RUGER 10/22 25RD MAGAZINE 22LR Reviews & Ratings

Extra-tough, polymer magazines are self-lubricating and hold 25 rounds of .22LR ammo. Constant force spring provides uniform feeding and smooth loading. Two alternating, interlocking notches make it easy to “click” two or three mags together for fast reloads and increased shooting time. Available with separately molded, Stainless Steel (SS) feed lips for optimum performance. Fits Ruger® 10/22® and 77/22®, and AMT Lightning.

View Product

Write a review

5 Stars

Reviews Summary

The Ruger 10/22 25rd magazine has garnered mixed reviews. Many users appreciate its solid construction and reliability, while others criticize its fit and jamming issues. Though some found success with specific ammo types, the magazines often require modifications for optimal performance. Overall, quality control seems to be inconsistent, leading to disappointment for many buyers.

What Reviewers Are Saying

Product Quality

60%

Reviewers express mixed feelings about the quality of the magazines. While some praise their solid construction and reliability, many report issues with the fit, materials used, and performance failures. This inconsistency in quality has led to frustration for users who expected better.

Fit and Compatibility

50%

Several customers mention problems with the magazines not fitting well in their rifles, requiring modifications to work properly. Users often note that the magazines are too snug or too loose in the magazine well, impacting their usability.

Performance Issues

70%

Numerous reviews highlight issues such as jamming and failure to feed. These problems persist across different types of ammunition, with some users recommending against these magazines due to reliability concerns. This indicates a significant quality control problem.

Comparison to Other Brands

40%

Many users compare the Butler Creek magazines unfavorably to Ruger's factory magazines, with several confirming that the factory options perform significantly better in terms of reliability and feeding. This comparison highlights the perceived shortcomings of the Butler Creek magazines.

Modification Necessity

35%

A notable number of reviews mention the need for modifications to make the magazines work properly, indicating a lack of readiness for use right out of the packaging. This is seen as an inconvenience and a reflection of the product's poor quality.

Sort by Filter by rating

Very cheap quality

I bought 3 of them. 2 lasted long enough to be used twice and 1 lasted long enough to be loaded 3 times. Very expensive for cheap quality when they are almost disposable magazines.

Bad QA

Bought two, one worked. After inspection I found that the dimensions where off on the one failing so feeding was at a 50% miss rate. Bad or no QA at factory and worn Machines I guess AVOID THESE!

Poor performance

I've tried multiple brands of ammo. With each, used these mags and Ruger brand mag as a test. While the Ruger performed flawlessly with each brand the Butler creek at best would fire 3 rounds before FTEs and FTFs.

Jams frequently

Yesterday at the range my 10/22 jammed 3 times in 37 rounds using Butler Creek steel lips mags, twice in the first mag and once half way through the second. At that point I switched to Ruger factory BX-25 and BX-10 mags, and using the same ammo, I fired 210 rounds without a hiccup.

Not what they used to be ?

These used to be the best aftermarket 10-22 mags you could buy, the only ones that would work flawlessly with any brand of .22 Long Rifle ammo (not shot shells). The last two butler creek mags I bought will not feed any brand without jamming. First the top of each mag had to be filed down so the bolt would not hit it causing a jam. I did not get any filings down inside the mags. Then they would only jam for the first 4 or 5 rounds, if I loaded only 20 rounds they would function properly. The angle of the cartridge in these mags is not the same as in the Ruger factory mags. They also fit really sloppy in the mag well. The quality control at butler creek is not what it used to be.