Rifle Scopes 30 MOA Base for 10/22

[akabaron]

Hey I have a Ruger 10/22 with a Tac/solution barrel and Tac/solution base and installed a Tasco 6-24 Varmint Mildot and can only sight it in at 25 yds as I run out of elevation. Any one have any info on where I can get a 30 or 40 MOA Base for it? All I can find is a throw lever one for 165.00
Thanks in advance

 

[galveston22]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

I have never heard of a 30 or 40 MOA base on a 10/22. Pretty sure its your scope that is causing the problem.

 

[Aries64]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DEATH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey I have a Ruger 10/22 with a Tac/solution barrel and Tac/solution base and installed a Tasco 6-24 Varmint Mildot and can only sight it in at 25 yds as I run out of elevation.</div></div>
Sounds like you have some major <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">10/22 Barrel Droop</span></span>. Take the time to read that thread, as well as <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Longrange with a 10/22</span></span>, <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">10/22 barrel droop adjustment</span></span>, and <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">10/22 threaded receivers and barrels</span></span> for starters. There is a lot of good info on the 10/22 on the Net', and some very good tips can be found on RFC (Rimfire Central). However, as with anything, there is also a good deal of misinformation and "diss"-information there as well, such as the myth that 10/22s' do not suffer from barrel droop, that if your barrel-to-receiver tenon fit is tight that you can't have barrel droop, that an adjustable V-Block is better than threading a receiver and barrel together, or that each 10/22 requires a different set of tweaks, ect. This is marketing propanganda from people who make adjustable V-Blocks and also happen to be paying advertisers over on RFC. Disagree with the powers-that-be and/or talk down on a forum sponsors product - or even question the effectiveness of one and you risk the ban stick.

In fact, <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">YAOG</span> here on the Hide'</span> and I (<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Aries64</span></span>) were banned on RFC after I posted <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">"Understanding "Barrel Droop" "</span></span> over at RFC for the benefit of the members there. It was clear that some of the people can't comprehend sound engineering principles and how they relate to and affect 10/22s' - just read the thread. Anyway, after disecting some people's posts with logic, basic engineering, and mechanical facts while those same people repeatedly posted without disproving anything I posted or even demonstrating that they understood what I had posted I was verbally attacked. I continued calmly, but later on <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Admin3</span></span> came to the rescue of the 10/22 fanboys and the bottom-line of the forum sponsors/paying advertisers, took a cheap-shot at me, and then locked the thread. How mature. Funny how paying advertisers and sponsors affect forums and unscrupulous moderators, isn't it?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DEATH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Any one have any info on where I can get a 30 or 40 MOA Base for it? All I can find is a throw lever one for 165.00

Thanks in advance.</div></div>
Sorry <span style="font-weight: bold">DEATH</span>, but the EGW 20 MOA Extended Picatinny rail has the greatest amount of MOA I know of for a 10/22. I'm running one of these which I shortened about 20mm to 145mm for objective bell clearance and aesthetics. I also have a Tactical Solutions 15 MOA 10/22 Picatinny Rail which I prefer, but in order to get the "extra" 5 MOA cant I had to go with the EGW unit.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: galveston22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have never heard of a 30 or 40 MOA base on a 10/22. <span style="font-weight: bold">Pretty sure its your scope that is causing the problem.</span> </div></div>
Possible, but the more likely culprit is barrel droop. Like it or not, all non-threaded 10/22 / 10/22 clones have some degree of barrel droop, period. Barrel droop is an inherent byproduct of the 10/22's V-Block barrel attachment system. Sure, the 1" tube doesn't help, but when you look at the V-Block it is not difficult to understand why the design results in drooping barrels. The V-Block has a single point of contact (the rearmost cut in the barrel notch) to secure the barrel to the Barrel Block on the action lug. The rest of the notch is un-loaded. As the two (2) V-Block screws are tightened into the action lug the barrel is pulled downward, inducing barrel droop.

If you think that a 10/22's barrel droop is insignificant, consider that there are 60 Minutes in 1 Degree - this means that even if your barrel only "droops" 1/2 degree you need a 30 MOA base to compensate for that 1/2 degree of droop (at 100 yards). And let me tell you - all of the V-Block-equipped 10/22s' I've seen in 37 years of shooting all had droop that was easily discernable to my eye. Thats no shit, and tells me that these guns had at least 1 degree of droop. 1 degree is 60 Minutes (60 MOA).

Keith

 

[YAOG]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DEATH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey I have a Ruger 10/22 with a Tac/solution barrel and Tac/solution base and installed a Tasco 6-24 Varmint Mildot and can only sight it in at 25 yds as I run out of elevation. Any one have any info on where I can get a 30 or 40 MOA Base for it? All I can find is a throw lever one for 165.00
Thanks in advance </div></div>

Hey DEATH,

You should be able to dial out to at least 200 yards if all is right. I can almost dial 300 yards with my bone stock 10/22T in a B&C Varmint/Tactical AJ32 stock using a EGW 20MOA base, Seekins rings and prototype Falcon 5.5-25x56FFP scope. This prototype Falcon 5.5-25x56FFP scope has just under 20mils of elevation adjustment if I dial max up I need to hold over 2-3mils to hit the 300 yard steel. Did your 10/22 zero past 25 yards before you installed the new the barrel? If not your old problem is obviously still a problem. If so read on.

