Portable Fun

[linux_author]

hey folks - headed out day after tomorrow to 'scope out' how my new plinker shoots w/inexpensive optics

(iron sights are spot on at 25 yards, but cripes at my age i have a hard time seeing the target, let alone the bullseye)





put in the bolt slingshot mod... first couple outings successful w/no malfunctions at the 450-round mark

best of all: shoots cheap Remington Goldens (36gr, 1280fps) from Wally World @$0.04.5/rnd

last week i cleaned, then took out my 43-year-old Mossberg 341 out to the range...hadn't been fired since 1985... the original $9 Weaver D4 scope fell apart with the caps disintegrating and marker rings flying off into the ether... so i threw on a cheap $26 Barska (interesting scope w/metal caps and see-thru end caps!) and put some CCI 'quiet' 710 rnds through the barrel:



having a lot of fun!

willie
on the Gulf of Mexico

[Warthog]

Nice, I thought about a break down 22 but wound up telling myself I have enough 22s for a few folks so I passed.

[billmeek]

...wound up telling myself I have enough 22s...

Not possible!  You can never have enough 22s. 

Well.. you could have "enough for now" IF you run out of space to store them in your home.  That is until you can arrange for more storage space.

[linux_author]

got to the range this morning to sight in the cheap Simmons 3-9x scope... i'm pretty happy with the Takedown ... shoots inexpensive ammo with some accuracy:



lots of fun!

willie
on the cheap-plinking Gulf of Mexico

[OV-1D]

  SOME ACCURACY ? I couldn't do better standing next to those and poking them with a pencil . Fine shooting there Linux .

[Uncle_Lee]

  SOME ACCURACY ? I couldn't do better standing next to those and poking them with a pencil . Fine shooting there Linux .

I second that big time.

[linux_author]

tks fellas, but as you more experienced shooters know, there are many folks out there that do much better at 4X the distance using these stock 10/22s..

heck, i can do all right with the 'iron' sights at 25 yds, but can barely see the bullseye - scope helps quite a bit...

at my age i need all the help i can get (getting out of bed, making the bed, and getting breakfast ready)

willie
on the Gulf of Mexico

[Uncle_Lee]

I gave up open sights on long guns at age 50. Long time ago.

[Honky Tonk Man]

I noticed a trend since I've been hanging out here.  ALL of willies targets are amazing.  Good shooting!!

[billmeek]

Willie,

Was that target 75 yards or feet?

[linux_author]

75 feet - 25 yards... (all my pistol work is 3-7 yards) that's why it's not such a feat, but was satisfying to know the scope was adjustable, worked, etc.

i'll know a bit more when i take it back and shoot it again to see if it's still on... and the Takedown is *supposed* to remain accurate between barrel swaps, but we'll see...

but for now, it's close enough for me... i think if i really took my time, practiced a bit more, and got lucky i could do some dime-sized bulls

willie
on the Gulf of Mexico

[billmeek]

Willie,

If you have the barrel tension adjustment correct then the 10/22 takedown should be accurate between barrel swaps.  You might also want to check the torque on the action screw holding the action to the stock.  I often tweak the torque of the action screw to get the best accuracy on my 22 rifles.  But on the 10/22 takedown you need to be careful of over-torquing the action screw as it can put pressure on the spacer ring connected to the barrel tension adjuster. 

You might also find that it'll take several rounds through a new rifle for it to settle down accuracy wise.  I sent my Savage B22 FVSR back for repair and when it returned, the groups were horrible.  Most rifles settle with less than a box of ammo.  The B22 took just over 400 rounds to get close to where it was before.

[Honky Tonk Man]

I have a 10/22 Take Down.  It shoots as well as any standard 10/22 I've owned or shot.  Amazingly it doesn't seem to make a difference.  I had a cheap scope on it, but changed it out for a Bushnell TRS-25 red dot sight.  It is a real bargain for about $50.  I wanted something for making cans, pine cones, etc. dance, in other words, high speed plinking.  It is a lot of fun. 

Willie, is that the case your's came in?  Mine was a little different.  It looks like a narrow backpack.  There is an extra barrel sleeve in mine.  Some folks conjectured Ruger was going to offer a .17 cal barrel for it someday. 

