a disagreement with my mentor... your opinions ???

[magnumwheelman]

so... I still respect my retired tool & die / gunsmith buddy enough,that I'm temped to just accept his thoughts... but alas,,, I'm a thinking man, & a man of science & ration...

here in lies the problem...

... another mutual friend of both of us, recently purchased one of those new fangled take down 10-22's... the iron sights are pretty cheesy, & he ( like us ) is also suffering from aging eyes, & is thinking about scoping the rifle... which has brought about a discussion based more on theory, than practice...

I think over the course of ownership, mounting the scope on the barrel, rather than the receiver ( being a take down rifle ) would offer a scope mount that requires less adjustment over the life of the rifle... my mentor, feels that mounting the scope to the receiver will offer a less adjustment needed mount... the new 10-22 uses a threaded "collar" to keep lock up tight over the life of the rifle during take down & reassembly...

my thoughts, are that by mounting the scope on the barrel, & using a handgun scope, it would mirror the Contenders I use regularly as far as reliable accuracy, & adjusting the collar should not greatly effect point of aim... buddies thoughts are if the collar is adjusted keeping tension the same, the point of impact should not be effected, with scope mounted traditionally on the reciever...

again, this is a matter of theory, since either method could exceed the accuracy level of the stock 10-22 configuration...

the chamber is in the barrel assembly, so with a long eye relief scope, I don't see where minor adjustments in the tension collar would effect the accuracy if the scope were mounted on the barrel...

lots of experience & knowledge here... any thoughts

[jayhawker]

Do it the way Ruger suggests. The gun is ment to be scoped.

[magnumwheelman]

JAY... since the gun is so new, I'm not sure Ruger has a suggestion... the "bag" that comes with the gun, doesn't look like it would accommodate a mounted scope in the pocket intended for the receiver, & they don't offer a mount for barrel mounting... the pocket is big enough though, to fit a compact pistol scope mounted on the barrel...

there is an aftermarket producer of a "rail system" for the gun, but it uses a barrel band mount for the front screw, & a dove tail nut for the back screw, & we both agree that would not be the most accurate of mounts... my thoughts are taper a blank weaver base to the barrel contour, use a dove tail nut in the stock rear sight slot, & drill & tap 1 or 2 other holes in the barrel to hold a barrel mounted base... lots more work than just using the extra receiver base I already have in stock... but I always felt, if I were going to do something, I'd rather do it right the 1st time...

In this case, I neither own the rifle, or would be doing any of the work ( other than collecting the parts )

so the discussion is purely academic

[groo]

Groo here
Mount the scope as normal and shoot it.
Take it apart and see if it shifts.
Second look for a scope rail with a peep sight [there are a few] and use quick detatch mounts.

[2 Dogs]

I don't see how it is a problem. Mount the scope on the receiver and see how it holds up. If it fails to hold zero, then drill and tap the barrel!

[stevemb]

Unless going with a heavy barrel set-up, I'd never scope a 10-22. The finest open sighted plinker E V E R ! Empty beer cans beware ! NEVER. stevemb

[seancass]

In theory, i agree with you. Mount to the barrel with an EER. No matter how you tighten the barrel nut, the barrel and scope are always pointed in the same direction. Mount to the receiver and you're introducing a point of potential error.

However in practice, with a take down 10/22 i don't think you would ever find a difference in performance.

[tangocharlie]

I, too, am of the try it first school of thought. BUT - in the long run, I firmly believe you will find barrel mounted optics more reliable. Consider though that you are talking a rifle that was never intended to shoot to benchrest standards and you will have answered your own question. At best it was conceived, designed, and built to be a M.O.T.R. (Minute of Tree Rat) rifle, not a target rifle. My apologies to all the 10-22 fans....

[brushpopper]

Tis a matter of opinion and preference and there is no right or wrong way to do it. Me? I would mount the scope on the receiver, just because that is where it belongs.

[jgt]

If mounted on the receiver you can count on minor adjustments each time the barrel is remounted to the receiver. The barrel mount not so much. Personally I would rather mount on the receiver and rezero each time.

[ranch23]

Do both, shoot it extensively, report back to us.

[balrog]

I think it depends on what kind of scope, that is the magnification range as well as the size of the beast. For higher magnification or even just a large size scope I would tend toward the receiver. An EER or dot sight might make a barrel mounting preferable. Although I am at "that age" where optics are helpful I find the handling and damage resistance of an uncluttered firearm to be paramount for actual field use when afoot. If optics it must be, fine, but workable irons whether open or aperture would be first on my mind.