Michigan Joe

I found a box of 22 shells I bought 40 years ago and the price on the box (from K-Mart), was $.87 or $.97. Given that inflation has been at least 1000% since 1970, the manufactures were getting a lot more per box than they are now. It is no wonder why when we buy the less expensive bullets now the quality is not there. It would not be so bad if the manufacturers were honest about the fact that the same name or brand does not mean the same over the years.

Check out This one http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/60987 I heard that the Mkii is a very accurate rifle and well worth the price.

The person who designed the ISSC m22 also designed the P12. The trigger may be more like the P22. Short answer is that I don't know.

I played with trigger today. It is pretty bad. Saw on web that one guy greased it at various points. I will try that in an attempt to smooth it out. Thanks.

Have not tried gun from a rest position. The trigger on the M22 is not good. I am not sure what effect a poor trigger has on shooting results. What effect does it have? The Browning's trigger is nice and crisp and consistent. As my son said about the M22, "I can't tell when it will go off."

I am hoping you guys can give me a bit of advice. I never shot handguns very much and cannot figure out what I must be doing wrong. I bought a Browning Challenger III back in 1983 and only starting shooting that a lot during the last couple of months. That gun has a 7 inch barrel. I shoot right-handed, but have to use my left eye to sight. I got to where, with the Browning" I can put 10 rounds into what is recognizable as a "group." However, with my new ISSC M22, the Glock clone, I am all over the target. The M22 is lighter and has a shorter barrel and therefore, a shorter sight plane. But you are talking only a two inch difference. The weight difference between Would that make that much difference? I have put about 600 rounds through the M22 and don't see much of an improvement in my marksmanship. I am shooting standing up about 20 or so yards from the target. Any advice would be appreciated.

25 years ago, in between marriages, I shot a lot if skeet. I did not like trap as you were only on one station. Sporting clays were new then, and I never got into that. I used a Kreighoff (sp?) over/under with tubes. Had a custom stock and a lot of work done on it. When you shot a lot of skeet (3 or 4 times a week), you need a shotgun that can go through a million shells without giving up the ghost. I was shooting about 800 shells a week at least. We all had about $10,000 into our guns back then. Of course we had more money than brains back in the 80's. I enjoyed skeet a lot, obviously. It really did make me into an excellent shotgunner. What made it enjoyable was the fact that I was hanging around with a bunch of other guys who liked shooting. We all eventually got married or remarried and the guns were packed away. If you want to get good at skeet, where you are shooting 98 or 99 out of a hundred consistently, you have to shoot a lot. We would get upset if we missed more than two or three birds a night. Oh yeah, we shot at night all during the winter and shot in the weekend shoots in the summer. We were a little nutty about the whole thing. That's why sporting clays is popular. They constantly change the stations to present you with different shots. As a result, you will have more fun and less frustration by shooting sporting clays than trap or skeet.

I don't think it would stop my mother-in-law, but it would not hurt to try.

Do you like it? I would like to get one as they look cool and don't seem to be a lot if complaints about them.

Yep, I meant the M22. I want to make it clear that I am used to shooting a early 80's Buckmark Challenger III, which has wood grips and is made all with metal. The M22, which looks like a Glock, was new to me. The looks grow on you, of course. Perhaps a big consideration is the weight. The M22 is light. Probably a pound. At first my groups were the size of a Volkswagon. They got a little better as I got used to the gun. I forgot to mention that the trigger action was not that good. I have no idea how to take the creep out of the action. My M22 had no trouble staying open after the last round. As I may have mentioned, loading the magazine was really nice and easy. And, it has the mag release on the side of the grip. A little separate button. That may be normal for Glocks, but I never saw it before, and I really liked it. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I liked the darn thing.

That is what I use. You may get a misfire here and there, but pretty solid stuff. The bullet itself looks like it has a waxy coating on it. I like to think it helps the feeding process, but lead is pretty slippery anyway, and it might have little or no effect. The Federal Lightning or Champion roundnose brand works just as well. Some guys think that the Blazers are dirtier than other ammo when they shoot.

Welcome. What do you still have to do to it. Looks nice.

Hey Woblinwheel, I have the same problem. My right eye has problems so I have tried to use my left eye. With pistols, if you shout with a two handed grip, there does not appear to be a big problem. It just feels a little weird. With a rifle, I tried and had big problems, so I just started using Red Dot scopes which just made it somewhat easier. I looked for left handed rifles and found the selection of real left-handed rifles, (one that ejected brass on the left) to be very limited. Perhaps if you find a method that works to shift from right eye to left eye shooting, you will let us know.

