Ruger Forum banner

10/22 modifications for accuracy,etc...

50K views 55 replies 23 participants last post by  Harley Viet Nam Vet 
#1 ·
What are some of the more popular modifications for the 10/22 for accuracy,etc? I've seen mention of aftermarket parts,but just how many "good" parts are there that actually enhance the rifle for accuracy and ease of use?
I'm sure some things are for the "bling" factor,or other non-useful purposes,and I'm not really interested in those-I'm looking for functionality.
JL
 
#2 ·
jlangton, The real 10/22 accuracy issues mostly come from the barrel. The best fix is to replace the barrel with one of the many good aftermarket barrels. I opted for the Green Mountain 20" bull barrel (under $100). My groups at 75 yards went from 4 or 5 inches to under an inch with most any ammo and under .5" with good ammo. Of course that required some work on the stock channel to accommodate the larger diameter barrel. I used a Butler Creek folding stock but there are several aftermarket stocks that come with the .920" barrel channel.

Lighter triggers help so you might consider one of the drop-in trigger job kits. I just did some polishing and my trigger went down to a very crisp 3.5 lbs. Extended mag releases are a nice option but do nothing for accuracy. I made my own extended mag release by drilling and tapping a hole then installing an Allen head screw. Most of the other internal parts are just "blings" but fun none the less.
 
#3 ·
So,just a bit of wood clearancing to get the 20" bull barrel to fit,and it'd be good to go,eh?
I'm likely to do a bit of polishing on my trigger as well-I know the heavy,scratchy trigger is causing a bit of pull when shooting.
JL
 
#4 ·
+1 on the barrel as a first stop. If you don't want to go bull, there are other options. GM (Green Mountain) also makes some sporter diminsioned barrels, but you will still have to do some minor fitting to a factory contoured stock to get it to fit right. Another option, and one that I have done twice now, is to have your factory barrel worked on. I have had two of mine set-back, re-chambered, and re-crowned with great results. These services can usually be had for about the same amount or a little bit less than a new barrel, and in the case of the two that I had done, shoot better than a comparably priced aftermarket manufacturer.

FWIW

JJ
 
#5 ·
jlangton,
Improved functionality can be achieved with very little expense.
As has previously been noted the barrel is a huge part of accuracy. GM Barrels have been a great bang for the buck but they're harder to find now that they have a gov contract. The ER Shaw barrel is just as good and should be available at various vendors for the same prices as GM.
You can save the stock money by hoggin' out your existing stock channel with a simple tool! An electrical sweep works wonders! Some like appropriate sized sockets



Unless your very comfortable tweeking your hammer sear engagement surfaces I'd recommend a Power Custom Hammer which will put your pull right at 2.75 lbs for $30.00 Don't use their springs which are included.
You can make a buffer out of 1/4" fuel line which will out live ya!


You can make or modify the existing mag release fairly simply for pennies.



A bolt release is accomplished by a simple modification via a dremel.


I like a hex headed stock screw to avoid scaring my stock.


Actually on a different level than shooting it's a whole bunch of fun doing this stuff yourself!


SD
 
#6 ·
jlangton,
Check the stickies at rimfirecental.com, that well cover just about every mod. If you rebarrel, I would recommend doing the bolt, radius the back, pin the firing pin and square and set headspace. Also do the MK series mod on the extractor, or buy an aftermarket one. The bull barrels have very tight chambers. You can get close to 1/4 MOA groups @ 50yds with just a barrel and modified oem parts.
 
#7 · (Edited)
I have the stainless target model with 20 inch bull barrel......and I did virtually nothing to it.....which is unusual for me because I almost always tune my guns. The gun has more accuracy than I am capable of......... so there's no need for me to play with it. I always recommend an aftermarket, urethane bolt stop pin on the 10-22. It gets rid of the metal-to-metal...... slam-bang...... when the bolt stops at the end of its recoil stroke ....as it contacts the OEM steel pin. Song Dawg's 1/4 inch fuel line buffer sounds like a winner to me.
 
