shootingbuff
Well-Known Fanatic
Hello one and all,
DISCLAIMER: These are my initial shooting impressions with my Ruger 22/45 Lite. Not saying yours has less, more, or the same issues. This is my experience with this one example of the Ruger 22/45 Lite.
==============================================================================
First I am not a great fan of the 1911 grip (nothing wrong with it, just not a fan) and have a 1950s Standard (4†barrel) and a Government Target (GT). I really like how the original framed pistol sits in the hand versus having to be held as the 22/45. My 12 year old daughter who has only shot the Standard and the GT once feels the same way. Now the grips I liked being that they are at least for now tacky to the feel though being a .22 one need not worry about the recoil. If one wants to dress their pistol up there are many 1911 grips that are “pretty†to choose from.
Of course having an “American†magazine (mag) release in lieu of the “European†mag release is a plus unless the “American†mag release is short and you are used to the “European†style heel release. Getting past the different locations of the mag release is nothing but a training issue, but being that the mag release on the Lite is short (I would assume the same for all 22/45s) it does present a problem. I have heard that there is an extended mag release in the aftermarket world, which supports the fact that the mag release should’ve been longer and is difficult by many to operate. Before any start with the small hands etc comments I shoot Glocks with no issues regarding the mag release.
Trigger, well let’s say it needs work, but to give it credit in a heavier gun it would not seem as bad. In the approximately 100ish rounds I was able to shoot through the pistol either the trigger was already smoothing out or I was getting used to it. Maybe a bit of both. I will be swapping out the parts for a complete trigger kit after I see what I can do with trigger.
Sights, I dislike a black front sight on a dark target as well as black on black sights and before I even shot the Lite, I painted the front sight white. I was going to use florescent orange, but the paint was past its prime. That stated the paint made picking up the front sight easier on dark targets as well as discerning the front from the rear when sighting. This was mostly due to the fact that the front sight is so thick. The rear adjustable made getting rounds on target a breeze.
The weight of the Lite is what caused me to purchase the pistol. I was looking for a KT512 for my daughter and the store only had 22/45s. Again I am not a big fan of the 1911 grip and I have a bucket full of mags for the original grip frame. Though keeping options open I asked to see the Lite. WoW! The thing belies its advertised weight. I figured I am getting old and the pistol is so lite that it will be my next pack pistol. A bonus would be if my daughter preferred the grip then I could get her one of the 22/45s that the store had on hand with the 5.5 Bull barrel.
The magazines, magazine well, and orientation of the top round SUCKS! I was thinking I could get some practice for action pistol shooting. Well NOT! Iit takes forever and a day sometimes getting the mag into the pistol and seated. Without getting into the pistol I think this is at least in part caused by the mag disconnect. Once you get the mag seated then you have to make sure the top round (for me) was not sticking up. It appeared if it was it would hang up in the mag well, again. Then if the mag seats and the round is sticking up when the bolt goes home the bullet gets a nice gouge in the middle because it is not orientated correctly to run into the chamber straight and true. WTHeck? This prevents practice for action pistol or defense; if having to use the pistol for defense you better hope a round is chambered and you don’t have to change mags. Really puts a damper on plinking, sighting in, and would be highly detrimental in a crises situation. These issues with the mag I would think could be common to all 22/45 platforms since they share the same mag and frame.
The accuracy is not even close to what the standard produces let alone the GT. I am waiting to see what a better trigger and a fiber optic front will do as well as getting at least one thousand rounds through it before I make a final call on the accuracy. Now, now I used the same ammo and shot the standard right after the Lite, same targets same distances.
The standard has the original four inch pencil barrel with dinged up sights front and rear with the factory trigger. In all honesty I have less time on the Standard then I do the Lite. I had purchased the Standard in pretty bad shape about a year ago and after much TLC I was able to get it out a couple weeks ago and shot less than one hundred rounds through it. This was the same time my daughter shot it and the GT. Once she picked up the GT she wouldn’t put it back down. Heavy for sure hence looking for a KT512 or maybe even a Hunter, both being a couple ounces lighter than the GT. So while she was shooting the GT I was trying the Standard with various types of ammo. Gun runs great with everything thus far and like all .22s has it better loads.
