(Always fun to start a gun-enthusiast thread)

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=4901
...a .22 rimfire semi-auto pistol with a warp resistant stock, attached bipod, picatinny rail, and 10 inch barrel, based upon the 10/22 action. Other than violating the handgun laws of Toledo, Ohio it seems great. For those of us seeking small-caliber, rapid fire, high magazine capacity, telescopic-sighted, weather-resistant firepower in a truly compact package, the moment has arrived. Just add the BMF activator and an after market 50-round banana clip, and voila, a teeny little gatling gun.

Has anyone integrated this remarkable firearm into their kits? Is there a sillier firearm in current production? Can anyone explain why I want one?

Wow, that's...um, well, a really ugly gun.

-Blast

You'll shoot your eye out kid.

The first gun I ever bought for myself was a Ruger mark 2 with a 10 inch barrel and a Redfield scope, about 1980. I have put a lot of ammo through it. It’s a great gun. I would rather have it then a 10-22 (I have both.) I don’t think you need a BMF activator, it actually a dangerous item prone to accidental firing of any gun it’s hooked to. (I had one for a few months a long time ago and figured out it’s very dangerous and unneeded) There is no protection for the hand crank and with guns, you want to make sure it’s in your control all the time. It doesn’t allow for this. It pulls the trigger 4-times per revolution, just bumping it can easily cause 2-rounds to go off. It’s an accident waiting to happen and not needed, it’s almost impossible to aim a pistol with any accuracy and crank it. I have the original 10 round mags and several of the Ram-Line 12 round mags, these work good for me.


The Ram-Line mags are prone to jamming, the Ruger mags feed 100% of the time.




Please reeread the forum rules and courtesys

I suspect that if you don't have time to extend the bipod it would be a real hard thing to shoot accurately...

Quite so-no one 'needs' a bmf activator, or an extended mag for a .22. It is, as you indicate, a bad idea on all kinds of levels. But the 10/22 dress-up game seems to flourish-folding stocks, ventilated forends, flash suppressors. I suppose the charger is ruger's way of adopting the mattel marketing strategy for Barbie dolls-when sales go flat, add a ken doll. Awhile back, the folks manufacturing the AR-7 survival rifle offered a handgun version on the same action. Looked a little like a broomstick mauser. As I recall, AR-7 's only ate standard velocity ammunition, which seems unfortunate. At least the ruger creation has a good mechanical foundation.

If someone has to have a compact .22lr pack rifle, why not go whole hog?

Hmm, maybe next we'll see a bullpup version???

If the Mk 2 or later won't do it, this won't be any better.

I've seen a lot of this general lay out of horse pistol that had promise. And lot that didn't. This could have been executed so much better- as it is, it is heavy, bulky and unweildy. Possibly a good idea, but it sucks in execution.

It looks like it was designed for silhouette target shooting. I know that is usually done at long range with larger caliber guns, but I know there is a .22 class as well.