Assuming your scope is not broken and that your TacSol base is installed the correctly and that the scope objective is not touching the barrel and all the other scope and action related mechanical are reasonably sound I suggest you go back to the begining. Double check your barrel installation and make sure that the barrel is pressed fully flush with the face of your receiver, if there is ANY gap start here and fix it first before moving on. Next make sure that you torque the V-block bolts to the specified torque. You don't mention what stock you have but chances are that you have some sort of stock style barrel support in the forearm of the stock. If there is no bump in barrel channel near the front of the forearm to support the barrel check for some sort of barrel support near the action/TD screw. If there is no barrel support in the forearm put one in the barrel channel. Start by cutting up a business card, 3 or 4 thicknesses will do, put them under the barrel near the center to outer third of the forearm. Tape them in place, this is just temporary to confirm the issue is the usual excessive barrel droop problem that all 10/22's have designed into them from Ruger. Next drop the action back into the stock and make sure that you have torqued the action/TD screw to about 25-30in/lbs. (inch/pounds, NOT ft/lbs.!) and go back and try again.

Whatever you do, if you used to be able to zero past 25 yards before installing the new barrel DO NOT rush out and buy some kludgey adjustable V-block kit or adjustable anything to support the barrel. You have some sort of part(s) or installation issue that is on the edge that needs to be resolved correctly if you have any hope of ending up with an accurate repeatable (well as accurate and repeatable as 10/22's go anyway) rifle. I suggest you find someone locally with 10/22 experience who knows what barrel droop is. Sadly the only way to fully correct barrel droop so you can avoid random changes in POI (point of impact) and random flyers is to thread your reciever and screw the barrel into it just like a centerfire rifle. Once you screw the barrel into the receiver you should be able to dial out to 300 maybe 400 yards depending on your scope's range of elevation adjustment, base MOA cant and ammo used.

HTH!

 

[akabaron]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

I am aware of Rugers barrel/receiver problem. No problem with the barrel install. The stock is a hogue which floats the barrel. The base on it is a standard one which is where I think the problem is. My friend had the same issue with his and He was using a Leupold 3-9 I found him a 30 moa base and fixed the problem. I just cant seem to locate one for me. I did order a burris ring set with inserts which can adjust I think up to 40 MOA. If that doesnt fix it will pick up a different base also. I dont think Ruger intended anyone to shoot past 100yds with a .22 Little did he know......

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

Similar problem with the same scope, but in my case, the distance limit was out at around 150yd. This is a Ruger problem, and not a Tasco problem.

Shimmed the rear of the Ruger slab-type base with a washer so 50yd zero was almost but not quite down at the bottom of the elevation adjstment range. Worked, then epoxy bedded the base with release agent on the receiver and grease on the base screws to maintain the slope without inducing any bad tendencies. The entire project took under an hour, using 5 minute epoxy.

This sort of thing is becoming a rather common technique for me.

Greg

 

[YAOG]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DEATH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am aware of Rugers barrel/receiver problem. No problem with the barrel install. The stock is a hogue which floats the barrel. The base on it is a standard one which is where I think the problem is. My friend had the same issue with his and He was using a Leupold 3-9 I found him a 30 moa base and fixed the problem. I just cant seem to locate one for me. I did order a burris ring set with inserts which can adjust I think up to 40 MOA. If that doesnt fix it will pick up a different base also. I dont think Ruger intended anyone to shoot past 100yds with a .22 Little did he know...... </div></div>

DEATH,

How did you confirm the barrel is installed correctly? You might try locking open the bolt and sighting down the barrel and seeing where your barrel is pointed at on the bolt face. Chances are the barrel is drooping and your barrel is pointed at the upper end of the headspace cut in the bolt face. You can also do this with a laser pointer if you have a small enough laser point spot. Look for the brightest hot spot on the bolt face when pointing the laser down the bore at the bolt face and note the brightest spot which indicates the alignment between the bore axis and receiver axis. If the spot is not dead center of the rim cutout this is your problem and you need to correct for excessive barrel droop.

AFAIK the Hogue OM stocks are NOT full floating stocks unless you removed the pressure pad. IIRC they have a bump/pressure pad in the barrel channel near the end of the forearm. Maybe your 10/22 action just needs a little taller bump/pressure pad and/or a little more torque on the action/TD screw to force the barrel into position. As you can imagine with the flexy Hogue OM stock if you need to do this to get your 10/22 to dial elevation past 25 yards your POI will be changing quite a bit as the stock changes position due to flex and temp changes.

HTH!

 

[akabaron]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

I will have to take a closer look at it. Needs to be pulled apart anyway to smooth out the trigger. Thanks for the info

 

[Dogbone]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

Death,
You do not need anything over a 15MOA base, the one from TacSol will work perfectly. You do likely have a problem with a bit of droop but this problem is easy to fix or it can be expensive if you listen to Aries.

