View Single Post
Old 01-10-2010, 19:04   #20
Rooster Rugburn
Got Pignose?
 
Rooster Rugburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hopefully, on your ignore list
Posts: 5,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ Niner View Post
Actually, I think you may have gotten a better deal than buying a new one, as the older ones had many parts that were metal vs. the current plastic substitutes. I don't mind buying/using guns that were DESIGNED with plastic parts/frames (this IS Glock Talk, after all), but when a gun has metal parts and suddenly the manufacturer changes over to plastic, it just seems to cheapen the product. Warped parts (look closely at the barrel band on those new 10/22s), mold marks (trigger housing), and even casting marks on the bottom of the barrel's front sight band. It's sad.
I tended to agree about he polymer trigger assembly. Mine is Al. I saw an article by someone who tested the new polymer design. They beat the rifle up pretty good and determined the polymer was actually more durable. One of the notable observations was a heavy blow to the trigger guard assembly. The aluminum version was bent, but the polymer version flexed back out and was usable. They beat it up pretty good, but the polymer still seemed to be worth the change. I'll try to find the link and ETA.

Found it:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-1022.htm


Quote:
Ruger has a fixture set up to do their drop tests on revolvers and pistols. We used this same fixture to drop a four and one-half pound weight directly upon the trigger guard portions of both the aluminum and polymer trigger housings. The video shows the results clearly. A standard 10/22 RB weighs in at about five pounds, so this 4.5 pound steel weight pretty much replicates what would happen to a 10/22 rifle if dropped directly upon its trigger guard onto a solid surface, such as steel or concrete. As the video and pictures show, the polymer unit takes the abuse much better than does its aluminum counterpart. From a height of two feet, the aluminum unit was badly bent. The polymer unit was undamaged. From three feet, the aluminum unit was cracked, and bent in enough to render the rifle inoperable. The polymer unit was only scratched. From four feet, the aluminum unit shattered, and the polymer unit suffered a small crack, but was still serviceable, and would not impede the operation of the rifle at all. Also, this was the same polymer unit that had already endured the two foot and three foot drops. We had to use a new aluminum unit for each of the tests. I was convinced. The polymer trigger housing is much tougher than the aluminum part. Still, being a traditionalist, old habits die hard for me. However, I do have to admit that realistically, polymer was the right choice that for that part, and is an improvement over the aluminum part, even if I do hate to admit it. Another plus for the polymer is that if it is scratched, it is the same color underneath, whereas the aluminum shows a scratch vividly.
__________________
Sent from American Standard low flow using Crappertalk.

Ever notice that people who say "There is no I in TEAM" are the ones always riding your coattails?

Last edited by Rooster Rugburn; 01-10-2010 at 19:10..
Rooster Rugburn is offline   Reply With Quote