Truth vs. Balony?

[Aero Denezol]

At 30 yards the gun is hardly the limiting factor. A real problem is the inherent cheapness of rimfire ammo.

But inside a hundred feet against a stationary rat-sized target, you ought to be able to hit it 100% of the time off iron sights with any old kind of ammo, even through glasses as thick as mine.

Agreed 100%

 

[OregonPlinker]

I don't believe the 60 was designed for anything other than Long Rifle. Your ejection problems are most likely related to having shot Longs in the gun, fouling the chamber a bit prior to the rifling, and/or a weak extractor just from plain wear. Extractors are available and cheap, and a good chamber scrubbing (and sticking to Long Rifles ONLY) will put your good 60 back in the pink.

I agree. They say LR only right on the barrel. The op asked if anyone had shot longs or shorts thru a 60 and I was just throwing my experience out there. And yes they will fire but 60's dont like them cause they arent made for them... They dont feed and on my rifle the manual ejection sucks. Ive had it for 16 years and I cant remember if it always sucked...I think it did tho. It could be due to wear. I have both the replacement extractors and springs but Im not gonna change them till it doesnt SHOOT right.lol. It shoots fine, It doesnt MANUALLY eject worth a squat. Is that how you spell manually?

My Father in law threw some longs on the seat of my truck while we were shooting and I didnt notice they were longs. So I loaded up and shot once and could hear the difference and obviously experienced problems. Dumped the tube and started inspecting and found they were longs. So its not like I shoot longs all the time out of it or anything. I take better care of that old .22 then any of the other guns I have. Its sad to say but that thing was $99 when I was 12 and I still shoot it more than any other. I have custom 10/22s that Im real proud of and all but I love that Marlin. Great little gun.

 

[DeanMk]

For the last couple of weeks I've been busy learning what I can about affordable, reputable .22 Rimfire rifles. In no time, one reads of Ruger 1022 vs Marlin 60, etc. Then, as you attempt to parse the truth and weed out the bravado, etc, a common theme appears. Gun enthusiasts tend to give good grades to most everything! Pick a rifle or scope and then go read some reviews. What you'll notice is that just about everything seems to get 4-5 stars (out of a total of 5). I think this is because we become emotionally attached to our things. A gun isn't just a gun, but it is a reflection of how we envision our guns, what our heros used in the movies, Who we would like to be, and so on. Ammo is the exception. Ranting about ammo is commonplace. How then, does someone get to the truth? I think I've seen more positive reviews for cheap scopes than expensive ones!

I bought a Henry H001 a couple of weeks ago, and have enjoyed it a lot. I don't hunt, per se, but I do exterminate problematic rodents on my land here. Otherwise, I'm just a 55-year fart with time on his hands and some curiosity. Which leads me to my question regarding accuracy. If I am shooting at 25-30 yards 95% of the time, will I find that I can do better with target shooting with a Marlin XT (or even a 60), a CZ 455, or a savage MK II over my Henry? In other words, if I buy one of these rifles (in an effort to see how accurately I can shoot, while not breaking the bank) can I necessarily expect better results, given the shooting distance, or is it not the case? Also, is my inherent marksmanship more of a factor than these rifles I might buy and shoot?

I'd like to have some fun with seeing how accurate I can get, and I would like an appropriate rifle for the task. The only hiccup is that I want to be able to use quiet ammo. That's what I like about the Henry...it will fire shorts, longs, and LR. AND...it doesn't possess one of those hideous synthetic black stocks. No offense to those who own them.

Comments welcome and appreciated.

Brian
So Oregon

Other than checking headspace, the only way I know of to accurize a lever action is to drop that buckhorn for some Williams Peep sights.
Target acquisition can be quicker and a Willy Peep is far more adjustable than a standard Buck.
But if your gun is already hitting point-of-aim I'd say you can't get much more accurate than that.
If you want to see if any accuracy probs are you or the gun, put it on a rest and shoot a mag or two through it.
Check the target and see how the groupings are.
If they're all over the place, the gun needs accurizing.
If the group is tight, then I'd say the shooter needs accurizing.



Dean

 

[ZigZagZeke]

I used to shoot competition with a Remington 513T.



That rifle would put every shot in the same hole from a bench rest at 50 feet.

Small bore competition targets for 50 feet have a 10 ring that is .25" in diameter. Most of us were capable of perfect scores from the prone position.

To come to the point, yes, I could see a difference in my shooting with the target rifle versus my Browning semi-auto or any other .22 rifle I used. Part of it was the bull barrel. Part of it was the adjustable trigger. Part of it was the aperture front and rear sights with vernier adjustments. I believe all of these things coupled with shooting ability are additive. Remove any one and the overall performance suffers at whatever level the shooter is at.

As for ammo, we always favored standard velocity ammunition, whether it was actually marked as match grade ammunition or not, it was more consistent and accurate than high velocity stuff.

I don't remember whether the 513T would cycle anything but LR from the magazine. For matches we only loaded one cartridge at a time anyway. After I quit shooting competition I used the 513T for varmint hunting and squirrel hunting. I was spoiled enough by the accuracy that I didn't mind carrying an 8 pound .22 rifle through the woods. Being able to hit anything large enough that you can see it is that addictive.

Then again, my dad's favorite .22 rifle was a Stevens Favorite:



He shot 500 rounds a week when he was about 12, which is all his dad would buy for him. To hear his brothers tell it, he was pretty good at lighting matches with it.

 

[kott0n]

I have a Glenfield model 70 (Marlin) .22 tube load. It's a great gun as far as accuracy and reliability. I have shot near 4,000 rounds though it. I can drive tacks with my cheap 4x scope.

Downside is I would hate to have to field strip this. It is a very complex mechanism with many small removeable parts.

Had I of not got it for $60 at a garage sale and was in the market, I would buy a 10/22. I have shot my friends a lot, great shooter. With all the aftermarket/OEM stuff around you can't go wrong.