Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Rifles and Shotguns > Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-26-2012, 08:18 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 136
Likes: 10
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default aluminum 15-22?

ive just been thinking about the idea of an aluminum 15-22. As alot of you know the cool thing about the 15-22 is the fact its polymer and lightwieght. From where I am standing, a aluminum .22 rifle, or at least the upper, would contribute to better accuracy. any body else ever thought of this?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #2  
Old 04-26-2012, 08:27 AM
ragingyeti's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 327
Likes: 4
Liked 49 Times in 23 Posts
Default

Yup. It is called a regular AR15 chambered in 22lr.

I don't really think the aluminum upper would increase accuracy. Most of your accuracy comes from the barrel, then probably the quality of the ammo, the optics, trigger, and how well the bolt mates with the barrel extension. And this is assuming you are a good enough shooter to notice the differences.
Reply With Quote
The Following 10 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 04-26-2012, 08:47 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times in 10 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsha22lr View Post
ive just been thinking about the idea of an aluminum 15-22. As alot of you know the cool thing about the 15-22 is the fact its polymer and lightwieght. From where I am standing, a aluminum .22 rifle, or at least the upper, would contribute to better accuracy. any body else ever thought of this?


Morning jsha22lr

Yes, I have thought about it many times. Either a full aluminum upper or at least adding alloy reinforcements to the polymer in the barrel mounting area & from barrel mounting to scope rail & back along the sides to the attaching pin areas. Anything to stiffen up that very soft & compliant upper & keep it from deflecting.

No doubt that stiffening the upper between barrel mounting to scope mounting rail would go along ways towards improving inherent accuracy.


If nothing else just get the scope to mount directly to the barrel rather than having the barrel mount to the soft plastic upper in the front then have the scope mount to remote soft compliant plastic up top.
As it is now the barrel can deflect one way while the scope can (easily) deflect another way.


In fact I'm bettering that over time & complaints S&W will eventually add some inner reinforcement to the upper to stiffen it a bit (we'll just have to wait & see if they address the basic compliancy issue).
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-26-2012, 03:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Overland Park, KS
Posts: 48
Likes: 1
Liked 15 Times in 6 Posts
Default

I think my main concern with aluminum vs polymer is that polymer is very rigid, where as aluminum can bend if you torque it enough, i.e. drop your weapon. Also polymer doesn't rust

I would support aluminum reinforcements or even an aluminum rail at the least.

I think if I wanted a metal .22 AR I would get a CMMG or even the SIG 522. Polymer lowers are a non-issue, perhaps even with 5.56mm ARs (There are a couple companies making mil-spec polymer lowers).
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-26-2012, 03:40 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 136
Likes: 10
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Ragingyeti an aluminum upper would greatly increase accuracy. My hypothesis is that as the barrel heats up, the polymer threads will begin to distort and shrink or become misformed. Metal threads wouldn't be as easy to damage or heat up.

Wolverine, that is exactly what I was thinking talking about. By stiffening the whole receiver there is less flex in it. Now doubt that with optics there is a slight amount of flexing when you tighten on rings and sights and what not near the back. Thats why the ar target rifles are mostly heavy. The more metal there is to stiffen the whole thing the better right?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #6  
Old 04-26-2012, 04:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times in 10 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsha22lr View Post
----An aluminum upper would greatly increase accuracy. My hypothesis is that as the barrel heats up, the polymer threads will begin to distort and shrink or become misformed. Metal threads wouldn't be as easy to damage or heat up.

Wolverine, that is exactly what I was thinking talking about. By stiffening the whole receiver there is less flex in it. Now doubt that with optics there is a slight amount of flexing when you tighten on rings and sights and what not near the back. Thats why the ar target rifles are mostly heavy. The more metal there is to stiffen the whole thing the better right?

Afternoon jsha22lr


Actually the barrel does have metal threads & a metal nut to hold it in place (no threads in the plastic) . There is also a metal collar molded into the front of the plastic receiver that the barrel passes through then bolts securely into. Problem is that metal collar has no support other than the wimpy plastic around it.