A reliable, repeatable and easy fix is with an adjustable V-Block from Rimfire Technologies. There have been problems reported from people threading an aluminum receiver. notably it will stretch the threads of the aluminum caused by the battering of the bolt and result in your barrel being loose after a few thousand rounds. There have only been a few to report this however at this time.

Aries spent a couple of grand on his weapon (not including scope)and has a stainless receiver and as far as i can see he has done none of the work himself it was all farmed out. I am one among many who has done research purchased what I wanted then did the work myself. I have a very accurate weapon for half the cost including my scope.

I shoot mostly between 100 and 300yds with no problems. remember you are shooting a semi-auto 22 here, hitting gongs at 3 to 500 yards is not what the round was ever intended for but some of us do it just because its fun and we can.

The limiting factor on the 22 is the ammo period. the best you can do is to find a manufacturer of ammo that your weapon shoots well at 100 yards and weigh it for consistency. In any center fire weapon you can reload your own ammo tweak the ammo and gain sniper type accuracy and consistency that way and you will still have to do some tweaking on the weapon with triggers etc. with a 22 you must first find a good ammo for your weapon then tweak the weapon for best results to your ammo there is no other way. well unless you own a rimfire loading factory.

Aries you have been much less than forthcoming about your thread on the RFC site and why you were banned. I read the thread and while you had some good points I can see why they banned you there.

 

[YAOG]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Death,
You do not need anything over a 15MOA base, the one from TacSol will work perfectly. You do likely have a problem with a bit of droop but this problem is easy to fix or it can be expensive if you listen to Aries.

A reliable, repeatable and easy fix is with an adjustable V-Block from Rimfire Technologies. There have been problems reported from people threading an aluminum receiver. notably it will stretch the threads of the aluminum caused by the battering of the bolt and result in your barrel being loose after a few thousand rounds. There have only been a few to report this however at this time.

Aries spent a couple of grand on his weapon (not including scope)and has a stainless receiver and as far as i can see he has done none of the work himself it was all farmed out. I am one among many who has done research purchased what I wanted then did the work myself. I have a very accurate weapon for half the cost including my scope.

I shoot mostly between 100 and 300yds with no problems. remember you are shooting a semi-auto 22 here, hitting gongs at 3 to 500 yards is not what the round was ever intended for but some of us do it just because its fun and we can.

The limiting factor on the 22 is the ammo period. the best you can do is to find a manufacturer of ammo that your weapon shoots well at 100 yards and weigh it for consistency. In any center fire weapon you can reload your own ammo tweak the ammo and gain sniper type accuracy and consistency that way and you will still have to do some tweaking on the weapon with triggers etc. with a 22 you must first find a good ammo for your weapon then tweak the weapon for best results to your ammo there is no other way. well unless you own a rimfire loading factory.

Aries you have been much less than forthcoming about your thread on the RFC site and why you were banned. I read the thread and while you had some good points I can see why they banned you there.</div></div>

Dogbone,

So you decided to pop over to my link huh? Actually if he was listening to the RFC fanbois DEATH wouldn't need to buy a canted base at all because most of them only shoot at 25 yards. But we all know this is not the case when pushing past 50-100 yards unless you get really lucky or have switched stocks. But obviously DEATH has come up against the 10/22 barrel droop problem and wants to shoot past 25 yards. Sure to correct the problem DEATH can simply go buy an adjustable V-block and try to screw the heck out of the tiny litle screw in an attempt to push the barrel up enough to get his scope to a reasonable POI. But given that his barrel droop is so excessive and the scope he is using has a somewhat limited amount of elevation adjustment his options will be less attractive once he realizes he still can't zero much past 100 yards even with an adjustable V-block cranked up to within an inch of its' life.

To the person who had problems with the threads of their 10/22 receiver getting loose after only 5,000 rounds I submit that the gunsmith who performed the work did not use an appropriate amount of torque when screwing in the barrel. Additionally the actual threading of the receiver and barrel may not have been up to snuff, maybe the treading was poorly done or sized incorrectly or they may not have used the correct class of thread for the job at hand. Maybe the owner removed and reinstalled the barrel himself and damaged the recevier and wanted to blame someone other than himself. Do you know the owner of the 10/22 that pounded out his receiver? Do you know the gunsmith who did the work? Did you see the receiver in question to assertain how the threads failed? There are SO many possibilites here and none of them are under our direct control or observation so all of it is just speculation hearsay and second hand information found by somebody on the internet about what someone else heard about some other guys gun, at this point are you sure it was even a 10/22?

So let me get this straight, you looked at the ads for 10/22 parts. Then you read what other folks were bolting on to their 10/22's, then you ordered the same parts they did and bolted them to your 10/22 just like everybody else and then you tweaked and tweaked and tweaked your 10/22 to get it to shoot right. So how does bolting on a few simple parts makes you somehow better than Aries64? That's a funny one Dog (man I crack myself up)!