If the Lite or the next .22 pistol I purchase is at least as accurate as the Standard I will conduct a comparison of the target ammo I have. At present I am not going to waste it on the Lite and would like to have something that at least can (I can) shoot that is between the standard and the GT. Of course better is always..., well better.
Is the pistol capable of hitting 2x2 steel at 12 yards yes, but not consistently. Ammo is a part of that problem, trigger is as well, as are the sights especially when the front sight is bouncing around. I had to retighten it once and then it came loose again and I just stopped trying until I could put some thread locker on it. One, didn’t want to strip the threads and two I didn’t want to lose the screw. Now I will wait I think until I get a fiber optic to replace the front before I apply the thread locker. If it is seems to be a while before I get the fiber optic I might just use finger nail polish after degreasing the threads and reuse the original front sight. This would be a nice simple fix for what right now is an unacceptable accuracy issue.
Best part of The Nut and Fancy Project (TNP) is when the dude talks about folks writing in saying how their gun runs and how much better shooters they are yada, yada, yada, groan ,etc. Taking in my lack of practice in the past 7-8 years and only shooting a handful of matches in that time I concur that I shoot like crap. That being said, the distances I shot were 5, 10, and 12 yards. A couple weeks ago shooting the GT those little 2x2 steel plates almost always went down and with the Lite they sometimes went down. I was able to hit the steel more consistently when I was shooting the Standard than with the Lite.
The same ammo (various) , same old shooter with the same old eyes shooting both pistols behind each other doing better with the beat up old non adjustable sights from the 50s then with a modern version with adjustable sights. Plus I didn’t have mag issues. I am taking into account the loose front sight. What how can you do that? Because it wasn’t loose when I first started and out and of the ammo I had on hand it did not shoot its best group until about halfway through the session. Then the sight became noticeably loose after its best group.
I do believe a narrower front sight and a better trigger will improve this pistols accuracy. Well you say, why not put a scope on it? The reason I won’t is because I don’t plan on shooting it with a scope. Just like if I use bags or other type of rest during my shake down I won’t be shooting it that way. If I can do better with A or B, then why would I settle for F if everything else is equal? In other words it is about how I run the gun, not JM or TGO. Specs or what someone else does mean not if you cannot achieve your goal with it, whatever it is.
Now without going into comparing ammo I would like to comment that Federal Auto Match reminds me of yesterdays Golden Bullets (I have not tried any of the newer labeled improved) I had two duds even after multiple attempts at firing them. Had one downloaded round which bounced off the cardboard at 5 yards, and three FTFeed this was in about forty rounds. Not even close to the most accurate in the Lite or Standard. Now Federal Bulk is my go to bulk ammo followed close by Winchester. Yet those Auto Match rounds I won’t purchase again. I have had a round fire out of battery years ago with a different brand and would still use that ammo. After 50 years of shooting .22 I had never had a downloaded round bounce off of cardboard at 5 yards. When in high school I was shooting at minimum 500 rounds a week, so I have seen a lot of .22 go bang over years. I am greatly displeased as much with Auto Match .22 ammo as I am with the whole magazine issue if my example of the 22/45s is the norm.
My plans are to look at the magazine disconnect, order a fiber optic front site, check to see if there is a thinner front sight and as an interim solution finger nail polish the front sight screw after degreasing and see what can be done with the trigger and replace trigger with a trigger kit if required. Hold judgment on reliability and accuracy until a thousand rounds has been put through the gun.
The pistol weighs not and looks cool with a threaded barrel for a can, compensator. or barrel extension. I can deal with the grip and mag release if I can get the accuracy to improve and the mags to work properly without issues. With that stated I would not at this time recommend Rugers 22/45s “if†the mag issue is the norm.
Yes, I know there is a loyal fan base. I am saying “if†my example is the norm. I can change mags on pistols with the heel release much faster without bobble or other issues than with this 22/45 Lite.
I am interested to hear what other 22/45 owners have to say about the mag issues. I don’t care to hear comments from those waving the Ruger flag. I like my Standard (A100) and MKII (GT), 10/22, the Redhawk x2 I had ( to heavy) and GP101. I know those that have center-fire rifles and semi-auto pistols as well as single actions. No complaints, so what is up with the 22/45?
