The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 15, 1999, 10:58 PM   #1
Spirex288
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 1999
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 238
I currently have a standard Blued aluminum receiver. It does seem rather fragile. I am planning on getting another one to mess around with and considering stainless as the material of choice. What are the advantages of aluminum and stainless? One better over the other?
Spirex288 is offline  
Old September 16, 1999, 12:49 PM   #2
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,152
Better how? The stainless is certainly tougher, but standard 10/22s stand up to thousands of rounds with no problem. The recoil force on the 10/22 is taken up by the cross pin, not by the receiver itself.

Jim
James K is offline  
Old September 18, 1999, 06:08 AM   #3
Woody
Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 1999
Posts: 95
If you take the action out of the stock there
is a large pin at the back of the receiver. This pin is in place to stop the bolt from coming out of its track and to stop the bolt from hitting the rear of the receiver. This pin is what takes most of the punishment on the receiver. There are a couple of companies making a replacement pins made out of a hard rubber, or plastic. When you replace the pin with these it allows the bolt to compress the material a little instead of coming to an abrubt stop. However I have a 10/22 with well over 10,000 round out of it and the only thing that has broke was the extractor. The stop pin hole is slighly enlarged but the stock still holds it in place and the gun still shoots.
Woody is offline  
Old September 18, 1999, 10:58 AM   #4
4V50 Gary
Staff
 
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 16,612
The argument for the stainless steel receivers come into play when the 10/22 is rebarreled with the heavier match barrel. Supposedly the heavier barrel causes more stress on the receiver and hence the receiver should be fabricated of stronger material.

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt

4V50 Gary is offline  
Old September 18, 1999, 03:20 PM   #5
chucko
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 1999
Posts: 151
I have a Briley STC 10/22 that is based on the Ruger 10/22. The only Ruger part left is the aluminium receiver. I can see that the aluminium receiver could have problems supporting the 21" long stainless bull barrel without the additional support. Briley solves the issue of needing extra support for the heavy floated barrel by attatching the weaver rail, both to the receiver and to the barrel. I have had no reason to remove the barrel since Briley built it, but it looks very solid.

On the subject of the rubber/polyurathane bolt buffer pins for the 10/22. I like them. They prevent the bolt pin holes in the receiver from goose egging and the also make the action noticably quieter.

Chuck

[This message has been edited by chucko (edited September 18, 1999).]
chucko is offline  
Old September 18, 1999, 04:37 PM   #6
navdoc
Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 1999
Posts: 23
I agree with the concensus on the vibration dampening replacement bolt stop pins. I have the Volquestren dampener in my 10/22 and I have noticed how much quieter and more efficient the weapon seems to fire (it brings the felt recoil from wimpy to just plain panzyesque!)
navdoc is offline  
Old September 22, 1999, 12:11 AM   #7
Flashman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 1999
Posts: 137
I may be wrong, but I recall reading in the Ruger catalog that the stainless 10/22's receiver is also aluminum but is simply anodized to match the stainless barrel.
Flashman is offline  
Old September 22, 1999, 04:54 AM   #8
Woody
Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 1999
Posts: 95
Flashman the Ruger stainless 10/22 uses the same receiver as the other 10/22 rifles. It just has a different color of anodizing. What we were discussing is the aftermarket 10/22 receiver made from stainless steel that mimic the Ruger receiver. Like the various manufacturers of AR receivers. Rugers patent protection ran out and other companies started manufacturing them about 4 years ago. So far not many have wanted to mostly because the standard Ruger receiver is just fine unless you would like to install a threaded barrel for a more secure barrel to receiver fit.
Woody is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08322 seconds with 7 queries