Longrange with a 10/22

308

Private
Minuteman
Feb 16, 2002
15
0
Dixie County Fl.
Just a bit about how I set up a 10/22 for longrange, up to 500 for fun and practice.

A bit about my rifle first, its nothing fancy, just a plain old 10/22 action about 15 years old, that about 5 years ago I put a Green Mountain stainless barrel on and a hogue overmolded stock, like I said nothing fancy.

I did notice on several occasions that the rifle with this barrel shot very well, less than 1/2 inch at 50 yards and less than 1.5 at 100 with good ammo.

I have several remington heavy barrel rifles set up for longrange shooting (3) and always wanted a rimfire with the ability to click up for longer range shooting.

So I began a search to replace the leupold 3x9 vari x II that I had on the rifle with something more suitable for long range. After selling off this scope and 2 others that I was not using at the time I settled on a Leupold 4.5x14 with the 30mm tube and side focus, the reason I picked this scope is because it has 125 minutes of adjustment, you need a lot to go long with a 22. So back it went to Leupold to have target turret adjustments installed. Soon it was back and ready to go.

From midway I got a egw 20 minute base and burris signature zee rings with the polymer offset inserts.

I put it all together with the offset inserts in the rings, this gave me 20 in the base and 10 under the back ring and 10 on top of the front ring for a total of 40 minutes of up in my mounts.

Here is where I encountered my first problem, I did not consider the barrel droop inherrent in the design of the 10/22. When I shot it, it was very close to being dead on at 50 yards with my scope adjustment being in or very near to the middle of the available travel, so after a calculated swag (scientific wild ***** guess) I added a 1/16 aluminum shim under the back of the egw base.
This shim measured .060 thick or another 60 minutes worth of included angle, thus overcoming the barrel droop.

When I zeroed it now at 50 yards I am left with nearly 120 minutes of up in my scope.

I carried it to my friends range which has metal targets to 1000 yards to give it a good testing.

It was too windy to really see what it could do but I was able to shoot it to 400 yards. Can you say wind sensitive!!!!! a gnat fart at that range would move the bullet a foot or more. I still have enough elevation to go another 100 yards or to 500. But ran out of light before geting to 500.
I would never consider shooting small game beyond the range the rimfire is gun enough for good kills, 50 yards or so, but for having fun, shooting long is fun and affordable.

A rough guess as to group size at the longer ranges would be as follows, this is not what the gun is capable of, but what I saw on that range day.
100-2"
200-5"
300-10"
400-20"
I know the gun is capable of better and I intend to see just what it will do over the coming months now if I can just sell my 1.5x5 leupold and get me a kidd trigger I think I will see it really come alive.

( At this time I think velocity variations may be the biggest cause of group size, the wind was a challenge, but when I would get a steady wind my group size horizontal would be half as big as the verticle, since I'm shooting from sandbagged rests and hold is not a very limiting factor it must be velocity variations, I have plans to spend some time in front of my chrono to see what kind of spreads my lot of ww dyna points is giving me.)

Just my 2cents on one version of a longrange 10/22, warm barrels and tight groups: JS aka 308

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by 308 : Today at 10:58 AM.
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Sounds like a bitchen build.

I have considered doing something very similiar myself with a 10/22, heavy barrel/tactical scope combo.

A low cost alterative to shooting my .308s

Sounds like the Dyna ammo is working well.
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

I know that better groups could be shot with better(more expensive) ammo but part of the appeal is low cost practice. It shoots the dyna point 1/2 to 3/4 inch at 50, occasionaly better, and this is good enough to see whats taking place OUT there. 308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here is where I encountered my first problem, I did not consider the barrel droop inherrent in the design of the 10/22. When I shot it, it was very close to being dead on at 50 yards with my scope adjustment being in or very near to the middle of the available travel, so after a calculated swag (scientific wild ***** guess) I added a 1/16 aluminum shim under the back of the egw base.
This shim measured .060 thick or another 60 minutes worth of included angle, thus overcoming the barrel droop.</div></div>
Good on you for realizing that barrel droop is an inherent byproduct of the 10/22's V-Block barrel attachment system and actually thinking about a way to help <span style="font-style: italic">compensate</span> for the barrel droop. Most of the 10/22 owners over on Rimfire Central are in denial about barrel droop.

