BOGO Ruger AR-556 and 10/22

[Liberty]

I've been debating with myself about buying either utility AR-15 or a .22 cal rifle. I have a bolt .308, but it does get kind of expensive to shoot with quality ammo. I wanted something I can shoot a lot and shoot a little cheaper. A .22s are a lot of fun, but I've been a little envious of the ARs when I see them being shot at the range. My wife spotted an Academy ad, and brought it to my attention. A 2 fer. The Ruger AR223 and a 10/22 for $699. She told me to go for it!

I picked them up today along with some ammo. They appear to be nicely made, and I expect they will meet my high expectations of Ruger reliability. Hopefully, I will get to take them to the range next week and put them through their paces. I'm gonna have some fun!!

[flechero]

Awesome! I would suggest a quality date night asap to say thanks and to reinforce those kind of suggestions!

[Liberty]

Awesome! I would suggest a quality date night asap to say thanks and to reinforce those kind of suggestions!

I think it's gonna happen!

[Liberty]

I took both guns to the range today. Shot at 25 yards to sight them in.

AR 556 16 inch:
Shot 20 rounds through it. It was shooting 2 inches low and 3 to the right. It was treated internally with a thick clear oil (not cosmoline). I had to adjust the rear sight quite a bit to get the line of fire horizontally centered. I didn't bring the tool with me bring up up the front sight. I'll bring the tool next time and adjust it for 50 yards. The trigger was decent. The gun went through the 20 rounds flawlessly. I never put more than 5 rounds in the 30 round magazine. The AR is a pain in the buttocks to clean. It is fun to shoot though. I'm liking the economical ammo, It's a lot cheaper than .308 which have been costing me about a buck a round. It's been about 47 years since I have shot and cleaned an AR platform. I must say this Ruger is a lot better than the Colt crap they pawned onto Uncles soldiers. The plastic furniture is pebbly and grippy where it needs to be and the adjtable stock is pretty nice. Fit is not as rattely as the old M16. I think the ammo (Hornady .223 FMJ) burns cleaner. I don't know if I will put any optics on this thing maybe some day a red dot.

I don't plan on doing much customization on this. gun, a couple 20 round p-mags and maybe a red-dot down the road. It's a fun shooter, alhough I'm not sure what role it will serve in my self defense plans. Maybe for home defense, or a car gun. Regardless it will see a lot of range time.

Ruger 10/22
Part of the BOGO was including the .22. It comes with a 10 round rotary mag. Which is a little bit of a pain to load, but gets a little easier with practice. I shot 25 rounds through it about 10 rounds of CCI Standard velocity, and 10 of Remmington High velocity. I was warned that the standard velocity might not be enough to cycle the bolt. This proved to be not an issue so far.

The front sight is tiny, the sights are fixed and not easily adjustable. My first volley was high, I figured out that I was lineing the sights up wrong. I needed to set the front bead to fill the center notch in the rear sight. Pattern was pretty tight. It too was fun to shoot and operated flawlessly.

I was surprised at my first shot. I could hear the the bolt cycle but there was literally no bang. I was wearing my muffs maybe the muffs attenuated the bang more than the bolt noise. I had long forgotten the joy of shooting a .22 I need to find a good plinking range.

Scorpian:
While at the range I was standing back while I was picking up my gear admiring 2 young men shooting a kewl looking gun. They noticed my studying the gun and explained it was a 9MM CZ Scorpian with a shoulder stock. They offered to let my shoot it!! I shot off a couple of rounds but it took a lot of discipline on my part not to unload the whole mag.

Overview:
The two guns I bought performed well, they are Value oriented, and well made so typically Ruger. I have full confidence that these guns will give years of trouble free shooting. These aren't tackdrivers, but are good practical utilitarian guns. and are capable of shooting better than my abilities. I own 3 Rifles all of them Rugers. There might be better guns, but these are mine and I'm getting quite proficient with them.

[bblhd672]

I took both guns to the range today. Shot at 25 yards to sight them in.

Ruger 10/22

The front sight is tiny, the sights are fixed and not easily adjustable. My first volley was high, I figured out that I was lineing the sights up wrong. I needed to set the front bead to fill the center notch in the rear sight. Pattern was pretty tight. It too was fun to shoot and operated flawlessly.

My first outing with my 10/22 I discovered the front bead was just too small for me to see with my aging eyes. So I bought these HiViz sights to go on it.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MR ... pldnSite=1

Lot easier to see and shoot accurately.

[cyphertext]

I didn't bring the tool with me bring up up the front sight. I'll bring the tool next time and adjust it for 50 yards.

If you had bullets, you had the tool. You can use the tip of an fmj round to depress the detent and turn the sight.

I must say this Ruger is a lot better than the Colt crap they pawned onto Uncles soldiers.

Ummm.... no. Glad you like your new rifle, but let's not get carried away here. The Ruger AR 556 is a good, budget minded entry into the AR field, but it is not better than the Colt. Meets your needs, yes... better bargain, maybe... but straight up better, no.

[Jusme]

I like my Ruger AR 556. It too needed quite a bit of adjustment to sight in the iron sights, but once set, it puts good groups out to 100 yards, with inexpensive practice ammo. I did install a quad rail hand guard, and a Houge pistol grip and stock. I may put an after market trigger on it, but for my needs right now, the factory trigger works fine.

[mcscanner]

...snip...

The AR is a pain in the buttocks to clean.

...snip...

I think what you need is an AR15 Cleaning Link. It holds the upper and lower apart and keeps the two from flopping around if the upper and lower have not been completely separated. It will remove much of the pain.

Mike

[Liberty]

I didn't bring the tool with me bring up up the front sight. I'll bring the tool next time and adjust it for 50 yards.

