Dave, I don't think you could really go wrong with any of those actions for a fine .22 competition gun.  I'm in the finishing stages of my second Stevens 44 rebuild in the last couple of years, and I kinda like them for .22's.  There is way more than ample leverage in the swinging breech to easily seat rounds in a full-match chamber, they have a rather dainty hammer fall that doesn't upset the aim badly, and a pretty good single trigger.  The one we built for .22 silhouette has a sweet 12 oz trigger job (thanks, Glenn!)

The 44 1/2's have the advantage of a removable trigger unit...I think that a set of CPA double-sets can be fitted to the original action pretty easily.  Since you appear to be flush with those actions, a matched set stocked for bench and offhand would be REALLY neat. 

And of course, the Ballard is a "legendary" platform for an accurate .22...

Greg

Joe, interesting comments re: barrel manufacturers.  I have in hand a Douglas .30 caliber tube that is going on the schuetzenRuger project, I hope it shoots as well as yours!

I helped (did the stock-work) build a pretty neat CPA with a back-bored barrel system (sorta).  On this one, the outer shell was a Green Mountain #5 weight octagon barrel, in .50 caliber, that was pulled from the production line after drilling/reaming, before rifling.  The inner tube was a second Green Mountain .22 caliber blank, that was turned to fit inside the .50 caliber tube.  The trick part is, the liner only firmly attaches at the breech with, IIRC, a couple of small fillister screws (kinda like the breech face of a M-N firing pin bushing), and the tube of the insert rides on several rubber "O" rings.  With this system, the gunsmith can try various barrel manufacturers, barrel lengths, etc...tuning the gun from the inside out, as it were

This rifle was a purpose-built O/H gun, and has several 250's to it's credit in gallery matches already...but of course the owner is an exceptional shot  .

Greg

ssdave;
            I don't think you could go wrong with any of your choices, I shoot all of these actions in 22RF but my first choice would be the 44.5 Stevens because of the parts available for this action, its also takedown.  I have a Ballard in 22RF that I use for OH IS rimfire, they make a dandy 22 until you drop a spent case down in the action, if your action does not have the rimfire extractor I'd use it for another project. I have a couple nice 44 Stevens 22's but I don't think they compare with the other's.
            I've spent several hundred dollar's on 22RF singleshots and after I put all these expensive parts together they WON'T outshoot my BSA  MK 1V Intl.--I know their ugly but they work.   leadball

remeber if you back bore to get the backbore large enough - I have always heard a minimum of 3X grove dia - but I am thinking .75 or larger wouldn't hurt - does anyone know for sure? - you have a great day now - the rimfire - cdpersons

There's of course the obvious option - buy a good Martini, best would be one of the offhand models  like the Int'l Mk IV ISU.  Good barrel, fine (and fast!) trigger, good sights...  Hard to fault that combination, and probably a whole lot cheaper than any of the other options.  And remember - beautiful is as beautiful does!

Ballards and low walls also seat ammo in a match chamber quite handily, and low walls also have the advantage of incorporating the kicking ejector if wanted. The Stevens rifles are nice for 22s but I personally would want a drawbolt buttstock attachment. I'm currently experimenting with a different extractor/ignition system for the low wall since I consider the factory setup to be inferior, kinda like the cheesy wood screw buttstock attachment on some Stevens rifles. IMO both need improvements that can easily be incorporated during the rework of the rifles. The two-piece Ballard 22RF extractor is easily accessible and, if properly constructed, will hold the extracted cartridge in place for removal by the shooter's finger or nail.

I personally believe that accuracy with a 22RF will be greatly enhanced by having a shorter effective barrel length, to reduce any wandering/vibration between the time of the priming ignition and the bullet's exit from the end of the rifled portion of the barrel (barrel time). I also believe that this wandering/vibration explains the well-known phenomenon of almost all 22RF target rifles, that they will almost always shoot much more accurately, that is, produce smaller groups, from the prone position than from the bench. I believe the tight sling somewhat dampens the unplanned movement and wandering/vibration; at any rate this accuracy anomaly is well-known to many Smallbore shooters, and I believe that a shorter rifled portion can only improve matters. Experiments continue.
Regards, Joe

If Smallbore Silhouette is any judge offhand accuracy in rimfires is enhanced by short barrels.  It's barrel time in my opinion.  Having said that and owning a short barrel T/C  that I shoot Silouette with would not want one for Schuetzen.   Too ugly

Boats

So then, if we can get by an ugly rifle, I still say its very hard [not impossible] to build a 22Rf  rifle that will out-shoot a BSA Intl.--- I've discovered that if you win a few matches they become less ugly. leadball

Hi All !!!