IMHO, the best way to avoid barrel droop is to thread the barrel into the receiver. As long as the receiver face is square and the receiver and barrel are threaded concentricly barrel droop should not be a problem. A threaded barrel is also the best way to ensure that the barrel and receiver remain aligned shot-to-shot. Still, an aluminum receiver is not the best for supporting a heavy barrel. Even the billet-machined CNC'ed receivers, as nice as they are - are not as strong as a stainless or carbon steel receiver.

Also, if you want to free-float the barrel, the action needs more than the 10/22's single action screw on the front lug. Some people over at Rimfire Central have also pinned their receivers through stock towards the rear of the receiver. I consider this less-than-ideal because the pin(s) can introduce lateral force and stress on the sides of the receiver as well as the somewhat thin sides of the stock.

IMHO, the <span style="font-weight: bold">MOA 17-4 SS Receiver</span> has the most logical and effective secondary mounting point - the rear of the receiver. The MOA is cast and machined 17-4 Stainless Steel. It is not billeted, but then what do you expect for $180.00?

The only other manufacturer of steel 10/22 receivers that can incorporate the rear lug like the MOA Receiver uses is <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">L.H. Precision, LLC</span></span> in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. <span style="font-weight: bold">L.H.P.</span> manufactures a <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Custom 10/22 Action</span></span>, which can be manufactured from <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Fortal aluminum</span></span>, chromoly steel, or stainless steel. You can get the receiver with rear lug or without, and a flat (zero) rail on top or the "plain" top to accept any base available for the 10/22. These billet-machined, CNC'ed actions are badass with a price to match - $799.00 for steel and aluminum and $849.00 for SS. I spoke to Larry Huettel (L.H.P. owner) and he said that all parts are proprietary, so Ruger and aftermarket parts will not fit the L.H.P. receiver or bolt or vice versa. They seem to be the ultimate 10/22 receiver, though. Right now L.H.P. is only building full rifles - mostly magnums, but he will build a .22LR if you order it.

<span style="font-weight: bold">L.H. Precision Receiver with MOA-style rear lug and flat (zero cant) rail:</span>
LHPrecision1022ReceiverwRRLug.jpg


I just built-up a 10/22 from all aftermarket parts, and had the MOA receiver and Kidd SS barrel threaded together. Below are some photos and the specs on my new build. I shot in some 15 MPH winds today, and the best I could manage was 10 shots in .75" at 50 yards with Winchester Super-X High Velocity. However, the rifle is definitely capable of sub-MOA accuracy at 100 yards on a calm day.

MOACustom102258x6.jpg

MOACustom102238x6.jpg

MOACustom102228x6.jpg


<span style="font-weight: bold">75% Black/25% Dark Gray Swirl McMillan Sporter</span> - inletted for the MOA Receiver's rear lug by Randy at <span style="font-weight: bold">CPC</span> (Connecticut Precision Chambering). Randy installed a brass escutcheon for the rear lug screw, but I still had to do some additional inletting to fit because the front and rear lug holes did not line up. This held true for both the Kidd Trigger and an older factory (cast aluminum housing) Ruger trigger assembly. I also I enlarged the barrel channel to 1" to allow true free-floating of the barrel.

<span style="font-weight: bold">MOA 17-4 SS Receiver</span> - Bead-blasted finish, hand-stoned and polished bearing surfaces

<span style="font-weight: bold">Volquartsen CNC Machined Bolt</span> - fitted with Volquartsen CS Guide Rod Spring and <span style="font-weight: bold">Power Custom Competition Spring Guide</span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Kidd SS 20" Match Barrel</span> - Bead-blasted finish, shortened to 19.25" and threaded into MOA Receiver. Totally free-floating

<span style="font-weight: bold">Kidd Two-Stage Trigger - set to 1.5 lbs. Curved Black Blade</span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Kidd SS Receiver Pins</span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Kidd Bolt Buffer</span>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Tactical Solutions 15 MOA Picatinny Rail</span>

<a href="http://www.usoptics.com/accD.php?recordID=BBL-350" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: bold">U.S. Optics Rail Mounted Swivel Bubble Level - Contoured
</span></a>
Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14X 40mm A.O. w/Duplex Reticle - Matte

<span style="font-weight: bold">Leupold 1" LOW (.75") PRW Rings - Matte</span>

As soon as it arrives I'll be mounting a <span style="font-weight: bold">Falcon 4.5-14X 44mm FFP with ML16 Reticle with MIL/MIL adjustments</span> in <span style="font-weight: bold">Seekins Precision Rings</span>. Then I'll be able to dial and hold for 100, 200, and 300 yards with accuracy instead of best guesses.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Harris BRM-S</span> bipod with <span style="font-weight: bold">KMW Pod-Loc</span>

Keith
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

308,

I just got back from shooting out at the range today. We were shooting .22's today, 10/22's! I'm breaking in a 10 year old NIB 10/22T I purchased a few weeks ago.

