Is a Pac-Lite upper neccisary?

[TACAV]

I was looking at one of the new gen Ruger 22/45 For a suppressed .22LR pistol.

Considering Ruger now makes a factory version that comes standard with a threaded barrel, and top and bottom rails, should I even bother getting a Pac-Lite upper for it?

What if any advantages are there? Better materials/construction/reliability etc with the Pac-Lite?

[WillC]

+1

Following thread for an answer.

[Sam]

The Pac Lite upper for the Ruger 22 pistols is very light. That's probably the only advantage, now that Ruger is making those .22 with the threaded barrel and rails. If I was buying one today, I would stick with the factory Ruger. At the time of my purchase, the Ruger unit was not even on their drafting table. :)

[JasonM]

quick answer is - no, not at all.

That factory Ruger 22/45 is a great little setup, and not exactly heavy.

[Quiet Riot]

I have a factory threaded 22/45, and though its bore is concentric and mates well with my AAC Pilot, I'm having trouble finding ammo that it likes. I haven't managed better than a shotgun group with everything I've tried. There's a shit ton of ammo out there that I haven't tried yet, so I am willing to give it a chance.

Otherwise, it is a good pistol with only a few mag-related FTFs. If I can't get it to tighten up, I will send it off to Ruger.

You can see me using it in the video below. I don't want to give too much away, but be sure to watch the outtake at the end. I was aiming about 2" to the left when what you see happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWYHQRAsaR8

[mallowpufft]

If you had a MKII or MKIII the pac-lite upper would be crucial for lightening it while giving you a threaded barrel. With a 22/45 it will lighten it a hair but it's not the giant hunk of steel the other models are.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I847 using Tapatalk 2

[TACAV]

Thanks for the replies everyone

Dumb question... since I have never owned a .22LR pistol... but i hear they can be finnicky.

when everyone is talking about the weight savings with the pac-lite upper,

is having a lighter slide crucial for running suppressed with the little .22 or is this all just about general weight savings for the comfort factor or something? Because to me unless it is affecting reliability, the weight of the pistol really is a non issue for me.

[mallowpufft]

It's been a long time since I shot my friend's pac-lite but I thought it used the original bolt/slide assembly.
The Ruger has an internal slide mechanism. The whole upper/barrel is one piece that mates to the grip/mainspring housing and the slide is actually inside the barrel. Sort of like a blowback AR upper w/o the buffer tube (yes, it's a very simple explanation but it gives a sort of accurate picture).
Exploded view : http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&redir_esc=&client=ms-android-att-us&source=android-com.sec.android.app.twlauncher&v=133247963&qsubts=1344307780011&action=devloc&q=ruger+mkiii+exploded+view&v=133247963#miuv=1 (copied from my phone so it may not work properly)

The pac-lite unit weighs significantly less so if you're outside hiking and hoofing it for a long time the weight savings will be your friend.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I847 using Tapatalk 2

[Quiet Riot]

Thanks for the replies everyone

Dumb question... since I have never owned a .22LR pistol... but i hear they can be finnicky.

when everyone is talking about the weight savings with the pac-lite upper,

is having a lighter slide crucial for running suppressed with the little .22 or is this all just about general weight savings for the comfort factor or something? Because to me unless it is affecting reliability, the weight of the pistol really is a non issue for me.
I have not had any reliability problems with my stock 22/45 that weren't related to the crappy magazines they come with. There are lots of sharp edges and burrs on the inside of brand new factory magazines that need to be worked out by use. Until then, it is typical for the magazine to get bound up when loaded to full capacity.

Besides, the Pac Lite is not really lighter in the parts that cycle. It is basically replacing the all steel "upper receiver" and barrel with a small steel barrel pressed into an aluminum sleeve.

[JasonM]

Thanks for the replies everyone

Dumb question... since I have never owned a .22LR pistol... but i hear they can be finnicky.

when everyone is talking about the weight savings with the pac-lite upper,

is having a lighter slide crucial for running suppressed with the little .22 or is this all just about general weight savings for the comfort factor or something? Because to me unless it is affecting reliability, the weight of the pistol really is a non issue for me.

The MK1-3, 22/45 etc don't have a slide, they have an internal bolt. This is the same between all models.

Adding a can generally will improve function, since it will add backpressure and help cycle the gun.

[bulbvivid]

When you say "new gen Ruger 22/45," are you talking about the 22/45 Lite?

ETA: NM, I see the Lite doesn't have the bottom rail.

[GlocksInMySocks]

I had a factory threaded 22/45, but sold the upper for a paclite. Why? I wanted top and bottom rails while still having iron sights, saved a lot of weight, and over all looks better.

[cj5_dude]

Unless you really want a bottom rail I suggest you look at the Ruger 22/45 Lite. It comes with a gold anodized upper with a pre-tensioned barrel for accuracy and has adjustable iron sights and is pre-drilled for a weaver mount so you can mount any red dot, scope, or whatever on top. And best of all it has a threaded barrel. I'm waiting for my dealer to be able to get one and then it'll be all mine. It's pretty much like getting a Pac-Lite upper from the factory.

[GlocksInMySocks]

I pretty much agree with the above. I use mine for supressed critter shooting at night. So I wanted an under rail for a x300. The fact that the only way to get that rail from ruger is without iron sights just pisses me off, therefore, paclite.