Buddy wants a 22lr Pistol. Narrowed it down to. Suggestions please

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have a second hand early production but almost-new MK II plain Jane vanilla as they come. It handles, shoots and feeds almost anything; the fit, finish and balance are superb. I know this wasn't even on the page of discussion , but I'll say it; the Ruger Wrangler single action revolver (black colored one) is an utterly fantastic value for the money and shoots very well. For 200 bucks or so, it will shoot ANYTHING .22 LR or shorter...shotshell and the works. You can even "Fan" fire the thing like a movie cowboy. For some utility applications, like hunting an indoor pest animal it goes places a .22 Auto just can't with one handed operation and fast follow-up with odd duck special purpose ammo.
 
While I really like Colt Woodsman, especially in Match Target configuration (I have a few), and some vintage classics like S&W 41 are nothing short of fantastic, I'd still go with a Ruger Mk.II.

I bought mine in 1987, 5½" bull barrel model, and after tens of thousands of rounds and a few odd spare parts like firing pins, it still shoots like new. I have a detachable scope mount for it and the Mk.II has proved to be as accurate as they come; sighted in at 50yd the bullet goes exactly where the 2MOA red dot is, usually dead center.

Surprisingly enough, its "replacement", Colt/Walther 1911 .22 Rail Gun I bought a few years ago, is much better than its sketchy reputation might suggest but it never really replaced the Ruger. A few .22 pistols have come and gone but the Mk.II is here to stay. I originally bought it because all gun stores near me were out of stock on S&W 41, thinking that I'd just shoot it for a while and trade it in for one shortly afterwards.

After a few weeks I didn't want to.
 
the Ruger Wrangler single action revolver (black colored one) is an utterly fantastic value for the money and shoots very well.

Where the Wrangler lacks is in the sights department and while I agree it’s a gem of a sleeper, the six shooter won’t keep up in competition shooting.


If only Ruger had added the Single-Six’s sights to the Wrangler.
3BCF096D-F056-4344-A9F2-1FF1B9A09B78.jpeg
 
all of o.p.’s choices are nice 22lr handguns, but to me rimfire handgun simply speaks ruger. for $500 i would get a sr22 and a wrangler, and call it done.
 
Mr. Wick - in your OP, you listed three SA pistols. Now, in Post #53, Skylerbone suggested a Ruger revolver. I concur about the Ruger Single Six as you get two guns, a .22LR and a .22 Magnum. While they are single action, that gives you the ability to focus on your target better. It also can make you more frugal with ammo. Being single action can also be a safety feature for somebody unfamiliar with a SA as you have to cock the hammer before shooting. A fully loaded and charged SA goes off with a simple trigger pull and that can lead to a ND/AD (a Negligent or Accidental Discharge) which can be a potential disaster.
 
I've had various Rugers and Brownings in the past. It is pretty much a tossup. Ruger does offer more variants and my only 22 pistol at the moment is an older Ruger 22/45. But my brother has the Smith Victory and I've shot it enough to say that if I were to add another I'd go that way.
 
Browning Bushmark
Ruger Mark IV
Smith and Wesson Victory

Thanks all.
I shot all three a bunch, and own a Mark Iv. If I could do over I’d buy a Victory. They are the best of the three out of the box. The one I shot was without a doubt more accurate than the other two. Again, stock
 
If you can find one, get a GSG 1911 22 or a Walther 1911 22. Both are great little guns that are 80 % compatible with regular 1911 parts so there is no end to what you can do to the pistol if you want.

Walther P 22 is another one that won't break the bank. Mine likes CCI Stingers the best but also shoots Mini Mags well.

I would rate the guns:

Ruger Mark IV 22/45 Lite
Walther 1911 22
Victory
GSG 1911 22
Walther P 22.
 
I like the Ruger, but, as many have stated, all of them are fine pistols.

You may find an advantage with the Ruger, for upgrades, and aftermarket parts viability.
 
I've never understood the appeal of the Buckmark

I confess to having a BuckMark for 2 reasons; price, under $220 after clearance price and rebate, and because as a youngster who got an arm (not shoulder) full of 20ga single shot I was committed to never shooting again until my dad’s friend put a BuckMark in my hands to plink with. I immediately forgot my sore arm and the rest was instant nostalgia.

Still, that Browning is plenty accurate and now well behaved with a few tweaks.
 
Buckmarks are the most beautiful tool to cross the path of men...the rest are just wenches that do the same exact job with less pizzazz....:D
Heh. I clicked "like" because I can feel what's going on here. Buckmark was my #3 choice in the 80's and there's certainly nothing wrong with it; it's a class act and a great .22 on its own right, but one of the LGS's happened to have Ruger Mk.II 512 in stock and that happened to be my #2 option.

Underrated, heck yeah. If the red tape situation was anywhere near as sensible as it was pre-EU, I'd grab one in a heartbeat.

But it isn't hence the Buckmark has gone the same way as the $250 mint 6" nickel .22 Colt Diamondback I had to pass on last year. Can't be a$$ed with current regs, and my SWMBO thinks I already have all the guns in the world so it's a bitter-sweet win/win situation for everything. Except for what I really want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top