.22 Pistol Recommendations

[oneshotkill]

My dad and I are looking at buying a .22 semi auto pistol.  Right now I am leaning towards a Browning Buckmark and he is leaning toward a Ruger Mark II or III.  We are trying to keep it under $500.  Is there any others you would recommend that we should consider?  Thanks

[carpsniperg2]

I shoot a competition Ruger Mark II with a 10" heavy barrel. That gun will drive tacks all day long! I would really look at the Ruger's. I have no feedback on the buckmark. I have only ever looked at them.

[lumpyd]

+1  Ruger Mk. II

[Oldguy]

The Ruger is accurate and the heavy barrel isn't needed unless it happens to aid your shooting stability in competition. I competed as a Master Shooter back in the 50's with a Ruger Mark I, regular barrel, and also had a S&W model 41 which wasn't any more accurate. I think either model you are considering would be a good choice but I too lean toward the Ruger. Same basic gun for a lot of years so they got it right the first time!

[denali]

Kel Tec   PMR 30 is now in production - 30 rounds of .22 mag      MSRP $415.00    I have never held or shot one ??

http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/pistols/pmr-30/

[gadwall]

I have owned a standard model buckmark since they first came out.  It's a very good shooter and likes a wide range of ammo. 

[FC]

Stay away from the Mk III or the Mk III 22/45 if you go with a Ruger, the Buckmark is a good choice.

[JackOfAllTrades]

FC, If you're going to condem a Ruger MKII, please say why.

The Buckmark is a great gun for something that has a non-steal slide. Something that has virtually no aftermarket options. But has a trigger that is usually superior to out of the box Rugers.

But, the Rugers have a great following of aftermarket options that will allow the heavy barrel models become a tool worthy of getting a competitive shooter to master class, (NRA Standard Pistol) with great reliability for a lot less than any european model of competitive target pistol. The Ruger is also made in America. I don't think you can say that for all of the Buckmarks.

I personally dont' like the Ruger MKIII's that are designed to be within the People's Socialist Republic of Kaliphornia rules for loaded chamber indicator and won't allow the trigger to pull unless there is a magazine installed.

My recommendation would be a Ruger MKII or a Buckmark. Both are good guns.  (I shoot modified MKII's in competition)

-Steve

[GEARHEAD]

my votes for the buckmark. its a very good reliable pistol. but mainly, super easy to clean. remember those .22's burn messy leaving all kinds of unfired powder. the buckmark does not have this problem as the unburnt powder is allowed to escape outa both sides. very easy to clean i think is the advantage of the buckmark.

[toothfangclaw]

My cousin got a sig, pretty nice. The only thing I don't like is it has a long trigger pull. But that's a person thing.

TFC/Matt

[PolarBear]

Buckmark

[ICEMAN]

Ruger MkII Bull barrel

[Straight Shooter]

Ruger MkII

[kingmountain]

I have both a ruger mark II bull barrel, and a Buckmark target model. The Buckmark has a better trigger,will shoot any ammo, .no misfires.  I like the buckmark.

[GregMcFadden]

I've got a 22/45 MK3.  the grip fits my hand.  that is the extent of the positive I can say for that pistol.

[runamuk]

I really like my markIII it fits my hand well and shoots great as long as I stay away from really cheap winchester ammo...and its super pretty

[swanny]

You really need to go feel the models you are looking at and see what fits best in your hand and all that good stuff.

I bought a Buckmark last year after much debate because it really did just feel the best. I have loved it so far and had zero issues. No misfires and the thing is super accurate with a variety of ammo that I have used. It's fun, but if anything I would HIGHLY recommend getting more than one magazine for it, because those 10 shots can go super quick.

[Blacklab]

I have the Ruger MKlll target/hunter and I'm quite pleased with it. Comfortable has good weight, balance an very accurate. By no means I'm a competitive shooter. For what I do with it target shoot and hunt it fit's my bill.

run yes they are 

[oneshotkill]

My brother has a Mark II and my best friend has a Buckmark so I have shot both.  The Buckmark felt better to me.  My dad is leaning towards the Mark II or III because it is the only 22 auto he has ever shot and liked it when he shot it.

[thinkingman]

My brother has a Mark II and my best friend has a Buckmark so I have shot both.  The Buckmark felt better to me.  My dad is leaning towards the Mark II or III because it is the only 22 auto he has ever shot and liked it when he shot it.

I have owned and shot a pre-Mark Ruger for almost 40 yrs.
My dad gave it to me and I'll never get rid of it.
I bought a longer barreled MkII and buffed the internals, added Volquartsen parts...It's a good shooter.
I bought a Buckmark Micro a couple yrs ago...basic, nothing special.
It has a better trigger than either Rugers and is just as accurate, and fits my hand better and a better grip angle (very similar to my other favorite, 1911).
Now the Rugers stay home and the Buckmark goes to the range with me every time.

[h20hunter]

How abour a .22 convesion if you already have a 1911? Is this an option?

[FC]

FC, If you're going to condem a Ruger MKII, please say why.