[linux_author]

Mr. Meek - tks for the tips! i read somewhere that i should slingshot the bolt after reattaching the barrel - i'll be mindful of the barrel tension - it was somewhat loose out of the box, along with the rear sight, which could be pushed with a thumbnail until i tightened down the set screw

Mr. HTonk - the 10/22 i got is Ruger Model 11125:

https://www.ruger.com/products/1022Takedown/specSheets/11125.html

it came in a plain black bag with a velcro patch on one side w/a detachable square black Ruger logo - kinda stealthy... no external pockets, but 3 internal pockets and carry handles in mid-horizontal, not on the end... a shoulder strap and two d-rings allow shoulder carry... the open area is configurable with each strap and hollow tube able to be positioned anywhere inside... rifle's 16.4" barrel included a dovetail/Weaver optics mount, Williams fiber optic front and rear sight (which is windage and elevation adjustable), and a removable flash suppressor on its threaded tip...

it also included a BX-25 magazine (i have subsequently purchased a number of extra mags from Natchez - 2/$34, which i thought was reasonable - a LGS sold me the molded BX-25 pair for $30  and a clear BX-1 for $20)  - the magazines are very easy to take apart and clean!

i haven't done anything special to the rifle except for a slingshot mod on the bolt release - the standard procedure is absurd IMHO

so now i have a little rimfire rifle for the range and can take 210 rounds loaded in magazines ready to go!

i like it - wish i had one of these years ago!

willie
on the Gulf of Mexico

[redhawk4]

got to the range this morning to sight in the cheap Simmons 3-9x scope... i'm pretty happy with the Takedown ... shoots inexpensive ammo with some accuracy:



lots of fun!

willie
on the cheap-plinking Gulf of Mexico

Cheaps scopes are fine, my Marlin 60 shoots even better than that at 25 yds with a $12 (on sale) BSA scope that has also killed many rabbits out to 100 yards in the dark spotlighting in NV. My wife's 10/22, with the Simmons scope formerly on my Savage 30-06, isn't quite as accurate as the Marlin, but still shot as good, if not better groups than a guy next to us who was shooting a 10/22 with all the accuracy mods and a $1000 scope. I don't have any what would be considered expensive scopes, but they are good enough to qualify for the main reason I see for spending more on a scope which is the reduced likelihood of it failing in the field and ruining your hunt. At the range, or just plinking, if one fails just buy a new one, your rifle has to be something very special to remotely justify what some people I know spend on scopes, IMO.

[OV-1D]

  I'm with you RedHawk , the only difference is the shock abilities of the more costlier scopes (generally specking that is) . Oh and the weather tightness of course because of fogging .

[billmeek]

I think depending on how your using the rifle determines if you can justify a higher priced scope for a 22.  Since I started shooting NRL22, I won't buy anything that isn't first focal plane, adjustable objective, focuses down to less than 25 yards, with good glass and reticle.  A couple of the scopes I have on my 22s:

https://athlonoptics.com/product/rifle-scopes-helos-btr-3/
https://athlonoptics.com/product/rifle-scopes-talos-btr-4-14x44-aplr-ffp-ir-mil/
https://www.acmemachine.com/products/6-24x50mm-first-focal-plane-tactical-rifle-scope-tr-mil-reticle?variant=48625453254

Good glass really helps when trying to clear a KYL rack (which goes down to a quarter of an inch) at 50 yards... in the shade... and after other shooters have destroyed the paint and all you have is a black hanging steel target at which to aim.     

[redhawk4]

There are definitely times where a good scope does have benefits, low light may be one, but like most things there is a law of diminishing returns and for the majority of users there's no way a $300 is 10x better than a $30 one and the same applies even more for a $3,000 one.

