10/22 steel vs aluminum receiver
I have a tricked out little 10/22 and your forum has me thinking about taking it to the next level. I may have missed it, but have you guys seen any advantage to the steel receivers over the aluminum ones like Kidd offers. Most of what I have read so far seems to indicate that the extra money for steel is not worth it.
There's a video by one of the rimfire authorities that counsels against free float barrels
with aluminum receivers. I have two aluminum receiver rifles with free floating barrels.
Neither of which has broken a receiver yet. May wake up tomorrow with both cracked.
Steel receiver, like the Kidd, would give you a option for a screw in free floated barrel.
Clearances are supposed to be a good bit tighter too. Rambo can tell you more about
Look at the 9-10 Pine Belt match results. SA Custom was won by a Kidd shot from
sandbags. Regular "old school" sandbags in a light gusting wind. If cost is no object I
don't see how you could go wrong with the Kidd. If budget is a consideration, I always
felt that I got the most bang for the buck buying a great barrel. Good luck with
whatever you decide.
I think there are'nt but a couple of companies that make steel one's?
Originally Posted by Brbob1
I think there's only a couple of companies that make's and you are right high priced for sure. I don't see any different's in them but the weight and the 22 magnum Ruger was done in steel (investment cast) and they quit making them some few year's back because the receiver was cracking. Weather the barrel is clamped on or screwed on (which I think the screwed in is the best to use) they will work good as the barrel that's used on it with afew other mod's will do ok. Setting headspace and a good match barrel is what I'm saying. I don't think Kidd has any steel made receiver's only aluminum with the clamp on or screwed on barrel's. I built a tool tothread the standard receiver's and it work's good, I got a picture posted on it in another thread over here in our semi-auto forum. These little rifle can be made to shoot and time will tell as we go along and learn trick's from each other on here, YBRF Rambo (Douglas)
PS: Hay J, I've never heard of a Ruger receiver cracking from free floating the barrel's, they will work one way or the other free floated. You just have to try them with or without support on the barrel and you know how we do it, which ever way work's we go with it.
Last edited by Rambo; 09-26-2011 at 10:22 PM.
Rambo, I lied. Oldtimers kicking in I guess. 3 Marlin's and 2 597's have floating barrels.
Originally Posted by Rambo
Ruger still uses a single bolt pressure point arrangement.
Sadly only 1 Marlin and 1 597 are decent shooters. Finding rifles bored with a worn out
reamer, rifled with a new button and chambered with a worn out chambering reamer
has been difficult.
My mistake, I thought the Kidd had a stainless receiver. Is the MOA stainless
receiver not as tight as the Kidd? MOA is selling for about $165.
Last edited by dead_end; 09-27-2011 at 08:42 AM.
10/22 Receivers...SS vs. Aluminum
There's nothing wrong about using a SS receiver but, there's not going to be anything particularly gained either. The material is not going to impact accuracy one way or the other IMO. As to floating the barrel in an aluminum receiver, what they are really talking about is floating a heavy barrel in a slip-fit aluminum receiver. Jim Clark Jr. (whom I respect) discourages this but acknowledging his expertise, there have been any number of shooter to do it successfully. In some cases where the barrel is a known commodity, I've even seen some barrels that were permanantly glued in and floated. On conventional slip-fit receivers, Kidd, OEM or otherwise, there is generally a lot of agreement that best results come from bedding the action and the first inch and a half or so of the barrel immediately in front of the receiver. This method works very well for me and all mine are done this way except for a Kidd Supergrade gun (with threaded receiver) which has a 20" heavy SS barrel totally floated.