Aries64 had a 10/22 that he had bolted all the same old stuff you did and a few more little bits and found the results wanting and inadequate for accurate precision long range shooting. I shot his old 10/22 and while it was impressive for a 10/22 in terms of a .22LR boltgun or centerfire it still had a long way to go. Aries64 actually researched the problems he had with his original 10/22 over a period of many months. After talking to various gunsmiths and others with similar interests in precision shooting plotted a sort of different course of action and specified what he though would be an outstanding 10/22 in terms of long distance precision shooting. Then Aries64 sent his MOA 10/22 parts collection (MOA receiver, Kidd barrel, McMillan stock, Kidd trigger, VQ bolt etc.) to Randy at CPC one of the most respected gunsmiths specializing in custom 10/22 work in the country and had the work performed to his specifications. Even though Randy did the gunsmithing work Aries64 still had the barreled action in and out of the McMillan stock about a million times checking this and that and found the stock needed to go back to McMillan for some fine tuning of the inletting and action screw escution hardware. So obviously Aries64 has a few more hours into his 10/22 than you think he does. The resulting MOA 10/22 has shot inside 2" (that's using OUTSIDE measurement not CTC) at 200 yards with inexpensive Super-X ammo and he thinks it may be able to do better with good air. I really think that you have no idea what a precision 10/22 can do unless you are going to claim that your 10/22 can shoot under 1/2 MOA at 100 yards like Hickerx2 claims his 10/22 can shoot. Now that would be a heck of a 10/22 IMO, a heck of a 10/22 and like I posted to Hickerx2 I would PAY to see a 10/22 shoot a few groups like that!

In order to find the limits of a cartridge you have to had a weapon capable of better performance then the cartridge and a stock 10/22 out of the box is far from better than the .22LR cartridge. It takes a lot of work on a 10/22 to get there. The reason the .22LR cartridge is so easy to find the limits of is because the .22LR is a very low performance round relatively speaking. I mean do the math, the 223 is basically the same caliber and bullets can be had in the same 40-60grain weight range but a 40grain 223 round comes out of the barrel at over 3.5 times the velocity of the .22LR round and a really bad BC to boot! Give the .22LR a break.

That RFC thread got snippy because many of the 10/22 fanbois were attacking Aries64 even though the thread was very informative and he had posted excellent information found out the hard way not through speculation. Aries64 was not just drinking the Kool-Aide and buying into the same old song and dance that barrel droop is not an issue even though the number one best selling cheap part sold for the 10/22 is an adjustable V-block or adjustable bedding kit to correct barrel droop. Given the number of parts being sold for the 10/22 to "fix" these so called non-existant problems even the fanbois can't argue with the facts. The whole RFC site seems to be based on advertising and promoting the services and parts of RFC advertisers who provide gunsmithing services and sell parts fixing these nonexistant problems with the 10/22. The numbers don't lie and when faced these facts the 10/22 fanbois have nothing to respond with seeing how this is the truth of the matter so they go cry that they got their feeling hurt and complain to an admin to lock the thread. Of course the admins know who pays to keep the lights on and promptly lock the thread as soon as the main advertiser posts his position which can never be rebutted due to the lock.

Now many folks on RFC choose to remain ignorant about issues with 10/22 design flaws but now some are starting to listen to how to do things better with their 10/22's. The fainbois promote continued ignorance so they can feel good about their themselves and slap each other on the back telling each other how cool they are and how well they are shooting at 25 yards or maybe even 50 yards.

I'd rather have the truth and you don't need to sugar coat it. As to the cost I'll find a way to play or go elsewhere. But what I don't want is to find that the stuff folks say works is not all it's cracked up to be after spending the money and having to tweak and tune the thing only to have to go the slightly more expensive path afterall. Like I've posted before I'd rather have a known good method requiring no adjustment to make it shoot and pay for quality skilled gunsmithing work upfront with a known outcome than the cheap easy to buy parts that yield hard to duplicate results and still in need of fine tuning in the field.

HTH!

 

[Aries64]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Death,
You do not need anything over a 15MOA base, the one from TacSol will work perfectly. You do likely have a problem with a bit of droop but this problem is easy to fix or it can be expensive if you listen to Aries.

A reliable, repeatable and easy fix is with an adjustable V-Block from Rimfire Technologies.</div></div>
A klugey $23.95 add-on that places stress on the barrel in two directions simultaneously is not what I'd call a "fix" - thats a bandaid.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There have been problems reported from people threading an aluminum receiver. notably it will stretch the threads of the aluminum caused by the battering of the bolt and result in your barrel being loose after a few thousand rounds. There have only been a few to report this however at this time.</div></div>
So, according to you, if you thread a barrel into a 10/22 aluminum receiver <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">"...it will stretch the threads of the aluminum caused by the battering of the bolt and result in your barrel being loose after a few thousand rounds."</span></span>

However, this same "battering" of the bolt upon the breech face will not cause any of these issues? (a) any displacement/misalignment of the bolt face to breech face, which can lead to misfires and/or inconsistent ignition which may result in inconsistent POI, (b) any displacement/misalignment of the bolt face to breech face, which can lead to FTF and/or FTE, (c) any change of bearing angle or bearing pressure exerted upon the barrel by the hex screw of the RFT Adjustable V-Block, which may result in inconsistent POI, (d) any change in the harmonics of the barrel caused by a change of bearing angle or bearing pressure exerted upon the barrel by the hex screw of the RFT Adjustable V-Block, which may result in inconsistent POI.

