Ruger 10/22 or m&p 15-22?

cyphertext · #51 02-17-2013, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbm6893

Not far off at all. The low recoil on any .22 makes it a poor trainer for real centerfire ammo. I can hit the bullseye with my 10/22 all dat long at 50 yards. With iron sights. Group is the size of a nickle. The same groups aren't going to happen with a centerfire.

You're going to use a "trainer" for a 10 year old? What about sight alignment, and trigger control? I leanred to shoot on a bolt action .22. Kids today want high capacity tacticool guns like the 15/22. They also want new iphones for their 10th birthday. Should we give them those?

My son is 6. I plan to start him shooting when he's about 9. I will be picking up a bolt or lever .22 for him. When he gets it down, we'll move on. But giving a child a tacticool .22 so he feels like he's in a video game is not the proper way to teach him to shoot. Maybe one day I'll get a 15/22. Not against them. But for a kid, I'm starting with anything but.

And the reason your son's choice was the 15/22 or ArchAngel with a red dot is because he has seen a bunch of movies or played video games. Think that will make him a batter shot? he'll spray 500 rounds in an hour and have a grouping like birdshot.

I took my nephew to the range last year. He didn't want to shoot my 10/22 (which has a Tapco stock, by the way). he wanted to shoot my Ar, because "that's what they use in my game".

So, you think the military is wrong by using .22lr as trainer? The groups don't open up that much, because it is the same trigger pull and the same sight picture. Look how many guys run a conversion bolt in their AR....same purpose, training. You get more trigger time for less money.

My son started shooting way before 9. He started on a Crickett single shot bolt action around 5. Shot that until he was 10. Then he moved onto the 15-22. You have no idea why my son chose the 15-22. Could it possibly be because dad has an AR-15? Because his uncle has an AR-15? And no, he doesn't spray 500 rounds an hour and have a grouping like birdshot. He consistently shoots a 5 shot group at 25 yards that a quarter can touch all 5 shots, from a rest, without optics. He earned his rifle merit badge in Boy Scouts on his first time out. My son also hunts and shoots close to 1 MOA with his .243 at 100 yards. But for just fun shooting, he likes the 15-22 with red dot sight.

Besides, the OP didn't ask if either of these were how we would start a kid shooting. He asked for a "fun shooting .22 for the boys", and for boys today, they would pick the 15-22.

Chuter · #52 02-17-2013, 06:11 PM

The correct answer is "both". I have had several 10/22's and they are fine rifles. For young boys, I really would use the 10/22 first. It simply is a more robust, damage resistant rifle. My wife has her 15/22 and loves it. It's a lot lighter than they 10/22, a key feature for her.
A wood stock on a 10/22 will probably give your youngsters several advantages over the 15/22. It will be harder to break, give them the feel of a wide variety of other rifles and be as comfortable to shoot as either.
I train young shooters on either a bolt action or pump action rifle before moving to a semi-auto. Yes you can just load one round into a semi auto mag and if budget allows for only one or two, get the 10/22.
I also like my Malin 7000T. It will outshoot the Ruger or Smith at distance all day long. That being said, under 100 yards the 15/22 is the most fun .22 one could every want.
So there, just my $0.22 for your consideration.

kbm6893 · #53 02-17-2013, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyphertext

So, you think the military is wrong by using .22lr as trainer? The groups don't open up that much, because it is the same trigger pull and the same sight picture. Look how many guys run a conversion bolt in their AR....same purpose, training. You get more trigger time for less money.

My son started shooting way before 9. He started on a Crickett single shot bolt action around 5. Shot that until he was 10. Then he moved onto the 15-22. You have no idea why my son chose the 15-22. Could it possibly be because dad has an AR-15? Because his uncle has an AR-15? And no, he doesn't spray 500 rounds an hour and have a grouping like birdshot. He consistently shoots a 5 shot group at 25 yards that a quarter can touch all 5 shots, from a rest, without optics. He earned his rifle merit badge in Boy Scouts on his first time out. My son also hunts and shoots close to 1 MOA with his .243 at 100 yards. But for just fun shooting, he likes the 15-22 with red dot sight.

Besides, the OP didn't ask if either of these were how we would start a kid shooting. He asked for a "fun shooting .22 for the boys", and for boys today, they would pick the 15-22.

The military originally went to .22 trainers to save on ammo costs.

never said a kid COULDN'T leanr to shoot well with a 15/22, just said it is NOT being billed as a trainer for the AR rifle. It is marketed to those who want to feel like Navy SEALS without spending the bucks on a real AR.