I'm thinking of doing a write up on my 10/22T as I build it up to see just how far a 10/22T can go on the Ruger receiver and bolt. I plan to start with an original late '90's Ruger laminated stock and 20" Ruger "Hammer Forged" barrel 10/22T and see how it well it groups with various types of ammo. Then I'll make a single change and see what if any shooting improvements can be found. I'll start by installing the stock action into the new varmint/tactical stock from Bell & Carlson and try to find the best torque value for the action screw. Next I'll add a high-end trigger to see if this improves my ability to shrink group sizes. Next up will be to add a titanium firing pin and lightly radius the rear of the bolt, blueprint and polish the bolt and receiver's dynamic surfaces. Finally I'll have the Ruger receiver threaded and screw on a custom chambered and finished barrel starting with a 26" stainless steel Lothar Walther match competition barrel blank. Next I plan to test the rigidity of the Ruger receiver and confirm it can properly support a 0.920" barrel in this length. This is required so I can fix the rear of the receiver to the B&C stock with a stud in the cleaning rod hole which would allow me to fully free float the barrel with zero barrel contact points just like a normal centerfire rifle. If the Ruger receiver cannot properly support the full weight of the new 26" barrel I'll go the opposite way and fully bed the barrel in the forearm and free float the action in the stock.

But it's early yet and I only have 200 rounds through it so far and my initial efforts were hampered by very gusty winds today. I thought the gun was shooting really poorly as the groups were quite large initially but after the first 50 rounds were shot it got a whole lot better. After shooting 150 rounds it seems to have settled down quite a bit and the action has smoothed out quite a bit. All groups at 50 yards are well inside the X-ring now.

The initial break-in shots were taken using the stock 10/22T action in a B&C Varmint/Tactical 10/22 stock sitting on a Harris bi-pod with a TacSol picatinny base and Seekins 30mm high rings holding a Falcon 5.5-25x56FFP scope. Wow, what a blast the prototype Falcon 5.5-25x56FFP scope was to use. The adjustments are repeatable and easy to dial in, I like it! Once I see the group sizes settle down I'll revert back to the stock Ruger laminated stock and see what a really stock gun can deliver. I'll try to optimize the single action screw's torque to see what it likes best in the laminated stock.

The majority of the ammo used was the last of a 30 year old case (5,000 rounds) of Remington High Velocity. I also shot a fresh box of SK Standard Plus and some Winchester Super-X High Velocity all with 40gr round nose lead bullets. They all shot similarly well out to 50 yards once I dialed the scope for the difference in POI but the lower velocity rounds started to loose the battle of wind drift at 100 yards and by 200 yards the high velocity rounds were obviously more accurate for these windy conditions.

Anywho this is the plan, what do you all think?

Cheers!
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Something that i've been wondering that i'm not sure if anyone has tested. You talked about velocity variation of the ammunition which I can understand causing significant vertical stringing at extended ranges of the .22lr round. One thing i'm seriously curious about would require 2 chronos. The first at the muzzle end (10' or so), the other at 100m, or 150m. Why you ask? Since the bullets are swaged, I wonder if there is significant BC variances coupled with velocity spreads assisting in severely degraded accuracy at long ranges. My concerns could possibly have no basis, but from all my readings on this site, and others oriented towards the shooting of rimfire rifles at longer than typical ranges, I have never read a post about BC variations, or actual real world measurements.

Just curious as to whether somebody could chime in with their thoughts on this matter, or at least refer me to some online reading where this was tested out.

I would do it myself if I;

a. Had a .22, which at this time I don't, been shopping around for the right deal too, and working the wife about it too.

b. Had a chrono, let alone 2.