Now if that metal collar could extend rearward along each side of the upper receiver & extend down into the front hinge pin area then also extend up to become molded into the upper scope rail that would allow a much more robust & much less compliant upper receiver. At least if it still did allow a bit of barrel displacement the scope rail should move with it so the scope follows the barrel & retains scope alignment to barrel bore.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #7  
Old 04-26-2012, 04:26 PM
CrazyFingers's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 531
Likes: 103
Liked 395 Times in 177 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sahlomonic View Post
There are a couple companies making mil-spec polymer lowers.
An AR-15 lower made from polymer by definition does not meet the TDP.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #8  
Old 04-26-2012, 11:13 PM
ragingyeti's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 327
Likes: 4
Liked 49 Times in 23 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsha22lr View Post
Ragingyeti an aluminum upper would greatly increase accuracy. My hypothesis is that as the barrel heats up, the polymer threads will begin to distort and shrink or become misformed. Metal threads wouldn't be as easy to damage or heat up.
The 15-22 as previously mentioned actually does have aluminum inserts where the barrel mates with the upper receiver and the barrel nut screws on. However, I do not think that this has a large effect on accuracy. Like I said in my previous post, the important things are barrel, bolt/barrel mating, trigger, and optics. Obviously the shooter will play a big part in this, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsha22lr View Post
Wolverine, that is exactly what I was thinking talking about. By stiffening the whole receiver there is less flex in it. Now doubt that with optics there is a slight amount of flexing when you tighten on rings and sights and what not near the back. Thats why the ar target rifles are mostly heavy. The more metal there is to stiffen the whole thing the better right?
This effects accuracy, but not really. A more accurate description would be to say that the polymer has an effect on the optic's point of aim. What I mean is that the polymer won't effect the accuracy of the round, but given enough pressure on the handguard, if any sights are mounted to it, it can throw off the point of impact from the point of aim. If you mount the optic to the receiver and free float the handguard by removing the endcap, you will no longer have this problem. For the record, an all aluminum AR15 will have this same exact problem.

Also, "the more metal there is to stiffen the whole thing the better" is not necessarily true. A heavy barrel will be more accurate than a light profile barrel, but only to a certain point. Adding metal all around the rifle in any area other than the barrel for the sake of adding material will NOT increase accuracy. It might do a million other things depending on where the weight is added, but it will not add accuracy.

Given all of this information, I still come to my original conclusion that an all aluminum receiver on this rifle will not improve accuracy.

Last edited by ragingyeti; 04-26-2012 at 11:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #9  
Old 04-27-2012, 12:09 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

It WILL increase the cost.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #10  
Old 04-28-2012, 10:42 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Default

What really helps the flex of the upper on this rifle, and accurcy to a point: is simply attaching a two or three inch or longer, low riser block between the upper reciever and the handguard, at least an inch or two on both sides of the connection point, stiffening the barrel connection point and also better securing the handguard. This acts as a very secure brace. A 5" low riser block is perfect, with irons, but probally will interfere with optics...Use what's best for your optics, but any number of combinations can be used. You can then remove the handguard end cap, or ream it out some and and free float the barrel, and the handguard will have much less flex on resting points, and or excessories. ...............best regards Plum
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #11  
Old 04-28-2012, 11:57 AM
team sidewinder's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Montana
Posts: 559
Likes: 310
Liked 79 Times in 64 Posts
Default

Very good points. Plumbago. Think I will try your idea on my gun as I have a extra riser block laying around. I will have to remove it to break the gun open but that is no big deal and I don't do it that often to make it a problem. I will have to modify the riser a little so it will slide under my optics. Thanks
__________________
44 Garrett Defender Ammo 4 me.

