Browning Buckmark vs. Ruger 22/45


PDA






whm1974
July 4, 2004, 06:13 PM
Ok I went to the range yestiday and besides shooting my S&W Mod 10-5, I also shot 500 rounds though the range's Buckmark. I also shot a 22/45 there a few weeks ago.

I'm looking for a .22 handgun. At the moment I'm undecide if I want a revovler or auto, maybe I'll get both... Anyway I liked both guns but am leaning to the Buckmark.

-Bill

If you enjoyed reading about "Browning Buckmark vs. Ruger 22/45" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Black Snowman
July 4, 2004, 06:37 PM
I prefer the balence of the Buckmark to that of the Mk II but the only ones I've had to compare are the 5.5 Target and the Mk II slab side (AKA Government Competition model).

Can't go wrong with any of those, what are you planning to use the pistol for? Plinking? Target shooting?

Jim K
July 4, 2004, 09:10 PM
My heartburn with the Buckmark is that take down involves two screws that can get lost, buggered, worn or cross-threaded. The Ruger guns are a bit harder to dis-/re-assemble until you get used to them, but are very solid and last about forever.

Jim

Standing Wolf
July 4, 2004, 09:50 PM
The Ruger's barrel is stamped with a so-called "safety" message for people who aren't smart enough to keep and bear arms responsibly.

HSMITH
July 5, 2004, 01:09 AM
I've had multiple Rugers, sold them ALL, even one I had a lot of money into. I sold them all off because I bought a Buckmark Standard, it blew them away totally in reliability and ease of care with accuracy just as good if not better than all but a long barreled Goverment model Ruger (with over $800 in it). You could not GIVE me a Ruger 22 unless it was with the clear understanding I was going to use it for trade bait with the uninformed.

The guys I shoot with going back 15 years have abandoned the Rugers for Buckmarks almost to a man, a couple have gotten serious and purchased Hammerli and the like, but none have kept a Ruger for a primary shooter after some range time with the Buckmark.

SteelyDan
July 5, 2004, 02:44 AM
This is kinda like 9mm vs. .45. They're both very good .22s, and you won't go wrong with either one (barring the occasional factory lemon). I got the Browning because it pointed exactly where I wanted to shoot, but I'd be happy with the Ruger, too.

Croyance
July 5, 2004, 03:44 AM
I chose the Buckmark. The fact that I got a good deal on one while getting a HiPower had something to do with it.
Haven't regretted it. One of the best triggers on any gun I handled. Its a wonder somebody didn't grab it before me.
It really seems like a no-lose situation though. Both are quality guns. The Ruger is harder to reassemble and the Buckmark takes a little care in getting the screws in.

zaijian
July 5, 2004, 03:48 AM
At first, I shot my dad's Ruger, and it was merely ok. Once I understood how to strip and clean it I liked it a lot better. However, due to everybody praising the Buckmark, I ended up getting one of those. While the Buckmark does shoot better, I find that it's much more of a pain to strip and clean compared to the Ruger (once you know how to do it). With the buckmark, you've got to have that allen wrench, keep track of the screws (AND WASHERS!6@#$!), but the Ruger disassembles easier and is easier to clean.

DHart
July 5, 2004, 05:25 AM
Certainly both are good pistols, but my decision came down to the Buckmark Classic w/Rosewood grips... magnificent looking, feeling, and shooting pistol. Feels so slick and smooth I hardly even know the gun is going off... very accurate and fantastic feel in the hand... a better "hand feel" than Ruger... for me anyway. Plus the thumb safety button on the 22/45 is ergonomically awful... it tends to cut into your thumb flesh... terrible design to interface with human thumbs. Go for the Buckmark... they've got some fantastic models..

http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/category.asp?value=006B

RooK
July 5, 2004, 05:49 AM
I love my 22/45. I've had it for over 6 years and it has yet to let me down. Like others have stated, the Ruger's breakdown is difficult at first, but once you get used to it, it's like second nature. No tools needed.

The only complaint I could possibly come up with is the trigger. They ship with the typical lawyer proofing. This brings me to another point though: The aftermarket for the Rugers are unparalleled. VQ, PC, Clark and many others make so many aftermarket parts for them, the options are endless. This includes the neccesary parts to bring the trigger down to sub-3lbs. A company called Tactical Solutions even makes new uppers (FFL required) that are made of aluminum and bring the weight down to practically nothing. If you get a 22/45, Broken Ranch can do some mods on it including installing 1911 grips, an extended slide releases and safety.

Ruger is also making a new Mark III version of the 22/45 and the standard model. Although they include internals locks and magazine disconnects, the 22/45 model sports a new grip frame/sights and the standard model has finally switched from a heel mag release to a button release. If they don't suit your fancy, the older Mark II models are still being made.

whm1974
July 5, 2004, 04:18 PM
Thanks, I'll probley get the Buckmark. The shop where I brought my .38 has a Walther P22 I was also thinking about getting. Feels good in my hand but... I have my eye on a High Standerd .22 revovler the shop has as well.

