Shotgun Forum banner

O/T Browning Semiauto .22 Accuracy?

6K views 17 replies 10 participants last post by  RandyWakeman 
#1 ·
Does anyone have experience with the accuracy level that can be obtained with the Browning Semiauto .22, fitted with a scope with the barrel mount?

I am refering to this model;

http://www.browning.com/products/catalo ... ype_id=001

I owned a couple on the past but that was the 1970's and we still used the grooved receiver scope mounts in those day which is not the best choice, given the takedown system.

I know some may not like scoping one of these but I am facing up to the effects of being 55 :shock:
 
#7 ·
Yes, my 61' is just like that also, with the "wheel" sight. What a neat looking sight these were.
Mine has extremely nice wood. The stocks were also attached differently in those days.
I also have a fitted Browning case that would accommodate the scope mounted on the receiver or the barrel. The first cases would only accommodate the scope mounted one way, but I can't remember which.
At point in time, the barrel also had to be drilled and tapped for the Browning scope mount and the "wheel" sight had to be removed.
The .22 Autos of that period are truly a great part of Browning history.
 
#8 ·
Here is one gun that I had converted with a scope base and a quick testfire without sandbags at 50 yards:



I do a lot of special work and custom jobs. See one here:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/sho ... p?t=273271

Trouble was that I found some factory defects and saw a similar condition in one article from the American Rifleman, so I posted about the problem here:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/sho ... p?t=277701

If you have any input of a similar problem in a revolver that you examined, I would appreciate you posting details of the same problem at that thread.

Thanks.
kirbythegunsmith@hotmail.com
 
#9 ·
kirbythegunsmith

Thanks, that's the kind of info I was looking for :D

Have you had any experience as to how accuracy of the Browning Semiauto .22 compares with a Remington 572 Pump .22?

I have never shot a 572 or seen one apart but have never been to enthused on the aluminum alloy receiver on the 572 or the mode of barrel attachment.
 
#10 ·
How in the heck did you know that I had used one of those 572's as the other gun in an article with the Browning?

(Keep in mind that I had condensed the paragraphs to make all the print fit on one sheet, and had little room for text vs. what I wanted to convey in the limited article space)

Perhaps this will answer some questions for you.
The picture sheet is copied just below. I used the max. size available to make the photo of the photocopy useful. Hope it's readable for you.
I may be able to repost in another format, if necessary, but that will take a bit more effort and time investment.

Let me know what you think of the article.
I posted 2 original pics below the article copy.







 
#11 ·
kirbythegunsmith said:
How in the heck did you know that I had used one of those 572's as the other gun in an article with the Browning?
Its a gift I have :wink: :lol: (Actually, a complete coincidence :oops: )

kirbythegunsmith said:
Let me know what you think of the article.
Very intersting, I could see where the .22 scope base would not be "up" to the recoil of a slug load; I don't know why some people do these things.

The write-up and the pictures of the 572 were interesting and reminded me of why I never bought a 572 in the last 38 years.

I like 870's and 1100's and have put a lot of rounds through them on trap ranges since 1976.

This doesn't mean I buy everything with "Remington" on it. The 572 is not an inexpensive gun to buy and at least, here, is getting close to the cost of the Browning Semiauto .22.

I have studied the drawings and parts diagrams over the years and IMHO, the barrel attachment method on the 572 is just wrong and not in keeping with the price.

At least the Browning Semiauto .22 is a very old, traditional, all steel design, factory tapped for a barrel mount on the new production guns. I would choose one over a 572.

I am not a big time rifle guy but do enjoy them when I can and I like accuracy. My favourite .22 is my CZ ZKM452 LUX that I bought new in 1973 (barrel is threaded into a steel receiver in that one), it wears a Leupld 2.5x compact; the blame with any poor shots with that belongs to me :oops: , not the gun.

If someone would buy me one of the new T Bolts, I would be willing to do an extended test and report in once and a while :wink:
 
#13 ·
Ole Cowboy,

The T/C Classic is a very nice rifle with a great trigger out of the box. I had one and it shot very tight groups. It did leave a lot of blow back powder residue in the action, IMHO much worse than a Ruger 10/22. My favorite .22 semiauto is a high quality custom Ruger 10/22 with a high grade barrel and aftermarket trigger, etc. I have two and they are keepers.

Some years ago, I had a Japanese .22 Short Browning semiauto and had problems with the barrel working loose from the reciever, affecting accuracy. I think the take down joint is the weak point in that design. I traded it. Also traded the T/C Classic. Kept the Rugers.

DF
 
#16 ·
Claydust said:
A5Mag12 said:
A scope would have probably made it unfair.
For most of us 50+, it is a very rare individual that can see and use a set of open sights like they could in their 20's.

If you can, you are one of the fortunate few :cry:
Yep, I finally gave up on open sights and scoped my .22 because I don't have 20 year old eyes anymore.
However, if you hate scopes, peep sights are an order of magnitude better than open sights, as long as there is enough light. In low light situations, scopes absolutely rule.

If you are looking for accuracy, it pays to experiment with different brands of ammo. Wolf MT, (same ammo as SK Standard Plus) shoots real well in my rifle. One hole groups @ 50 yards.
 
#17 ·
buckweet said:
Wow... old thread.
Most accurate. 22 i own is a Browning SA-22
PURE CLASS!!!
fantastic awsome incredible.
Yeah, i love my Browning SA-22. :)
Yup, the SA-22 is capable of great accuracy with a barrel-mounted sighting system, either a scope on a cantilever mount (from Leupold or Weaver) or small red dot on a simple Weaver base (my favorite).

However, if you don't want to mess up the looks of the gun, you can replace the V-notch rear sight blade with a Ruger peep-style blade. (See http://www.midwayusa.com/product/186476 ... bine-99-44)

It's cheap, and you only need to swap the blade itself (which may need a teeny, tiny bit of filing on the edges to fit).

Best of all, for older eyes, it dramatically improves the view of the front bead.

Enjoy!
Dave
 
#18 ·
Claydust said:
I owned a couple on the past but that was the 1970's and we still used the grooved receiver scope mounts in those day which is not the best choice, given the takedown system.
There isn't any difference in accuracy at all . . . until you take it apart reassemble. Then, of course, with the receiver-mounted scope you get to sight it in all over again. :shock:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top