It’s hard to find a handier rifle than a Ruger 10/22 Takedown, but if it’s out there it’s probably an integrally-suppressed 10/22 takedown. Normally the domain of the aftermarket, Ruger has jumped into the integral suppressor market with a very slick new design, called the Silent-SR ISB . . .

Inside the external housing is a 10″ barrel followed by the suppressor core. Remove the bolt underneath the bore and the baffles slide right out.

The baffle stack, comprised of interlocking, 17-4 stainless steel baffles, comes apart easily for cleaning. As the baffles snap together and seal, the tube is kept clean of .22 LR combustion junk.

The CFD-designed baffles are similar to what’s seen inside of Ruger’s thread-on .22 LR silencer, but offer significantly more volume thanks to extending downwards into the lower tube.

MSRP is $629 and the entire assembly weighs 2.6 lbs. It fits on 10/22 Takedown, Takedown Lite, and Charger Pistol.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

50 COMMENTS

  2. This is what I was talking about when I said the gun companies that built integrally-suppressed firearms would be doing *very* well if we get the HPA passed into law.

    Although it will be a neat trick if Glock can make a polymer can.

    (Who knows? Everybody claimed it was impossible to land and re-use an orbital-class first stage booster…)

      • I imagine the R&D costs are fairly minimal, and will pay for themselves eventually even without the HPA.

        In my mind, the reason for this sort of development is actually more a hedge against time to market should the HPA pass. IF the HPA passes, they can hit the ground running, where as any competitors who didn’t do this work, have a huge lag before the first product rolls out the door.

      • Damn, I was just being my usual smart-ass self with my Glock plastic can crack.

        And it averages out to about 10 bucks a shot.

        That should be real popular with contract killers and those who need to take care of an occasional ‘problem’…

        *snicker* 🙂

    • No one with two brain cells to rub together and a scrap of knowledge in the field thought that such boosters would be improbable.

      I’m looking at getting a 10/22 Takedown Lite, and this would compliment it *PERFECTLY*. MUCH WANT.

      • The hard on I have for this is if it works with the x22 back packer stock from Magpul. If it does, my TD 10/22 will be my most favorite gun ever. The only down side to this barrel is it must be used with an optic. Ruger needs to add sights.

      • “No one with two brain cells to rub together and a scrap of knowledge in the field thought that such boosters would be improbable.”

        Musk did it a whole lot faster than any of the usual launch providers ever thought it *could* be done.

        Word is he may attempt S-2 recovery when they test the 3-core ‘Falcon Heavy’ stack in a few months…

        • Musk is nothing more an excellent con/PR guy. He hasn’t done shit, his engineers have. Once they stopped pulling scrap from Baikonur (repainting it/rebranding it) and designed their own launchers, boosters, and capsules, that is…

        • And a butt load cheaper, he spent $1.4B to date to develop a reusable rocket, NASA spent $130B on the Shuttle and almost everyone in the traditional industry positions said it would never work, they still say it today

          Kroglikepie: I need to set something straight, Musk was an accomplished (software) engineer before founding SpaceX. He taught himself rocket science in about a year after trying to buy some ICBMs from the Russians (warheads not included), he is an engineer by education not a PR guy

        • Musk wasn’t that accomplished in writing code, he saw a need for on-line payments and started what ended up as PayPal.

          And sold it for a butt-load of money that he used for playing with rockets. And whaddaya know? Looks like he picked the right folks to turn an idea into reality…

        • And? I know of many an engineer who, well, couldn’t engineer their way out of a paper bag. He is not involved in the hard science of any of the process. As much of a husckster as he is (and how I denigrate it), you can’t argue with results. He made smart moves in the market at the right times, made a buttload of money, and has spearheaded a new front of private sector development of launcher tech. And uh, it doesn’t matter how of a “genius” one dispenses themselves as, one does not teach themselves “rocket science” in a year.

          And you’re right, he spent significantly less money developing his boosters. That was accomplished by not working in the 1970’s and 80’s, utilizing data and material advances since then, and working off of existing concepts. It is amazing how much easier it is to smooth a wheel with a lathe, than to chisel one with sharpened rocks. There is no comparitive cost analysis in this scenario. The scale and time frames are completely incomparable.

          Getting back on target, anyone know what the length of the suppressed barrel is? Is the same as overall as the takedown models?

        • Biggest difference between space x and the other guys is the amount of risk they are willing to take. With space travel there is usually a catch 22 when it comes to fielding new technology. Nobody will fly new technology without significant testing being done on the ground, but no one will fund that testing if it hasn’t flow in space. It’s a problem that is happening right now.

          With space x, they just do it. They have a relatively high failure rate, but they try to learn from every failure and they have been able to make huge advances.

    • I’ve said it several times this past year: buyRuger! NYSE RGR. The only major manufacturer producing both firearms and suppressors… now if they’d come out with a line of repeating shotguns they’d have just about every base in the business covered.

      • There are quite a few other examples in addition to SIG Sauer. BPI (which owns Dead Air, Bergara, and others), Vista Outdoor (which owns Blackhawk! and Savage and others), Freedom Group (which owns Advanced Armament, Remington, DPMS, Bushmaster, etc etc), Daniel Defense now, Knight’s Armament, Yankee Hill Machine, Thompson Machine, Arsenal Firearms….others.

      • ” now if they’d come out with a line of repeating shotguns ” According to my leaked sources, Ruger is working on it.

  3. As a Takedown owner and the owner of a rimfire can, I really want this with the extra $200 penalty

      • Yeah the extra $200 Uncle Sam payment kinda puts a damper on it, especially when it’s $629 MSRP.

    • Forget the price, it’s the wait that kills me.

      I just have bad luck with the ATF I guess, but I’ve never had a Form 4 approved in less than 10 months.

