looking for a semi auto .22lr

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

opr1945

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
105
Location
South of the Zoo, Michigan
I have a couple revolvers, but was thinking of getting a semi-auto for range and plinking.

1. Smith 22A

2. Ruger Mark I, II, III
In the 1960's I had a ruger mark ? to reassemble it there was a pin that went up and then a lever that moved sideways. I had the darnest time getting that pin back in. do they all behave that way, was there a secret I never figured out?

3. browning buck mark

I know there are variation of each of the above. What recommendations do you have. As always a good, dependable, inexpensive gun desired

thanks.

PS. just remembered I have a Glock 26 with .22LR conversion kit. Maybe I should save money and just shoot the glock?
 
I'm personally looking at getting a 1911 in 22lr. I figure it will be more analogous to my CZ75 clone than most of the other options out there.
 
Should you go with any of those you listed I like the Ruger and Browning guns with a preference for the earlier versions. I like the Ruger MKII guns with the bull barrels for a first choice. Never cared for the S&W guns but just a "me" thing with their 22 pistols. I love my Model 17 Revolver. As to your question:

In the 1960's I had a ruger mark ? to reassemble it there was a pin that went up and then a lever that moved sideways. I had the darnest time getting that pin back in. do they all behave that way, was there a secret I never figured out?
Click to expand...

It's just a matter of developing the correct technique or knack but you are not alone in the universe. :) Kicked my butt many times when I had my shop till I finally got good at it.

Nice thing about adding a 22 pistol is while they don't cost what they did 25 or 30 years ago they can still be had for a reasonable price.

Ron
 
From personal experience I also prefer the Browning Buckmark. It is accurate, feeds pretty much all the available ammo, and is very comfortable to hold and aim. The only problem I have had with mine is that if you stack your left thumb on top of your right hand you will have new skin growing on the back of your left thumb. That slide will do rapid surgery, but you will never likely make that mistake again..... I have a heavy barrel Buckmark with a scope and from prone at 35 yards I can rapid fire the entire magazine (10 rounds) into a hole that can be covered by a dime. My 13 year old grandson was hitting 12 ounce pop cans at 30 yards with an open sight Buckmark.
 
I have and like the Ruger MKIII, I also have a conversion for my 1911 Kimber Target that's fun to shoot.
That being said the Buck-Mark's do VERY WELL in the pistol league at the club I belong to.
My wife was just given a Colt Challenger (mid 50's era?), that I'd take over any of them.
The older Hi Standards are nice too.
TOO MANY CHOICES :confused:
 
Everything you listed is a winner.

I have owned every one of those at one time or another. Only still have the Ruger MK II.
Will
 
I've got a ruger 22/45 and it's OK, however since getting a Buckmark Hunter the 22/45 has been living in the safe. Love the buckmark.
 
The Buckmark definitely has a better trigger over the MK outta the box....It takes me a just short while to get a great trigger on a Ruger.
 
opr1945 stated: "As always a good, dependable, inexpensive gun desired."

In my opinion, that points directly at the Ruger whether it's a Mark I, II or III. I have a MK III bull barrel and like it a lot. It is nicely accurate, hugely reliable and reasonably priced. You can master takedown and reassembly with some practice. There's a good video on Ruger's website and, I bet, a bazillion youtube videos.

I also have a discontinued Buckmark Target. It's unfailingly reliable. It is very accurate; better than the Ruger. It fits my hand better than the Ruger and is the 22 I shoot most often. If you feel the Ruger is tough to field strip, a Buckmark is worse. It's more "disassembly" than field stripping. I don't pull mine down very often.

My S&W isn't a 22A as you have in your list. Rather, I have a 41 with a couple extra barrels. The 41 is not inexpensive, so you may want to disregard my comments. The 41 fits my hand perfectly, has a beautiful trigger and is phenomenally accurate. Takedown is child's play. Its downfall is reliability. Some of them are better than others, but mine is cranky. It will run well for quite a while and then start to hiccup. It's ammo-finicky and must be kept perfectly clean and lubed. It doesn't like the cold. Really! 50's and above, it's fine if clean and lubed. Take it out on a cold day it? It will turn cranky and fail-to-eject. So for me, the 41 is a love-hate relationship.