Last edited by team sidewinder; 04-28-2012 at 12:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-28-2012, 03:36 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Essex , England !!!
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

as I have said on another thread..
I think that S & W should do an after market metal upper & lower case, that you can swap everything into, should you wish...
then you would have a better rifle than any CMMG or Sig ut there..
come on, less face it, they knew full well that when we all bought these we would modify & upgrade them, thats why it was made to take all mil spec parts..!!
if enough of us got together we could lobby S & W.. and try our luck...
I feel that they are missing a turn here.. I am not saying they should sell them complete in metal, but as a upgrade... hell yeah !! any gun smith would be able to swap out all the parts from one to the other in no time...

any way... just my idea ..

cheers
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-28-2012, 03:57 PM
e577's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I'd buy two bare metal uppers!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:12 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lacey Washington
Posts: 220
Likes: 40
Liked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by treetop View Post
as I have said on another thread..
I think that S & W should do an after market metal upper & lower case, that you can swap everything into, should you wish...
then you would have a better rifle than any CMMG or Sig ut there..
come on, less face it, they knew full well that when we all bought these we would modify & upgrade them, thats why it was made to take all mil spec parts..!!
if enough of us got together we could lobby S & W.. and try our luck...
I feel that they are missing a turn here.. I am not saying they should sell them complete in metal, but as a upgrade... hell yeah !! any gun smith would be able to swap out all the parts from one to the other in no time...

any way... just my idea ..

cheers
Let me start by saying that I'm not trying to be a debbie downer. That said, it wont happen. they built this rifle as a light weight low cost trainer/plinker. they didn't build it to compete in rimfire benchrest competitions. they didn't intend for it to shoot sub moa groups, more like sub grape fruit. the 15-22 without upgrades is good enough to use in tactical rimfire shoots, and if the right parts were available for enough money you could make it sub-moa. but it would be a lot cheaper to buy a ruger a remington and modify it. I ride a 2000 yamaha roadstar, she's a slow but torque-y pig. I could spend the money on a bigger pulley or a magna charger but I'd still only have a real fast pig
__________________
psalm 23:4 cause I'm armed
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #15  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:33 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by true_shooter View Post
Let me start by saying that I'm not trying to be a debbie downer. That said, it wont happen. they built this rifle as a light weight low cost trainer/plinker. they didn't build it to compete in rimfire benchrest competitions. they didn't intend for it to shoot sub moa groups, more like sub grape fruit. the 15-22 without upgrades is good enough to use in tactical rimfire shoots, and if the right parts were available for enough money you could make it sub-moa. but it would be a lot cheaper to buy a ruger a remington and modify it. I ride a 2000 yamaha roadstar, she's a slow but torque-y pig. I could spend the money on a bigger pulley or a magna charger but I'd still only have a real fast pig
Well said!!!!
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #16  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Essex , England !!!
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by true_shooter View Post
Let me start by saying that I'm not trying to be a debbie downer. That said, it wont happen. they built this rifle as a light weight low cost trainer/plinker. they didn't build it to compete in rimfire benchrest competitions. they didn't intend for it to shoot sub moa groups, more like sub grape fruit. the 15-22 without upgrades is good enough to use in tactical rimfire shoots, and if the right parts were available for enough money you could make it sub-moa. but it would be a lot cheaper to buy a ruger a remington and modify it. I ride a 2000 yamaha roadstar, she's a slow but torque-y pig. I could spend the money on a bigger pulley or a magna charger but I'd still only have a real fast pig
I think you miss my point..
I am not saying or wanting it for any other reason than that it was built for.!!
For .22 comps & sub moa I shoot an Anschutz - why ? cos its the best!!
for long range I shoot a Remi 700 AICS - why ? cos its great, and yep, if I could afford it, I would have an Accuracy International..
I could go on listing all my rifles & why.. but I wont..
and yes, I have owned a Ruger.. ( my club where I teach uses nothing but Rugers as 1st level training guns) and IMO there **** !! they dont feel right, & they are all temperamental .. dont matter how many mods you do... but, that said.. it is a rifle that oozes money, how much do people spend on them ??
just to say... I bought a mp15-22 cos its great at what it does.. but, it could be better... with 1 addition.. and it would piss all over any Ruger out there then....
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-28-2012, 05:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lacey Washington
Posts: 220
Likes: 40
Liked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by treetop View Post
I think you miss my point..
I am not saying or wanting it for any other reason than that it was built for.!!
For .22 comps & sub moa I shoot an Anschutz - why ? cos its the best!!
for long range I shoot a Remi 700 AICS - why ? cos its great, and yep, if I could afford it, I would have an Accuracy International..
I could go on listing all my rifles & why.. but I wont..
and yes, I have owned a Ruger.. ( my club where I teach uses nothing but Rugers as 1st level training guns) and IMO there **** !! they dont feel right, & they are all temperamental .. dont matter how many mods you do... but, that said.. it is a rifle that oozes money, how much do people spend on them ??
just to say... I bought a mp15-22 cos its great at what it does.. but, it could be better... with 1 addition.. and it would piss all over any Ruger out there then....
No I didn't miss the point, I get it. As men and especially gun nuts we all spend money on stuff better spent elsewhere lol. By the way i'm not a big ruger fan either, not really sure why just don't like 'em.
__________________
psalm 23:4 cause I'm armed
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-28-2012, 05:24 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Essex , England !!!
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

