play after the gun is assembled. I have added a Burris 3-9x40 rimfire scope in Weaver Lever Lock rings to make it more shootable and easier to take down. Not shot it yet, but after the initial boresighting, I removed the scope and re-installed. Boresight shows to be spot on from the original mount.

The Papoose is a much lighter gun than the Ruger. It has been fired by me during one range session, but the only available ammo I had was Wal-Mart Federal 550 bulk. Normally a good performing load in my other 10/22, this particular batch is underpowered and caused several FTF jams in the Marlin and a Walther P22 I was testing as well.

Since then, I have built up a quantity of CCI MiniMag in solids and HPs to use in the next round of test-firing, as well as some Winchester Power Point.

The Ruger came with a neat little bag, almost a box shape. It has three interior pouches for the receiver, barrel, and scope (at least that is what I plan to use it for). There are two exterior pouches I plan to use for 5 sleeves of MiniMag and spare magazines, a cleaning kit, and small survival kit.

Still working to develop the list of items, but half the fun is trying to figure the best combo of items without going beyond the limits of the bag.

ironglow · « **Reply #19 on:** August 11, 2012, 04:29:16 PM »

From Gunnerd;
" The Ruger appears to be a solid gun and there is no play after the gun is assembled."
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

I saw my first one today.. My nephew has one. I tried the dissamble/assemble move and as Gunnerd says..it locks up tight!
My nephew uses it with the original, furnished sights..and he said it returns to zero each time after he has taken it down.
I was pleased to hear this, since I was highly disapointed by a Browning grade #1, which I temporarily had, in the 1970s.

rio grande · « **Reply #20 on:** August 26, 2012, 12:03:31 PM »

I like 'em all.
Browning, Marlin, Ruger, Ar-7, NEF....all take down.
But remember, a taken-down take down won't take nuthin' down...won't be ready when the need arises.
Best use, stored in pack, in conjunction w/ a handgun concealed and ready to draw.

Then you have size/weight issues. When you start putting extra clips/ammo etc in the bag.... y'all see how big that Ruger take-down bag is?

ironglow · « **Reply #21 on:** August 27, 2012, 12:57:35 AM »

Rio;
Actually, that carry case the 10/22 comes in is a really neat little package..a really nice way to transport it. Naturally, it will be uncased and ready for hunting, when not in transport mode.

Tacklebury;
That is some service your papoose has provided... Now, I have considered a conversion to black powder on a .22...but a semi-auto? do you lock the bolt to use it?

Years ago (1970s) I bought a Browning grade I because it was of such a handy size and it sure was purty..but it would have difficulty hitting the broad-side-of-a-barn...from the inside!!
Another point which displeased me was the blast of unburned powder hitting my bare left arm each time I fired... Yeah, I know, we rightys are spoiled..

but it was disconcerting..

chefjeff · « **Reply #22 on:** August 27, 2012, 01:13:43 AM »

I have three walnut(2-200th year)stocked, metal butt plate,and one vintage sporter.With a rifle so small and light anyway,what is the need for a TD? I think just another ploy for sales.

Victor3 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 24, 2012, 01:39:43 AM »

I'm not much for takedown rifles either. I have a Win 62A and a Savage 1909, both TD rimfires that have never once been taken apart for transport.

I'm not a 10/22 fan. I sold the two I'd owned years ago in favor of more accurate rifles. However, the other day I handled (and took apart/put back together) one of the Ruger takedowns and I must say, they did a fine job on the design and manufacture of this model. I have no need for a takedown rifle but if I did, I'd buy one of these over any other modern TD rimfire auto I've used. Probably as inaccurate as any stock 10/22 but still a durable, well made, jam free plinker.

jpshaw · « **Reply #24 on:** January 01, 2013, 06:57:43 AM »

I have the plain skeletized polymer stocked standard 10-22 (doesn't take down) but real handy and accurate. Killed a few squirrels with it with the iron sights.