Branden
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SLEEVER</div><div class="ubbcode-body">and finaly end up how much money for that setup ? </div></div>

Trust me you don't want to know.
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SLEEVER</div><div class="ubbcode-body">like discuss in the secon thread 10/22 are lame....I mean for the same price you will never outchoot a bolt action.. never. </div></div>
No one ever said they would, or even that they can equal a bolt action.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SLEEVER</div><div class="ubbcode-body">and finaly end up how much money for that setup ? </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">SLEEVER</span>, even though you're a Hater, I'll tell you. With the Leupold and PRWs' $1,900.00 - but about $2,000.00 with the Falcon and Seekins. I figure the Predator 25X RF Repeater action I want to build on probably won't be available for the better part of a year, so I have an interesting semi-auto .22LR to play with. The Predator 25X RF repeater build will probably be $2,000.00 + S & B or Premier glass.

Keith
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dust_Remover</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Something that i've been wondering that i'm not sure if anyone has tested. You talked about velocity variation of the ammunition which I can understand causing significant vertical stringing at extended ranges of the .22lr round. One thing i'm seriously curious about would require 2 chronos. The first at the muzzle end (10' or so), the other at 100m, or 150m. Why you ask? Since the bullets are swaged, I wonder if there is significant BC variances coupled with velocity spreads assisting in severely degraded accuracy at long ranges. My concerns could possibly have no basis, but from all my readings on this site, and others oriented towards the shooting of rimfire rifles at longer than typical ranges, I have never read a post about BC variations, or actual real world measurements.

Just curious as to whether somebody could chime in with their thoughts on this matter, or at least refer me to some online reading where this was tested out.

I would do it myself if I;

a. Had a .22, which at this time I don't, been shopping around for the right deal too, and working the wife about it too.

b. Had a chrono, let alone 2.

Branden </div></div>

Branden,

I think there is plenty of accuracy in good modern .22LR ammunition these days. If you dig around on the net a bit I think you will see some folks have done some velocity testing and some ammunitions shows smaller variation in velocity than others. Of course this is just near the muzzle but overall I think the testing shows high quality .22LR ammo is nearly as good as high quality centerfire match ammo in terms of percentage of velocity variations. The Ruger 10/22 is a poor way to measure the potential accuracy of .22LR ammo due to the way this gun works. The .22LR bolt gun shooters are shooting nearly as well as upper end centerfire guns of similar types. This matches up well with the tested velocity variations seen in chrono testing.

The limiting factor with .22LR ammo is very low projectile weight and limited velocity of projectiles. You really can't fight physics which is why larger heavier bullets traveling at higher speeds are more accurate at greater distances and resist wind drift much better not to mention their higher stability due to gyroscopic forces. The limitations of .22LR ammo are much like any other caliber, due to the forces working on the projectile at some point they slow down and can no longer remain stable and start to wobble.

Cheers
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Aries64, Barrel droop... I ain't the sharpest tack in the box but, when you put a barrel in a receiver that has enough clearence for a slip fit and then clamp it at one point, in the case of the 10/22 the clamp being at the bottom it stands to reason that all the slack will be in the direction the clamp is pulling, this case its down hence barrel droop. Thats just the way my simple mind sees it.

Yao6 I see no reason your 10/22t will not shoot as good as or better than mine. The only hiccup I see in your plans is trying to hang a 26" barrel on the stock aluminum ruger receiver, I don't think it has enough meat for that, my 10/22 barrel is not free floated, it contacts the hogue stock for the full length but still shoots pretty well, It does not shoot with full bolt guns but its not meant to or trying to make it is probably just not feasible.
In any event keep us posted of your results. 308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

The longer the barrel on a .22 the slower the bullet will travel.
A 26 '' barrel will slow the bullet down considerably.
16'' will give you max. velocity.


Supersonic speed is bad for .22 accuracy - if the bullet slows back below the speed of sound before it gets to the target (and it does) and is destabilized by the turbulence as it passes through the trans-sonic zone. So benchrest .22 target shooters shoot subsonic ammo. (Centerfire starts out supersonic and stays there.)

Target rifles don't have long barrels just because of sight radius. Slowing the bullet a little by using a long barrel helps guarantee that the bullet does not reach the speed of sound.



"Officially, the speed of sound is 331.3 meters per second (1,087 feet per second) in dry air at 0 degrees Celsius (32 degrees Fahrenheit). At a temperature like 28 degrees C (82 degrees F), the speed is 346 meters per second."

From what I've read, ammo that's rated at 1061 f.p.s. like this box of Eley TENEX Ultimate EPS I'm looking at, or Wolf MT at 1085, might be affected beginning at a speed as much as 10% under the speed of sound. So 1085 minus 11 = 1074...making the Wolf MT sort of iffy for BR depending on the barrel length, actual bore dimensions, elevation, temp and humidity.