A few years back I was ill during the week before a deer hunt I had a tag for and I'd just replaced the cheap Simmons scope on my 30-06 with a $100 (majorly on sale at the time) Diamondback scope. Not having the time or energy to sight my gun in I took it to a local outdoor range where they would sight it for you for $15 and 5 rounds of ammo. I turned up, unexpectedly it was really busy and I had to wait. Put you gun on the rack there I was told .  The rack was full of fancy custom rifles with expensive scopes, I felt rather self conscious of my Savage 110 and scope. Anyway eventually it was my turn having watched the others go before me. The guy put the gun in the rest fired one shot and made a tiny adjustment before firing another, I had roughly bore sighted it at close range looking down barrel with the bolt removed and through the scope when I fitted the scope. After the second shot he was shaking his head and started looking at the barrel markings of the rifle. I immediately assumed what's wrong. It turned out after 3 shots, compared to 5 through the expensive rifles, it was done and he could not believe the accuracy of my rifle. I paid $180 new for the rifle when I first bought it new at Walmart on closeout in 2003 complete with the Simmons scope and $100 and some change for the Diamondback scope, to me it showed you don't always get what you pay for, everyone else there that day had 10 times that at least in to their equipment. It's plenty good enough for me anyway, and I'd rather spend the difference on some other guns, than have it all tied up in one.

[billmeek]

Again, it depends on how you're using the rifle.  If all you are doing is deer hunting at 200 yards or less, then you have a pretty big target to hit the vitals.  If you are hunting elk and shooting at 1000 yards, then a better scope could be justified.  Or if you are precision shooting (as I am) it makes sense to invest in better optics. 

Low light is not the only reason to get a better scope.  Repeatability is one of the main reasons.  I've had less expensive scopes that when I made a single click (or even a double) adjustment on the turret, it had no effect. You had to dial 4 clicks then back 3.  Or you might find that a cheap scope when you adjust the windage and elevation and then move it back to the original setting, the point of impact has changed. 

In my shooting we are timed.  During some portions (such as a stage that shifts from 25, 50, 75, and 100 yards) it's advantageous to drop the power where you can locate the targets quickly.  In other stages (like the KYL rack) a higher power on the scope is preferable.  A first focal plane scope allows you to change the magnification without a point of impact shift.  So you don't have to worry about trying to get the scope set back to an exact point to know your DOPE. 

Most inexpensive scopes (and some not so inexpensive) have a fixed parallax.  If you are under a 10 power scope, then you likely don't need a parallax adjustment.  But let's say you are using 18 power in your scope to see a small target clearly.  With a 100 yard fixed parallax scope when aiming at a target at 300 yards, move you eye and you'll notice the crosshairs move off of the bullseye.  This is because the scope is not "focused" at the proper distance.  You may also find the target to be fuzzy.  Adjustable parallax resolves this.

Eye relief is another advantage with better scopes.  When I was about to start shooting NRL22, the FFP scope that was recommended to me was the Monstrum Tactical 6-24x50.  I decided to go with a better/more expensive scope.  Since then I've shot a few rifles with the Monstrum and am VERY glad I spent the money on higher grade optics.  Compared to my scopes, the Monstrum is difficult to find the correct eye placement.  The scopes I have are much more forgiving.

I'm sure there are other reasons for better optics.  The point I'm trying to make is there are several reasons to look at better scopes.  Personally, I'd rather invest in decent quality glass that'll cover any foreseeable need.  Even if that means I must spend less on the rifle.
 
By the way, Savage (in my opinion) makes some of the best rifles for the money.  4 of my 22 rifles are Savage and have been tack drivers.  And my first non-22 rifle (since getting back into shooting) is very possibly going to be a Savage 110 Tactical 6.5 Creedmoor with an eye of replacing the barrel with an 8.6 Creedmoor once the specs are firmed up.  I also want to say that the Diamondback isn't a slouch either when compared to a $30 scope.  I assume that's why you replaced the Simmon scope.  Check the MSRP prices of them now on the Vortex site.

[Honky Tonk Man]

Years ago, I bought a Ruger Number 1 single shot rifle in 7mm Rem. Mag caliber.  It came without sights.  I mentioned I needed a good scope to my better half, and she told her Brother.  Now he's a great guy, and the best fisherman I know, but not much of a gun nut.  He bought me a fixed 4 power Tasco scope for Christmas.  I was looking at Leupolds Vari X III 3X9 at the time.  I didn't want to hurt his feelings, so I mounted it and took it to the range.  The first time I shot it, the horizontal cross hair broke off.  The second shot took out the vertical cross hair.  After that experience, it made me appreciate Leupolds quality even more.  You get what you pay for. 

[ray]

nice