Category: Gratuitous Gun Pics

Fiend Reader JC_In_PA sends me this article, which compares two old rimfire warhorses (the Marlin Model 60 and the Ruger 10/22) and then invites me to wade into the argument — which he correctly compares to the various X vs. Y arguments in the gun world (.45 ACP vs. 9mm, etc.).

And I respectfully decline the invitation.

You see, I’ve owned both at various times in my life, fired at least a jillion rounds through each — more than a few times at the same range session together — and for the life of me I can’t / won’t declare a favorite.

I love the heavier barrel of the Mod 60 — I shoot it more accurately than I do the 10/22 — and likewise prefer the reloading ease of the 10/22’s magazine over the Marlin’s tube.

At the moment, I don’t have a 10/22 — if anybody has a spare one that isn’t worn out, I’ll take it under advisement — but I’m not under any pressure to get one because I do have a Mod 60 standing in Ye Olde Gunne Sayfe #2 (alongside its bolt-action brother, the scoped Mod 880 SQ).

With these two Marlin brothers, therefore, I can indulge my plinking needs, whether in volume at tin cans (60) or when the occasion calls for single-hole accuracy at varmints or swinging plates (880).  I am blissfully happy with either activity.  While both rifles “prefer” CCI Min-Mag ammo, the Mod 60 will shoot just about anything, whereas the 880’s pinhole accuracy tends to drift towards more of a quarter-sized hole.

So yeah, I could do with some kind of 10/22 (because reasons) — such as this one:

…because with my crappy old-fart-eyesight, I need a scope to see the stupid target and one is somewhat limited in scope choice with the Mod 60 because of the scope mount shortcomings;  but I can’t honestly say that the lack thereof is burning a hole in my psyche, either.

What I really want is a Ruger 10/22M (.22 Win Mag) in its “International” full-stock variation:

…but they make hen’s teeth look like a household commodity, and when one does become available, it’s generally at a price which makes my nuts ache and causes my trigger finger to go numb.

Anyway… I seem to have wandered off the reservation here, but there ya go.

Marlin Model 60 or Ruger 10/22?  Take yer pick;  either is a good choice.

By the way:  everyone does own a .22 rifle, right?  Because if not:

It’s un-American.

(Furrin Readers — including those in New Jersey — get a pass on this one, because as we all know, semi-auto .22 rifles are the cause of a million human deaths every second — I read it on Teh Intarwebz, so it must be true  — and that’s why they’re banned in your benighted countries.)

Oh, and the title of this post?

The Marlin was released in 1960, while the Ruger 10/22 was released in 1964, making last year its sixtieth anniversary.

My old pal, the late Airboss once said (pace  the old AT&T ad) that everyone should own at least one rifle that can “reach out and touch” someone.

Here’s my candidate, which has the added benefit of almost utter silence with the proper add-on, the CVA Scout, chambered in the .300 Blackout:

Yes, it’s a single-shot rifle (but that means it’s both quiet and cheap — nothing wrong with that little scenario).  Also, I would venture to suggest that if you do your part, a quick reload should be entirely unnecessary.

In fact, it’s difficult to imagine a better gun for pig-hunting, where the sound of the shot from a regular rifle makes the other pigs scatter like flies.  With silence comes an excellent chance for a further pop, or three…

I also like that the Scout can also come with a short barrel (ribbed  threaded for your pleasure).

I have also said in the past that hunting with a single-shot rifle is not o be sneered at, because nothing concentrates the mind better than knowing that one shot is all you’ll get.  And I’m all over that one, with my own peerless Browning High Wall:

…but I must say that the CVA does make the old trigger-finger itch a little, because of its utter stripped-down utility and scope-ready rail (which the Browning does not have).

Worth some consideration, yes?

SOTI, Chris Cypert talks approvingly about revolvers as self-defense weapons:

I set out to learn all I could about revolvers, their strengths and weaknesses, and how to use them effectively for self-defense. Did I learn that revolvers are obsolete relics of the previous century? That’s what I expected, but instead I learned that revolvers are still more than sufficient for self-defense and can even be the optimal tool in certain contexts. Let’s examine the strengths of revolvers for armed citizens and self-defense.

And then he goes on to list all of them.

As most Readers know, I keep a S&W Mod 65 next to the bed — my “bedside” gun — because in any kind of bad situation, a revolver is like a fork:  you pick it up, and it works.

No scrabbling for a safety, no racking of a slide, none of that.  You get it in your hand and pull the trigger… bang!  and it’s all over.  (Okay, bang! bang! bang!  etc. as the need arises.)

It’s that instinctive action that makes me do the above.  Gawd knows that I have practiced for countless hours with my 1911, and its operation is by now about as automatic and instinctive as I could possibly get it.  And it’s the reason I keep it under the revolver… as a backup, because I do believe that by the time I’ve emptied the Model 65’s cylinder, I’ll be awake enough to grab and operate my 1911 (which is always kept cocked and locked anyway), should I need more than six shots.

This is my way, and if yours is different, that’s fine — whatever works for you, works for you.

But just as Cypert learned about the excellence of the revolver as a self-defense piece, maybe my argument will help you, and perhaps at a time of the direst emergency.

Think about it.