DISCLAIMER: These are my initial shooting impressions with my Ruger 22/45 Lite. Not saying yours has less, more, or the same issues. This is my experience with this one example of the Ruger 22/45 Lite.
==============================================================================
First I am not a great fan of the 1911 grip (nothing wrong with it, just not a fan) and have a 1950s Standard (4†barrel) and a Government Target (GT). I really like how the original framed pistol sits in the hand versus having to be held as the 22/45. My 12 year old daughter who has only shot the Standard and the GT once feels the same way. Now the grips I liked being that they are at least for now tacky to the feel though being a .22 one need not worry about the recoil. If one wants to dress their pistol up there are many 1911 grips that are “pretty†to choose from.
Of course having an “American†magazine (mag) release in lieu of the “European†mag release is a plus unless the “American†mag release is short and you are used to the “European†style heel release. Getting past the different locations of the mag release is nothing but a training issue, but being that the mag release on the Lite is short (I would assume the same for all 22/45s) it does present a problem. I have heard that there is an extended mag release in the aftermarket world, which supports the fact that the mag release should’ve been longer and is difficult by many to operate. Before any start with the small hands etc comments I shoot Glocks with no issues regarding the mag release.
Trigger, well let’s say it needs work, but to give it credit in a heavier gun it would not seem as bad. In the approximately 100ish rounds I was able to shoot through the pistol either the trigger was already smoothing out or I was getting used to it. Maybe a bit of both. I will be swapping out the parts for a complete trigger kit after I see what I can do with trigger.
Sights, I dislike a black front sight on a dark target as well as black on black sights and before I even shot the Lite, I painted the front sight white. I was going to use florescent orange, but the paint was past its prime. That stated the paint made picking up the front sight easier on dark targets as well as discerning the front from the rear when sighting. This was mostly due to the fact that the front sight is so thick. The rear adjustable made getting rounds on target a breeze.
The weight of the Lite is what caused me to purchase the pistol. I was looking for a KT512 for my daughter and the store only had 22/45s. Again I am not a big fan of the 1911 grip and I have a bucket full of mags for the original grip frame. Though keeping options open I asked to see the Lite. WoW! The thing belies its advertised weight. I figured I am getting old and the pistol is so lite that it will be my next pack pistol. A bonus would be if my daughter preferred the grip then I could get her one of the 22/45s that the store had on hand with the 5.5 Bull barrel.
The magazines, magazine well, and orientation of the top round SUCKS! I was thinking I could get some practice for action pistol shooting. Well NOT! Iit takes forever and a day sometimes getting the mag into the pistol and seated. Without getting into the pistol I think this is at least in part caused by the mag disconnect. Once you get the mag seated then you have to make sure the top round (for me) was not sticking up. It appeared if it was it would hang up in the mag well, again. Then if the mag seats and the round is sticking up when the bolt goes home the bullet gets a nice gouge in the middle because it is not orientated correctly to run into the chamber straight and true. WTHeck? This prevents practice for action pistol or defense; if having to use the pistol for defense you better hope a round is chambered and you don’t have to change mags. Really puts a damper on plinking, sighting in, and would be highly detrimental in a crises situation. These issues with the mag I would think could be common to all 22/45 platforms since they share the same mag and frame.
The accuracy is not even close to what the standard produces let alone the GT. I am waiting to see what a better trigger and a fiber optic front will do as well as getting at least one thousand rounds through it before I make a final call on the accuracy. Now, now I used the same ammo and shot the standard right after the Lite, same targets same distances.
The standard has the original four inch pencil barrel with dinged up sights front and rear with the factory trigger. In all honesty I have less time on the Standard then I do the Lite. I had purchased the Standard in pretty bad shape about a year ago and after much TLC I was able to get it out a couple weeks ago and shot less than one hundred rounds through it. This was the same time my daughter shot it and the GT. Once she picked up the GT she wouldn’t put it back down. Heavy for sure hence looking for a KT512 or maybe even a Hunter, both being a couple ounces lighter than the GT. So while she was shooting the GT I was trying the Standard with various types of ammo. Gun runs great with everything thus far and like all .22s has it better loads.