#8 ·
Reading through the thread ... there are a couple of things I picked up. madcratebuilder stated "You can get close to 1/4 MOA groups @ 50yds". 1 MOA @ 100 yds is 1" so at 50 yds 1/4 MOA is a 1/8" group. Must be a typo .... even a match grade target rifle won't shoot that tight.

The buffered bolt stop pin is mostly a farce ... in fact could result in poor ejection. Ruger designed the bolt with a large contact surface with the bolt stop pin. I've never seen the bolt or the pin get damaged or worn even with 10's of thousands of rounds fired. It does reduce the metal-to-metal clank but that's just not a big deal. This classic "bling" doesn't hurt anything ... it just doesn't improve function at all.
 
#9 ·
I'm not really concerned with the clack on each shot-I'm looking for better accuracy only. I'm looking at a few barrels right now-just kinda on the back burner for now until I round up those old WW2 relics I've had my eyes on,and a new AR15 style rifle too.
JL
 
#11 · (Edited)
I bought my 10/22 because, well, because everyone praised them as being great rifles. Mine wasn't so great. I messed around with different ammo and some cheap scopes, but nothing seemed to work. It would not perform well and the factory sights left a lot to be desired.

It sat in my safe for a couple of years, while I considered selling it, but something just wouldn't let me do that. I was lucky enough to land a job at Leupold, the scope maker, where I befriended one of the engineers / gunsmiths. One day over coffee, the subject of .22's came up. I told him that I wasn't happy with the 10/22, and he said to bring it in and he'd take a look.

First we replaced the barrel and stock with Butler Creek stock and carbon barrel. We replaced the recoil buffer and he told me the head space was out of whack. He put the bolt on one of Leupold's CNC milling machines, and took off some ridiculously small amount of metal. Add a quick trigger job and a 4x fixed Leupold scope and viola, it's a tack driver. I swear I can hit mosquitoes at 50 yards with it. :cool:

The rifle likes CCI mini-mag ammo, but will shoot just about everything equally well. It isn't fancy looking, but it has become a family heirloom. My son wants it, but he's gonna have to wait. There are squirrels and rats that need to die sudden death!

By-the-way, it's pronounced Lew-pold, not Lee-a-pold.

 
#13 ·
One comment concerning your quest for accuracy. At the club I belong to,we have a number of members that went whole hog tricking out their 10/22s. A number purchased Clarks and put high dollar Leupold 6.5-20s on them, and then there were a whole raft of the do-it yourself copies. They all shot great.

Where this is going, we had a lot of impromtu matches with these and a fellow showed up with a stock 10/22 and was using some standard velocity ammo that his gun favored. I was amazed watching him shoot at 100 yards. He shot some excellent targets. As with most .22 RFs it seems that finding the right ammo is one key.

You might do what the match pisotleros do with their .22s and buy a bunch of different ammos and see if your gun favors one over the other.

Back when Russian Junior ammo was still available a friend and I did some serious work looking for a combo that his gun liked. We found one lot that his gun loved, provided that you wiped all fo the excess lube off. With the lube left on, heis shots went all over the place. When we removed the lube, he was capable of holding the 10-ring on the 100 yard small bore target.
 
#14 ·
Yes, every 1022 has it's favorite ammo! I shoot a bunch of 1022's and I've learned that once in a while a stocker can come along and surprise the high dollar conversions. However often it's the headspacing of the bolt which can vary in these assembly line shooters which makes much of the difference.

SD
 
#15 ·
There are a lot of whats called a 'super stock' 10/22. Re-machine the oem barrel to a match chamber, a couple of bolt mods, and you have a fine shooter. Some shoot as well as the high dollar target barreled ones, and look bone stock.
 
#16 ·
Song Dawg, Please explain what you meant "However often it's the headspacing of the bolt which can vary in these assembly line shooters".

By definition, headspace is the distance between the head of the case and the breach face (applies to all firearms that use a cartridge). A rimfire cartridge uses the rim as a limit, thus it "headspaces on the rim" or in other words ... the rim is what prevents the cartridge from seating farther in the chamber. In a spring loaded semi-auto like a 10/22 or a MK series pistol, the bolt is pushed forward under spring tension so headspace can't help but being "zero".

