S&w 22A or Ruger 22/45?


PDA






The Jackal
May 7, 2006, 06:09 PM
I am trying to find a decent 22LR pistol for about $200-$250 and I have narrowed to these two. I have fired a Ruger Mark II before, so I would imagine the 22/45 would be fairly similar. All input on the 22A would be appriciated.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&w 22A or Ruger 22/45?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
EddieCoyle
May 7, 2006, 07:10 PM
I have an un-natural love for S&W pistols and revolvers (just read some of my other posts). However, if you enjoy shooting more than you enjoy clearing jams, FTF's, FTE's, etc. you should go with the Ruger.

The 22A that I had was so bad that I'm trying to convince myself that it never happened. I have a Ruger MKIII which is essentially a 22/45 with a different grip angle. It has been reliable and accurate. Just make sure you keep the manual handy until you memorize how to take it apart and put it back together.

wally
May 7, 2006, 07:18 PM
I've got MkII, 22/45, and S&W M22A with 6" fluted barrel.

The more I shoot the M22A the more I like it, but.... While take down is easy, putting it back together again is best done with three hands. The mag release is in a goofy location (ambi which is good) but is very easy to hit unintensionally while shooting. The rail is great if you want red dot or optics, but mine has the fiber optic "firesight" front and combined with its rear is by far the best iron sighted gun I can shoot given my presbyoptia. Don't care for the mag safety and there is a goofy plastic piece at the back of the recoil spring that seems to have a short life. Mine had a great trigger out of the box. Mine has been very reliable with cheap ammo out of the box, although I had a rash of mis-fires after the screwed in "lug" that locks the upper to the lower worked loose, tightening it cured the issue.

I'm not trying to talk you out of it, but it does have its quirks. The new MkIII 22/45 also have mag safeties with decent sights and models with adjustable sights come with a Weaver mount. If your eyes are young, the Rugers are hard to beat and very mainstream, but if you are old give the M22A a carefull look as my abaility to shoot it with irons more than makes up for its quirks.

--wally.

Soybomb
May 7, 2006, 07:27 PM
I have a 22a and love it. It was cheap and has the customer service of s&w behind it. It loves the $8 for 550 bulk pack of ammo from walmart. The magazine safety was removed (take off the grip on that side and literally yank the long bar out, nothing hard about it) in about 2 minutes and now its perfect. When I first got the gun it would sometimes fail to strip the 2nd round from the mag when shooting, but that quickly faded away as I broke it in with a few hundred rounds. The screws holding the rail on were loose after a few hundred rounds, but loc-tite fixed that problem. I personally prefer the aluminum frame also.

R.W.Dale
May 7, 2006, 07:35 PM
MY 22a was a pure piece of garbage of the highest order. It spent a large portion of the time that I owned it at the factory getting "REPAIRED":banghead:

I now own a Ruger MkII Goverment model it's four times the handgun the 22a was.

thewheelsonthebus
May 7, 2006, 07:36 PM
i have had both, my rugers have been more dependable than the 22a. with that said i am abusing the 22a to see what it can take. cleaning what cleaning. i want to see how far it will go before running out of gas. so far i love every bit of it. time may change that tune though. she sure is a looker!
check picture in my other thread.

The Jackal
May 7, 2006, 08:05 PM
I got young eyes (I am 28) and I have personally been leaning toward the Ruger. I have a big love for the Ruger since my p89 and 10/22 are fun and reliable. The p89 needed a new grip (Thanks Houge!) and front sight (HiViz), but I love it. Besides, I reside in Arizona, the hoime land of Ruger.

I know that the S&W 38's are good. I have fired a couple, but the reviews I have read on the 22A are mixed at best. I also like the Walther 22LR but it is a bit pricey for a plinker.

jerkface11
May 7, 2006, 08:18 PM
I can vouch for the poor quality of krochus' 22A. It was inaccurate too. Wouldn't feed most types of ammo. Had lots of misfires. And in the course of taking it down it BROKE. It seems the barrel/slide assembly is held on by a cast aluminum nub. And when that broke S&W "repaired" it by screwing a peice of spring steel in it's place. But hey at least it was ugly.

TNT
May 7, 2006, 11:01 PM
I have had both and kept the Ruger. Ruger gets my vote.

The Jackal
May 7, 2006, 11:03 PM
I can vouch for the poor quality of krochus' 22A. It was inaccurate too. Wouldn't feed most types of ammo. Had lots of misfires. And in the course of taking it down it BROKE. It seems the barrel/slide assembly is held on by a cast aluminum nub. And when that broke S&W "repaired" it by screwing a peice of spring steel in it's place. But hey at least it was ugly.

IT BROKE! Sheesh! I would expect better quality from S&W. I could see it happening with a Taurus, but not on a S&W.

Rube
May 9, 2006, 04:10 AM
I had them both, and ended up trading the 22a. In my case it was the comparison of a $200 gun vs. a $300 gun. As long as I used Winchester High Velocity in the 22a, no problems whatsoever. So far the 22/45 will handle anything.

jman74
May 9, 2006, 09:05 PM
Go for the Ruger. My 22/45 is the most reliable 22lr I've ever owned. Even if I don't clean it, just a few drops of oil on the bolt and she's good for another 500 round session. It's a bonus that it's most accurate with CCI standard vel. which happens to be about the cheapest ammo on the shelf at the local store.

10-Ring
May 9, 2006, 09:29 PM
I have a Mk II which is very similar to the 22/45 and have access to the 22a...this is probably a biased opinion, but I prefer the Ruger.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&w 22A or Ruger 22/45?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!