Best rimfire handgun?

[BryanP]

I was just talking with someone earlier about how nice the Mark IIs are but they seem to be a pain trying to take them apart. I also had trouble trying to release the mag -- kept looking for the release button where they was none..

The Ruger 22/45 will solve the mag release problem - it puts the mag release in the conventional US position rather than the European heel-release. And yes, the first time you have to take it apart and put it back together can be a PITA. There are illustrated guides on the internet that will show you how to do it. At one point I downloaded a 5MB MPEG video file that shows someone field stripping and reassembling a Ruger Mk II. I can't find it online anymore but I'll be glad to send it to anyone who wants it.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Another vote for the Ruger Mark II. The field stripping has a bad rep, but like any gun, with practice, it becomes easier. Mine's a snap now. I would recommend one to anybody.

 

[rick_reno]

I think you want a .22 for the range - for target practice.

The older Hamden High Standards are excellent guns, just make sure to check the slide for hair line cracks (usually from firing high velocity ammo) before buying.
A good target gun that should cost you under $400 is the Baikal IZH35M, it's a Russian import and will shoot as good as many of the more expensive guns. Youc an read all about it here http://izh.petebrunelli.com/

Lot of folks have mentioned the S&W 41 - maybe an older one would be good. Newer ones I've seen at our matches have had problems functioning.

If want to spend more money, the Pardini SP is excellent, Don Nygord imports and sells them - he's a great fellow to deal with - http://www.nygord-precision.com/nav.html or one of the new SP-20 Hammerli's from Larry Carter http://www.larrysguns.com/hammguns.asp

Rugers are ok, but for about the same amount of money the Baikal is a much better choice for a target 22.

 

[Sheldon]

The thing about any single action pistol is how slow they are to load and unload. I picked up a Ruger Single-Six for my son, just because he gets a kick out of the cowboy stuff. At least with a double action S&W 617 you can dump all the shells out at one time instaed of one by one. Double action would be better in my opinion.....unless you too love the cowboy stuff.

 

[243_shooter]

BTW -- for those recommending the Mark II -- how long does it take to learn how to take apart the gun and put it together -- and could you learn that on your own without help?

I've never had a tough time with mine, just sat down and read the instructions all the way through and did it. If you try to rush it, it can be a frustrating experience, but with a little patience it's not a big deal.

I have to admit that I've been completely taken off my feet by my single-six though, so much so that I'm considering letting the MKII go so I can pick up another one . The little single action is about the most fun rimfire pistol I've ever had..

Biggest trouble right now is saving up the $$ for a .17HMR single six to go with my .17HMR rifle

Leo

So many guns, so little $$

 

[ruger fan 101]

Another vote for the Ruger 22/45. I don't think that I will ever find a pistol that shoots as good as the one I have. You can feed it just about anything and the groups dosen't change a whole lot.

 

[farscott]

The only issue with the Ruger Single-Six is that the bore is sized for the larger .22 WMR bullet. As a result, .22 LR bullets do not fit the bore very tightly, leading to a possible loss of intrinsic accuracy. If you do not plan on shooting the .22 WMR as well, I would not recommend the Single-Six for a .22 target handgun.

 

[Black Snowman]

I'll put in a vote for the Buckmark. I like my 5.5 target quite a bit. Plenty accurate.

 

[Mastrogiacomo]

Personally, I do love the look of the Mark II. It appealed to me because it looks so close to the German Luger, which I would dearly love to own but probably never will....that said, I won't rule them out because on some level, they're very appealing. Some people think Berettas are hard to put together but they're not. So maybe it's a matter of taking my time -- but given in this state we can have a new Mark II, I suppose I'd have to look for a good used. I do like the S&W 617 so I plan to keep my eyes open for that -- but I also love the cowboy stuff too. Can someone please explain what is it about them that takes a long time to reload. What's this removing one at a time thing? You can't just empty it out? Thanks.

 

[TrapperReady]

I like the Ruger Mark II. Yes, it's a total PITA to strip and clean. BUT, it's a .22, so that doesn't have to be done very often (I do mine maybe once a year now), and it does get easier once you've gone through the process a couple times (50% from experience and 50% from a couple parts getting just a smidge looser).

If I was looking for a vintage piece, I'd probably pick up a Colt Woodsman.

 

[farscott]

Can someone please explain what is it about them that takes a long time to reload. What's this removing one at a time thing? You can't just empty it out? Thanks.

The single-actions load and unload one round at a time through the loading gate. On a Colt Model P or clone, you place the hammer at half-cock, open the loading gate, and load a round. You then move to the next charge hole by rotating the cylinder. This charge hole you skip; do NOT load it. You load the next four rounds one at a time and close the loading gate. You cock the hammer and then decock the revolver. If done in this manner, the empty chamber is under the hammer. This is important because the originals have no firing pin safety and the hammer would rest on the primer of a loaded round.

To eject rounds, you place the hammer at half-cock, open the loading gate, and use the ejector rod to push out one round. You then turn the cylinder to eject the next round. As you can see, this is slower than a hand ejector.

Ruger has a system in their New Models that eliminates the half-cock. Simply opening the loading gate is all you need to do. The Ruger system also uses a transfer bar to make the revolver safe with a round under the hammer.

 

[Sheldon]

Like I said.....SLOWWWwwwww . My son loves it though so there is a lot to say for a fun gun.