What I've seen in 10/22s are the "generous" chambers that enhance feeding but don't do accuracy any favors. A typical non-semi-auto rimfire 22 rifle will have a bore diameter of .221" which is just about perfect for a .222" lead bullet. The 10/22's bore diameters tend to run right at .222". This slightly loose bore and chamber will allow some of the propelling gasses to escape around the bullet. In a tighter bore and chamber, the bullet seals better and doesn't lose near as much pressure. In theory, if you chronograph several 10/22s with the same ammo, the one with the highest average velocity will have the best accuracy. That's because loss of propelling gasses lowers the muzzle velocity. This helps explain why some brands or types of ammo are more accurate than others. The bullet design may help prevent pressure losses in one brand whereas another brand may allow more pressure to escape.
 
#42 · (Edited)
I have a 16" SS Fluted that I threaded 1/2-28 tpi for compensator or suppressor, and am very happy with it. Shoots all standard velocity ammo well, but likes Wolf MT and SK Standard Plus the best, I use CCI Standard Velocity for practice and plinking with excellent accuracy also...Single ragged hole at 30 yards. Plan on doing some testing out to 100 yards when time and opportunity allows.
 
#19 ·
Song Dawg, That's what I was afraid you were going to say. Yes indeed, milling the bolt face does tighten headspace but I sure would not recommended it without good machining and measuring equipment. First, it can be dangerous. When headspace is snug, you run the risk of a slam fire. That's where the bolt slams against the rim when cycling and makes the cartridge fire. All it takes is a little piece of crud between the bolt and rim. Next is firing pin protrusion. Ruger's design includes a firing pin stop to prevent the firing pin from hitting the chamber mouth. If you mill the bolt face, you must also mill the tip of the firing pin by an equal amount. If you don't, the firing pin will demo the chamber mouth.

I don't like to see these types of modifications posted without telling the whole story and quite possibly, you didn't know the rest of the story. Fact is, if this modification done in less than a machine shop environment (think kitchen table), it can be dangerous and it can result in a damaged-beyond-repair barrel. To me, it's just not worth the risk and there's no guarantee of tighter groups.
 
#20 · (Edited)
First of all I didn't make a recommendation as to this or any other modification. To suggest otherwise is inacuurate and unfair!


Here's the quote: "However often it's the headspacing of the bolt which can vary in these assembly line shooters which makes much of the difference."

Secondly none of MY 1022's, target or stockers have had this machining done. Maybe I'm just lucky but mine shoot great!:)

The statement addressed the fact that assembly line bolts vary in their spacing from the factory which translates to varying accuracy.

Additionally, one particular gunsmith with a very good track record has done countless numbers of these as an accurizing method. He's very popular on a particular rimfire site. I believe he takes them all to .0425
http://community-2.webtv.net/RandyAtCPC/CPC1022BoltRework/index.html


Since the depths vary from say .042-.043 from the factory then it sounds as though you're saying that some of these stock issues are dangerous.

Nowhere is there as much as a suggestion that this mod is a roll your own project.

So no need to be afraid unless you're suggesting that Rugers inconsistent bolt facings are a safety issue.

SD
 
#21 · (Edited)
Song Dawg, I think you should go back and read this entire thread before you jump to conclusions.

Today I measured all three of my 10/22s with unaltered bolts. The tightest had .008" headspace which translates to .043" face depth. The second was .010" headspace and was exactly .045" face depth. The loosest was .012", .047" face depth.

Now here's the kicker ..... A few weeks ago, I decided to test all three of my 10/22s for accuracy with different ammo using the standard factory 18.5" barrels. I settled on CCI Mini-mags. My older 10/22 was by far the most accurate and my 40th Anniversary was the worst no matter what ammo I tried. I swapped the barrels between the two guns just for grins and guess what? Accuracy followed the barrel .... meaning ... now the 40th Aniv was the best shooter and the 1974 vintage 10/22 was the worst by about the same margin.