lol...
true !!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-28-2012, 05:29 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

Funny how people's tastes differ.

I have a Ruger Super Blackhawk in .45 Colt, limited edition with brass Super Dragoon grip frame (1972), a stainless Mini14 in 5.56 (1977), a 10/22 (1983), a 77/22 (1986), a Mk II (1985), a P95 (2003) and an SR22 pistol (2012) and love all of them and have never had a single problem with any of them. The 77/22 and MkII have both been accurized by Jim Clark and are match guns. The trigger on the 77/22 is at 24 ox and the MkII is 18 oz. The SR22 pistol beats the Walther .22 and SIG Mosquito hands down. I'll take my 15-22 over the SR22 rifle any day, though.

To each his own.

Last edited by Majorlk; 04-28-2012 at 05:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-28-2012, 06:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lacey Washington
Posts: 220
Likes: 40
Liked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Majorlk View Post
Funny how people's tastes differ.

I have a Ruger Super Blackhawk in .45 Colt, limited edition with brass Super Dragoon grip frame (1972), a stainless Mini14 in 5.56 (1977), a 10/22 (1983), a 77/22 (1986), a Mk II (1985), a P95 (2003) and an SR22 pistol (2012) and love all of them and have never had a single problem with any of them. The 77/22 and MkII have both been accurized by Jim Clark and are match guns. The trigger on the 77/22 is at 24 ox and the MkII is 18 oz. The SR22 pistol beats the Walther .22 and SIG Mosquito hands down. I'll take my 15-22 over the SR22 rifle any day, though.

To each his own.

Actually what I should have said is that i'm not a 10/22 fan
__________________
psalm 23:4 cause I'm armed
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-28-2012, 07:14 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by true_shooter View Post
Actually what I should have said is that i'm not a 10/22 fan
I'm not really either, but at the time it was the best thing on the market. I doubt I would ever buy another. If I did, I'd spend the big bucks and get a Volquartsen version.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #22  
Old 04-29-2012, 04:31 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Concord California
Posts: 567
Likes: 1
Liked 75 Times in 44 Posts
Default

Guys, at the end of the day, accuracy or not, it's still a 22LR.. Building the best all aluminun upper/lower receiver may make the body more solid and so forth, but the bullet once it leaves the barrel, being so light would be toss around by the wind for any long distance type of shooting anyway...I guess for S&W it's engineers deemed this as a plinker and that is all they are gonna do to improve this fine rifle. The colt has a metal upper, and with it's thin pensil barrel it isn't anymore accurate than the M&P..

I wouldn't mind seeing an after market company make a alum. upper and lower to swap out if some folks want that weight and solid build. But I think the end results would be the same on paper.. But that's just my .02 cent... not trying to start a war... keepem in the X ring.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-29-2012, 07:55 PM
ChattanoogaPhil's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,715
Likes: 2,786
Liked 4,998 Times in 1,865 Posts
Default

Oh fine... that's just what I need... a 15-22 that likes Wolf Match Extra ... Y'all are going to put me in poor house!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #24  
Old 04-29-2012, 09:10 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Concord California
Posts: 567
Likes: 1
Liked 75 Times in 44 Posts
Default

All you need is the blue prints of the upper and lower receiver. Then you need someone with access to a CAD CNC machine, enter all this specs. in, put a block of aluminum in it, and wa la!... a aluminum upper and lower receiver.. Now does anyone know one.??????

