OK, so I bought one of these Chiappa "L'il Badgers"...

[Unlicensed Dremel]

in .22 magnum, and accessorized it.

I'll put up some pics soon. Haven't shot it yet, other than shooting .22lr super colibris through it in the house, so hopefully range report will come along with pictures, since I'm going to range saturday.

Anybody shot one? The price was nice - definitely worth it, if it will shoot 2MOA or better. Probably worth it if it shoots 3 MOA or better.

Has a threaded barrel, 1/2" x 28 tpi

http://www.chiappafirearms.com/products/136

Ugly as day-old sin, but only 2 lbs, 15 oz before I accessorized it. 4 lbs 9 oz so far with scope, rings, paracord wrapping on the steel skeletonized buttstock frame, buttstock pouch/cheekpiece, and AFG. Will be well over 5 lbs after the pistol grip/cleaning kit deal comes in (ordered it today).

The sights are cheap plastic, and the buttstock endplate is plastic, but other than that, it's built ok. I may try to fashion a wood buttstock endplate for it.

Oh, the thread protector is sheer crap (plastic), so I ordered a steel thread protector too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-EJVPDmMzE

Stay tuned.

 

[ndking1126]

Subscribing, but not entirely sure why. Nothing wrong with different, I guess.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

I'll get an accuracy baseline before I post pics, and put it all up at the same time here. I will test at 50 yards with at least 2 ammo types, probably 3 types.

I get a kick out of youth and survival type single-shot rimfires, and combo guns like Savage 24s. Except for the AR7, which I found to be a jammomatic.

Oh, and the way I acquired this... bid on it on gunbroker just for fun, thinking my bid would be too low and I wouldn't win. I bid $165. Shipping was $20, and FFL was $15, so it's to my hands for $200 even.

And the more I think about it, the more I think I will fashion a wooden buttplate - should be fairly easy. Will use both a press-fit and epoxy for the wire frame to go into it.

But first it's gotta shoot 4 MOA (I decided); else I will sell. So I need a 2" 5-shot group at 50 yards - anyone placing odds? Ha ha. Going to the range tomorrow.

 

[Microgunner]

Yep, that one got an extra dose of ugly.
Hope it shoots better than it looks.
May have to get one.

 

[nemesiss45]

I want one, I think its cool

 

[jeager106]

Butt frugly thing ain't it?
Wonder why the rails on the thing?
2" at 50 with .22 mags? Maybe. Do let us know please.
Wonder what retail is on that thing?
You have $200 in the rifle & I passed on a really nice Marlin .22 M-25N with walnut stock & rings because it was $200 bucks. Thought it was $50 too much.
Maybe I should go back to the shop & grab that thing.
Haven't seen a Marlin .22 with walnut wood in 25 years.
By the way. I looked up reviews on the Chiappa firearms & found plenty of
comments. 90% were bad.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

I shot it today. Sighted in at 25 then went right to 100. Wasn't able to get on a 50 yard range.

Winchester Dynapoint 45s showed promise.... 5 shot group was roughly 3.5" or a bit less at 100 yards - well within acceptable range. Wind was only very slight. I was using a 3-9x40 scope on 9 power.

Armscor ammo was horrible. At least 6 or 7 MOA. It was absurd.

As soon as the Pistol grip thing comes in, I'm posting pics.

 

[Colt46]

3.5" at 100 yds

Pretty darned good for a rimfire.

No offense, but you baby sure is ugly.

 

[jersurf101]

The rifle looks like a good idea to save weight. It is not the prettiest though and the rails make me chuckle a bit. Good luck with it. Sounds like it is shooting ok for you to start

 

[dayman]

I kind of want one. It seems like a pretty ideal backpack/camping rifle.

 

[Brotherbadger]

Hmm..... Interesting....

 

[chris in va]

I saw one at the Buds Lexington store. It was so absurdly ugly and skeletal, I had a hard time not buying one. I just couldn't justify a $150 freaky single shot because...lets face it, it's still just a single shot 22 no matter the delivery system.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

They forgot to ship the p-grip thing, so I had to call and remind them to ship it; so as soon as it gets in, pics will be put up.

"just a single shot .22"? Really? Single shot rimfires are the shiznizzle. Only this one is arguably better than most, being about 1.5 lbs lighter than the average one.

All that really matters is performance, along with weight and shootability. Haven't wrung it out, but initial accuracy looks promising.

And I've definitely made it more shootable with the addition of buttstock doohickey.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

Finally, the P-grip thing came in (some shipping problems, too). So first some pics and "stats", then review.

So, I
--Removed sights
--Added scope to top rail with 45 degree offset rings (so that I can cock and un-cock the hammer easily)
--Removed two side P-rails
--Added the separate P-grip thing (with material removal from the rear of the "rail" to make it fit in further / better)
--Added AFG-1 to lower rail
--Wrapped the skeleton buttstock with paracord
--Added a buttstock nylon padded cheekpiece with zippered pouch
--Subbed out a steel thread protector for the crappy plastic one that came with it.

It weighs 4 lbs, 8.0 oz as shown in pics, with everything except for ammo in the pouch. The reason it didn't end up over 5 lbs like I thought it would, is because I subbed out a slightly smaller & lighter scope, and because the p-grip is very light, being all plastic except for the bolt part, rather than metal like I thought it was made from.

This thing would really shine with something like a no-battery Trijicon RMI-DI sight on it, and would obviously be lighter. The plastic "iron" sights that came on it are largely un-usable because you can't get your face down low enough to align with the line of sight, although they would be usable if you could, as they are fully adjustable and nice in that regard other than being plastic.