-Bill

DFBonnett
July 5, 2004, 04:45 PM
Browning Buckmark vs. Ruger 22/45

Both are fine pistols and either will serve you well. I bought a Buckmark because it fit *MY* hand better. If the pistol doesn't fit you won't it shoot well and won't enjoy it.

shep854
July 5, 2004, 05:46 PM
I have a Buck Mark as well. It shoots and handles great. At the range today, I shot a Beretta Neo. To me, it seems like a cross between a Ruger and a BM.

I want to get a standard Ruger .22, as well as a .22 conversion for a centerfire pistol.

DMK
July 5, 2004, 06:00 PM
In my eperience with two Buckmarks and one 22/45, the Ruger is better made, shoots more reliably with a wider variety of ammo and is easier to clean once you get used to the funky takedown system(perhaps difficult to master, but requires no tools).

One specific thing I do not like about the Buckmark is the two allen screws that hold the top strap on, keep coming loose causing the gun to jam.

DHart
July 5, 2004, 06:34 PM
I haven't had the screw issue that you mentioned, but I wonder if just a touch of loctite would solve that issue for those that have it...

bokchoi
July 5, 2004, 07:57 PM
I had a great deal of appreciation for the 22/45 before I got my Buckmark; though it may not be as tough (mine was bought used and gave me no problems whatsoever), I quickly realized that it got everything right where the Ruger seemed to be weak, especially balance, accuracy, and pointability.

Marcus
July 5, 2004, 09:12 PM
I agree,it`s kinda like comparing a Sig P-226 to a Ruger P-85. I`ve had 2 Buckmarks and a Ruger Mk2 MK-512. I also shoot a Ruger 22/45 a lot. The ergonomics are no contest,the Buckmark`s are true 1911/HiPower style. The Ruger`s are little buttons recessed in the plastic. The Ruger has big clunky mag baseplates that don`t always seat the first time and often pinch my pinky finger. The grip is square as a brick and you can`t change it. The Buckmark`s controls fall easily to hand,the grip feels HiPower/CZ great and there are a variety of grips to choose from,the mags pop in easily and eject with vigor,finally the trigger pull is head and shoulders beyond any Ruger I`ve handled that didn`t have work done to it. PreBan Buckmark and Challenger mags are 12rd. hi cap also BTW. The two screws in the top strap are no brainers. I mean hey, they`re *just screws* guys...it ain`t exactly rocket science! The Ruger`s a good little gun but the Browning is better. Marcus

russlate
July 6, 2004, 01:03 AM
The new Shooting Times is on the magazine racks, and I just bought a copy as it had pictures of the Ruger 22 Mark III's with the integral lock.

Unless I find decently priced used Mark II's in basic blue and skinny barrels with fixed sights, I will probably pick up some light framed Buckmarks with similar features.

I don't buy guns with the abomination of an internal locksbuilt in. Smith and Wesson's Agreement to me was a pact with the devil. The only gun with such an abomination I would buy is a Springfield 1911 auto. It's lock can be swapped out. I'd pre-order the parts to do so, so I could rip the lock off and replace it before it made me start projectile vomiting.

I don't think I'll be buying many more new Rugers.

RooK
July 6, 2004, 02:51 AM
russlate, Mark IIs are still in production at the moment. You shouldn't have a problem buying one new.

P. Plainsman
July 6, 2004, 04:54 AM
Can't speak to the merits of the Ruger .22s.

However, one of my first two handguns is a Buck Mark (Browning spells it as two words) -- specifically, a Buck Mark Plus. The Plus is a BM Standard with a high-visibility front sight and nice rosewood grips. Cost me $350.

I really like it. For a casual sporting pistol with a mid-length barrel, it is crazy accurate. I can get 2" groups offhand at 40 feet or so, despite primitive skills. A 5'3" relative of mine particularly likes the Buck Mark for its balance, gentle recoil and moderate weight (2 lbs., 2 oz.).

I've put 350-400 rounds through the Buck Mark. It is due for its first full takedown and cleaning. However, it has kept on shooting with virtually no problems. It seems to like CCI Mini-Mags.

My gun has one quirk: when you chamber the first round, the orthodox pistol slide-racking technique (pull the slide smartly back, then simply release it, letting the spring tension do all the work of snapping the slide into place and chambering the round) doesn't always work. My amateur hypothesis is that this is because the slide springs on a .22 pistol cannot be made too stiff -- otherwise the modest blowback force of the cartridge will not suffice to push the slide back and feed the next round.

My solution is to give the slide a slight forward push when chambering the first round. Once I learned to do that, I've had 200+ rounds without a burp or misfeed.

Shooting the Buck Mark is so relaxing that I plan to buy another .22. I'm leaning toward a Ruger New Single Six revolver.

Hal
July 6, 2004, 06:28 AM
but I wonder if just a touch of loctite would solve that issue for those that have it... been there,,done that,,,didn't help.

vwfool
July 7, 2004, 04:16 AM
I like Ruger a lot, and I own a few right now that will never leave my colllection. However, I'd still go Buckmark all the way when pitted up against a 22/45.

If you enjoyed reading about "Browning Buckmark vs. Ruger 22/45" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!