 

[SnWnMe]

I'm leaning to the S&W 41 or used 617.

Well, it's good that you are back on the straight and narrow again Mast. My 41 is a 90s production. It likes standard velocity ammo too much! If I use Hi velocity stuff I only put 10 rds in the clip (I have 12 rd unlike most) and it runs flawlessly even with cheap stuff.

It is very, very accurate if you do your part.

I suppose we need not expound on how good Smith wheelguns shoot.

Here, let me push you more towards the Smith side

 

[Bainx]

MK II. Just the other day, my oldest daughter took control of our MK II and was standing there hitting plastic bottles at 25 yards!

Go for the model 512...bull barrel in stainless with adjustable sights.

I'm also a big fan of the S&W five-screw K22. Slick.

 

[Majic]

Another vote for the High Standards. A used Citation or Tourneyment is hard to beat. One of the best triggers, excellent sights, interchangeable barrels in different configurations and one mighty fine shooter

107 Supermatic Citation:

 

[Greek]

617 S&W

I have had my 6" S&W 617 (stainless, 6 shot) for about ten years now. Taught my wife, daughter and son how to shoot with it. Still enjoy taking it to the range. High quality revolver with an excllent trigger.

 

[Litlman]

Try a nice used S&W k22.......

 

[James Bondrock]

I was just talking with someone earlier about how nice the Mark IIs are but they seem to be a pain trying to take them apart. I also had trouble trying to release the mag -- kept looking for the release button where they was none...

There are two basic types of Ruger .22 pistols. One, the Mark II, is an updated version of the original pistol introduced in 1949. It has a steeply raked grip angle which is the same as that of the Luger, and a heel-base magazine release. This could be easily acclimated to with practice. The other, the 22/45, has a plastic frame with a grip angle and control location the same as that of the 1911. I would prefer this one for my own use, and a 5.5-inch bull (heavy round profile) barreled one with adjustable sights is on my "to do" list. The
Ruger pistols are a bit of a nuisance to field strip and reassemble.

 

[P95Carry]

james ...... I accept the strip-down hassles with my 22/45 .. simply because it is such a great shooter .. and the positions of mag release and safety are just right. I think you could enjoy one in your collection.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Your sig .......

"James Bondrock, you're wonderful!"



"I know."

 

[renaissance]

ruger 22/45

ruger 22/45

 

[V-fib]

I have a S&W 422 with 6â€bbl. had a scope (30mm red dot) mounted to it a few years ago. So accurate it’s almost boring to shoot ( not really). Its very easy to take down to clean and has been very reliable.

I also have a Taurus 94 snub. Very reliable. Adjustable sights, 9 shots. Surprisingly accurate for close range targets.

 

[Airboss]

.22 Rimfire

My $ 0.02 Worth
If you don't have to have the newest slickest lastest thing on the block
4 to look at
1.High Standard HD Military Great auto .22 trouble free and will drive tacks grips the same as the 1911 look for one in the $200/250 area and it will give years of trouble free service.
2 K-22 Model 17 K frame more accurate thatn you are great workmanship.
3 K-18 Combat Masterpiece ditto above just a little different look and in 4" rather than 6"
4 22/32 Kit Gun Model 34 (blue)Model 63(stainless)
Great for plinking carring with you fishing hunting just very nice all around fun gun.
Although I own all of the above if I had to get down to one of them it would be a Kit gun IMHO the best all around .22 on can have YMMV

 

[Khornet]

Mastro,

you're looking at entry-level rimfire target pistol shooting. You have budget limitations. If you ask me, there is only one answer: Ruger Mk II.

Good revolvers are lovely, but there's a reason why you almost never see them on the line at matches anymore: you have to learn to thumb that hammer back for each shot, and your grip will shift. No problem if you're plinking, but if you want to learn to shoot bullseye it will increase the difficulty.

Model 41 is much more costly, and not one bit more accurate than MkII, and there are lemons out there. I love mine, it's a sweet and pretty pistol, but I shoot my MkII just as well.

Hi Standards are classics, accurate and good-looking, but again pricier. I've shot more than a few, including the HD Military.

Can't comment on the IZH except to say that it is more costly too.

MkII is comfortable, accurate, reilable, easy to maintain no matter what some tell you (and doesn't even NEED disassembly but once in a blue moon), and it's affordable. I had a trigger job done, didn't cost much, and tha's all, except for adding a set of Pachmayr wrap-around grips. That was 21 years ago, and never a hiccup.

I think that for geting started, you just can't do better than a pistol which is accurate, easy to shoot, no worries about geting a lemon or a finicky feeder, and you can afford to buy it new. And if you're like many others, as the years go by if you stay in the .22 target game you'll accumulate cooler, fancier pistols but still come back to the MkII again and again. And when you do, you'll be surprised how well you can shoot it.

So that's what I'd do. Take it from ol' Khornet, who wants you to have fun and be happy.

 

[Owen]

sch40,

Why would you want a centerfire for putting holes in paper?

22lr is cheaper, has less recoil, and is generally more accurate. An entry level gun is cheap and reliable. They don't induce even the most gun shy person to flinch.

owen

 

[Mannlicher]

K-22, or a .22/32 Kit gun, model 34. No one has ever made a better .22 handgun than these.