Help me choose a new .22


PDA






Top_Notch
April 2, 2004, 03:57 PM
I'm in the market for a new .22. I currently have a Glock 19 (9mm) and a S/A Loaded (.45). I love the nine and shoot the lights out of it, and also my .45, although I don't shoot it as much mainly because ammo is twice the amount of money than 9mm. I'm looking for a 22 to make target paper punching last longer and be easier on my pocketbook. I have $400 to spend.

Ruger KMK515 (Stainless Bull) was going to be my choice. But, I'm not too sure I'm keen on the breakdown of the Ruger models. I've been looking at (but haven't fondled) Brownings Buckmark or a Sig's Trailside.

No Beretta NEOS, as I have tried that pistol and did not care for it in the least, although it was relatively accurate. Additionally, down the road I would like to scope/red dot my 22, so that too is a consideration of mine.

I'm wondering if these 3 are basically the same, or if one is a better standout than the others. Any experiences and/or recommendations with pros and cons of each would be greatly appreciated.

If you enjoyed reading about "Help me choose a new .22" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
pauli
April 2, 2004, 04:15 PM
i really liked the sig trailside. it's out of my budget, but i think it's easily inside yours.

from what i've read, the early ones were remarkably unreliable for sigs, but the new ones are great. of course, sending an old one back to the factory seems to solve all the problems...

MikeK
April 2, 2004, 04:27 PM
I'll give it a shot. The Ruger MKII has a grip angle similar to the Glock, the 22/45 is similar to a 1911. The Trailside is similar to neither and you can't get them around here for $400.

I own a 22/45 and a Trailside. I like them both, both are accurate. The Ruger takedown is easy, reassembly is not difficult IF you follow the directions exactly. It did cause me some frustartion the first few times.
Solow mounts make red dot installation easy on the Rugers. The gun can be disassembled without removing the mounts.

The Trailside is real easy to disassemble and reassemble. However, if you mount a red dot on it, it has to come off for dis/re assembly. You can probably use a bore snake or patchworm or whatever to get the barrel without taking it completely apart every time. Larry's Guns has red dots and mounts for the Trailside in different configurations. Try a search on the SIG forum for some pics.

No experience with the Buckmark.

sturgeon
April 2, 2004, 04:35 PM
I vote for the sig trailside.
I had a ruger 22/45 and also had a ruger markII. I then bought the trailside, and for me, this gun is much more accurate and more comfortable.
Both rugers were great guns, and they were accurate, but I chose to sell them because I like the sig that much more, and want another trailside.
Sturgeon

rbernie
April 2, 2004, 04:45 PM
I've got a Trailside ($340) and a Buckmark Micro ($240). Spend the extra $100 and get the Trailside.

R.H. Lee
April 2, 2004, 05:07 PM
Go with the Ruger. Breakdown is really not that tough. The trick to reassembly is just to get the hammer strut lined up correctly. In any event, there is no need for frequent breakdowns. I just keep the action clean with Hoppe's and a Q-Tip, no oil.

tc300mag1
April 2, 2004, 07:36 PM
Go with the Ruger Breakdown is easy So is putting it back together .. a pain once or twice then super east i can break down mine in under a Min. And back together in same amount of time

itgoesboom
April 2, 2004, 08:47 PM
Go with the Ruger. Just decide which pistol you need more practice with, the 1911, or the Glock. If you feel that you shoot the Glock best, get the 22/45 to give you more practice with a 1911 feel. If you shoot the 1911 best, get the MKII instead.

You will always hear how tough it is to breakdown and reassemble the Ruger pistols.

IT'S NOT TRUE!!!!!

I listened to everyone tell me how tough they are to break down for 6 months, and when I finally decided to do it, it was a piece of cake, and I am not mechanically inclined at all.

Very quick and easy to do.

I.G.B.

Sactown
April 2, 2004, 10:26 PM
I own 2 Rugers, a Trailside competition, and an IZH35M.

My preference is
1. IZH35M (this wouldn't work if you're looking for a plinker, but for bullseye, you can't beat it at that price range)
2. TS (Super sweet, no work needed. Early problems have been fixed on the guns and the magazines)
3. Ruger (the cheapest of the 3. Good accuracy, trigger needs work. First couple of disassemblies may be a pain if the pistol is tight, but it gets easier)

I feel that the Ruger (not 22/45) points more like a glock and the TS points more like a 1911.

Get a hold of them all if you can before you make your final choice.

Lobotomy Boy
April 2, 2004, 11:16 PM
Dang, at those kind of prices you could find a decent old Colt Woodsman, not a pristine collector's item, but a real shooter. Maybe I'm being delusional from the mists of nostalgia, but none of the modern .22s I've shot have seemed as nice as the old Woodsman models.

Or how about a Smith Model 41? Another classic, though I think those tend to run a bit more than you are talking about spending.

KarlG
April 3, 2004, 12:45 AM
I have a Buckmark Camper (inexpensive - $200 new) that I am quite fond of. I like the location of the controls, the angle/shape of the grip, and the trigger was good right out of the box. Downside is it requires an allen wrench to break down and you need to locktite the screws back in when re-assembling. It has been quite reliable and accurate. My wife likes to shoot it too.

I also have a Colt Challenger (2nd series Woodsman without slides stop after last round). It has also been accurate and reliable for me. The grip angle is steeper than the Buckmark ( I prefer the Buckmark). Magazines are more expensive and it is more particular with magazines than the Buckmark. Lobotomy Boy eluded to the quality of these older guns and I have to agree. The quality is outstanding. I get the impression that they were crafted and not just manufactured. When I rack the slide of my Challenger it seems so smoooooooth compared to more modern .22's. The blueing is so much more appealing than the paint applied to modern guns.

Majic
April 3, 2004, 01:04 AM
The old Browning Challengers were nice too and can still be found. Another alternative is one of the many High Standards (the originals not the Mitchell or Houston examples).

Preacherman
April 3, 2004, 02:32 AM
Why not save some money and buy a .22 top end for your Glock? They're usually in the $225-$250 range, retail. I strongly recommend the Advantage Arms unit: see here (http://www.advantagearms.com/conversion_kit.html) for details. Their Target Model has adjustable sights, which can be useful when switching ammo brands or bullet weights. Their Law Enforcement model can be fitted with any standard Glock sights, which makes it easier to practice with the same sights as are fitted to your carry slide.

Highly recommended!

If you enjoyed reading about "Help me choose a new .22" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!