Call "Son's of Guns" or that other gun show, let's give them the challenge.....
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-29-2012, 09:18 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lacey Washington
Posts: 220
Likes: 40
Liked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aceman58 View Post
All you need is the blue prints of the upper and lower receiver. Then you need someone with access to a CAD CNC machine, enter all this specs. in, put a block of aluminum in it, and wa la!... a aluminum upper and lower receiver.. Now does anyone know one.??????

Call "Son's of Guns" or that other gun show, let's give them the challenge.....
I might be wrong but i'm pretty sure that the average guy isn't allowed to make firearms (lower reciever)
__________________
psalm 23:4 cause I'm armed
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-29-2012, 11:55 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Concord California
Posts: 567
Likes: 1
Liked 75 Times in 44 Posts
Default

True Shooter, I stand corrected... Strike that from my comments, only upper please... thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-30-2012, 12:18 AM
ragingyeti's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 327
Likes: 4
Liked 49 Times in 23 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by true_shooter View Post
I might be wrong but i'm pretty sure that the average guy isn't allowed to make firearms (lower reciever)
Actually you can. But you still have to follow local laws. It has to have a serial number, you can't sell it without a manufacturers license, and some states require a FFL for transfer to another person just as any firearm. But if you have access to the materials and equipment, machining your own lower is perfectly legal. 80% lowers (not 80% of lowers) are sold using this this concept.

Last edited by ragingyeti; 04-30-2012 at 09:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-30-2012, 08:16 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 136
Likes: 10
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aceman58 View Post
All you need is the blue prints of the upper and lower receiver. Then you need someone with access to a CAD CNC machine, enter all this specs. in, put a block of aluminum in it, and wa la!... a aluminum upper and lower receiver.. Now does anyone know one.??????

Call "Son's of Guns" or that other gun show, let's give them the challenge.....
Early on, I thought about a .17hm2 upper, since its basically a necked down .22lr. Some parts of thier show i like, but the drama is one i dont like! all they would have to do is make a upper and a barrel
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-30-2012, 12:29 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lacey Washington
Posts: 220
Likes: 40
Liked 13 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ragingyeti View Post
Actually you can. But you still have to follow local laws. It has to have a serial number, you can't sell it without a manufacturers license, and some states require a FFL for transfer to another person just as any firearm. But if you have access to the materials and equipment, machining your own lower is perfectly legal. 80% lowers (not 80% of lowers) are sold using this this concept.
sweet, learn somethin new everyday
__________________
psalm 23:4 cause I'm armed
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-01-2012, 02:22 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Martinsburg, WV
Posts: 897
Likes: 41
Liked 305 Times in 229 Posts
Default

Sorry but aluminum absorbs and disipates heat nearly as fast as polymer and also expands and contracts, depending on the alloy.
If you want a quick accuracy upgrade then buy a 6" by 1/2" Picatinny riser block and bolt it down across the gap between the polymer upper receiver and the the polymer quad rail handguard. By locking the mass together it stabilizes the rear of the barrel. Better solution would be to get 2 thin steel plates and put them on the flat vertical surface below the upper rail, and drill both them and the polymer underneath to lock the area even better. But the best solution is to replace the polymer handguard with a metal one (or carbon fiber). Then the barrel nut will be locked into a long alloy section that will better stabilize the barrel by locking its nut to a larger metal structure instead of just an alloy collar nut holding another polymer structure.
Yes both an alloy upper and lower would help, as long as the barrel is good. Otherwise just go build an AR lower and buy a .22 upper assembly, assuming it also has a good barrel.
I saw one of those shooting the rimfire side match at the PSA Shootout over the last 4 days. Shooter was sponsored by Lancer Systems. Don't know which upper it was but it did use Black Dog mags and had a carbon fiber handguard on it. However most of the bigger shooters were actually using modified AR15-22 PC and regular models (after all S&W is the main match sponsor for this event). Plus the usual assortment of 10/22s, usually by junior shooters.
I had the 3rd best score after the first 3 days of the 4 day event at around 60 seconds. That is 70 targets, some only an inch in width from 8-25 yards, plus 2 Texas Stars and 6 plate racks of various sizes all had to be shot down within the 90 second par time. I managed to dump 4 complete mags in that 60 seconds but it took me shooting 100 rounds to get all the tiny targets. I was using my usual TruGlo dual color reflex sight. Some used tactical 1-? scopes. For this I am not sure which was better.
This was a sample of their 3rd annual PSA Rimfire Shootout the last week in October. They have changed the name to the PSA Rimfire Challenge. It will be over 2 days unlike the first 2 two which were 1 day events. Divisions for open and iron sight pistols or rifles and 2 person teams with one shooting rifle and the other pistol (both must be same division either iron or open). It will be 4 stages of a combined 200 steel .22 knockdown targets around 50 per stage. It will be fun.