I picked up my Mk22 last Monday and today was the first time I shot it. It comes in a plastic case that is foam rubber lined. Also, with the gun comes several front sights that you use to adjust elevation. A small screwdriver is included to adjust the windage back sight. When I first saw the gun I was not impressed. It looked cheap to me and crudely made. Everything that can be made of plastic without the gun blowing up in your face, is made of plastic. Being that I paid $200 for the gun delivered, I could see how they could sell it for that price. That being said, after shooting 350 rounds through it, and having gotten used to its looks, I thought the gun performed very well. It did not like the Federal solid roundnose 40 grain bullets as much as it did the Blazers, but it could be that the Federals were too powerful, as there seemed to be a lot more stovepipes as the gun broke in. Perhaps it was cycling too fast and catching the case on the way back(?). I really liked the magazine. It was plastic, but a strong thick substance that had the look and feel of metal. Very easy to load. The grip had all of these little nubs to enhance the ability to grip the gun, but I found them uncomfortable. Next time, I will wear shooting gloves. The gun was fun to shoot in that because it is fairly light you get the impression that you are firing a more powerful weapon. However, it is never going to win any target shooting matches. A little too light. Blasting away at targets while practicing tactical moves seems to be what the gun is made for. Overall, the gun performs very well. You have to get past the "plastic" construction. Worth $200? Definitely. But, if you have several .22 handguns already, I do not think the Mk22 will end up being your favorite. I'd save up a little more and get something more substantial.

I believe that entry level guns will be made with the most inexpensive materials that can meet safety standards and performance standards Where plastic and cheaper metals can be used so that their use will not affect performance, they will. However, there will always be a market for well made guns with wood stocks or grips. Just like we will pay more for leather trim in our cars, we will pay more for that "special" weapon or one used for defense. I believe that the M-16 type straight stock will find its way into shotguns because the deminished barrel rise will help the shooter get back on target faster for the second shot. Just like extended forcing cones in shotguns are normal now and barrel porting is now common, straight stocks should be fairly normal in the future. Finally, the price of centerfire ammo is too high for recreational shooting. I think the move to .22 rimfire guns that mimic the size and feel Centerfire calibers will accelerate.

Remember those maintenance comics the Army put out? Here is one for the M-16 issued to the troops in Vietnam. Just click on each page to turn the page. http://www.ep.tc/problems/25/index.html

There is a picture of the Armi here a little down the page. http://www.thefirearmsforum.com/showthread.php?t=46591

Yes, I saw picture of Black Dog metal magazines. Sixty dollars, I think. But, now I think worth it.

It was bitter cold at times, so they had canvas tents with Franklin aka potbelly stoves that they fed with coal. The tents were hot inside and had a really bad smell. A lot of smoke inside tent. The guys probably kept throwing in too much coal. So, I just stayed outside and shot and shot and shot.

When I was in basic training, rifle practice was a half day event. Because we did not have enough guys to fill up both morning and afternoon sessions, if you wanted to, you could shoot both sessions. As I could not tolerate the coal stoves in the warm up tent, (I was in basic in the winter, Fort Leonard Wood), I shot two complete sessions each day of training. After a while, there were times I could see the 7.62 NATO round (reloads), travel down range to the targets that were far out. We used to shoot a lot of rounds. I recall several times where we had to get rid of the ammo , so I shot one clip after the other (with my three clips taped together), until the barrel turn red. So, is it fairly common to see the bullets going down range like that? By the way, I did not use ear plugs back in the army, and now constantly hear what sounds like the sounds of a summer night in the woods, crickets and such. Wear your ear protection!

Went out back today and ran 500 rounds through Sig. With Federals and CCI Blazers, no problem. Remington Thunderbolts had failures at least once in 10. It amazes me that Remington would put their name on such junk. The Sig 522 is a really nice gun. It cycled on all the shells. The Remingtons just failed to fire. The rifle just feels comfortable when holding it. The stock feels solid. The magazine that came with mine fits well and is not loose as some have said. The plastic magazine does ruin the looks of the gun in my opinion. I think it would look a lot more "bad ass" if it had a metal mag. I see where they do sell them. (Black Dog?). I think it would be worth it.

Apparently, Federal Lightnings are the same as Federal Target loads. Same specifications. So, what are the American Eagle brand shells?

That new Browning 1911 22 looks nice.

Walmart was selling 500 Federal lead round nose .22 LR for 14.75. 40 grains. "Lightning" brand. Today, found they replaced them with Federal "Target Loads.". 325 for same price. Grab the Lightning brand if you still can.

At Bud's you can layaway as many as you like. I have an ISSC Mkii on layaway as well as the Ruger. The catch is that you have to put 20% down and if you change your mind or don't pay it off on time, (90 days), you lose the 20%. You would get back the balance of any money you send them. You could just pay the 20% and not pay anything else until the end. I send them money whenever I have a few bucks extra. The problem is, of course, if you have more than one on layaway, it will take you longer to get the first one as your money will be split among several guns But, it takes the worry out of the possibility that the gun will be out of stock when you want it.