I'd say that the RFT Adjustable V-Block is one amazing, physics-defying feat of engineering, especially at $23.95 from someone who has publicly stated that his Adjustable V-Block is better, more consistent, and more accurate than threading a barrel and receiver together and that threading a barrel and receiver together introduces problems. However, in the same breath he refused to mention any of these "problems" he spoke about.

I may be wrong, but I submit the possibility that the threads were "stretched" by too much torque being applied to the receiver/barrels threads.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries spent a couple of grand on his weapon (not including scope)and has a stainless receiver....</div></div>
Actually, it was about $1,500.00 including shipping all parts back and forth, and about $1,900.00 with a Leupold Vari-X III 4.5-14X 40 A.O. and PRW Rings. My MOA 10/22 is accurate enough to shoot 2" groups on calm days using Winchester T22 (not even the Wolf Match). And thats OVERALL group size, NOT CTC.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...and as far as i can see he has done none of the work himself it was all farmed out.</div></div>
You're absolutely right - I didn't do any of the machining myself. I do not own nor do I care to own and operate the type of precision machining tools necessary to machine and thread receivers and barrels. Instead, I did my research, bought the parts I needed and then hired an experienced professional who has the proper equipment and tools perform the machine work.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am one among many who has done research purchased what I wanted then did the work myself.</div></div>
Congratulations on installing your Adjustable V-Block and slip-fit barrel yourself.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have a very accurate weapon for half the cost including my scope.</div></div>
I also have a very accurate Ruger 10/22 that shoots sub-1/2" at 50 yards. That one hasn't had any machine work, but I did tweak a few things. All told, about $1,000.00 including a Leupold scope, Tac Sol 15 MOA Rail, and Seekins Rings.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I shoot mostly between 100 and 300yds with no problems. remember you are shooting a semi-auto 22 here, hitting gongs at 3 to 500 yards is not what the round was ever intended for but some of us do it just because its fun and we can.</div></div>
I agree that the 10/22 was never designed for long range accuracy, but in calm conditions I can and do smack the Desert Ram in the head at 300 yards with consistency.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The limiting factor on the 22 is the ammo period. the best you can do is to find a manufacturer of ammo that your weapon shoots well at 100 yards and weigh it for consistency. In any center fire weapon you can reload your own ammo tweak the ammo and gain sniper type accuracy and consistency that way and you will still have to do some tweaking on the weapon with triggers etc. with a 22 you must first find a good ammo for your weapon then tweak the weapon for best results to your ammo there is no other way. well unless you own a rimfire loading factory.</div></div>
So, forget about sound engineering principles, receiver faces being square with barrels, barrel and bore concentricity, and trying to achieve excellence? Don't bother trying to eliminate as many equipment variables as possible with the end result being that you have a better ability to isolate "flyers", enabling you to focus on improving your technique? Instead, lets just blame <span style="font-style: italic">all</span> our misses on the ammo?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aries you have been much less than forthcoming about your thread on the RFC site and why you were banned. I read the thread and while you had some good points I can see why they banned you there.</div></div>
<span style="font-style: italic">"Much less than forthcoming"?</span> Who are you trying to fool here? Below I have provided a direct link to the thread, and I feel confident that any rational, objective-minded person who visits RFC and reads the thread from beginning to end will consider my original post detailed and well thought-out, and that I answered accurately and calmly, queries and emotional outbursts from several posters who tried to discredit what I said with insults. I raised the ire of some RFC advertisers/sponsors, which in turn brought in <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Admin3</span></span>.

I heartily encourage anyone reading this to check-out my <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">"Understanding Barrel Droop"</span></span> thread over at RFC and to decide for yourselves. I was definitely banned from RFC for being a "troublemaker" - the definition of <span style="font-style: italic">troublemaker</span> at RFC apparently being someone who speaks about products and machining honestly, trying to impart knowledge to other 10/22 owners instead of denying the advantages precision machining and parroting talk that someone else said or read somewhere, all the while stating that a $23.95 Adjustable V-Block is superior to precision machining...

<span style="font-style: italic">"The truth does not fear investigation"</span> - <span style="font-weight: bold">HuDisCo</span> web site

Keith

 

[Dogbone]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Dogbone,

So you decided to pop over to my link huh? </div></div>

LOL Well in a word yes.

Sorry to ruin yours and Aries line of facts and BS over here but the OP deserves another view point that is based on facts where he will not have to spend thousands to get a 10/22 to shoot accurately.

Frankly YAOG you and Aries keep getting your threads closed not because what you are saying about threading the receiver and barrel are wrong but because both of you have been rude know-it-all jerks and tell everyone who does not follow your line to the T that they are idiots etc for not taking your rants as gospel. There are some extremely talented engineers and gunsmiths over there who have put a lot into making the little 10/22 preform well beyond its intended design. there are also a good number of us at RFC that shoot these Hot Rodd 22's reliably and accurately at 100 yards and beyond with these engineered fixes that supposedly do not work according to you.

