aluminum 15-22?

[jsha22lr]

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?

 

[ragingyeti]

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.

 

[wolverine]

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).

 

[sahlomonic]

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).

 

[jsha22lr]

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?

 

[wolverine]

----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.

 

[CrazyFingers]

There are a couple companies making mil-spec polymer lowers.

An AR-15 lower made from polymer by definition does not meet the TDP.

 

[ragingyeti]

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.

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.

 

[Majorlk]

It WILL increase the cost.

 

[Plumbago]

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

 

[team sidewinder]

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

 

[treetop]

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

 

[e577]

I'd buy two bare metal uppers!

 

[true_shooter]

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

 

[Majorlk]

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!!!!

 

[treetop]

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....

 

[true_shooter]

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.

 

[treetop]

lol...
true !!

 

[Majorlk]

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.

 

[true_shooter]

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