Remember, the crack of a high speed .22 is a shock wave that can upset a bullet in flight.

Ruger 77/22; Remington Standard Velocity .22 LR ammunition
Barrel Length/ Velocity
28 1095
26 1107
24 1119
22 1129
20 1138
18 1149
16 1157
14 1149
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Linedrive301ft,

Come ups in my gun with ww dnya-points and about a 1.75 scope above bore is:
50-0.0
100-6.5
200-24.25
300-48.0
400-78.0
500-114.0 This is in yards

The 500 has not been confirmed yet, I haven't got back out to verify it,but after playing with the bc and velocity of my ballistic program to match my actual results, it should be within a minute or two.

Later:308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Shooter65 have you actually witnessed this with hispeed 22 rimfire ammo?

I have seen accuracy go to pot with the 168 sierra mkbthp at a 1000 when it was fine at 700.

I have not seen this with 22 rimfire ammo, granted I'm not shooting anywhere near benchrest accuracy levels but I have seen a 22 that will shoot .5 inch at 50 yards still maintain 5 or so inches at 200 and 10 or so at 300.

where with the 168 match kings, you could bust a clay pidgeon 6 or 7 times out of 10 at 700 yards, you could not keep them on a 6 foot by 6 foot plate at 1000. But 175's would shoot at and around minute of angle.

Just wondering: 308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Sure have. .22's have to stay sub sonic and center fire have to be super sonic. Your centerfire with the 168's went below sub sonic and that is what is causing your accuracy problem.
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

But my 22's that were shooting .5 at 50 were hispeed, 1200, and I know they were subsonic before 100 and they still shot with a high degree of accuracy after and continueing far beyond passing thru the sound barrier.
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

I never said it would outshoot subsonic, I said I had seen hispeed still shoot accurately after dropping back through the sound barrier, I asked had you ever actually see accuracy of hi speed ammo go to pot like the 168 sierras did when they fell back thru the sound barrier because I have not. 308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

AMT Challenge Edtion 22LR,Shilen select stsainless match chamber, made by AMT custom shop. McMillan stock, stainless action with built in Weaver scope rail and an extremely fine Jewell trigger. The barrel length from the front of the receiver to the end of the barrel is 20.25" and the weight of the rifle is exactly 7 lbs. Action has been glass bedded to stock for increased accuracy.

amt100001.jpg


amt10001.jpg


amt20001.jpg


amt40001.jpg


amt50001.jpg


amt60001.jpg
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries64, Barrel droop... I ain't the sharpest tack in the box but, when you put a barrel in a receiver that has enough clearence for a slip fit and then clamp it at one point, in the case of the 10/22 the clamp being at the bottom it stands to reason that all the slack will be in the direction the clamp is pulling, this case its down hence barrel droop. Thats just the way my simple mind sees it.</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">308</span></span>, you don't give yourself enough credit - you are one of the few who not only realize and concede that the 10/22 has inherent barrel droop, but you also understand that as you tighten the V-Block screws the clamp is pulling down barrel down. I was in a hurry and in my haste did not take the time to fully explain the problem with the V-Block in my post above, but yes you are correct. The slip-fit barrel is only part of the problem - the primary problem is that the V-Block only contacts and bears upon the rear of the notch cut into the underside of the barrel, and this uneven pressure pulls the barrel down and causes the barrel to cant downward ("droop") as the V-Block screws are tightened. I've actually discussed this on other forums but people won't accept simple physics because then they'd have to admit that there are design flaws/limitations in their beloved 10/22's design.

Keith
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Aries64 thanks for the credit, I don't know that the design in itself is a flaw, but you do have to take steps to avoid running out of scope travel. And you sure do if you want to got beyond 100 yards or so.
Some one should make a scope base with 30-50 minutes or so of included angle for the 10/22 and this would solve the majority of the issues.
Later: 308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

Here's a question from an ignorant fellow:

If "barrel droop"is deemed to be a problem, why not bed the heavy barrel into the stock? Then locate, drill and tap two new 6-48 blind holes into the underside of the barrel, and use them to lock the barreled action in place. Discarding the factory action screw should allow the receiver to "float" with no further load on that flimsy dovetail barrel attachment.

That's what I have planned for my 10-22 T, but just don't have time to tackle it at the moment. I'm sure this is not a new idea. Anyone seen the results from such an approach?