Today when I measured headspace, the 40th Aniv had the loosest headspace and the tightest was the '74 model. Point is ... It was the barrel not the headspace that changed accuracy.

I don't know what Ruger uses as a headspace spec but if they follow the normal SAAMI guide .... non-semi autos typically headspace at .005" and semi-autos at .010". With the measurements I took, this seems to run pretty close. In your example, a .042" would be on the tight side (.008" HS) but still safe. When headspace on a rimfire 22 auto is .005" or less, the risk of slam fires increases.

Yes, this procedure could be dangerous and it could damage the gun if not done properly. If a professional gunsmith did it, I'd have less concern because they should know how to measure, know about firing pin throw, and know the minimum limits. Here on the forum, we get a lot of gunsmith wannabes that might try a modification like this expecting some miracle cure and end up in trouble. And that's why I don't recommend it. Besides, I've yet to see any proof that tightening headspace a few thousandths will improve accuracy.

BTW, I put a Green Mountain 20" bull barrel on my 40th Aniv ... complete with a folding stock and a 4X tactical scope. Looks like crap but it shoots some mighty fine mouse ear groups ... even with .012" headspace. Next time I go out to the farm, I'll rob the old 10/22s bolt with the tight headspace and test the two to see if it makes any difference.

 
#22 ·
Again, not my recommendation nor my endorsement. Just reporting the variances. But I know that countless folks are having and have had this mod done by at least one competent gunsmith with the expectations of improved accuracy. This has been the case for approx the past 10 yrs or so. Never heard a discouraging word!
I have not nor did I sanction the procedure. Again mine don't have the mod but that doesn't mean the bolts don't vary from the factory!

Reporting a fire doesn't mean you started or condoned it!
I suggest if you are curious about this procedure you contact the smith on the link. He seems to be extremely popular, competent and trustworthy. Probably makin' a pretty good livin' too!

As to the latest greatest 1022 tweaks there's at least one site which shamelessly promotes their sponsors and the products and services they feature to the extent that it resembles a feeding frenzy! I've never thought that was a very responsible and prudent way to go! But as long as the law "ain't" violated I guess they're within their rights!

I'll be sincerely interested to know your findings relative to this "tweak" I'll bet many others will be as well...especially if it's smoke & mirrors!:)

SD
 
#23 ·
When I woke up this morning, it was reasonably cool, overcast and calm ... just perfect for a day at the farm range. I grabbed a couple 10/22s, some tools, a chronograph, and a brick of ammo. The only thing I forgot was my digital camera.

I started out chronographing 10 shot strings from my Green Mountain 20" bull barrel with the bolt that has the most headspace (.012"). My average velocity was 1271 fps and my max spread was 39 fps. I then swapped out the bolt assembly with another 10/22 that had a tighter headspace of .008". The rest of the gun was the same including the barrel. This time my average velocity went up slightly to 1286 fps and the max spread went down to 29 fps. So, this was looking good. A slight increase in velocity of 15 fps and 10 fps slightly tighter max spread.

Note: Normal headspace is .010" so .012" is .002" looser than normal headspace and .008" is .002" tighter than normal headspace.

I repeated the same exact test with my 1974 vintage 10/22 with a 18.5" factory barrel with both the same bolts as above. This time I got 1255 fps average with the tight bolt and 1242 fps with the loose bolt for a difference of 13 fps. My max spreads were 55 fps with the loose bolt and 44 fps with the tight bolt.

Based on these two tests, it's safe to conclude that in my guns, tighter headspace increased velocity by a token amount and decreased max velocity spread also by a token amount. Because the GM barrel is 1.5" longer and is built to much tighter specs, the velocity was higher than the factory 18.5" barrel and max spreads were tighter.

I set up several targets at 50 yards and started by mounting and sighting in a 4-12X varmint scope on my 1974 10/22 with the AO set to 50 yards (18.5" factory barrel). After sight-in, I fired 3 - five shot groups from a good bench rest on separate targets then changed the bolt. The loose bolt groups averaged 2 1/8" for the three targets. I repeated the same exact test with the tight bolt with nearly identical results ... One group was a token larger, one was the same and one was a token smaller. In all, they both averaged 2 1/8". POI was exactly the same on all 6 targets.

