10/22 Vs. 795

[C_1]

The Ruger 10/22 is more expensive, at about $200, and the Marlin 795 could be had for $140 (plus $25 rebate). Out of the box, the Marlin is a bit more accurate than the Ruger, but the Marlin feels cheap, because of the stock. If you like to mod and upgrade your guns, the 10/22 has more aftermarket parts available for it, than the 795.

[easy]

I own both and they both serve my purpose. I usually don't let newbs handle my 1022 because I put a nice chunk of money on it. I don't worry as much with my 795 because if it gets dropped or scratched, it was still a $130 gun. The 795 is very accurate BTW.

This is where I am on this. Different tools have different uses. Get the tool for your job.

[roushstage2]

The new synthetic 10/22's with the plastic parts on it don't feel too different IMO when compared to the synthetic 795's...except that one costs twice as much as the other. Though, I really didn't care for the feel of the synthetic 10/22 at all actually. Felt very odd compared to my c.1975 10/22 with the wood stock and all metal parts.

[enegue]

I was looking at both a little while ago as well. Went to the gun shop to look at both side-by-side. I suggest you do the same. I have a lever action Marlin .22 which is amazing. But I didn't like the 795. Didn't feel good to me and the mag release is terrible. The Ruger 1022 felt much more solid, so I picked one up.

[enegue]

Personally, I you spend a little extra for the 1022 simply for the fact that it was deemed reliable enough to be put to use by the IDF



good luck with your decision

Love the custom cheekpiece.

[Lex]

Ok,

Turner's has them on sale for $109 after MFR rebate and Big 5 has it for $124 after rebate. Hmmmmmm I cant decide...LOL.... Might just going to pick up two and do some testing between the two rivals.

[trob]

The Marlin 795 is the magazine fed version of the Marlin 60 which was made 4 years before the 10/22 and has sold over 11 million copies over the Ruger's over 5 million. I can not find the number of Marlin 70 and 795's sold but I'd wager its a couple million as well. And yes these numbers are from wikipedia so take them with a grain of salt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlin_Model_60

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_10/22

Sorry but there's nothing cheesy about this:


The Marlin 795 may be cheaper then a 10/22 but it's Micro Grooved Barrel is far superior to the Rugers. Another thing that Marlins have stock that Rugers don't is a last shot hold open.

Is the stock amazing? No, its not but its functional. To me a ruger synthetic feels pretty much about the same.

But here's an idea:

With the money you save on the Marlin you can pick up a Boyd's stock for the 795. They have 4 styles and many colors available.

http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/Boyds-Rimfire-Target-Hunter-Marlin-s/196.htm

http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/Boyds-Ross-Rimfire-VT-Marlin-s/187.htm

http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/Boyds-...rlin-s/158.htm (out of stock for now)

http://www.boydsgunstocks.com/Replacement-Stocks-for-Marlin-s/186.htm

Also DIP makes triggers, guards, charging handles and rails for it before people say there is no after market parts

http://www.diproductsinc.com/Products.aspx?CAT=3603

So lets see better barrel, LSHO, your pick of amazing stock and still cheaper then a Ruger. Hmm that's a hard decision...

Here's what nutnfancy has to say:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzUb2_sWorE

really, is that how big 5 sells them now?

the factory stock is lame but that can be changed like you have shown. The part I have a problem with is the complete receiver (trigger, receiver and innards). The machining is rough, the action is not smooth, the trigger is far worse, its not as adaptable, and it just feels cheaply thrown together. Im sure you could go through the whole thing and smoothen it up a bit. but i still dont like them enough to own one.

[Chaos47]

Did you even bother to read my post? Apparently not. It's easier to just look at the photo.

Anyways trob you have "a horse in this race" so its no wonder you think the 10/22 is better

[roushstage2]

Let's not act like no one spends money on different stocks and such for the more expensive 10/22 either...

[Shoxg]

I have had both.
In the hands the wood stock Ruger feels better then the synthetic Marling.

Getting rounds down range and accurately goes to the Marlin when new out the box.
Ruger has more aftermarket upgrades available.

Are you looking for a blank canvas to start you own personal gun or are you looking for a great shooter out of the box and never touch it again?

I like the Marlin for $125
I dont really like the Ruger for $225 if it was $175 Maybe.

Most people spend the $225 on a Ruger then ditch the stock Barrel and Stock. Thats at least another $150-$175 on top of the $225.

[dirtykoala]

Let's not act like no one spends money on different stocks and such for the more expensive 10/22 either...

That's a major selling point of the 10/22 though. If you go to rugers site they even have like 75 different versions or so of the 10/22.

If you are really just looking for the cheapest thing you can get to shoot .22 out of, marlin wins. If you want something more fun and customizable, marlin is out the door.

There's a reason that aftermarket companies sell $450 10/22 receivers, $400 barrels, $200 trigger kits... The 10/22 can be made into a great .22 that compete with the best of them, but for much cheaper, the 795... You're pretty much stuck with it the way you get it.

Even a really tricked out 10/22 isn't all that expensive in terms of gun prices. You can do pretty much everything possible to it including a scope and you'll have a really fun, accurate, gun for the price of a cheap AR or a cheap 1911.

[Raptor3000]

I would say 795, i have one with Tech sights and love it. Also, like the magazine on 795 instead of 10/22.

Why spend more on a 22LR rifle, spend that saved cash on an AR or AK.

Thanks

[jbush]

the factory stock is lame but that can be changed like you have shown. The part I have a problem with is the complete receiver (trigger, receiver and innards). The machining is rough, the action is not smooth, the trigger is far worse, its not as adaptable, and it just feels cheaply thrown together. Im sure you could go through the whole thing and smoothen it up a bit. but i still dont like them enough to own one.

Isn't this what people do to a 10/22. Stock 10/22 has bad trigger, so so barrel that's why people add 6 or 8 hundred dollars to it. First they dump the barrel then rework or dump the trigger group. I know, I'm one of those suckers with a 900 dollar 10/22. Shoots awesome, and I'm not sorry at all that I built it, but all thats left is a factory receiver, trigger, bolt have been reworked and the stock and barrel replaced. If your looking for an out of the box shooter, my neighbors 795 feels a little cheesy to me, but shoots just as good as my stock 10/22

[roushstage2]

That's a major selling point of the 10/22 though. If you go to rugers site they even have like 75 different versions or so of the 10/22.

If you are really just looking for the cheapest thing you can get to shoot .22 out of, marlin wins. If you want something more fun and customizable, marlin is out the door.

There's a reason that aftermarket companies sell $450 10/22 receivers, $400 barrels, $200 trigger kits... The 10/22 can be made into a great .22 that compete with the best of them, but for much cheaper, the 795... You're pretty much stuck with it the way you get it.

Even a really tricked out 10/22 isn't all that expensive in terms of gun prices. You can do pretty much everything possible to it including a scope and you'll have a really fun, accurate, gun for the price of a cheap AR or a cheap 1911.

That wasn't the point of my post though. It was in response to this:

really, is that how big 5 sells them now?

[jbush]

OP at 110 bucks, I don't think you can go wrong. I think I might pick one up for my grandson. He's 7 months old, but by the time he's shooting age you'll probably will need a $110 DROS fee, have to make an appointment and take your lawyer with you to help fill out the paperwork to buy a rifle in this state.