Cheers... Jim
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

I'm no gunsmith but I'm sure that your method has merit, I myself did not want to make any changes to mine because it shot well enough like it is.
I don't see any problem with the droop as long as your aware of it, you just need 50 to 60 minutes of up angle in your base/ring combo over a threaded barrel receiver combo. In other words say with a remington 541 for example, a 20 minute base will get you to and probably past 100 yards, but the with the ruger 10/22 you need the 20 plus the addition al 50 or 60 to overcome the droop.
This should not apply to the ones with the barrel threaded to the receiver, here I'm just guessing because I have no personal experience with one. Just my opinion, its probably worth just what you payed for it. JS aka 308
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Just Jim</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a question from an ignorant fellow:

If "barrel droop"is deemed to be a problem, why not bed the heavy barrel into the stock? Then locate, drill and tap two new 6-48 blind holes into the underside of the barrel, and use them to lock the barreled action in place. Discarding the factory action screw should allow the receiver to "float" with no further load on that flimsy dovetail barrel attachment.

That's what I have planned for my 10-22 T, but just don't have time to tackle it at the moment. I'm sure this is not a new idea. Anyone seen the results from such an approach?

Cheers... Jim </div></div>
Jim, barrel droop is not a problem in and of itself. Rather, it is the resulting effect of barrel droop (a downward-angled barrel requiring the use of a canted base and/or significant Elevation turret adjustment in order to zero) where the problem lies. Bedding the barrel and free-floating the action is not the answer as that will have no effect on the downward-angled barrel.

Barrel droop typically requires the use of a canted base and/or a significant amount of elevation adjustment to zero at 50 yards. By the time you get to 100 yards many scopes are maxxed-out or close to max on the elevation (and, of course, this usually has an effect on the Windage). And maxxing either of the adjustments is never the best idea. Unless a scope has lots of elevation adjustment a canted base is usually required beyond 100 yards on a 10/22.

For lots of 10/22 shooters, shooting beyond 100 yards is of no concern. However, there are lots of others (myself included) who enjoy splashing 40 grainers on steel at at 200+.

I know that some people have free-floated the action while fully bedding the barrel, but I don't remember the results. You should check-out the threads over on Rimfire Central, although most over there are in denial about barrel droop on their rifles...

Keith
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aries64</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Just Jim</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a question from an ignorant fellow:

If "barrel droop"is deemed to be a problem, why not bed the heavy barrel into the stock? Then locate, drill and tap two new 6-48 blind holes into the underside of the barrel, and use them to lock the barreled action in place. Discarding the factory action screw should allow the receiver to "float" with no further load on that flimsy dovetail barrel attachment.

That's what I have planned for my 10-22 T, but just don't have time to tackle it at the moment. I'm sure this is not a new idea. Anyone seen the results from such an approach?

Cheers... Jim </div></div>
Jim, barrel droop is not a problem in and of itself. Rather, it is the resulting effect of barrel droop (a downward-angled barrel requiring the use of a canted base and/or significant Elevation turret adjustment in order to zero) where the problem lies. Bedding the barrel and free-floating the action is not the answer as that will have no effect on the downward-angled barrel.

Barrel droop typically requires the use of a canted base and/or a significant amount of elevation adjustment to zero at 50 yards. By the time you get to 100 yards many scopes are maxxed-out or close to max on the elevation (and, of course, this usually has an effect on the Windage). And maxxing either of the adjustments is never the best idea. Unless a scope has lots of elevation adjustment a canted base is usually required beyond 100 yards on a 10/22.

For lots of 10/22 shooters, shooting beyond 100 yards is of no concern. However, there are lots of others (myself included) who enjoy splashing 40 grainers on steel at at 200+.

I know that some people have free-floated the action while fully bedding the barrel, but I don't remember the results. You should check-out the threads over on Rimfire Central, <span style="color: #FF0000">although most over there are in denial about barrel droop on their rifles..</span>.

Keith </div></div>

Actually there is a known easy fix for barrel droop, you can find it here HawkTech Arms what you are looking for is the "Rimfire Technologies Custom Modified V-Block" it is actually talked about quite a bit at Rim Fire Central. Yes the <span style="font-style: italic">best</span> fix is to thread the barrel but then you would not have the advantage of easily changing barrels. Such as to the .17H2 or a longer or shorter barrel if you decide to do something different for a while and the modified V-Block does work quite nicely.

Along with a 15 MOA scope base you will easily be in the mix out to 300 yds or so using a good mill dot or specialized reticle type scope.