When both you and Aries were asked to prove that these other fixes did not work by an engineer neither of you could. Instead you just write incredibly long winded post with no facts. You attempt to try and force your point of view on everyone by tearing apart other peoples post and propping them up to force your point or you simply bash them because they did not tow the line to your whim. You are a true internet bully. The other thing I have noticed, you are pretty good at taking other peoples post and making the valid points they make look like your own, I'm almost impressed.

Sorry Death but you deserve another view on your problem that is not so incredibly slanted. I encourage you to research. look at all the options available to you and find your own way on this, only then will you make a knowledgeable decision. I would ask you to contact skeeter HERE for a start and ask him all the questions you want. He will give you honorable straight forward answers based on years and several <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="color: #FF0000">HUNDRED</span></span> builds of experience.

 

[YAOG]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 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: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Dogbone,

So you decided to pop over to my link huh? </div></div>

LOL Well in a word yes.[</div></div>

Cool. When I posted on RFC there are people with 10/22's who could not zero much past 25 yards and I suggested that barrel droop could be part of the problem Gunsmither (who by the way sells adjustable 10/22 V-blocks, just keep following the money...) challenged me to post a link to even one of these people he says don't exist. I suggested that Gunsmither, he being so un-helpful and all in previous posts look in the same places I did to find these posts. I even posted links to the RFC Advanced search and Google pages to help him do his own research which is what Skeeter answered when asked for details about the problems he claims he's found in testing of 10/22 receivers with barrels screwed into them. I guess Gunsmither didn't find it as funny as I did that one of the advertisers didn't like having it turned around on them. Then I posted a message to Gunsmither with a link to this fellow's problems here on the Hide.

Then a really funny thing happened in that thread, an admin removed all of the above mentioned posts in the thread including the link to one of these imaginary people with barrel droop! I guess the RFC admins don't like it when you spread information that backs up a dissenting POV of their advertisers or links to other useful sites that may not agree with them (RFC and their advertisers) and may even contain factually useful information on topic.

The RFC admins are like Nazi Germany or Communist China trying to constantly hide, eliminate and alter the record to suite their needs before locking them out. Posting experiences and facts about issues and problems with the 10/22 and encouraging people to challenge and think for themselves, posting a differing POV and easy to demonstrate ideas on RFC can get you banned if they don't go along with the wishes of their paying advertisers. They even alter the threads before closing them to make it look nice and to the advantage of the advertisers and parts makers who pay the bills. Hey, I got banned twice for posting about a basic issue with the 10/22 design and I did not see a single one of the advertiser's fanboys get the same treatment after they whined and whined in the thread and calling me all manner of unpleasant things both publicly and privately while not even trying to add to the legit discussion and topic of the thread.

Oh well I guess I'll just have to go make a new RFC login, maybe "hesback." Look for me!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Sor<<Snipped>>rience. </div></div>

I think Aries64's replies will do just fine here.

Cheers/Chip

 

[akabaron]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

Thanks for the xtended info. Dont think I will be spending a lot on the Ruger as thats what my other rifles are for.The whole reason behind the .22 is their fun and cheep to shoot. I would like to keep it that way. I got my EGW base today and Burris Rings yesterday, tore the gun down completely on Tue and also smoothed out the trigger. Hopefully I can make it out to the range next week. Friday and Saturday it is supposed to be 116 deg here and if it stays like that it will be a while before I pull the trigger on the Ruger.

 

[Aries64]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 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: YAOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Dogbone,

So you decided to pop over to my link huh? </div></div>

LOL Well in a word yes.

Sorry to ruin yours and Aries line of facts and BS over here but the OP deserves another view point that is based on facts where he will not have to spend thousands to get a 10/22 to shoot accurately.</div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Dogbone</span>,

You quoted <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">YAOG</span></span>, and he has responded. However, since you addressed both of us and have inaccurately called us "BS"ers' I will respond to your BS as well.

<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">First of all</span></span>, something I have noticed about you is that <span style="font-weight: bold">YOU</span> frequently avoid replying to comments and answering questions that are asked of you - and that if and when you respond you will try to spin things your own way and/or change the subject, never addressing the substance of what is being discussed or producing any evidence against what others have said.

Not unlike <span style="font-weight: bold"> <span style="font-style: italic">Post #1230776</span> </span>, which is four (4) posts above this one

<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Secondly</span></span>, it is <span style="font-weight: bold">YOU</span> who is running a line of BS here. It is actually <span style="font-weight: bold">FACT</span> it is neither my (<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Aries64</span></span>) viewpoint nor <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">YAOG</span></span>'s viewpoint that it costs thousands of dollars to get a 10/22 to shoot accurately. Also <span style="font-weight: bold">FACT</span> is that neither I nor YAOG have said or implied that people "have to spend thousands to get a 10/22 to shoot accurately". Another <span style="font-weight: bold">FACT</span> is that I have never said V-Block-equipped 10/22s' are inaccurate - both here on the SH and over on RFC I have said that many accurate 10/22s' have been built on factory Ruger receivers using the standard V-Block and a regular, slip-fit barrel. I've said that with conviction and with several decades of shooting experience that includes shooting a bunch of stock and "modified" 10/22s' - this is also <span style="font-weight: bold">FACT</span>.