With the bull barrel 10/22, I repeated the above tests with both bolts. With the loose bolt I got a .42" average group size for 5 shots in each of 3 targets. With the tight bolt, my group average shrunk to .40". That's a whopping 20 thousandths tighter!

After a very fun day of shooting the 10/22s, I learned some amazing stuff. Tighter headspace seemed to increase muzzle velocity and tightened max velocity spread by a tad. Accuracy at 50 yards with the standard factory barrel was unchanged. Accuracy with the GM bull barrel was so close I'd call it unchanged too. Based on my own tests, I'd have to say spending money to reduce headspace isn't going to improve accuracy much, if at all.

Here's a few "side affects". My bull barrel gun started out with the loose headspace bolt. About every 20 rounds +or-, I'd get a failure to extract .... In fact the barrel is stamped "WARNING: UNFIRED ROUNDS MAY NOT ALWAYS EXTRACT". With the tighter headspace bolt, the spent cases were flung farther and I never had a single failure to extract. I ended up leaving the tighter bolt in the bull barrel gun for that reason. The other 10/22 with the factory barrel never hiccuped once with either bolt so I'd say it is just as happy with the looser bolt.

In all, I fired about 20 more cartridges using the tight bolt than the loose bolt. When I did a field strip for cleaning, the tight bolt had way less powder residue than the loose bolt. Apparently, the tighter headspace helps prevent powder residue from blowing back into the action.

So despite the lack of improved accuracy, in my guns ... extraction was improved as was powder residue fouling when a tighter headspace bolt was used.

YMMV ... I'd be very interested to see other 10/22 results with headspace changes. Personally, I think someone is making money on a non-value added accuracy modification.
 
#24 ·
Thanks for your efforts and interest in this matter. Your findings are interesting to say the least.
As I've stated here many times there are two maybe three "smiths' in which I have total confidence and respect. You being one!

This particular issue may serve as an example of the many "mods" which are generating huge amounts of takers without any real consideration to improvement worthiness or safety.
Again, sites which are little more than commerce zones can cause feeding frenzies among those seeking a better more accurate weapon without reference to other considerations.
Personally Ive never been a huge supporter of these many mods.
10 yrs ago the concept of a "bolt buffer in a 1022 was pretty much unheard of. Now we're to believe our guns won't function properly without one of these $5.00 pieces of everyday polyU.
Yes, there's been a ton of $$$$ made off of these "mods" with promises of improvement but many I'm sure are little moire than snake oil!
Thanks again!

SD
 
#25 ·
Song Dawg, It all started with 1911s. Because there are so many different aftermarket parts and so much misinformation in circulation .... shooters fall prey to the trendy modifications. 10/22s and AR-15s are a close second to 1911s when it comes to aftermarket support. There are indeed many modifications or after market parts that improve function, looks, accuracy, or longevity. Then there are the "snake oil" things like you mentioned. Bolt buffers (a spin-off of 1911 shock buffers, also equally worthless) are a classic example. Many shooters just want "braggin' rights". They may never even shoot their customized guns but they certainly do like to show them off. I don't have a problem with people spending money on worthless "features" but I do have a problem with gunsmiths preying on gullible people claiming some remarkable improvement that really isn't an improvement at all and could even be dangerous or damaging.

I was cruising through the Brownell's catalog the other day. Here's one of the best companies in America but with all sorts of snake oil goodies listed for sale. I guess it doesn't matter if it works ... just as long as you make a buck.

When I lived in the Phoenix, AZ area, we had frequent gun shows at the state fair grounds. One of the guys rented a table and hung a sign "Ruger Single Action Trigger Jobs $40". He claimed to be a gunsmith but it was obvious after I talked to him that he didn't have a clue about gunsmithing ... he just learned a "trick" and made a lot of money from it. He had a good line ... normally $50 but as a gun show special, he would do a professional trigger job while you walked around the show. He would tell customers he was backlogged so they wouldn't stay and watch. All he did was to remove one grip panel, lift one side of the trigger spring from its holding pin, then replace the grip panel (AKA poor boy's trigger job). When customers came to pick up their guns ... wow, what an improvement. Soon they were sending their friends. What a ripoff! After several gun shows, he finally got exposed and thrown out but he made a bunch of money in the mean time.

