Suppressed Ruger MK II

Schapman,

One other thought. Who ever you buy the suppressor from send them your Ruger and have them thread the barrel, don't do it yourself or have someone local do it.

The biggest reason is that if the threading in not perfectly done and the suppressor is keel just a tad the first bullet out could wreck the suppressor. If the manufacturer does it not only will it most probably be done right, but if it's not they should replace the gun(barrel) and suppressor.

The second reason is that most suppressor manufacturers make a thread cap to protect the threads when the suppressor isn't on the gun. They should be able to make one so that you really can't tell there is a cap on the barrel.
 
FWIW, my .22 tube is constructed from (don't laugh too loud) a Maglite 5-cell C cell tube cut off just shy of the button. An aluminum endcap was knurled and fashioned to press fit at the cut end and lock in with Allen screws. The original butt cap is the muzzle endcap. Twelve aluminum baffles were fitted with .5" spacers; .25" holes were drilled in the muzzle cap and baffles. Serial number is stamped on the unknurled portion of the tube. Overall length is 8.5", diameter 1.25. Bigger than store-bought, but fun (and a pain!) to build.

Yes, I applied for and rec'd the proper authorization for building the tube prior to construction. This was back about 15 years ago, when I was lucky enough to have a friend who was gunsmith/machinist and wanted to see if we could acutally make it work. Given my current situation, the general paranoia due to federal scrutiny and the cost of machine shop work, I'd probably just buy from Sound Technologies or Gemtech or Advanced Armament Corp and forget it.

Anyway, in spite of the turn of the century design (19th century, that is), my li'l Maglight Maxim tube has proven durable and fairly effective. Lacking scientific measuring equipment (I spent all my monies on barrels, threading, scopes and beer) its performance has brought plenty of smiles to my skeptical cohorts. On a 16" standard barrelled 10/22 RWS subsonic ammo produces an audible "click-clack" of the action, a slight hiss, and the "smack" of the round on plywood downrange. RWS induces malfunctions, however, due to excessive wax. Yechh!

The 10/22 action does not function at all with CCI CB longs, producing instead a "click" (hammer strike) and "smack" (round striking plywood) that is quite satisfying. Your desk stapler is no doubt louder.

Standard ammo, of course, produces a supersonic crack which nullifies the purpose of the project.

My new favorite round is the Aguila 60-grain "Subsonic Sniper" round. Reliable (no wax!), but smells awful. With the Aguila the High Standard pistol (4" barrel) sounds like an air hose under pressure. Dunk the tube in water, shake it out, and you dampen the sound (pun most definitely intended) to a loud sneeze.

Understand that these impressions were at the range where observers quieted down with each firing with the intention of listening. In the woods or in urban environments firing with the suppressor goes unnoticed; foilage softens sounds and street noises overwhelm them.

While accuracy with the rifle is not effected by the tube, point of impact is. Thus the scope -- a Beeman 1.5-4x airgun scope -- is sighted in for suppressor use. I get sub-1" groups at 25 yards, meaning that I'm as bad a shot with the tube as I am without it. I'm convinced the gun has a crappy trigger ... I know, excuses, excuses. My bull barrel 10/22 gets same hole groups at that range, so it's not just me. (Yeah, right.) I'd like to thread a bull barrel and put a tactical stock on the rifle.

My next step would be to fit decent sights on my High Standard (maybe even install a Weaver base for a scope) and refinish both the tube and gun with a gray moly coating for that "OSS" look.

Well, that's my little .22 project. Hey, my wife won't let me have a Harley. This is cheaper and safer, so what the heck!
 
Back
Top