Some 10/22s', including <span style="font-weight: bold">YAOG</span>'s 10/22T shoot very well with a simple stock change (YAOG's 10/22T wears a Bell & Carlson Varmint / Tactical), while others need a lot more than that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Frankly YAOG you and Aries keep getting your threads closed not because what you are saying about threading the receiver and barrel are wrong but because both of you have been rude know-it-all jerks and tell everyone who does not follow your line to the T that they are idiots etc for not taking your rants as gospel.</div></div>
Oh, so it wasn't things like me saying:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aries64</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
"<span style="font-style: italic">As a method of attaching a barrel and receiver together</span>, a threaded connection is superior to a V-Block system for a multitude of reasons:

Shot-to-shot, the receiver-to-barrel alignment will always be consistent and true

Shot-to-shot, the bolt face-to breech face will always be consistent and true

Shot-to-shot, the extractor slot will always be in exactly the same place shot-to-shot and in-line with the extractor

Shot-to-shot, the barrel angle will always be consistent a consistent zero (free of barrel droop)</div></div>
As long as proper machining procedures are followed (SOP for a professional gunsmith) these relationships will always remain consistent/static when a barrel and receiver are threaded together as a single, rigid unit. Obviously, the bolt face-to-breech face relationship is dynamic while the bolt is in motion.

Consistency in the above cannot be guaranteed when a V-Block, adjustable or not, is used.

Rude? Again, I was not (one of several) posters screaming insults while adding nothing constructive. People just can't stand hearing the truth - that from a engineering design standpoint the 10/22 has issues. Sure, its' a great, inexpensive plinker but there is a lot of room for improvement.
<a href="http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2398064&posted=1#post2398064[b" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="font-style: italic">
<span style="font-weight: bold">"Understanding Barrel Droop"</span></span></a> was doctored to the disadvantage of <span style="font-style: italic">YAOG</span> and myself, locked, then we were both banned. So much for honest, open, and free discussion. Anyone who reads through the thread can see that I was very calm and rather polite - especially considering that I was under attack pretty much as soon as I replied to the first post.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are some extremely talented engineers and gunsmiths over there who have put a lot into making the little 10/22 preform well beyond its intended design.</div></div>
I know, I had some machining work done by Randy at CPC. IMHO, the accuracy and consistency demonstrated by my MOA 10/22 is a testament to Randy's machining skills and well as how well a threaded barrel and receiver combination work when proper machining procedures are executed with precision by a professional with the right tools and equipment for the job.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">there are also a good number of us at RFC that shoot these Hot Rodd 22's reliably and accurately at 100 yards and beyond with these engineered fixes that supposedly do not work according to you.</div></div>
"A good number" - hhmmm...I don't know what that number is, but from what I've seen people over at RFC who shoot to 100 yards, let alone beyond 100 yards, appear to be in the minority. Maybe there are more people who use multiple names between RFC and SH than <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Skeeter27Red</span></span>, (<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">aka HodRod9mm</span></span> here on the Hide'). <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Skeeter27Red/HotRod9mm</span></span> has been very quiet here about the RFC fiasco, as have I in an attempt to keep that BS from migrating here.

Also, I haven't said that adjustable V-Blocks don't work. However, I have said that they are bandaides and that "<span style="font-style: italic">As a method of attaching a barrel and receiver together</span>, a threaded connection is superior to a V-Block system for a multitude of reasons:..."

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When both you and Aries were asked to prove that these other fixes did not work by an engineer neither of you could.</div></div>
IIRC, that was after <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Skeeter27Red/HotRod9mm</span></span> stated that his Adjustable V-Block is more consistent, accurate, and reliable than a threaded barrel/receiver combination, and that threading a barrel and receiver together actually introduces problems. Of course, in a pre-emptive measure a refusal was made to even mention any of these "problems" alledgedly introduced by threading a barrel/receiver together. YAOG was told to <span style="font-style: italic">"Go pound sand"</span>.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Instead you just write incredibly long winded post with no facts.</div></div>
No facts? Your comprehension and view of "facts" is truly selective. Physics, mechanical certainty, and an examination of the 10/22's design bear out many facts in my <span style="font-style: italic">"incredibly long winded post with no facts".</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You attempt to try and force your point of view on everyone by tearing apart other peoples post and propping them up to force your point or you simply bash them because they did not tow the line to your whim.</div></div>
Actually, I like to break posts into individual statements and ideas and respond to those statements and ideas in turn, rather than running everything together. This makes it clear who I am addressing, what part or parts of a post I am referring to, and makes it easier for everyone, <span style="font-style: italic">including the person I am addressing</span> to follow the reasoning and train-of-thought, should they actually read the post.