Last edited by photoracer; 05-01-2012 at 02:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-01-2012, 03:39 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Essex , England !!!
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Accuracy is not the issue for me.... and anyone who thinks this is a prat.... sorry, but its a tactical .22.... not a target rifle...!!

my issue = its weight, balance & feel ...
weight.. plastic = to lightweight,
Balance... it isnt that bad at mo... start adding mass to tube, or nut... balance will change...
Feel.... its plastic.... add mass... its still plastic !!

I didnt buy it for any more than what it does.... i think its a great rifle... and probably the most reliable Tactical semi .22 on the market... it also has all the features, that most tactical .22 dont.... however...#

my only gripe, is the feel, light & plastic.....
the perfect solution.... S & W do after market bare metal upper & lower..... why ?? = cost will be cheap, as it needs finishing & all parts moved over.... S & W do not have to go into expense in production, & it doesnt effect sales or marketing of current range..... it will increase longevity of rifle ( i have known of 2 destroyed, due to damage of plastic ! that a metal upper & lower would have survived) ..

yes I can buy a Lantac Cmmg, Sig, Southern Guns AR, but I dont / didnt want one... why ?? cos they dont have the features and the ones that do... the cost is way off target... how can a fully functioning AR .22 be more expensive than a .223 / 5.56 ???
thats my issue.........
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-03-2012, 11:28 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Concord California
Posts: 567
Likes: 1
Liked 75 Times in 44 Posts
Default

TreeTop, I have to agree with you, I too feel the M&P 15/22 is the best tactical .22LR on the market to date, functions just like the full size, light and it's performance is fantastic. It is not sold as a target rifle, it can be modified and that's what makes it a great all around tactical rifle, it's flexibility to do both..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-04-2012, 12:57 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Martinsburg, WV
Posts: 897
Likes: 41
Liked 305 Times in 229 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by team sidewinder View Post
Very good points. Plumbago. Think I will try your idea on my gun as I have a extra riser block laying around. I will have to remove it to break the gun open but that is no big deal and I don't do it that often to make it a problem. I will have to modify the riser a little so it will slide under my optics. Thanks
Why would you have to do that? The part goes between 2 parts of the complete upper so no removal is required for separating the 2 basic modules of the rifle.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-04-2012, 01:02 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Martinsburg, WV
Posts: 897
Likes: 41
Liked 305 Times in 229 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aceman58 View Post
All you need is the blue prints of the upper and lower receiver. Then you need someone with access to a CAD CNC machine, enter all this specs. in, put a block of aluminum in it, and wa la!... a aluminum upper and lower receiver.. Now does anyone know one.??????

Call "Son's of Guns" or that other gun show, let's give them the challenge.....
Those blueprints are proprietary info belonging to S&W. And they are slightly different than a true AR lower or upper. One reason is the length of the action is different between a .22LR and a .223, so some parts are not in the same location.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-27-2012, 10:52 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I want to chime in here with support for a metal 15-22 lower, but for different reasons.

I recently purchased a 15-22. I purchased a slide-fire stock. I purchased a timney trigger replacement.

I have been very happy with my rapid mag dumps ever since.

During installation of the timney trigger I overtightened the screws which hold the trigger in place within the lower. Now I can see noticeable bulges on the underside of the lower near the trigger where those screws have now permanently warped the polymer lower.