But hey, lookit, a Marlin 915 Youth, for example, in .22lr is only 4 oz less than this BEFORE any scope, and this is a .22 mag, not .22lr ... so the weight is still the main this going for this rifle. I think it is getting close to the perfect backpacking / long-trek subsistence rifle.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

Now the review.

Before I got the P-grip thing today, I would have given this a marginal thumbs up, in anticipation of getting the p-grip unit, due to pretty good accuracy and low price.

But I have to give it a marginal to moderate THUMBS DOWN now overall, and wouldn't buy one again, knowing what I know now.

First, the P-grip thing has a plastic body and somewhat thin plastic at that. It cost $25 shipped when it should have cost maybe $12 to $15 shipped at most, given the cheap materials in this thing.

So it needs to be made from aluminum or thicker plastic. Then the kicker is that the cap on it which holds in the cleaning kit (which is decent), is a press fit, not a screw-in, which is really unacceptable in my view even though it's a pretty tight press fit. It's just too cheesy, and I deem the p-grip very desirable overall for the general ergos of this rifle, so just throwing it to the side and not using is not a great option. One option would be to "fill" the p-grip body with a drying foamy / fiberglass type of substance that will add some heft and rigidity but not too much weight - then it will be tougher and more substantial and you'd just keep the cleaning kit elsewhere and wouldn't need the end cap at all (or you could just superglue the endcap on after filling with the thick foamy type material).

So bottom line, if the buttstock's buttplate was a material other than plastic, and the p-grip unit was a material other than plastic OR a much thicker plastic, I'd give this rifle a thumbs up. It's *just* on the wrong side of the junkiness continuum to recommend, though for $160 plus the accessories and FFL, it's hard to go wrong, espec. if you're going to suppress it, since it's already threaded. Possibly the best budget-suppressed-rimfire choice going.

I'm keeping it, so no doubt someday I'll fashion a better p-grip and more durable buttplate, but that's really more work than it's worth, even though I'm sure I'll do it.

By the way, this is a terrible, *horrible* choice for a kid's rifle, due to the *extremely* light trigger (well under 2 lbs) - this is great for precision for experienced shooters, but not kids or newbies.

 

[Magnum Wheel Man]

As soon as the Pistol grip thing comes in, I'm posting pics.

ah... that's what the lil rail is for in the grip area

grip sure adds to the ugly, could have been ergo molded plastic, & still used for storage... makes it look like a pellet gun ( kinda looks like a compressed air tank )

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

Yeah, the grip is ugly, and as noted above, cheap crap.

The "rail" there that you see under the receiver is useless as teats on a boar hog - it's too narrow to be a Picatinney or Weaver, and too wide to be an 11mm. The rail isn't even used to attach this factory grip. There are two drilled & tapped holes in two of the cross slots in the rail, into which the grip can screw.

It would have been much easier / better / nicer if it were an actual P-rail, because then you could just put on any number of aftermarket grips and it would rock. It would be a thumbs-up / buy recommendation from me in that event. Heck, even if it were a 3/8ths rimfire or an 11mm rail, I could probably buy a rail conversion adapter to turn it into a P-rail, and work from there. But it's a width in no-man's land. Useless.

As I say above, as it stands, thumbs DOWN for this rifle. Close but no cigar. Fail, Chiappa. Marginal fail, but fail nonetheless.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

By the way, note that there are two places to put your thumb when using the rifle like this with p-grip on:

1. "Standard", with thumb wrapped around the back of the p-grip, and
2. "Modified", with thumb up over the TOP of the receiver, and the middle, ring, and pinkie fingers in front of the p-grip, in vertical position.

Modified usually doesn't work for most rifles, because the grip/tang is too hefty, but with this rifle it works perfectly and feels great. The standard hold doesn't feel right, due to the cheapness/ cheesiness of the p-grip itself (and slippery-ness) - so I have to say, Modified as described above feels pretty good, and doesn't exert too much pressure on the cheap p-grip, since you can exercise "any-direction control" with the thumb on top pushing down, combined with the top of the middle finger pushing up on the receiver - without much pressure at all exerted onto the p-grip. So this copes with the cheapness and is a workable temp solution. But it still needs a solid wood, metal, or thick plastic grip, IMO.

And they have GOT to "heavy up" this trigger to around 2.5 lbs or even just 2.0 would be fine (which is a very unusual complaint). I have accidentally dry-fired several times with the slightest pressure in readying the dry-fire "shot" (using .17 hummer snap caps), with the current trigger that is just over 1.5 lbs. This is an expert-only gun, and as always, all 4 rules must always be followed.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

I made my own wood handle with two 10-32 screws holding it on.

 

[Unlicensed Dremel]

This should be the last update.

I did some epoxy/sanding/ painting work to make the wood pistol grip I made rock-solid.

It's finished except for putting the "correct" optic on it, and hopefully getting a heavier mainspring (and/or different sear) someday, to take it from less than 1.5 lbs, to over 2 lb trigger pull. And a suppressor of course.

It's still a marginal thumbs-down / don't buy, as mentioned, but AFTER the work I've done, it would be a big thumbs up for me if the trigger pull was "heavier-ed", and the top rail was metal not plastic, and the buttplate was wood or aluminum not plastic. The heavier trigger is the number 1 thing it needs right now to transform it to a marginal thumbs up. Frankly, the thing is so ridiculously light, I'd call it dangerous (arguably), and almost a hair trigger.