Best .22 for target, plinking, practice?

[rocinante]

I am interested in this topic also. The S&W 41 is out of my budget league so it seems to be between the Browning and the Ruger as a lower cost 22 target pistol. It appears to me the Browning has an edge given the Mark III is more finicky about ammo and harder to clean? Recently introduced "features" of the Mark III makes it less desirable than the II?

 

[BamBam-31]

I would have to say yes. If you can find a Mk. II or an older 22/45 w/o the "upgrades," then go for it. Otherwise, check out the Buckmark Camper. You'll be pleasantly surprised by how accurate they can be.

 

[cmidkiff]

I've got a 6" buckmark slabside and a 6" bull barrel MkIII 22/45. Both are accurate, reliable (with the right ammo), and fun. The buckmark is simple to break down, but requires an Allen wrench. The MkIII is 'tool free', if you've got strong thumbs. Neither one is overly complicated to take apart or reassemble, but the Ruger is a bit 'twiddly', especially with the magazine disconnect (which is supposedly easy to remove... I'll be doing so soon). A can of break-free, a toothbrush, and a bore snake takes care of my cleaning for the most part. I might break one down and really give it a good cleaning once every 6 months or so.

Either will serve you well.

I'd _love_ to have an S&W41, but I simply can't see spending that kind of money on a plinker. The Neos is an interesting looking critter, but not really my thing. Everyone I know who has one loves their Walther P22's, if you want a 'combat style' .22 plinker.

 

[gcrookston]

I'm fresh out of Woodsman's at the moment, but usually have 2 or 3 2nd series... Here are my three favorites

 

[Average Joe]

Ruger MK III

 

[CoinMan]

I LOVE my MKIII 22/45 - it shoots straight as a string, goes bang every time, and costs $200. My only beef, of course, is re-assembly. I bet I've broken it down 25 times, and I still need the manual to put it back together

 

[TimboKhan]

I am a big fan of the Ruger MkII, but in general it's hard to go wrong with any of the little .22's on the market. Someone earlier mentioned that good sights and a bull barrel are important, and I tend to agree with that. I have one MkII with a bull barrel and one with the regular old tapered barrel, and there just isn't enough weight up front for me. The difference in accuracy is fairly small, but there is a difference. Now, I will say that is something of a subjective opinion, but I don't think it is any mystery as to why most of the manufacturers either build a bull-barreled gun or a bigger gun than is strictly necessary for a .22.

Rockstar.esq bought a Beretta 87, and while I personally won't be abandoning my MkII's for it anytime soon, it sure is one fine pistol.

http://www.berettausa.com/product/product_pistols_main.htm

 

[XavierBreath]

Ruger MKII



The Ruger MKII can be a pain to detail strip and reassemble the first time you do it. Doing so is not really necessary though. Some owners never clean their MKII's! The little plinkers just keep chugging along using the powder residue as dry lubricant.

I use a bore snake on mine, along with a patch sprayed with BreakFree on a pair of hemostats to clean the breechface and boltface. I wipe the outside with an oily chamois rag, and I'm done. I use On Target triggershields to keep my action clean. OnTarget is out of business now, but you can make your own trigger shield by following these instructions. Otherwise, simply remove the grips and spray the trigger area with brake cleaner every once in a while if the trigger gets gritty. I might detail strip one of my MKII pistols every couple of years or so, if I'm bored, or if someone wants to bet me I can't have it apart and back together in under five minutes.

If you simply must detail strip your MKII, here are some decent instructions.



The Ruger MKII is durable, reasonably accurate, and it holds it's value if you buy it used (the only way you can get one now anyway......). the button safety is an afterthought, and it does have a heel magazine release. Most folks will not be attempting speed reloads with the pistol though.

The advantage of the Ruger MKII, if you are a Glock afficianado, is the grip angles are similar. On the MKII below, I have grips installed that change the grip angle back to a 1911 type angle.



Colt Woodsmen are excellent .22 pistols, but they are becoming scarce. The grip frame is a bit small, parts are expensive, and I do not find them to be any more accurate than a Ruger MKII or a Browning Buckmark. They are excellent for teaching new shooters with small hands.

 

[Jkwas]

I recently purchased a S&W 22A and have been very pleased with it's accuracy and function. It has a nice adjustable rear site, a built in Weaver rail and feels like a full size auto. I also know that if there is ever a problem, S&W will fix it on their dime including shipping. For me that's a big plus for a gun that's going to get shot quite a bit.
The pricing is also very competitive (read "cheap")

 

[MikeS63301]

Hey everone, I was looking for opinions on the best .22 auto for target, plinking, and practicing. I currently am a multiple Glock owner and am open to the AA Conversion Kit but also open to a whole 'nother pistol. I love shooting a Ruger Mark II but haven't had to clean it yet (brother's and he shoots my Glocks so we are even) but I hear they are kinda a PITA. Other brands/models are not out of consideration but accuracy is important. Gotta love that Ruger! Thanks! Steve.

