- Thread starter apapig
- Start date
This will be my next rifle purchase. Looks to be a good deal.
Mounted up my Vortex 5-15x44 scope with the Weaver #12 bases and Warne Maxima QD medium height rings. Also swapped out the low profile comb for the included high profile/cheek rest comb (easy, just remove the rear sling stud, replace comb, and reinstall stud). The scope is probably overkill for this application. But how many of us have "just enough" glass. The medium height rings allow the bell housing to easily clear the rear sight, I didn't measure but the low height would likely work. I found everything to be near perfect mounting the rifle in a standing position. For prone, found my eye closer to the scope then I prefer to be comfortable, around 2 3/4", but recoil isn't going to be an issue here so I don't expect any problem. Also, scope was just a bit high, but am adding a Triad Tactical stock pad/pack which should make the height about perfect.
Only downside is that setting up the rings to mate with the location of the mounts as tapped in the receiver puts them in a location where they can't be used on a picatinny rail. I suppose you could look into re-tapping the receiver, but if you intend to move the scope around, that may be a problem for you. I'm using it as an excuse to buy a PST.
Only downside is that setting up the rings to mate with the location of the mounts as tapped in the receiver puts them in a location where they can't be used on a picatinny rail. I suppose you could look into re-tapping the receiver, but if you intend to move the scope around, that may be a problem for you. I'm using it as an excuse to buy a PST.
Just got this one set up with Tech Sights.
Will post a new thread with pics and review once I get a chance to shoot it.
Ruger American .22lr with Tech Sights by wareagle700, on Flickr
Will post a new thread with pics and review once I get a chance to shoot it.
Ruger American .22lr with Tech Sights by wareagle700, on Flickr
If you install the Weaver #12 bases, the distance between your rings will be 3". With Picatinny rail spacing at .396 (I think), approx. 2.8" or 3.2" is what would be needed. I have ordered the B-Square 3/8" rimfire rail mounts to replace the #12 bases. I sent an e-mail to the "Tell the CEO" link and customer service on the Ruger website to see if this was by design to not be Picatinny compatible, merely coincidence, or if I had misdrilled holes. Based on the fact they are exactly 3", I don't think it was the latter, and I am guessing not the former, leaving the "coincidence", an oversight in engineering. Anyway, I got an e-mail back within hours from an address signed Michael Fifer (Strum Ruger CEO for those that don't know) telling me great question and he would forward on to marketing and engineering for an answer. I got an answer from customer service (which I think was a reply to my separate customer service e-mail) telling me they would forward to marketing, but didn't actually answer my question.
Anyway, don't bother with the Weaver #12 bases if you intend to share with a Picatinny rail. Will report back on the B-Square bases when I get them, but they should work fine.
Anyway, don't bother with the Weaver #12 bases if you intend to share with a Picatinny rail. Will report back on the B-Square bases when I get them, but they should work fine.
Tag for later...
I thought this might be fun little critter getter if nothing else
I thought this might be fun little critter getter if nothing else
Holding out for a hardwood stocked, heavy barrel, threaded version.
Does anyone know if the barrels are threaded to the receiver or if they use a system more like the 10/22's V block?
The barrels are press fit and then pinned to the receiver. (like Anschutz)
Last edited:
Thanks for the info.... Sounds like they are replaceable but not very easily or conveniently.
So I've tried a couple different options for mounting a picatinny rail atop the rimfire rails and none have worked so far. Not much choice here other than to have a scope dedicated for this rifle or have the receiver re-drilled and tapped. Gotta give a thumbs down to Ruger on the design in this aspect.
^ much easier and cheaper to redrill the base of the rail to the receiver hole measurements. problem solved without putting extra holes in the receiver, and able to return to a factory configuration.
though close to each other, vs the old ruger ring to receiver cuts, IMO it gives more adaptability to use other rings and bases.
Amazon.com: .22 Dovetail To Weaver/Picatinny Rail Adaptor: Sports & Outdoors
Amazon.com: UTG Dovetail-To-Picatinny Low Profile Rail Adaptor, Black: Sports & Outdoors
B-Square 3/8 Aluminum Dovetail to Weaver-Style Adapter Matte
Weaver T-22 2-Piece Adapter Scope Base 3/8 Grooves to Weaver-Style
this by far is the best option (may have to do alittle modifying): Diversified Innovative Products - Product Detail - 3/8" Picatinny Scope Base - $29.97
though close to each other, vs the old ruger ring to receiver cuts, IMO it gives more adaptability to use other rings and bases.
Amazon.com: .22 Dovetail To Weaver/Picatinny Rail Adaptor: Sports & Outdoors
Amazon.com: UTG Dovetail-To-Picatinny Low Profile Rail Adaptor, Black: Sports & Outdoors
B-Square 3/8 Aluminum Dovetail to Weaver-Style Adapter Matte
Weaver T-22 2-Piece Adapter Scope Base 3/8 Grooves to Weaver-Style
this by far is the best option (may have to do alittle modifying): Diversified Innovative Products - Product Detail - 3/8" Picatinny Scope Base - $29.97
Thanks.
The first and last rails will not work as the 3/8" rails on the receiver are not continuous, you can't slide one of those rails on.
I purchased the B-Square but they are too big. There is only a limited amount of 3/8" rail available to the rear of the chamber.
The UTG low profile doesn't work as they top of the receiver is not flat, it is curved.
It looks like the T-22 adapter *may* work, hard to see from pics online but it does look curved inside. Does increase the height quite a bit, as well. I found an online measurement of .938" for each one, and if that is the case, they may be too big, as well.
The first and last rails will not work as the 3/8" rails on the receiver are not continuous, you can't slide one of those rails on.
I purchased the B-Square but they are too big. There is only a limited amount of 3/8" rail available to the rear of the chamber.
The UTG low profile doesn't work as they top of the receiver is not flat, it is curved.
It looks like the T-22 adapter *may* work, hard to see from pics online but it does look curved inside. Does increase the height quite a bit, as well. I found an online measurement of .938" for each one, and if that is the case, they may be too big, as well.
Last edited:
The Weaver T-22 will fit. I am not going to use it, however. I don't like the extra 1/2" of height, nor do I care for how it tightens to the rail making it very difficult to ensure the bases are centered on the receiver.
Bought a Vortex Crossfire as a dedicated scope for this rifle until someone comes out with a base that will provide picatinny spacing.
Still love this gun, kids (and I) have a blast (no pun intended) with it.
Bought a Vortex Crossfire as a dedicated scope for this rifle until someone comes out with a base that will provide picatinny spacing.
Still love this gun, kids (and I) have a blast (no pun intended) with it.
Checked a couple of them out at the store, along with the Marlin XT rifles. Ended up with a Savage 93FSS in 22 Mag. Liked the feel of it better and shoots pretty accurately.
Over on RFC, there are several reports of them outshooting Savages. They look pretty slick to me.
love mine.
i had it cut down to 16" and threaded for the sparrow.
10 shot 50yd group.
my only complaint is the stock. it is about as rigid as a pizza box. the trigger is way better than my remmy 5R!
i'm thinking about getting another one so i can go scopeless.
i had it cut down to 16" and threaded for the sparrow.
10 shot 50yd group.
my only complaint is the stock. it is about as rigid as a pizza box. the trigger is way better than my remmy 5R!
i'm thinking about getting another one so i can go scopeless.
