.22 question!

[InterWebGuy]

Howdy all, I'm looking to buy a .22 pistol to work on my fundamentals, and have narrowed the field to the Ruger Mk 3, Browning Buckmark, and S&W 22A. Of these choices, which pistol would you recommend, and why?

So far, I'm leaning towards the S&W 22A, as I already have a Ruger MK1, and the 22A seems to have a great reputation as well as a great price... anyone heard different?
Thanks,
IWG


P.S.
I'd be willing to include the Beretta Neos if it's significantly better than any of the pistols I've mentioned, but I haven't been able to find one; any input on this pistol would also be appreciated.

 

[Crawfish141]

They are all fine pistols. If it were up to me I'd go with the Mark III, a close second would be the Buckmark. The best way to choose which one is right for you, is to go to the gun store and see how each one feels best in your hand. This will make the decision of which one to get, a whole lot easier.

 

[ScareyH22A]

All my buds and I recently picked up a Mark III 22/45. They're fantastic little shooters. More accurate than I.

After shooting a couple thousand rounds through it, I'm started to look into upgrades. Currently I have my eye set on a Volquartsen Exact Edge Extractor. Hopefully this will help eliminate some extraction jams. Also, I think I'll be getting a Hi Viz fiber optic front sight and a V-notch rear sight.

The trigger is plenty smooth with a decent break even in factory form. The grip is sorta thin but unless I do some surgery, there's not much I can do about it.

All in all, probably the most enjoyable investment I've ever made.

 

[gator1gear]

I would get the Buckmark or a used MKII. I bought a Ruger MKIII, and had nothing but trouble with it. The round would slam into the bottom of the feed ramp and jam. Ruger sent me two new mags, and it didn't solve the problem. Do some Google searches on MKIII problems before you purchase one. Some people have MKIIIs and never have a problem, but a lot of people do have problems....just sayin' I had the 22/45, and I'm not bad-mouthing anybody's gun. I'm just telling the experience I had with mine. I ended up buying an old Belgian made Browning Nomad, that I absolutely love!

 

[searcher451]

You are unlikely to go wrong with any of the three pistols you've listed here. The .22 Ruger and Browning line are particularly good. I have a couple of versions of both pistols and have many thousands of rounds through them without so much as a hitch or hiccup. You also might look for a used Colt Woodsman or Challenger.

Be patient, shop around, and get the one that best fits your hand and eye and wallet. The .22 is a great range gun, especially in this age of No Ammo.

 

[6x6pinz]

The only one I don't have is the Ruger. Had one a long time ago and was not all that impressed. Currently my SW22 has a red dot on it that most of the girls/women in my life seem to enjoy shooting, along with of course my walther p22 (more of just a fun gun). The Browning I have is the 7.25" barrel fiber optic front sight. The buckmark has proven itself as an extremely accurate and very reliable gun, so it has been my main 22lr hunting pistol

 

[krs]

So, why isn't an M41 in the running? This one has served me very well since 1959 - never failed, more accurate than anyone can shoot.

 

[Crawfish141]

Probably price; they're fantastic pistols, but they cost three times that of the Mark III.

 

[Pilot]

Look for a used MK II or just get the Buckmark. The changes Ruger made to the MK III can cause reliability issues. Yes, there are fixes if you want to tinker.

 

[david_the_greek]

my father had a mk II that we would bring to the range with us and it failed EVERY time, and is a PIA to take apart!!!! That being said, we were probably using the same cruddy ammo each time (I was like 13 at the time so it didn't really click in my head) and the jamming would likely have been resolved had we switched to something better quality. I'm going to stand by my opinion that taking it apart is a PIA. Definitely not fun. I use a CZ cadet kit on my CZ pcr and I absolutely love it, it's functioned 100%. I know that's not in your running, but just in case it ever is, mine's been flawless.

 

[Matt-J2]

I have a Beretta NEOS and I love it. Shoots great, reliable, etc.
Wish it had more aftermarket support, though. Definitely a downer. Also, doesn't fit everyone's hand well, and the safety is annoying in that it disengages rather easily while in a holster. If anyone made a holster for the gun that fit well then it might change.
At any rate, as much as I love the pistol and recommend it to others, in your situation I'd step up to the Buckmark. I find them to be a nicer pistol overall, plenty of support/accessories, much better sights, etc. Better fit in hand, as well.
(No issues with the Rugers, either, just like the Buckmark a bit more. No experience at all with the S&W 22a)

 

[Racinbob]

The Ruger I had years ago was 100% reliable. Sweet little pistol. The buckmark I have now is just as reliable and quite a bit easier to strip down. You really can't go wrong with either.

 

[InterWebGuy]

Thanks for the advice guys, I wound up finding a LNIB Ruger Mk 3 Competition Target- It's a great little gun, and I got what I feel was a very good price on it too (basically at cost). It's sporting a cheap walmart red-dot for the time being, though I might pony up for a nicer one if this model isn't up to the task ("the task " being popping tin cans, for the most part).
Thanks again!
-IWG

 

[Guillermo]

Buckmark is the best bang for the buck, Ruger is fine, Smith & Wesson model 41 is the gold standard

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

+1 for the mk III. However, it is tough to go wrong with any of these choices.

 

[DoubleAction]

​