I cannot imagine that this is good for the integrity of the lower. I imagine that the trigger screws can continue to press against the polymer and loosen up the more I shoot. I would not be surprised if at some point the lower starts to crack in this location.

Had the lower been made from a quality piece of metal, I feel that it would have been much more difficult for me to over-tighten the trigger screws. I would have felt more of a stop. Instead, the screws felt like they needed to be continuously torqued down, but instead they were just pushing out soft, cheap, crappy polymer.

Immediately after my modification the 15-22 performed wonderfully with the trigger and slide-fire stock. I had no issues and could dump all 10 of my magazines one after the other. As time has gone on, I have started to experience the trigger not resetting. There will be an unspent cartridge in the chamber, but the trigger will not release the hammer as it has not been reset. I then have to pull the charging handle. This strips the live round and feeds another round while resetting the trigger. I plan on doing some more testing, as this could be related to a dirty rifle or a operator error with the way I am applying forward pressure for the slidefire stock. It just seems weird that I would have digressed from obviously perfect operating handling resulting in perfect magazine dumps to sloppy operator error resulting in the trigger not being reset.

Now since a lower is registered, I imagine that it might be very difficult to find a replacement part. Unless the replacement part is an entirely new rifle. I imagine that Smith & Wesson will not service/replace my lower as I have caused the damage as a result of my modification of the rifle. Let me know if you think they might help.

I would happily replace my **** polymer lower with an aluminum lower if it were available for the 15-22. Aluminum is not that heavy and is much more solid.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-27-2012, 01:48 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

IMHO, none of the problems you are having are the result of a polymer lower. As for "crappy polymer" the overwhelming majority of semi-automatic pistols on the market are polymer-framed and they seem to do quite well.

You knew the 15-22 had polymer upper and lower receivers when you bought it. If you wanted aluminum uppers and lowers, you should have bought an AR and put a .22 conversion on it in the first place.

Just my opinion, of course.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-27-2012, 03:54 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 975
Likes: 572
Liked 554 Times in 302 Posts
Default

I'd like an aluminium one because I can.

I don't have a problem with polymer. I own polymer framed guns.

I would like a metal one though.

Who can do the maths? What would a metal one weigh? I'm guessing fairly close to what a "real" AR-15 would weigh. I like the low weight of the 15-22.

KBK
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-27-2012, 05:46 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayback View Post
I'd like an aluminium one because I can.

I don't have a problem with polymer. I own polymer framed guns.

I would like a metal one though.

Who can do the maths? What would a metal one weigh? I'm guessing fairly close to what a "real" AR-15 would weigh. I like the low weight of the 15-22.

KBK
And the cost, as well.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-28-2012, 09:36 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 587
Likes: 95
Liked 363 Times in 171 Posts
Default

I'm basically happy with the 15/22 the way it is, but aluminum would be nice.

As for changes, an A1 stock option would be great. Maybe S&W will expand the line due to the 15/22s popularity.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-28-2012, 01:37 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Default

It's been a few months since this thread was started. Since that time I can definately tell you that there is night and day differance as far as accuracy goes between a upper reciever made from alumium vs the polymer....I've not given up on the 15-22, but it is now simply a nice lightweight plinker for the grandsons.....I bought a Sig Sauer 522, heavy barrel, metal upper, and it is far far superior as far as accuracy goes...The Sig just suits my expectations much better...........best regards Plum
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #41  
Old 11-28-2012, 05:25 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 975
Likes: 572
Liked 554 Times in 302 Posts
Default

Mission drives the gear. If you need a tac driver, buy one. I personally need an AR-15 simulator on a budget.

KBK
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #42  
Old 11-28-2012, 06:13 PM
Majorlk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 5,506
Likes: 4,693
Liked 3,828 Times in 2,036 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayback View Post
Mission drives the gear. If you need a tac driver, buy one. I personally need an AR-15 simulator on a budget.

KBK
My feelings, too.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-28-2012, 07:48 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 587
Likes: 95
Liked 363 Times in 171 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayback View Post
Mission drives the gear. If you need a tac driver, buy one. I personally need an AR-15 simulator on a budget.

