New 10/22's for cheap - just couldn't do it

[chemist]

Bi-Mart has their Ruger 10/22's on sale real cheap, $180 for blued or $200 for stainless, both with synthetic stocks. BUT...

"Synthetic" is the operative word here. What the heck has happened to that gun? The barrel band and mag lever are now plastic doo-dads too, along with the trigger guard. They've bead-blasted the stainless barrel so that it matches the grey plastic parts, and it's a clever disguise, but... I couldn't do it, no matter how good the price looks, the gun is just too fugly.

I paid $300 for a stainless/synthetic 10/22 a few years back when I was in Kalifornica, and thought I was robbed at the time. But the next year they switched to the plastic trigger guard, and now I feel LUCKY.

All in all, it makes no marketing sense to me. If you want a cheap, reliable .22LR rifle, then get the Marlin 795 for half as much. But if you want one that you'd be proud to hand off to your grandkids, then if you're like me you'll pay extra and get extra.

What's up with this "race to the bottom" in so many products? Flashlights, radios, shoes, and now guns: cheap is all that matters. "Race to the landfill" is more like it.

Read More

 

[PhysicsGuy]

According to several extensive tests, the plastic is more rugged than the aluminum parts. (try dropping your gun on the trigger guard to find out), I really don't like the plastic parts, but from what I've seen, the guns are just as rugged, if not more.

 

[pioneer461]

To a seasoned, experienced shooter, that may be the case, but to a new shooter, or a youngster's first .22 LR, it may be a great place to start. And there is one thing about 10/22's that make them good purchases, if you don't like the various options, there are literally thousands of others to choose from to customize them.

Here's mine. The only factory part on it is the receiver. Including custom machining and Leupold scope, I have about $600. invested in it and it is a tack-driver.

​

 

[cbzdel]

The stainless barrel is not actually bead blasted, it painted. Dont ask me why but they choose to paint the stainless barrel gray?! My only guess was because its cheaper to paint that smooth out all the machine marks..

 

[Cougfan2]

I still have Mine that I bought back in the late 60's. That was when they still put Walnut stocks on them and it's a pretty good piece of Walnut at that! Goes to my Grandkids in the event that I ever have any.

 

[Mutoman]

Bi-Mart has their Ruger 10/22's on sale real cheap, $180 for blued or $200 for stainless, both with synthetic stocks. BUT...

"Synthetic" is the operative word here. What the heck has happened to that gun? The barrel band and mag lever are now plastic doo-dads too, along with the trigger guard. They've bead-blasted the stainless barrel so that it matches the grey plastic parts, and it's a clever disguise, but... I couldn't do it, no matter how good the price looks, the gun is just too fugly.

I paid $300 for a stainless/synthetic 10/22 a few years back when I was in Kalifornica, and thought I was robbed at the time. But the next year they switched to the plastic trigger guard, and now I feel LUCKY.

All in all, it makes no marketing sense to me. If you want a cheap, reliable .22LR rifle, then get the Marlin 795 for half as much. But if you want one that you'd be proud to hand off to your grandkids, then if you're like me you'll pay extra and get extra.

What's up with this "race to the bottom" in so many products? Flashlights, radios, shoes, and now guns: cheap is all that matters. "Race to the landfill" is more like it.

I remember all the hype when the Glock came out and many were questioning the new "plastic gun".

I guess I'm no gun snob, so a little plastic, as long as it's durable, doesn't bother me any.

 

[Member 5605]

My first .22 : Marlin Stainless/Laminate Stock tube fed. Was solid and heavy compared to my new Ruger with a scope. there's an obvious difference when it comes to the weight. Ruger is the standard wood stock, black barrel with a good tasco scope.

Plastic costs less to manufacture than aluminum/stainless.

I would in a heartbeat get another Marlin like my first. It was well worth the $300 for the gun. But for a kids first gun. I'd rather spend less and let them get comfortable.

 

[smurf hunter]

Given that many hobbyists would buy the cheapest available 10/22 for the receiver and kit it out with anything from match grade components to rambo tacti-crap, that's still a good price.

 

[Riot]

According to several extensive tests, the plastic is more rugged than the aluminum parts. (try dropping your gun on the trigger guard to find out), I really don't like the plastic parts, but from what I've seen, the guns are just as rugged, if not more.

If it has the flexibility to bend then it will take more to break.

Nevertheless, I think there are just some parts that should always be metal. No mater how much Bushmaster says, I still think AR bolt receivers should be metal!

<broken link removed>