I'm not going to say bolt machining to reduce headspacing is worthless because as I discovered, there are a few token advantages. Doing it for the purpose of improving accuracy ... it probably falls into the "snake oil" category. I hope you know ... I have nothing to gain or lose by addressing this modification. My main interest is to keep one of our forum's kitchen table gunsmiths from doing something potentially dangerous or ruining a gun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johngoboom
#26 ·
Thanks Iowegan!
As usual a complete well written response on a subject of which you know plenty.
It made me think of some of the "gotta have it" mods being done via a certain "commercial" website.

Radius-ing the bolt to cure light strikes on sub ammo
Do it yourself trigger jobs via a stone without expertise
Mag releases
Bolt releases
Bolt buffers
Modified V blocks to stop barrel droop
Machined bolt faces
Sears with adjustable set screws
Hammers with adjustable set screws
Triggers with adjustable set screws
Tampering with temped surfaces
modified springs including pen springs on trigger plunger
Paper clip type hammer returns
Extractor replacements
Bolt pinning to prevent fire pin jump.
Charging handle changes

These just some of the "mod evey" that occurs without real or hands on knowledge. Some are clearly harmless but others are anything but........ in the wrong hands!

Most of my efforts go to stocks for utility and appearence. FUN TOO!

Thanks again!

SD
 
#27 ·
I have one of the Bolts that SD is talking about, and from the individual that he linked to earlier in the thread. I also have four non-modifed bolts. I don't really think that the modded bolt has given me much in terms of accuracy over the other non-modded bolts, but will take a single platform out and shoot all five bolts to attempt to determine if there is a difference. I will say this even before the testing though, the worked over bolt does indeed function much smoother and is more reliable on extraction, cycling, and feeding. I'll try to sneak out this weekend and get some results. And yes, I will use a bedded action, the same barrel/receiver/trigger group, and I do use a torque wrench when assembling my rifles, so it should be a pretty fair test. Actually, it sounds like a good reason to spend another hour or two at the range!! :)

JJ
 
#28 ·
jjfunk, That's what I thought yesterday morning ... gee, a real mission .... and it involves shooting .... what more could you want? I'll be interested to see if your findings match mine. So far, it looks like one already did (extraction). I never had feeding problems so you can't fix what aint wrong.

SD, Looking at your chart makes me think about some of my customers when I had my gunshop. I swear some of them tried to invent a problem to go along with a "fix". I had several customers that had way more money than brains. The more I tried to talk them out of doing some wild procedure, the more they wanted it. I once "blue printed" a Ruger Blackhawk. Many hours of work and custom made parts. When I finished, everything was pretty much zero tolerance. I shot it before and after and quite honestly couldn't see any difference in group size. The customer was as happy as a clam even though his Ruger cost more to modify than it cost to buy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjfunk
#29 ·
Well we all know that's true with many consumer "gotta haves"It's that latest greatest :ego driven amenity that some just can't be without! I'm sure a psych could have a field day with the subject.

That's why it's so great to have individuals here and other places post their own cheap & dirty fixes and finds..the safe one's that is!

I've learned much about guns from forums and friends that I might never had learned otherwise. Including this thread!
But part of that learning is knowing the difference between a prudent mod and one in hyperbolic mode!:)

SD
 
#30 ·
Well,my 10/22 likes the el-cheapo Federal bulk pack and Remington Golden Bullet bulk-pack ammo. I sighted it in today at 50 yards with a 4x12x40 Simmons scope,and it will keep a 5 shot group in just under 1.75" with either of the above listed ammunition. Tried Winchester Wildcats,Remington Vipers and Thunderbolts,and all of those were around a 4" group or larger. Didn't have any stingers or other CCI ammo here to test-I'll do that later.
JL
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top