Dick's has some H&K MP5 knockoff with a fake suppressor on it in .22. Who's buying that? Some wanna-be who wants to feel like Rambo. I shot one once. With gun rested on the bench, the rounds had about a 4" spread at 25 yards. Same ammo in my 10/22 at same range had them all covered with a nickle.

The important thing is to get them shooting, but going with what a 10 year old feels is "cool cause it's like my video game" is not the best way to introduce a person into shooting, in my opinion.

LaCarolus · #54 02-17-2013, 07:42 PM

You guys that are ragging on new people to the sport need to step off your high horses! If a tacticiool rifle gets someone interested in shooting what does it matter that it's a "wannabe firearm"? Sure it might not print a dime size group but for many that's not the point...spending time with family and friends and trying to have fun is what its all about for me. Plinking rifles tend to grow firearm enthusiasts from one gun owners to slightly addicted multigun owners in a good way. Anyhow isn't
variety the spice of life?

moosedog · #55 02-17-2013, 08:18 PM

I'm "old school", heck, i'm old period. The first rifle I bought was a Ruger 10/22 at K-Marts back in 1974. Still have it and it's a great gun, very reliable.
But it is not anywhere near as much fun as my S&W 15-22. Plus, maybe I have a freak, but i'd put my 15-22 up against the Ruger for accuracy any day.

Buckskinner · #56 02-17-2013, 08:45 PM

Get the 15/22 for your fun gun and then a nice bolt gun for accuracy, Savage makes a nice one for about $300 with a bull barrel.

cyphertext · #57 02-17-2013, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbm6893

The military originally went to .22 trainers to save on ammo costs.

Right, lower costs = more training time = more efficient on the platform. Not rocket science...

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbm6893

never said a kid COULDN'T leanr to shoot well with a 15/22, just said it is NOT being billed as a trainer for the AR rifle. It is marketed to those who want to feel like Navy SEALS without spending the bucks on a real AR.

Funny, S&W marketing does not agree with you. I'm betting that most of the folks who answered in this thread, who you just insulted, would not agree with you either.. M&P15-22 Owners Age/Occupation

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbm6893

Dick's has some H&K MP5 knockoff with a fake suppressor on it in .22. Who's buying that? Some wanna-be who wants to feel like Rambo. I shot one once. With gun rested on the bench, the rounds had about a 4" spread at 25 yards. Same ammo in my 10/22 at same range had them all covered with a nickle.

Thread isn't about some H&K MP5 knockoff, it is about which is more fun, M&P 15-22 or Ruger 10/22. But, even so, some firearms will shoot some ammo more accurately than others. Also, what kind of sights are you using on your Ruger for these nickel sized groups? I know it ain't the stock sights...

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbm6893

The important thing is to get them shooting

This we agree on

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbm6893

but going with what a 10 year old feels is "cool cause it's like my video game" is not the best way to introduce a person into shooting, in my opinion.

Why not let the 10 year old pick what he thinks is cool? You are comparing a semi auto to a semi auto, with the same bullet. You realize you are basing your argument off of cosmetics....same argument as the gun control crowd. The OP asked for a fun to shoot gun for his boys. If he had asked for a gun that consistently knock and aphid off a ticks *** at 100 yards, we wouldn't be discussing either rifle.... Neither the M&P 15-22 nor the Ruger 10/22 are what anyone would consider a target grade rifle.

You realize, back in the day, a lot of boys wanted a lever action because that is what they saw in the movies, right?...some things never change.

kbm6893 · #58 02-17-2013, 09:18 PM

Yes. iron sights on my 10/22. With the scope, I shoot erasers of pencils at 50 yards. And it fires just as fast if I want as the 15-22. So really, the real draw for a 10 year old to a 15-22 is just how it looks. It doesn't do anything better. Unless you count an accessory rail for lights and lasers as a plus. i don't. Not on a .22

It's a free country. Buy what you like. But learning to shoot is serious business. I choose not to leave the choice of equiptment to a child. When he learns enough, he can choose what he wants.

And yeah, I've fired the 15-22. it's fun, like any other .22. But the whole gun is plastic. it just feels like a BB gun to me.

Majorlk · #59 02-17-2013, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckskinner

Get the 15/22 for your fun gun and then a nice bolt gun for accuracy, Savage makes a nice one for about $300 with a bull barrel.

Ruger's 77/22 is another excellent and accurate bolt action.

ChattanoogaPhil · #60 02-17-2013, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ditchdigger

Again I want to thank everyone for their points of view. That being said I believe I've made up my mind and will have to go with both. My oldest likes the idea of the challenge to pick an eraser off a pencil at 25+, the youngest likes the tacticool look. I like the idea of both. Now the difficult part, convincing the Lady of the house without having to get the pink camo version.

Sounds like a good way to go.