If the Lite or the next .22 pistol I purchase is at least as accurate as the Standard I will conduct a comparison of the target ammo I have. At present I am not going to waste it on the Lite and would like to have something that at least can (I can) shoot that is between the standard and the GT. Of course better is always..., well better.
Is the pistol capable of hitting 2x2 steel at 12 yards yes, but not consistently. Ammo is a part of that problem, trigger is as well, as are the sights especially when the front sight is bouncing around. I had to retighten it once and then it came loose again and I just stopped trying until I could put some thread locker on it. One, didn’t want to strip the threads and two I didn’t want to lose the screw. Now I will wait I think until I get a fiber optic to replace the front before I apply the thread locker. If it is seems to be a while before I get the fiber optic I might just use finger nail polish after degreasing the threads and reuse the original front sight. This would be a nice simple fix for what right now is an unacceptable accuracy issue.
Best part of The Nut and Fancy Project (TNP) is when the dude talks about folks writing in saying how their gun runs and how much better shooters they are yada, yada, yada, groan ,etc. Taking in my lack of practice in the past 7-8 years and only shooting a handful of matches in that time I concur that I shoot like crap. That being said, the distances I shot were 5, 10, and 12 yards. A couple weeks ago shooting the GT those little 2x2 steel plates almost always went down and with the Lite they sometimes went down. I was able to hit the steel more consistently when I was shooting the Standard than with the Lite.
The same ammo (various) , same old shooter with the same old eyes shooting both pistols behind each other doing better with the beat up old non adjustable sights from the 50s then with a modern version with adjustable sights. Plus I didn’t have mag issues. I am taking into account the loose front sight. What how can you do that? Because it wasn’t loose when I first started and out and of the ammo I had on hand it did not shoot its best group until about halfway through the session. Then the sight became noticeably loose after its best group.
I do believe a narrower front sight and a better trigger will improve this pistols accuracy. Well you say, why not put a scope on it? The reason I won’t is because I don’t plan on shooting it with a scope. Just like if I use bags or other type of rest during my shake down I won’t be shooting it that way. If I can do better with A or B, then why would I settle for F if everything else is equal? In other words it is about how I run the gun, not JM or TGO. Specs or what someone else does mean not if you cannot achieve your goal with it, whatever it is.
Now without going into comparing ammo I would like to comment that Federal Auto Match reminds me of yesterdays Golden Bullets (I have not tried any of the newer labeled improved) I had two duds even after multiple attempts at firing them. Had one downloaded round which bounced off the cardboard at 5 yards, and three FTFeed this was in about forty rounds. Not even close to the most accurate in the Lite or Standard. Now Federal Bulk is my go to bulk ammo followed close by Winchester. Yet those Auto Match rounds I won’t purchase again. I have had a round fire out of battery years ago with a different brand and would still use that ammo. After 50 years of shooting .22 I had never had a downloaded round bounce off of cardboard at 5 yards. When in high school I was shooting at minimum 500 rounds a week, so I have seen a lot of .22 go bang over years. I am greatly displeased as much with Auto Match .22 ammo as I am with the whole magazine issue if my example of the 22/45s is the norm.
My plans are to look at the magazine disconnect, order a fiber optic front site, check to see if there is a thinner front sight and as an interim solution finger nail polish the front sight screw after degreasing and see what can be done with the trigger and replace trigger with a trigger kit if required. Hold judgment on reliability and accuracy until a thousand rounds has been put through the gun.
The pistol weighs not and looks cool with a threaded barrel for a can, compensator. or barrel extension. I can deal with the grip and mag release if I can get the accuracy to improve and the mags to work properly without issues. With that stated I would not at this time recommend Rugers 22/45s “if†the mag issue is the norm.
Yes, I know there is a loyal fan base. I am saying “if†my example is the norm. I can change mags on pistols with the heel release much faster without bobble or other issues than with this 22/45 Lite.
I am interested to hear what other 22/45 owners have to say about the mag issues. I don’t care to hear comments from those waving the Ruger flag. I like my Standard (A100) and MKII (GT), 10/22, the Redhawk x2 I had ( to heavy) and GP101. I know those that have center-fire rifles and semi-auto pistols as well as single actions. No complaints, so what is up with the 22/45?
