Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Calico 22 ?

Comments

9 comments

  • kimberkid
    I had a carbine version, followed directions and still kinked/broke the mag spring first time i loaded it ... sent it back and got it fixed (I think was $50 warrenty didn't cover over torqued springs), took it to the range, shot it once and sold it ... cool looking POS

    ===========================
    Chance favors the prepared mind
    kimberkid@gunbroker.zzn.com
    0
  • pabloescobar
    i had one a long time ago, it was a great toy, i emphasize "toy". this is not something meant for dependability. it is a great plinker, but the mag will jam, and dont even think about using birdshot! all in all, it was fun though.

    "a man's got to know his limitations"
    0
  • cliffdropover1
    Shot one that a friend had. The 9mm version has the sights as part of the magazine. I think the .22 is the same here. Very inaccurate. Just a toy and not a good one at that.

    Hope this helps.
    0
  • 74cuda
    Had the 22 pistol and it shot great. Had a lot of fun with it. I still have the carbine and it is probably more fun than the pistol. Has the scope attachement on it.

    Also have the 9mm with the 100 rd drum. Puts out a lot of lead, is alot of fun and the brass drops at your feet, since it is the bottom drop. But as far as accuracy, it doesn't even fit well in the hand, like a standard pistol, to be able to get consistent groups. But then, I really doubt that it was designed for match shooting either.

    All in all, I have had great luck with the Calico's, but then I don't try to compare them to something that they are not. You do need to be very careful of the torque on the magazine springs.

    Just my 2 cents worth....

    "In God We Trust........All Others Go Thru NCIC"
    0
  • outdoortexas
    Thanks guys, about what I expected or we'd all be hearing more about them. My "need" for owning unusual 22's is what brought me to give 'em a look. They still might end up hanging on my wall.
    0
  • cbxjeff
    ODT,

    These 22's are about as unusual as you are going to get. Naturally, that mag design was the backbone of the firearm. The hi cap ban left them with no civilian customers. The fact that they are still in business means that either LE or foreign buyers are still interested.

    I have the 22 pistol as well as the 9mm rifle w/ collapsible stock. Particularly accurate - no. But a blast to shoot. Yes, you need to take care not to overwind the mag spring. I tend to wind mine a little less that the recommended. I don't really care if I can feed 100 rounds or just 91! A nice feature about the mag design is that it can be stored fully loaded but with no spring tension (meaning forever).

    After you buy the usual 10/22, a nice lever, and a nice bolt action, I would consider these just for fun. But then, I always have been interested in the unusual.

    cbxjeffIt's too late for me, save yourself.
    0
  • spasmcreek
    like you i also have fun with odd 22 cal including one some years ago,unseen since....kintrec 22 auto rifle, long bbl in short total length, clear plastic 10 shot clip, two safeties,...just fyi......
    0
  • outdoortexas
    Spasm,
    I'd like to know more about this one. Nothing in the latest Blue Book about them.
    0
  • spasmcreek
    outdoortexas.........kintrek kbp-1...semi-auto22lr; 17 shot,25" bbl....31' overall length...wght 5.5 lbs..post front sight fully adj aperature rear..drilled & tapped for scope mount.... solid black synthetic bullpup stock with smooth pebble finish...grip safety & trigger blocking safeties.... ejects empties out of bottom of stock...bolt hold open position operated by grip safety...matte black finish...made in us by kintrek inc. intro 1991--disc 1992 10th edition modern gun values 1996 perf--$175..exc--$150..vg-$130......every thing you need to know except where the thelll is one?????????old gun books catalogs & reprints are super info base...enjoy jds spasmcreek
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity

Didn’t find what you’re looking for?