Quantcast
S&W 422 or Buckmarck? - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Tools and Technologies > Handguns: Autoloaders

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 17, 2012, 11:53 PM   #1
saenzrich
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 6, 2010
Location: Austin,Tx.
Posts: 391
S&W 422 or Buckmarck?

Looking to get a new plinker for the range. No special purpose other than shootin' paper. Which would you recommend and why?
__________________
No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love Him! 1 Corinthians 2:9

For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you! Jeremiah 29:11-12.
saenzrich is offline  
Old August 17, 2012, 11:59 PM   #2
floorit76
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 20, 2011
Posts: 613
I got a 6" 422 target for HS graduation. I shot it side by side with a friends 6"ish heaavy barreled Buckmark. Pretty equal all around, imho. I prefer the 422, probably because I have had it so long. Bought the 4.5" and 3" 2214 also. Definitly lighter.
floorit76 is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 12:07 AM   #3
BCRider
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 15, 2008
Location: Pacific North"Wet" Coast of Canada
Posts: 6,574
As a 422 owner that has also shot borrowed Buckmarks this would be a hard choice. Both are superb guns. But if I were using it for any speed matches such as Speed Steel I'd go Buckmark. My beloved 422 is a trifle light for rapid firing. I found that the gun and my hands were still wobbling a touch from the recoil by the time I had the sight picture on the next target. Yeah, yeah, I know that the recoil of the AWESOME .22LR isn't much to write home about. But when you're trying to rip off 5 hits in under 3 seconds it matters. For that the Buckmark or an all steel Ruger simply is the better option. But for basic plinking you can pick either and come away a winner.

Now since you're in the US if you expect to ever want to carry in the woods then I'd go 422 all the way without a single glance back. The mostly alloy 422 is a superb gun for woods carry because of the super slim design and light weight. And if you're up to the job the 422 will keep your camp dinner pot filled in fine form. Mine is every bit as accurate as my Ruger or any other .22 I've shot short of a Hi Standard fancy competition match gun.

So all in all unless you need the light weight or you need the recoil absorbing mass then it's a wash. Either are great. The only other reason to shift one way or the other would be if kids or small of stature women will be shooting it on a regular basis. There again the light weight of the 422 would seem to point in that direction over the Buckmark.
__________________
Sent from my boat anchor desktop via my pizza greased fingers....
BCRider is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 12:21 AM   #4
JERRY
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 5, 2003
Location: 30 miles from Auburn Alabama
Posts: 2,175
edited....i misread your post.

my vote is for the buckmark.
JERRY is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 06:54 AM   #5
Onmilo
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 26, 2004
Location: Illinois`
Posts: 9,037
422 is discontinued.
The Buckmark is not,,,
Onmilo is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 07:14 AM   #6
Paladin38-40
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2010
Location: Florida's Great Northwest
Posts: 215
Experience with both

As a plinker I enjoy the S&W 422/622 the most. Mine like CCI Mini-mags best. 15 yard sandbagged groups run 1 1/4" to 1 1/2".

The Buckmark is more accurate and likes Federal Gold Medal. 15 yard sandbagged groups run 1/2" to 3/4".

The choice for plinking will boil down to personal prefrence.
Paladin38-40 is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 07:30 AM   #7
bannockburn
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 24, 2007
Posts: 7,729
I would vote for the Buckmark. Currently available in any number of variations and to me has a much better feel and balance to it than the S&W Model 422.
__________________
"An elegant weapon for a more civilized age."-Obi Wan Kenobi
bannockburn is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 09:21 AM   #8
viking499
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,096
Buckmark
viking499 is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 12:17 PM   #9
jrdolall
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: February 3, 2012
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,870
Limited experience with the 422 as I have never owned one but have shot one on several occasions that a buddy owns. The Buckmark "feels" better to me which is a totally subjective opinion.
__________________
"...if I was wrong don't you think I'd know it?"- Dr Sheldon Cooper
jrdolall is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 12:20 PM   #10
nosmr2
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 26, 2010
Posts: 311
Sold my Buckmark. Was not a fan.
nosmr2 is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 12:23 PM   #11
usp9
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Stafford, Va
Posts: 3,409
Quote:
Which would you recommend and why?
I have both a 622 and a Buckmark Field 5.5. Either are fun for plinking, but the Buckmark has a better trigger and I shoot it much more accurately. I've never liked the takedown of the 622.

If you are a lefty, the 622 grip may feel better, as some Buckmarks are made for right hands.

Because the Buckmark is still made, I'd suggest it over the 622.
__________________
"Remember the Alamo"
"December seventh, a date which will live..."
"Let's roll"
"Go Hokies"
usp9 is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 09:31 PM   #12
HankC
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 9, 2005
Posts: 421
If one day you consider to fit a can, 422 is a better choice. Barrel is threaded already, just need an adapter and barrel is sitting low.
HankC is offline  
Old August 18, 2012, 10:12 PM   #13
Walkalong
Moderator
 
 
Join Date: November 20, 2006
Location: Alabama
Posts: 36,531
Both are good guns. The Buckmark is more versatile. I sold my 422 because I could not mount a red dot.
__________________
Do you ever wonder why nobody ever robs the bag man for the mob? No, you don't.