If it makes someone uncomfortable to see their own words quoted and responded to thats' their issue, not mine. - <span style="font-style: italic">"The truth does not fear investigation"</span> - <span style="font-weight: bold">HuDisCo</span> web site

Quoting someone directly is also better than generically replying to a thread because it prevents replies from being directed to the wrong person or persons in a thread. This is very common on web sites and is more often than not the rule rather than the exception, including the SH and RFC.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are a true internet bully.</div></div>
I don't know whether you are addressing <span style="font-style: italic">YAOG</span> or me, (<span style="font-style: italic">Aries64</span>) - but once again you are confused by your own BS. Neither <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">YAOG</span></span> or I (<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Aries64</span></span>) took cheap shots at others, and cleaned-up posts, then locked threads so we could not respond. Someone with ADMIN powers did that. <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Admin3</span></span>.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The other thing I have noticed, you are pretty good at taking other peoples post and making the valid points they make look like your own, I'm almost impressed.</div></div>
Again, I don't know whether you are addressing <span style="font-style: italic">YAOG</span> or me, (<span style="font-style: italic">Aries64</span>) but here is more of your BS - neither <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">YAOG</span></span> or I (<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Aries64</span></span>) do this. We speak our own words which is why we got banned for speaking the truth. If we do use someone else's words we quote them.

Something I have noticed is that you frequently avoid replying to comments and answering questions that are asked of you, such as four (4) posts above this one <span style="font-weight: bold">(<span style="font-style: italic">Post #1230776</span>)</span>.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogbone</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sorry Death but you deserve another view on your problem that is not so incredibly slanted. I encourage you to research. look at all the options available to you and find your own way on this, only then will you make a knowledgeable decision. I would ask you to contact skeeter HERE for a start and ask him all the questions you want. He will give you honorable straight forward answers based on years and several <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="color: #FF0000">HUNDRED</span></span> builds of experience. </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">DEATH</span></span>, maybe <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">Skeeter27Red/HotRod9mm</span></span> will tell you about some of the problems that are introduced when high-end action parts are used and proper, precise machine work is performed by a skilled professional when a 10/22 receiver and barrel are threaded together. More likely, he'll tell you to <span style="font-style: italic">"Go pound sand"</span> or something else along those lines.

<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Dogbone</span></span> - there is a distinction that needs to be drawn between a cheap, kluge bandaid add-on that is sold to hapless 10/22 owners under the guise that this simple $23.95 part is actually superior to a properly machined & threaded 10/22 barrel/receiver unit. It is this distinction that you conveniently exclude so often. So, why don't <span style="font-weight: bold">YOU</span> start using facts instead of trying to spread more of your BS around.

Keith

 

[akabaron]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

Well, installed my 20 moa base and the Burris rings with a + 20 on the rear and a -20 on the front rings so gave me a total of 60 moa. Got on site @ 50yds with elevation almost bottomed out then moved out to 100yds without a problem. Then started playing around with and was hitting Gopher sized steel @ 320 yds. Had to increase 88 clicks of elevation from the 100yd zero.Still had a long way to go before I ran out of adjustments on elevation and never got close. All and all was pretty dam fun and shot up around 500rds before it got too hot. Left and temp was around 106 deg.

 

[Dogbone]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DEATH</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, installed my 20 moa base and the Burris rings with a + 20 on the rear and a -20 on the front rings so gave me a total of 60 moa. Got on site @ 50yds with elevation almost bottomed out then moved out to 100yds without a problem. Then started playing around with and was hitting Gopher sized steel @ 320 yds. Had to increase 88 clicks of elevation from the 100yd zero.Still had a long way to go before I ran out of adjustments on elevation and never got close. All and all was pretty dam fun and shot up around 500rds before it got too hot. Left and temp was around 106 deg.

</div></div>


Nice looking weapon and some nice shooting with an inexpensive fix. Gopher sized targets at 320, sounds like your having too much fun!! let us know how you do at 400.

 

[kombayotch]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

EGW will re-machine the base on their rail to any MOA you want for an additional $20. I just ordered one with a 60 MOA taper. Even after correcting the barrel droop, I still needed 37 MOA with the scope maxing out. 60 brings me down to a little over 1 revolution away from it bottoming out, has me working right in the center range of adjustment.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aries64</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If you think that a 10/22's barrel droop is insignificant, consider that there are 60 Minutes in 1 Degree - this means that even if your barrel only "droops" 1/2 degree you need a 30 MOA base to compensate for that 1/2 degree of droop (at 100 yards). And let me tell you - all of the V-Block-equipped 10/22s' I've seen in 37 years of shooting all had droop that was easily discernable to my eye. Thats no shit, and tells me that these guns had at least 1 degree of droop. 1 degree is 60 Minutes (60 MOA).</div></div>

1 degree raises the muzzle 0.279" at 16", no adjustable V-block is going to crank it up that much... Correcting my barrel droop only added 3-4 MOA of elevation.

 

[Sandbogg]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

I did like Greg, started with a 20 moa egw and installed 6 playing cards as shims in the back and bedded the rail with Acra glass, now it sits up 60 moa which gest me to 500 yards with a 130 moa scope.The six cards gained 45 moa.
I will be doing do all my 22s this way.
(I did have to get some longer screws)

Sandbogg

 

[kombayotch]

Re: 30 MOA Base for 10/22

I was going to do the shim and bed trick, but then I though: what the hell, can't hurt to ask if the rail maker will customize... They do, and for $20 it isn't worth my time to do it myself.