KBK
+ 1 I love the little 15/22 and it saves me a ton of money.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #44  
Old 04-29-2013, 05:16 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I think that S & W should do an after market metal upper & lower case
As if they don't know but can say this not that S&W would listen but if they would make a upper and lower out of aluminum as nice as the poly I would not only buy a second one but a upper and lower for both! I bought this one to shoot with my grandson and I have a new granddaughter on the way but a poly gun I really don't see it lasting like his Henry 22 I picked it more for the reviews and it fit all the things I liked it did not hurt that it was a S&W but the plastic was a downer if it was 200 more and aluminum I would have got it a year ago
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-29-2013, 06:45 AM
TYSTYX's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 263
Likes: 109
Liked 194 Times in 85 Posts
Default

^^^^^^Wow, I just got a headache trying to read that punctuationless ramble.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #46  
Old 04-29-2013, 09:01 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 106
Likes: 18
Liked 65 Times in 37 Posts
Default

i just dont get it. the 15-22 is meant to be a COPY of an AR-15 but less expensive. if you want the benefits of a real AR-15 (ie: metal) then just build a damn AR with a .22 upper.

why the hell would you want to spend countless $$ designing and fabricating something thats specific to ONE rifle when the parts you want ALREADY EXIST and are cheaper than the 15-22?

its some crazy *** circular logic thing.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #47  
Old 04-29-2013, 03:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

First off sorry! To tystyx I do that. More so when I type on the tablet. But you read it lol! For the most part I got the idea of the aluminum parts across. This 15-22 is my first AR style! I have had weapons from the time I was 10 a Stevens 22. Never gave much thought to a modern style. I like the idea of a build could I put a m&p 15 together as a dedicated 22?
I have looked into it and found if I am right the AR 15 lower will not fit a M&P 15-22? have watched a lot of videos on YouTube about building a AR but really how hard is it? Bunch of answers? like how much would it cost about? And what needs to be bought? As I said I know a bit but probably just enough to be dangerous! I do shoot larger Cal 44. But the 22 is easy and with the 10 yo grandson he can shoot it. My other unknown is how interchangeable are parts? From say the M&P to say Colt that probably a bad choice but you get the idea plus this may be a bad thing to ask but would it be better to just stay with just one company for the complete rifle?
I know long post but just to many things and not many I can ask. Here guns in Illinois are scary for the media believers! I don't dare start into that LOL.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-29-2013, 10:48 PM
Col. Plink's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 219
Likes: 112
Liked 146 Times in 74 Posts
Default

Shemp,

Whew! Come up for some air!
__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-29-2013, 10:55 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, La
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 66
Liked 1,245 Times in 588 Posts
Default

Before i'd build a dedicate .22LR upper. I'd rather just build me another complete .308 and actually have a "tack driver".

.22LR is meant to be cheap and fun. Which is why s&w designed it the way they did. Also, the pressure of a .22LR is no where near that of the 5.56, .300 ACC or .308. So why even waste the extra money building it in aluminum. If ur going to do that, why not just build it out of Titanium and say u have a l33t .22LR.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-30-2013, 12:00 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Yep I guess I ran it a bit long but did have allot to ask glad to a few jokers in here thanks guys
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
223, 22lr, 522, anschutz, colt, handguard, mp15, polymer, remington, rimfire, ruger, scope, smith & wesson, smith and wesson, tactical, walther

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22 Thread, aluminum 15-22? in Smith & Wesson Rifles and Shotguns; ive just been thinking about the idea of an aluminum 15-22. As alot of you know the cool thing about ...
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTB - S&W Aluminum Handcuffs MJREDFISH WANTED to Buy 0 12-15-2011 09:13 AM
CS9 Aluminum Grips Rottie Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 6 12-26-2010 11:35 PM
3D Inc. aluminum speedloaders Erich Concealed Carry & Self Defense 41 06-26-2010 12:51 PM
Which S&W 617's have the aluminum cylinder? Bigblock S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 10 12-20-2009 01:51 PM
WTB: PC aluminum case KMB WANTED to Buy 0 11-21-2009 05:53 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:53 AM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)