Count III's again   , I have a MkIII 22/45 and out of the box it was the junkiest pistol I have ever tried to use! After I spent 8+ hours on it, the pistol runs flawlessly and has a pretty decent trigger too. I had to de-burr the inside of the receiver, all of the stamp points were pushing in against the bolt so that took quite a while to relieve it. I also had to polish the bolt, as the machining was very rough and it would hang up on the receiver after 100 rounds or so as the pockets and craters in the bolt would gather enough carbon and crud to start dragging. Polishing the bolt and receiver 100% fixed those problems and the gun will actually function without oil now.

Once the bolt would cycle reliably I only needed to get the pistol to reliably feed and extract shells and see if I could make the safety actually usable. I removed the LCI (loaded chamber indicator) as the forward edge of it's metal tab that protrudes into the rear of the chamber wouldn't slide over the rim of the case sometimes and prevent the pistol from returning to battery. The pistol would still fire as it was close enough to be able to trip the hammer but it wouldn't strike the primer with enough force for ignition usually but when it did it would result in a failure to extract.

Removal of the LCI 100% fixed the failure to return to battery and failure to extract problem.

I removed the magazine safety next as the pistol had a tendency to run the bullet into the base of the feed ramp where it would either split and jam the gun or it would sheer a piece of lead off while frequently bending the bullet a bit although it would generally chamber those they weren't my most accurate shots   .

The cause of the failure to feed problem was the forward pressure of the magazine from the magazine safety mechanism itself, it caused the magazine to be constantly tilted in the magazine well, it also made it difficult to eject a magazine.

Removal of the magazine safety 100% fixed the failure to feed issues, the manual safety problems and magazines now drop free when you hit the eject button. The manual safety would previously bind and either not move fully to the on position or get stuck there, it now moves smoothly and easily with a nice positive click on the detent.

While I had the frame gutted I did some corrective surgery on the hammer and polished the sear to get a better trigger, huge difference. The MkII parts will fit if you would prefer though and you can go that route to defeat the magazine safety as you can't just remove it, you must make a shim for the side of the hammer or replace the hammer with a MkII type.

It just occurred to me that this info might be helpful to someone else Steve, if you want to sticky or otherwise save it feel free. My 22/45 is completely reliable now and very accurate but I would never buy another.

[h20hunter]

FC...please don't post if you don't know what you are talking about. Jeez.

PS. Do you do any side work gunsmithing?

[FC]

FC...please don't post if you don't know what you are talking about. Jeez.

PS. Do you do any side work gunsmithing?

No I don't but I do work on all of my own stuff and some of my friend's guns too. Why, do you need something fixed? 

[GregMcFadden]

FC, thanks for the writeup, I think I will have to get the ole dog out and try your changes on my mkIII...

-Greg

[h20hunter]

FC, not at the time. However, great to see you know your stuff. I'm in your area and you never know, may need something done.

[FC]

FC, thanks for the writeup, I think I will have to get the ole dog out and try your changes on my mkIII...

-Greg

Good luck, take your time and take some pictures if you need to. The magazine safety is a real turd to put back in there if you were to change your mind or have a problem making a shim for the hammer but you can get a Volquartzen hammer for a MkII. The spring that wraps around the mag safety doesn't actuate anything else either so you can safely (and happily) remove it too without causing any malfunctions.

[whitey]

My Buckmark is an awesome shooter..
+1 for Browning..

[singleshot12]

I sure like the Sig Sauer Mosquito and the Ruger MK 11 for plinking. Paid 200 for the Ruger used and 400 for the Sig new. I would use the Ruger for hunting small game seems to be a little more accurate than the Sig, but both very dependable. The Sig likes cci ammo the best and the Ruger likes Remington and PMC ammo.
I want to trade the Sig in for the Kel Tec mag. though anyone know anything about them?

[Kent Hunter]

I have both Rugers and a couple of Buckmarks. I'm kind of a .22 pistol "nut". I like both the Ruger and Buckmark. The triggers on the Buckmarks are a bit better than the Rugers. You really won't go wrong with which ever one you choose. Go shopping and see which feels better in your hand. The Rugers that I have are the MKIII Hunter and the MKIII 22/45. My Buckmarks are the Conture and the Bullseye URX. Accuracy wise they are all pretty even. I also have an old High Standard "Sport King" and a old Colt "Woodsman". The Sport King has been shot quite a bit, but the Woodsman probably has less than 200 rds down the pipe. The .22 pistol that I REALLY want and just drool over whenever I see a new one is the S&W Mod 41!! It's just that I always have a hard time trying to talk the wife into letting me spend $1000 and change for a .22!!! . Good luck to you in which ever pistol that you do decide on. Good shooting to ya brother!!

[Coastal_native]

Awwwwhh

Nobody liked the Walther P22?  I'm no gun nut, but I think it's fun.  That thing will shoot anything you put in it, and I'm always hittin within 5 ft of my target  Plus, it looks really cool with the tactical look.  It looks like a real mans gun, but smaller

I've probably exposed my ignorance of handguns...I'll shut up now.

[CastleRocker]

I've never had a Buckmark, but I've been outshot by a few.  I'm a High Standard fan myself.  (The old Citations, Trophies, and HDs').  I've got an old Mark I Ruger that shoots fairly well and I've been looking at a newer 22 and will be following this thread with interest.  I also drool over the S&W 41, and the Benelli, and the full Volquartsen customs, not necessarily in that order.

[ElkBook]

Within 5 feet of your target isn't very impressive when you are only 10 feet away though.