      • Ditto same here. 10-12 months for each one. The same person signed and processed them too. Must be the only poor person working there doing this.

  4. I’ve been using the excellent Gemtech Mist barrels on my full size Ruger 22’s and also the Ruger take-down but they require you to have to buy a $60 Hogue overmolded stock to accommodate the larger barrels and I’ve never been told that the shorter one for the take-down would fit on my Charger pistol. Also, I had to send my Mist barrels back to Gemtech and have them ported (they do this for free and Dater himself did mine!) so they will work with standard velocity ammunition like my 39 year old AWC-Dater unit.
    Can’t wait to get this one…! I like the idea of the huge baffles and Ruger’s claim that it will keep standard velocity Ammunition subsonic.

  5. I’m kind of over .22, but this is pretty cool. Something about the last freakout and the fact that ammo is still about $10 (at best) a brick more expensive than is reasonable soured me on it.

    Now, if the HPA passes and we then start seeing a bunch of integrally suppressed DeLisle-type-but-semiauto carbines on the market in larger calibers… then I,lol start getting more excited.

    “but offer significantly more volume thanks to extending downwards”

    Uhh…

    • Sorry, that wasn’t very clear. Typically a baffle like this is cylindrical, like the ones on Ruger’s .22 LR thread-on suppressor. But the baffles in this case are sort of 8-shaped so there’s a top and bottom cylinder that meet in the middle kinda. Anyway…there’s WAY more volume in there than there would be if it were just a 1″-diameter tube, as usual, rather than this 1″-wide by, what, 1.75″ tall tube shape.

      EDIT: Oh, LOL! Yes, what Jeff said above. Hahahaha I still didn’t even understand what you were getting at 😛 …yes, yes, I meant “square inches of internal air capacity” haha

      • Ahh, that makes complete sense now. It was comprehension failure on my part; rushing through on my lunch break, but thank you both for the clarification.

        Rushing through is also my excuse for that weird-as-hell typo/autocomplete bungle that turned out kind of interesting.

  6. I love Ruger’s product innovation.

    In some aspects they just keep making iterations of the same thing, but they make good iterations of the same thing.

    And every now and then they release something wholly new, and then iterate it.

  8. Now that is friggin’ cool! Imagine how much more innovation like this we would see in the world of suppressors if we didn’t have the NFA.

  9. Only downside is no iron sights. I don’t want to be forced to use an optic. I want the option to use either or. Ruger, please fix that.

    Love,
    Jon in CO

  10. In the context of the ongoing discussion about Springfield Armory, this right here is further evidence (if any more is needed) that old Bill Ruger’s Fudd attitude is COMPLETELY gone from his company. It should provide hope to the Springfield fans that a company can make a big anti-2A mistake and realize the error of its ways and turn around.

    Now, does this thing fit in that cool Magpul stock?

    • I’ve been asking that question since I found out about this thing. Arfcom has a thread with the manual to this barrel, and from the exploded view, it looks like it’s just a standard fore end connection. Shouldn’t be an issue, but I’m not 100%

  11. All Ruger has to make it better is sell the Silent-SR ISB with sights and as a package with a 10/22 “receiver”. Why pay for 10/22 Takedown/Takedown Lite/Charger with a extra barrel you don’t need?

    • So you can shoot your rifle while you wait a year for them to run a NICS and process paperwork.

      • Yah. It’d be cool if you could “rent” the standard barrel though and return it when your stamp comes back for the integrally suppressed one haha. Do it like a core charge for a car battery 🙂

  16. Jeremy, because the barrel is 10 inches, does buying this mean the gun would have to be registered as an SBR?

    • Integrally suppressed means the barrel is permanently attached to the suppressor housing so it’s not an SBR unless the overall length is under the limit. Same thing as pinning and welding a muzzle device on a 14.5″ AR barrel, if the end product is 16″ or longer from closed bolt face to muzzle you’re good to go.

  17. I have hereby granted myself a waiver for my ‘never be an early adopter again’ rule for this puppy. How soon can I buy one is the only question. HPA or no HPA, I will have one of these asap, please and thank you.

    Side note: boy I’m sure glad i didn’t spring for the TacSol SBX already. That whole ‘issue’ with getting a dirty can out (which can be worked-around of course) made me hesitate… and in stepped Ruger. Hoo Rah

  18. Ummm, has anyone seen the MSRP on this thing???? You could buy a nice fluted bull barrel and a Sparrow for what this thing costs!!!!

    • Hi Steve, a lot of stores sell Ruger and other firearms for much less than the MSRP as long as the price does not go below the MAP… not sure what the letters stand for but I have an FFL and most companies will not let me sell below a certain price point.. I don’t know why but I can often sell handguns and rifles for at least $100-$150 less than MSRP so I’m hoping the price at the stores for these things will be less than MSRP. Although you could get a nice threaded barrel and an Sparrow .22 suppressor (although my current favorite is the Rugged Oculus modular suppressor) the Ruger is going to achieve better overall suppression and probably a much nicer tonal quality due to those relatively huge elongated baffles. Plus with their design, much like the Ruger Silent SR .22 round suppressor already on the market, the snap together baffles are designed to keep fouling within the baffles and not get onto the interior of the supressor tube or housing which should make cleaning easy….. Have you ever tried to get a Sparrow apart after shooting too many rounds through it? It can be a bit of a bitch…
      It would be nice to see the price point be a couple hundred less. I think you can get a Gemtech Mist barrel for less than what the Ruger is projected to cost and all of my Ruger suppressed setups, whether integral or can on the end type make the rifle so quiet that you really can only hear action noise and bullet impact with subsonic ammo…
      I’m probably going to get one of the Rugers just because I can… no pun intended…

Comments are closed.