Originally Posted by Brbob1
For anyone wanting to check the benefit of totally floating one I'd tend to think barrel choice would have to play into it. There are an awful lot of lightweight barrels out there and I don't think there would be risk to any receiver on those as compared to a 20 or 21 inch full SS barrel. I do suspect that the lightweight barrels will actually perform best with a bit of support as mentioned above near the receiver but, that's just my opinion. I even use a little pad under a Magnum Research 16.5 inch carbon fiber barrel in one gun and it's superb for such a flyweight gun. Bottom line, I don't really believe it would hurt to test and evaluate one totally floated and the bedding pad could always be added if necessary. Other than the Clark caveat, I've never seen, read or heard about an aluminum receiver risks or of being damaged by floating a barrel. I think the prevailing method of putting a short bedding pad under the barrel at the receiver is more for shot-to-shot consistency in slip-fit receivers than anything else.
Bedding my 10/22 + another question for Rambo
I piller bedded my Evolution Stock and bed about an inch of the barrel channel. without any rear receiver screw it is rock solid.
Thanks for confirming that there is nothing to gain with a steel receiver.
Rambo, did your shimmed stock receiver give you about the same accuracy gain as going with a Kidd receiver??
The accuracy of my 10/22 verse's the Kidd
Originally Posted by Brbob1
I went back and looked at the result's on my 10/22, bro-n-law's 10/22 and our friend's Kidd 10/22 (which has not shot but 4 matches this year), the best agg's on all of them was like this My 10/22 best so far was a .354, bro-n-law's 10/22 was a .322 and the Kidd's was a .321. So I figure that's pretty good between our top 3 rifle's in our club right now. But I'm still not done with mine, when the season end's this coming month, I'm going to thread out my receiver and put a Anschutz barrel blank I got ready for it. It's threaded and chambered with a Anschutz reamer, we are going to see what this will do maybe improvement I hope. Just try some more tinking on these rifle's to see if it will work. Now that Kidd I put together for BW, I shot it in ideal condintion's no wind and so on and got a agg of .171 out of it with Wolf ME ammo. The agg's I mentioned above was all shot in the wind's during the day so it make's a alot of different's with the condintion's. The Kidd's will shoot for sure with the right ammo. YBRF Rambo (Douglas)
Good, that tells mw what I need to know.
If I would get the Trigger system 2 stage it may do alot better?
If I would get Kidd's 2 stage trigger system and put it in my rifle, it just might do alot better than the trigger I got in it. It break's at 2 3/4 lbs and that's it for semi-auto operation's. Anything under that you got to hang on (LOL!!!) fullauto city. That's going to be another up grade I do also, get the 2-4 oz pull and it's fine also. YBRF Rambo (Douglas)
There is a guy on ebay who does trigger jobs on 10/22. He did mine and I am very pleased with it. Very reasonable cost too.
You probably already know this Rambo so, please disregard if you do. FWIW, I have 3 of Kidd's single-stage triggers and 2 of his two-stage (1-straight blade, 1-curved). The single-stage comes by default @ 1.5 Lbs and if you need a single stage, this one has no equal...zero takeup and breaks like a glass rod with no overtravel. Of course, the 2-stage is a different critter and it's smoothness makes if feel and shoot even better than the trigger guage shows. I've played with mine at various weights and have pretty well settled at about 5.5-ounces on both stages. It's real hard to be precise on the 1st stage since you have to get the guage reading from where it hits the stop at the 2nd stage and when you get down this light, it's not as easy to tell as you might think. As best I can tell, I'm right at 5 or 6 ounces on the first with the total break just under 11 ounces. Regardless, a very sweet trigger and you can bet it will tighten your groups. I would wholeheartedly recommend the 2-stage for bench use but I still like the SS for all-around plinking and casual stuff.
Originally Posted by Rambo
Yes sir, they are both great trigger system's?
Originally Posted by D. Manley
You are right about those trigger system's, they are fine piece's of art. The 2 stage system is the finest I've ever shot with. That Kidd SG rifle that I put together had the 2 stage trigger with it and it was set in the lowest setting when we got it around 2 or 4 oz. It is a fine trigger and I recommend it for BR shooting, YBRF Rambo (Douglas)