"Oh bother" said Pooh, as he chambered another round. Author unknown.
Walkalong is offline  
Old August 19, 2012, 01:43 AM   #14
TimboKhan
Moderator
 
 
Join Date: April 15, 2005
Location: Greeley, CO
Posts: 7,738
If its just for fun, you will probably eventually end up with both! I am personally not in love with the Buckmark, but there is a lot more stuff for them which allows for some futzing which is fun.
__________________
First Battalion, Seventh Marines, 1990-1994

Tim "Timbo"Marquart
TimboKhan is offline  
Old August 19, 2012, 01:50 PM   #15
dondavis3
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 28, 2009
Location: Dallas / Forth Worth Area
Posts: 605
I've enjoyed my Browning buck Mark for years.

I've added a optic sight to mine.



It's very reliable and fun to shoot.

dondavis3 is offline  
Old August 19, 2012, 02:52 PM   #16
Walkalong
Moderator
 
 
Join Date: November 20, 2006
Location: Alabama
Posts: 36,531
My .22 autos include a Browning Buckmark, A Sig Trailside, and a S&W M-41.

The Buckmark points a bit high for me, but is fine if speed is not an issue, as it shoots great and is very dependable. It has lots of aftermarket goodies for it. It is priced very reasonably.

The Trailside points well for me, is very accurate, but often doesn't lock the slide back and mags are expensive. It is discontinued, but can be found here and there at quite reasonable prices.

The Model 41 points perfectly for me, is very accurate, and mags are reasonably priced. The gun is pricey, but superb.
__________________
Do you ever wonder why nobody ever robs the bag man for the mob? No, you don't.

"Oh bother" said Pooh, as he chambered another round. Author unknown.
Walkalong is offline  
Old August 19, 2012, 07:06 PM   #17
Bush Pilot
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Posts: 1,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by nosmr2 View Post
Sold my Buckmark. Was not a fan.
What did you expect? You should have purchased a fan if you wanted to move air.
Bush Pilot is offline  
Old August 19, 2012, 07:27 PM   #18
viking499
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,096
Quote:
What did you expect? You should have purchased a fan if you wanted to move air.
Good one.
viking499 is offline  
Old August 21, 2012, 05:54 PM   #19
budman46
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 22, 2004
Location: north central pennsylvania
Posts: 71
saenzrich,

i like my buchmark 5.5" target, love my hi-standard similarly equipped, but prefer my ruger 5.5" bull, target-sighted 22/45. i swapped in a $30 volquartsen sear that brings the trigger to less than 2 lbs; they're available for $249 from grice's wholesale in clearfield, pa.
__________________
budman

ignorance is fixable...
budman46 is offline  
Old August 21, 2012, 07:20 PM   #20
gb6491
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 17, 2006
Location: Yuma County, Arizona
Posts: 1,705
Quote:
The Trailside points well for me, is very accurate, but often doesn't lock the slide back and mags are expensive. It is discontinued, but can be found here and there at quite reasonable prices.
FWIW, the Hammerli X-esse is pretty much the same gun as the Trailside and is currently in production and available in the USA through Larry's Guns.
Trailside/X-esse magazines run about $35.

I have a 422 and several Buck Marks. I prefer the Buck Marks because of their trigger and the platform's greater adaptability. The 422, with it's high mounted sights and threaded barrel, would be handy if someone wanted put a can on it.
Regards,
Greg
__________________
"His name is not Wild Dog any more, but the First Friend, because he will be our friend for always and always and always. Take him with you when you go hunting." - Rudyard Kipling, The Cat That Walked By Himself
gb6491 is offline  
Old August 22, 2012, 11:56 AM   #21
Oldnoob
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 327
Never own or shot 422/622. But my 2206 was very well made and I love the size and weight. I'll choose my 2206 over Buckmark any day.

__________________
Taiwan born, Chinese descent, red white and freaking blue America citizen.

http://oldnoobloveguns.blogspot.com
Oldnoob is offline  
Old August 22, 2012, 12:11 PM   #22
Pilot
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 29, 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 6,022
Gawd those S&W's are UGLY.

Buckmark or Ruger MK II.
__________________
Pilot
Pilot is online now  
Old August 22, 2012, 01:05 PM   #23
Certaindeaf
member
 
 
Join Date: January 16, 2012
Location: Wet Oregon
Posts: 5,170
I have a 4" 422. Yep, they's uglyyy but shoot sooo well.. and light.
I'd get a Browning Nomad over any new Browning or Ruger.
Certaindeaf is offline  
Old October 20, 2014, 12:11 AM   #24
slidemuzik
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 30, 2012
Location: Central Bluegrass
Posts: 93
Buddy just got the Buckmark. Field stripping alone rules it out for me. Any of the Smith's tear down easily compared to Ruger or Buckmark. If you want light, get the 622. Better finish than 422. If you want solid weight go 2206. 2206TGT is drilled and tapped for optics, finely adjustable Millet target sights, and has fat target grips.
slidemuzik is offline  
Old October 20, 2014, 08:27 AM   #25
snooperman
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 4, 2009
Posts: 1,966
I have the 6" 622 and prefer it over the Buckmark which I sold.
snooperman is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.