If you had bullets, you had the tool. You can use the tip of an fmj round to depress the detent and turn the sight.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I was only shooting at 25 yards and wasn't too concerned about elevation yet anyway. I'll make some gross adjustment here at home and dial it in at 100 yrds next trip the the range.

I must say this Ruger is a lot better than the Colt crap they pawned onto Uncles soldiers.

Ummm.... no. Glad you like your new rifle, but let's not get carried away here. The Ruger AR 556 is a good, budget minded entry into the AR field, but it is not better than the Colt. Meets your needs, yes... better bargain, maybe... but straight up better, no.

I was refering to the one I was issued 47 years ago.
The M16 the one I was issue was a piece of crap. They were poorly fitted and easily jammed. It may qualify as the most hated weapon in American history. I know they improved later on, but 47 years ago when they issued me mine I wasn't impressed. Neither were most soldiers. The auto function was pretty kewl, but not all the effective. I had been issued some good stuff in the Army and some crappy stuff, but the M16 was was one of the worst pieces of crap I ever got issued. We called therm Jamomatics or Mattels. Later on I got issued an M16-1a. It was better, but I'm not convinced (other than the Automatic selection) that it was any better than a $500 Ruger. They were slick to hold, and rattly like they had loose parts.

[Liberty]

I think what you need is an AR15 Cleaning Link. It holds the upper and lower apart and keeps the two from flopping around if the upper and lower have not been completely separated. It will remove much of the pain.

Mike

It might help, but the truth is the small caliber makes it a tight fit to scrub along with so many parts, it will never be as easy to clean as full caiber pistol, or my .308 bolty.

[bblhd672]

I was only shooting at 25 yards and wasn't too concerned about elevation yet anyway. I'll make some gross adjustment here at home and dial it in at 100 yrds next trip the the range.

Here's a good forum thread about sighting in an AR. http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=53365

[cyphertext]

I was refering to the one I was issued 47 years ago.
The M16 the one I was issue was a piece of crap. They were poorly fitted and easily jammed. It may qualify as the most hated weapon in American history. I know they improved later on, but 47 years ago when they issued me mine I wasn't impressed. Neither were most soldiers. The auto function was pretty kewl, but not all the effective. I had been issued some good stuff in the Army and some crappy stuff, but the M16 was was one of the worst pieces of crap I ever got issued. We called therm Jamomatics or Mattels. Later on I got issued an M16-1a. It was better, but I'm not convinced (other than the Automatic selection) that it was any better than a $500 Ruger. They were slick to hold, and rattly like they had loose parts.

Remember, many of the issues with the original M16 were due to using a different powder than what the rifle had been designed for and tested with, and the idea of the rifle being "self cleaning". As far as rattling, it never affected the accuracy or performance, but I am betting that machining techniques are a little better today, allowing for the tighter tolerances that we see now. They've come along way in 47 years.

[Liberty]

I was refering to the one I was issued 47 years ago.
The M16 the one I was issue was a piece of crap. They were poorly fitted and easily jammed. It may qualify as the most hated weapon in American history. I know they improved later on, but 47 years ago when they issued me mine I wasn't impressed. Neither were most soldiers. The auto function was pretty kewl, but not all the effective. I had been issued some good stuff in the Army and some crappy stuff, but the M16 was was one of the worst pieces of crap I ever got issued. We called them Jamomatics or Mattels. Later on I got issued an M16-1a. It was better, but I'm not convinced (other than the Automatic selection) that it was any better than a $500 Ruger. They were slick to hold, and rattly like they had loose parts.

Remember, many of the issues with the original M16 were due to using a different powder than what the rifle had been designed for and tested with, and the idea of the rifle being "self cleaning". As far as rattling, it never affected the accuracy or performance, but I am betting that machining techniques are a little better today, allowing for the tighter tolerances that we see now. They've come along way in 47 years.

You are right about the powder, but there have been other design changes which have been for the better. I mentioned texturing, and adjustable stocks. But the availability of rails etc. I really hated that first M16 assigned to me. These newer guns are far superior. I am just getting used it and maybe I'm just a better shooter than I was then, but even my modest Ruger seems more accurate than my old M16 was. I'm sure glad things have improved for our soldiers, the M4 from what I read is an excellent weapon. The Old M16 was getting a few of them Killed back in the day.

[Liberty]

I was only shooting at 25 yards and wasn't too concerned about elevation yet anyway. I'll make some gross adjustment here at home and dial it in at 100 yrds next trip the the range.

Here's a good forum thread about sighting in an AR. http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=53365

Good information. It turns out that I might be sighted in pretty close as it is now.

[Jusme]

I was only shooting at 25 yards and wasn't too concerned about elevation yet anyway. I'll make some gross adjustment here at home and dial it in at 100 yrds next trip the the range.

Here's a good forum thread about sighting in an AR. http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=53365

Good information. It turns out that I might be sighted in pretty close as it is now.

Mine was also, I guess it was the thread listed, here, that I used as a reference when sighting at 25 yards, my first trip to the range. I was keeping it at about 1.5" low at 25 yards, and then when I was able to get to the 100 yard range, it was only .5" high. I haven't tested it at 50 yards, and would have preferred to test it at 100 yards the first time out, but it was raining, and I went to an indoor range. Since this is my first AR, and I wasn't in the military, I can't compare mine to anything else, but I have had zero issues with it, shooting everything from 50 grain, FMJ, to 75 grain JHP. It has eaten everything I fed it, and the accuracy, seems very consistent. I plan to get some tactical training with it, and use it as a HD/truck gun,once I feel more proficient with it.