On my setup I use a 15 MOA base and Modified V-Block, my scope has 65 MOA of total elevation movement, sighted in at 100 yds i have 61.5 MOA elevation left to play with as needed as my scope is set 3.5 MOA from bottoming out. With my specialized reticle scope set at a 100 yd zero i can range to 325 yds without changing my turrets.

Aries64 to say that most people at RFC are in denial about barrel droop on our rifles is just plain not true. I have seen it talked about there more than anywhere else. There are a lot of people that just do not know what to ask about when they get involved with a 10/22. 10/22's are finicky have a few hangups along with a learning curve but if you look at a sticky or two like THIS one that's all about the modified V-Block then you will find out all kinds of info. To take a factory produced 10/22 beyond stock is not for everyone as it is a labor of love and takes some dedication. if a person is up to it i do not think you will find finer help then with the knowledgeable people at RFC.
 
Re: Longrange with a 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aries64</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Just Jim</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a question from an ignorant fellow:

If "barrel droop” is deemed to be a problem, why not bed the heavy barrel into the stock? Then locate, drill and tap two new 6-48 blind holes into the underside of the barrel, and use them to lock the barreled action in place. Discarding the factory action screw should allow the receiver to "float" with no further load on that flimsy dovetail barrel attachment.

That's what I have planned for my 10-22 T, but just don't have time to tackle it at the moment. I'm sure this is not a new idea. Anyone seen the results from such an approach?

Cheers... Jim </div></div>

Jim, barrel droop is not a problem in and of itself. Rather, it is the resulting effect of barrel droop (a downward-angled barrel requiring the use of a canted base and/or significant Elevation turret adjustment in order to zero) where the problem lies. Bedding the barrel and free-floating the action is not the answer as that will have no effect on the downward-angled barrel.

Barrel droop typically requires the use of a canted base and/or a significant amount of elevation adjustment to zero at 50 yards. By the time you get to 100 yards many scopes are maxxed-out or close to max on the elevation (and, of course, this usually has an effect on the Windage). And maxxing either of the adjustments is never the best idea. Unless a scope has lots of elevation adjustment a canted base is usually required beyond 100 yards on a 10/22.

For lots of 10/22 shooters, shooting beyond 100 yards is of no concern. However, there are lots of others (myself included) who enjoy splashing 40 grainers on steel at at 200+.

I know that some people have free-floated the action while fully bedding the barrel, but I don't remember the results. You should check-out the threads over on Rimfire Central, <span style="color: #FF0000">although most over there are in denial about barrel droop on their rifles..</span>.

Keith </div></div>

Actually there is a known easy fix for barrel droop, you can find it here HawkTech Arms what you are looking for is the "Rimfire Technologies Custom Modified V-Block" it is actually talked about quite a bit at Rim Fire Central.</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Dogbone</span>, I have been a reader over at Rimfire Central since it's inception, and I'm familiar with Skeeter's (Rimfire Technologies) products, including the "Rimfire Technologies Custom Modified V-Block", aka the <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">V-Block Barrel Stabilizer</span></span>, as well as the <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"Gunsmither" Elevation Compensating Barrel Block"</span></span>, and the modded v-blocks of <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"cletus hungwell"</span></span>. While they seem to work well for some people, others have had mixed results. This is most likely due to tolerance variations between guns - the amount of barrel droop seems to vary widely. Is the barrel port on the loose or tight side of the tolerance spectrum? Is it round? What about the barrel tenon? Is it undersize, oversize, or right on? Is it round? What about the v-block - is it symmetrically shaped?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes the <span style="font-style: italic">best</span> fix is to thread the barrel but then you would not have the advantage of easily changing barrels. Such as to the .17H2 or a longer or shorter barrel if you decide to do something different for a while and the modified V-Block does work quite nicely.</div></div>
I agree with you about barrel threading - IMHO the best way to eliminate barrel droop is to thread the barrel. As long as the receiver material is strong enough to support the barrel, the receiver face is square, and the receiver and barrel are concentrically threaded barrel droop should be non-existent. However, aside from the elimination of barrel droop, another key advantage of a threaded-in barrel is <span style="font-style: italic">consistency</span>. A rigidly-attached, threaded barrel will always remain in alignment with the receiver from shot-to-shot. The barrel-to-receiver alignment will not change, providing <span style="font-style: italic">consistency</span>. Consistency contributes to repeatability. People talk about how tight their barrel tenon-to-receiver fit is - how they had to heat the receiver and zap the barrel with 300 Below and then hammer the barrel into the receiver. Or how they shimmed the barrel and/or the v-block. That’s' all fine and well, but theres’ a lot of power released and vibration going-on when a .22 is fired. Why do you think that .22 Shorts are used to drive anchors into concrete? I'm not a physicist, but I'd say that the detonation a .22 Short probably has enough shock power to momentarily knock/vibrate/force a non-threaded, non-pinned barrel out of "the sweet spot". And that’s’ to say nothing about the pounding the breech takes as the bolt slams home, or the lighter, but still present jolt to the receiver's bolt stop (or bolt buffer if your rifle is so equipped) from the bolt.