First off let me say I can't give much of a total opinion on this yet because I don't own one yet. But I've been out shopping for a .22 auto loader myself this last week. For fit and feel alone, not taking anything else into consideration, the Sig Mosquito is HANDS DOWN the best feeling gun in my hands. The stories about it being picky with ammo and failures are keeping me away at this point. It's also considerably lighter than the rest of the ones I've looked at. Man, I really want to like this gun!

I won't be buying the Ruger because they felt the worst. From past experience, I know I'll avoid a gun that doesn't feel good to shoot. The higher priced models with wider grips felt better, but still not great.

The Buckmark feels pretty darn good to me depending on the model, and more than likely this is what I'll end up with, that is, once I find someone around here who has the model w/the options I want. (probably after the holidays) Some of the Buckmarks have "tabs" on the back end of the slide that make it real easy to get your fingers on and some models don't. I have more free time this time of year, so I tend to shoot more in the winter when I have gloves on, so a model with these "tabs" (or whatever they're called) is a must.

The S&W 22A felt ok. The plastic parts kind of turned me off. One thing that bugged me about was the sights dig into your fingers when you pull the slide back. Why didn't they narrow the sights? Still it's CHEAP.

I'm holding out for someone around here to get a CZ Kadet in stock. None of the dealers I've checked with around here have one. I like the look and have heard great things about them. Yeah, they're pricey, but whatever I buy I'll keep forever as long as it works properly and feels good to hold and shoot. Besides that, they're not that much more than the higher line models of the others.

 

[Bill B.]

I want to add a comment about the S&W 22A. A friend just purchased one and after a range session that he ran over 500 rounds through his I will have to say I was impressed! Accuracy was close to my Hi Standard target models. There was no issues with jams using several versions of bulk ammo. It basically ran like a top. Downside is the plastic parts do make the auto look cheap. Where it will hold up over the long haul I guess he will have to take a wait and see approach. For the price I think you could do much, much worse for a starter .22 auto.

 

[doc2rn]

I have a MKI,II,III. Of the the 3 I love the MKII target the best, even though I have close to 80,000 rds through my MKI. I like the 10 rd magazine, the 6" taperred barrel, and the same breakdown I am used to is awsome.

 

[greener]

If you want to stay in the $250-$450 price range then the 22A, Rugers and Buck Marks are all good choices. Each has strong points. The 22A is the simplest of the group to field strip and reassemble. There isn't much in the way of upgrades (grips, barrels). The Buck Mark may have the best trigger out of the box. Overall, Rugers appear to be the best made and have the best after market for tweaks and mods.

The Rugers can be challenging to field strip and reassemble the first couple of times if you don't read and follow the instructions. This site has some really good instructions: http://www.guntalk-online.com/fsprocedures.htm
Although the Buck Mark is technically easier to field strip than the Rugers, I'd rather field strip a Ruger than fiddle around with the sight base screws on the Buck Mark.

All are accurate, well-built and reliable. The "best" one is the one you like best and fits what you want to do with it.


My menagerie:

22A (w/5.5" and 7" barrels)
MKIII Hunter
MKIII 22/45
MKII GC
Buck Mark Standard

All are fun to shoot.

 

[blutarsky]

i have a buckmark camper, 5.5" -- i really like it a lot, but from all of the fans of the ruger mk ii/iii i have somewhat of an interest in those. i got my buckmark for ~$220 NIB and a couple extra mags for ~$20 a piece at the time. when i got mine, the buckmark was *substantially* lower in price than the ruger, and that definitely helped make the decision. that being said, even if the prices were close today i'd have no problems making the same decision for the buckmark... it's been a joy to own and shoot.

 

[2nd 41]

I just sold my TrailSide and Mosquito to buy a S&W 41.
Please do not buy a Mosquito unless you enjoy aggrevation.
The Trailside is a quality pistol

 

[krahling]

I'm very happy with my Mark II 22/45. It's the only Ruger I've ever liked.

 

[Geno]

I have three preferences: (Edit)

Contender .22LR MATCH

Ruger Mark II

Kimber Warrior with a .22LR upper

 

[Furncliff]

Hi Standard, anything made in the two Ct. factories, you will be buying used and they are a bit more expensive but worth it. My daughter has already asked for mine.

 

[nerfsrule2]

+1 to all of those who like the Smith and Wesson model 41. Just be sure to feed it a good 40 grain bullet. Mine likes CCI Stingers

 

[amprecon]

I like mine, Beretta Cheetah 87:

 

[Pilot]

I have two Ruger MK II's and a 22/45. I like the MK II's better, but the little 4 inch 22/45 is lighter and also fun to shoot, better for packing in the woods. I don't like the thin grip of the 22/45 though, but its OK. It needs a bit more palm swell for my large hands. My 5.5 inch bull barrel MK II has had a Volquartsen triger installed and that made all the difference in the world for trigger pull. It is very accurate. I also have a 50th Anniversary MK II, the little standard 4 inch with the tapered barrel and fixed sites. I've kept it NIB for collector purposes, but am thinking about shooting it because it looks like so much fun and guns are for shooting to me, not investing.

Love that little Beretta M87 in .22. Need to pick one up.