10/22.....SS...or.....blue
160.00 for a used blue in walnut, early enough to not have the warning stamped on the barrel..........orrrr a new SS w/ synthetic stock, the older style w/ the recessed area for 199.00? You tell me!
0
-
I personally buy every gun I can in the stainless/synthetic setup. The stainless barrel resists rust better, and seems to me that any minor blemishes can be polished out nicely. Now, of course the synthetic stock is much more durable than any wood stock, and there are many arguments about weather changing the point of impact on wood stocks. I haven't found this to be a major issue, but I have heard horror stories.
That said, I am not a big fan of the Ruger factory stocks - period! I don't like the barrel band. I know there are some factory variants that don't have it and those are nice. The bands just will eventually leave wear marks on the barrel (and again I have heard accuracy arguments about the bands), so if you ever went to an aftermarket stock that doesn't use the bands, you might have permanent marks on your barrel.
The new hammer-forged 10/22's stainless models are pretty sweet!
It doesn't matter what you shoot, just shoot it well...0 -
My oldest brother had a blued walnut 10/22 in the 80's, worked great so I got one in stainless steel in 1990. The wood showes age but not the barrel or action, I would recommend the stainless steel. 0 -
CURRENTLY,I OWN AN A.M.T. 25/22 IN MATTE STAINLESS FINISH, IVE OWNED MANY 10/22 RIFLES IN BLUED FINISH AND WILL NEVER GO BACK! GO STAINLESS! I THINK IT WILL HELP IN RE-SALE VALUE AS WELL. 0 -
I have both guns and i like the SS one better. The SS parts are a little bit more expensive if ya want to try to customize it. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments