pack rifle option


happysidd said:
I saw this recently and wondered if anyone had any thoughts or has used it.
http://www.rutalocura.com/PRK.html
Click to expand...

All that is a 22 bolt action with a aluminum tube that attaches with a wing nut for $250. And that does not include the rifle. If you search your local gunshops you can find alot more for that price. Or pickup a 22 bolt action for at least half that money and add a PVC section of pipe to create your own. And with PVC pipe you can do the same and have a water tight storage compartment.
 
Last edited:
Awful expensive for a single shot 22 and you still have to have the cricket to begin with. My son has out grown his years ago and have used it "as is" for this purpose more than once. Still I feel more comfortable with a pistol and it has more firepower in a smaller package.
 
They are charging a lot for the saving of a few ounces weight, which is why they use carbon fiber.

For a simple stock made from an aluminum tube, it night be worthwhile to me at $50 or so. At this price, it will matter only to a few ultralight types who want a firearm, I suspect.
JMHO/ YMMV
 
And the bottom line is that after adding the bells and whistles, you still end up with a Cricket action, which is a questionable foundation in my experience.

I'd much rather carry a .22 handgun or Marlin 39A, which is a breakdown design. The ultra light weight is not a concern for me when it comes to a well made firearm, and if it were I would want it to be of the highest quality, not the lowest.
 
Any one interested in a nice compact .22 look into the Henry AR7 survival rifle. Well worth the $ unless you are into ultra light back packing.
 
clever concept... needs a little refinement, but I think it has some definite potential... not worth what the are asking by any means, but they justify that by the materials they use... not necessary, IMO... aluminum would work fine and be cheaper, and there is no real reason to replace the cricket barrel,other than weight, but I would put up with the extra weight for a low price ... two improvements I think it could use: some sort of butt pad(just cause it seems awkward without one), and a fore end of some sort... maybe make it a half piece of tubing that folds down against the stock, then folds out and stops before touching the barrel
 
I believe what we see here is a NFA "short barreled rifle", because it is under 26" overall and can still be fired. Mods may want to clean up the links.
 
pack rifle

It's not the lightest, but I sure like my Marlin Papoose. It's far more shootable and reliable for only $199. The Henry AR-7 is something that intrigues me as well and I found an new one in camo locally for $239.

I would rather have more substantial rifle that is easy to shoot than an makeshift rifle that may not be easy to use and may not conform to NFA rules with classifiing it as an SBR.
 
mr_nice_guy228 said:
I believe what we see here is a NFA "short barreled rifle", because it is under 26" overall and can still be fired. Mods may want to clean up the links.
Click to expand...

PRK Specifications:
-15oz total weight for converted rifle with kit.
-32 Inch over all length when assembled
-20 Inches long when taken down
-13-5/8 Inch trigger pull
-Available in 22LR, and 22WMR
-Uses stock Cricket sights, adjusts for windage and elevation
-Single shot bolt action
-$250 for LR, $290 for WMR

To be legal it has to be over 26 inches in OAL, This is not a NFA weapon. Its classes as a rifle and the ATF states in it shooting configuration must exceed min. length and at 32 inches is good to go.
 
Last edited:
The concept is ok I guess. I'd never pay $250 for it.

I've decided that I'd probably just remove the stock from the action on my son's 10/22 CRR if I really needed a rifle to fit in my pack. Removing the stock seems much easier and more sound (from an accuracy standpoint) than trying to remove the barrel.
 
but it can still be fired when "folded". same issue as some of the 16" barrel folding stock 10/22 as they are 25.5" and can still be fired. some ak have same issue.
blkbd said:
PRK Specifications:
-15oz total weight for converted rifle with kit.
-32 Inch over all length when assembled
-20 Inches long when taken down
-13-5/8 Inch trigger pull
-Available in 22LR, and 22WMR
-Uses stock Cricket sights, adjusts for windage and elevation
-Single shot bolt action
-$250 for LR, $290 for WMR

To be legal it has to be over 26 inches in OAL, This is not a NFA weapon. Its classes as a rifle and the ATF states in it shooting configuration must exceed min. length and at 32 inches is good to go.
Click to expand...
 
mr_nice_guy228 said:
but it can still be fired when "folded". same issue as some of the 16" barrel folding stock 10/22 as they are 25.5" and can still be fired. some ak have same issue.
Click to expand...

As said ATF states that the OAL must be over 26 inches when in the shooting position, For a rifle that means with the stock unfolded.
And yes there are many weapons that fall under the 26 inch rule when the weapons is folded but no one has been arrested or nor has ATF confiscated any of them.

*EDIT* Found the scan copy on ATF determination on said subject.
http://www.victorinc.com/images/AKMFoldingStock.jpg

I will add that some states require a longer OAL length (Michigan) of 30 inches so if you decide to build a firearm for ones own use then check your local laws as they nullify federal law. Such in here NH all firearms require a Ser.# but ATF states that firearms for personal use require none. So this was one factor I fulfilled when I built mine.
 
Last edited:
Nitpicky but state law can't "nullify" federal law. A state law can be more strict than federal law (unless the federal law preempts that from happening, but that is another subject) but it can't "nullify" federal law.

The same generally applies to the states versus a municipality. A city can be stricter than the state unless the state preempts them from passing any firearms laws as many states have done.
 
I would suggst the thought was not expressed quite right, "nullify" isn't exactly the right word, but the end result means about the same, a stricter state law makes the fed law a moot point in that state.
 
pretty cool! makes me want to make one!

you can use PVC for the handle, but not sure what would make a good light weight barrel.
 
nemoaz said:
Nitpicky but state law can't "nullify" federal law. A state law can be more strict than federal law (unless the federal law preempts that from happening, but that is another subject) but it can't "nullify" federal law.

The same generally applies to the states versus a municipality. A city can be stricter than the state unless the state preempts them from passing any firearms laws as many states have done.
Click to expand...

Yes, just my bad choice of words.
 
Heres my pack 22

DSC00785.jpg


DSC00786.jpg


Father inlaw shortened the barrel made the stock and pump grip and gave it to me....not such a bad guy after all. Just need to make a butt plate for it now
 
I've not seen or fired this weapon, but it just doesn't look like it would be rugged and accurate, just light and compact.

I thought that i wanted a pack rifle for a long time (the classic Henry AR-7 or the Springfield M-6). pros and cons include being very light, very compact, with good enough accuracy, durable enough but not bombproof.

Then i fired a friend's Ruger 10/22. He has a son who was 4 or 5 at the time, and he had bought a 3 or 4-position collapsible stock so his son could grow into it. This thing was so light, so accurate, and so handy, that i just went ahead and got one. Roughly speaking, i think i paid $110 for the basic rifle, $68 for the stock, and $65 for an M16-like peep sight. I'm off about $5 on the stock and/or sight, but i still paid less than $250 for it.

So, for $250, i have a durable rifle that will shoot a squirrel in the head at 25 yards through a peep site with my old eyes, more than adequate for whatever survival needs i have. my friend has a 3x scope on his and he can chase a golf ball out past 50 yards (former sniper, much younger eyes). slung across my back with the stock folded, it is compact enough for the thickest southern briars, thickets, brush, and vines.

so, all that said, i'd not waste money chasing something lighter that doesn't also have accuracy and durability.
 
always like the ar7 and it floats. i went looking for an ar7 couple years ago. and i found a m6 scout i had never seen one before and even though it was alot more expensive than what i was planning on spending i picked it up and have enjoyed it since i would like to find another in the 22 lr version instead of the hornet. i was just curious if the weight was enough of a bonus to justify the seemingly outrageous cost. thank you for everyones input i will just stick to what i got or maybe get an ar7
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top