<span style="font-style: italic">For me,</span> threading the barrel and losing the ability to change barrels and/or calibers (requiring a bolt swap) is a non-issue. I believe in using the right tool for the job - if this involves shooting a different caliber then so be it. However, <span style="font-style: italic">and this is just me</span>, I prefer to use a rifle dedicated to a specific caliber rather than swapping barrels and bolts back and forth to change caliber on a 10/22. Once I get a gun shooting to the point that I am satisfied that I can't get it any better I try not to mess with it. To that end I will gladly trade barrel and caliber swapability for the consistency and accuracy of a dedicated rifle with a threaded barrel.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Along with a 15 MOA scope base you will easily be in the mix out to 300 yds or so using a good mill dot or specialized reticle type scope.

On my setup I use a 15 MOA base and Modified V-Block, my scope has 65 MOA of total elevation movement, sighted in at 100 yds i have 61.5 MOA elevation left to play with as needed as my scope is set 3.5 MOA from bottoming out. With my specialized reticle scope set at a 100 yd zero i can range to 325 yds without changing my turrets.</div></div>
Thats' great that your rifle, base, and scope combination work for you. So, sighted-in at 100 yards you are 3.5MOA "from the bottom" and still have 61.5MOA of "Up" available. You are doing well indeed. Out of curiosity what scope are you using? If its’ a variable, has repeatable adjustments, and will easily get you <span style="font-style: italic">"in the mix out to 300 yds or so"</span> I'd say that your scope is probably beyond a typical <span style="font-style: italic">"good mill dot or specialized reticle type scope"</span>. I like to zero at 50, and have the ability to either dial or hold. The difference from 50 to 100 yards is roughly 2 MILs' for me.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries64 to say that most people at RFC are in denial about barrel droop on our rifles is just plain not true.</div></div>
With all due respect given to the folks over at RFC, I have to disagree with you about the barrel droop denial problem there. I said <span style="font-style: italic">most</span> - <span style="font-weight: bold">not all</span>, people over there are in denial about barrel droop and I stand by that statement. It was (and is) a bold statement to make but that is what I have seen after close to a decade of reading there. RFC is a great asset to the firearm community and there are some very friendly, knowledgeable, and helpful people there. The fact that <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">cletus hungwell</span></span>, <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Skeeter</span></span>, and <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">gunsmither</span></span> developed adjustable v-blocks and/or have suggested modifications to the factory v-block is proof that they acknowledge barrel droop. People knowledgeable about the 10/22 realize that there is indeed a barrel droop problem inherent with the 10/22's V-Block barrel attachment system, but they are in the minority.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have seen it talked about there more than anywhere else. There are a lot of people that just do not know what to ask about when they get involved with a 10/22. 10/22's are finicky have a few hangups along with a learning curve but if you look at a sticky or two like THIS one that's all about the modified V-Block then you will find out all kinds of info.</div></div>
Again, with all due respect given to the folks over at RFC, I submit that the reason that you have seen barrel droop <span style="font-style: italic">"talked about there more than anywhere else"</span> is because of the sheer number of 10/22 owners that frequent Rimfire Central. I'm sure you realize that the more people there are with a product in-hand (such as a 10/22) the greater the likelihood that issues will be raised, questions will be asked and addressed, and knowledge and information will be passed on. Rimfire Central was originally started by and for 10/22 owners.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To take a factory produced 10/22 beyond stock is not for everyone as it is a labor of love and takes some dedication. if a person is up to it i do not think you will find finer help then with the knowledgeable people at RFC.</div></div>
I wholeheartedly agree with your first sentence here. However, while there is some excellent information over at RFC, there is an equal amount of misinformation spread around by certain parts vendors (read site sponsors/advertisers) as well as their KoolAid-drinking fanboys.

Keith