No such thing as an ugly rifle !!! Just some better !!!

My most accurate rimfire rifle’s are: M-35 NRA Mossberg, M-44a Mossberg, M-52c Winchester.. However, the most prettiest are my single shot’s…

I shoot the flies off the targets at 75’… As long as the gun is consistent, its up to the shooter to hit the target.. Like Carnage Hall   Practice, practice, practice…..

Ed….

Dale53 wrote on Feb 18^th, 2008 at 12:54am:


My statement applied to traditional 4-Position rifles with the traditional longer barrels of over 28" or so. Please don't compare the short-barreled modern BR rifles, they're not the same and they don't behave the same way. I personally haven't tried this experiment and so have only some folks' word for it, but I can't dismiss it as merely an urban myth without some rather convincing evidence comparing apples with apples. Comparing a 28"-bbld wood-stocked Winchester 52 with a modern short-bbld fiberglass-stocked Benchrest rifle is like comparing apples with oranges.

The crux of this discussion is 22RF accuracy, and the direction of discussion has turned toward decreased bbl time and/or vibration dampening and its effect on accuracy. Ask these same modern BR recordholders just how well their rifles would group from the bench with the longer 28"-30" position rifle barrels and without the tuners; I can imagine what they'd say!

Apples with oranges.

I agree that the statement MAY be only an urban myth, but I personally have so far seen no real evidence, either for it or against it, other than the opinions of some shooters and writers.

My shooting skills are mediocre at best, perhaps someone more skilled could conduct this experiment and report the results. That would certainly be better than what we have now.
Regards, Joe

Myth or not I can't shoot groups benchrest with my Anschutz 52 as small as I can prone, coat sling and glove.  I bet the best 22 bench rest shooter in the country can't shoot groups laying on his belly as small as he can from a rest.

It's what the rifle is built for and your ability to shoot it.  Switch disciplines and your are starting from scratch.  However this proves nothing only way to test rimfire accuracy is from a machine rest indoors.  Only way to test  Human ability is in a match. The two don't always mix.

Boats

Look at this site for the pretty .22rf Hepburn:   


(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Brent would like your autograph

Quote:


that can be arranged - but why for?   

Brent

Dave,
I think the Ballard is the one I would use, because of the through bolt, but mainly because of the two pice extractor that the little #3 action used. It's always pleased me with it's reliability, and positive extraction.
I own  Stevens 44 that was built into a schuetzen rifle, and it's probably the most accurate .22 singleshot I own. I love it, but my one complaint is the 6 o'clock extractor, and the fact that it doesn't move the empties out far enough for my big fingers to grab easily. I'm selling my 44 soon, and going to build something up on a Ballard #3 action myself.-Vall

I got a kick out of it Ben.  I think you got Brent spun up though. LMAO.

Course that aint hard to do.   


                                                                   Joe.

While I don't much care for bulging cases, I don't see that they much matter - provided they never burst.  I've shot right at about 3000 rounds through my low wall now, and it has yet to burst anything, yet every case is bulged at 6 o'clock.  As for accuracy, it will hold it's own with any Martini from Mark IV on down, so I don't think accuracy is an issue.

Brent

glad i didn't say that-poof i be gone.

Why didn't I think of that years ago? Take a $150 decent shooter 10/22 and sink in anothr thousand or two, plug the mag tube opening, then put a fancy schuetzen stock on it, and tell everyone it's a singleshot!!!!!!

just a couple general thoughts;

backboring:   the liner/insert systems that crossno and others sell seem to work very accurately,  If they are adjusted properly and if you can put up with the loading process.  they are all pretty well made for 40-45 cal bores.  We have a couple rifles at the EG 22 matches that are "back bored" "short lined" whatever and they seem to work well.

accurate actions:  Actions are just one part of the overall mechanical system that delivers the bullet to the target--accurately.  The trigger systems, lock time, solidness and squareness of barrel fit, same for stock, chambering and extraction systems, etc are all important. I'm not sure that one action is inheirantly more accurate than another--at least among solid quality made actions.
One thing I'd pay careful attention to is how solid the cartridge rim/extractor support  is at the moment of hammer/firing pin strike.  If the extractor is at all loose or floating it leaves the cartridge rim a little loose in the chamber which in turn can lead to variances in ignition. I believe that a larger precision-fitted extractor will give a more consistant ignition than a smaller one and consistant shot to shot ignition is a critical factor in rimfire accuracy