As for the Glock conversion? You may have heard "Dance with who ya' brung." You already have it, so head for the range. I suspect you'll enjoy a dedicated 22 LR semi-auto better, but while you're thinking it over, shoot the Glock!
 
This is my first post here. I live in California. My perspective on things is probably different as a result.

I am interested in this thread because I think some older high-quality semi-automatic .22 are frequently overlooked. I recently bought a High Standard Sport King of 1955 vintage at a local gun shop that specializes in consignment firearms.

I got this pistol out the door including taxes and tranfer fees for $285. In my world this is such a good value that I bought the gun even though I have a half-dozen other .22 semi-autos. It was too good a deal to pass by. I think it is the kind of thing that is available all over and one that represents a better, and often overlooked, value on the market as compared to the guns so far described here. This pistol, unlike the Rugers listed, and possibly others, cannot be dry-fired without damage. It, like other low cost pistols, does not hold the bolt open after the last shot. Nevertheless I think it is a great and often overlooked value.
 
I like the Ruger Mark pistols and own a slab sided Competition version, although they can be a PITA to reassemble. My suggestion would be:

If you like to tinker with or mod your pistol, and don't mind the reassembly, go with the Ruger.

If you want a gun that is good to go out of the box and easier to maintain, go with the Browning.

Not sure I really see any advantage to the Smith over the other two. It's not a bad gun, I just think the Ruger and Browning are both better.
 
The Rugers are excellent, and have lots of aftermarket support if you want to improve the trigger, or do some other mods. The Browning is also a good choice, and does have a little better trigger out of the box. Either would serve you well. I have four Ruger MK II's but my friend swears by the Buckmark, so I have shot both with success. The Rugers do seem a little more reliable with all types of ammo than the Buckmark, but that may just be with the ones I have shot.
 
mdauben said:
If you like to tinker with or mod your pistol, and don't mind the reassembly, go with the Ruger.

If you want a gun that is good to go out of the box and easier to maintain, go with the Browning.
.
Click to expand...

This. Rugers need a little tune up compared to the Buckmark. Buckmark's trigger smokes the MK all day long. Replacing with various Volq trigger and sear parts will add ~$75 to the cost of you insist on a better trigger.

Ruger MK series pistols are the most popular, by a 5-1 margin, at the local steel maches here.
 
Buy the one that fits your hand best,,,

All three pistols you mentioned are good shooters,,,
You could also add the Beretta NEOS and Ruger 22/45 to your list.

I own the S&W M22A, Ruger 22/45, and the Beretta Neos,,,
There isn't a whit of difference in general performance,,,
They are all accurate, reliable, and pleasant plinkers.

Each poster here will have their favorite,,,
Mine happens to be the Beretta,,,
It fits my smaller hands best.

My point here is that you can spend a lot of time debating the specifics of each gun,,,
I've seen people do this and buy a gun on specs alone,,,
Never bothering to see if it fits their hand.

Don't do this.

Finding the gun that fits your hand is the most important thing,,,
If you do that you will be happier with it,,,
And probably be a better shot.

Just my thoughts.

Aarond

.
 
I rented some .22 semi-autos last trip to the range.
* Ruger SR22 didn't care for the de-cocker in order to activate the
trigger - kinda small for a range/plinker but would
go well with a compact centerfire semi auto of
similar trigger sys.. oh and the mag release and
de-cocker are ambi. for lefties.

* S&W M&P22 - Typical M&P trigger and controls, grip
in a full size

* Colt Gold Cup Trophy - full size 1911 but by Walther
aluminum slide, fixed barrel, heavier zinc/alloy frame
- little recoil and nothing like a 1911 trigger.
About $ 400

The last one I'm seriously thinking about getting one
this saturday - I also have a full size 1911 and a Commander

R-
 
I have several Ruger semi's in 22lr. Heavy barrels, standard barrels,long barrels, and short barrels. All of them are good handguns. Also have a Buckmark, but haven't shot it much.
I have 2 of the GSG 1911's in 22lr, that have been great handguns. They both ran nearly 100% riight out of the box. These get shot more than the rest, as I really like my 1911's in 45 acp, and the GSG's match up very well with the more expensive 45 shooters. Cost for them is about what you'd give for a Ruger or Buckmark. Just my personal preference now.
 
I don't want to knock the 22A -- but I have to. :evil:

They're fine as plinkers, but I know three people that have tried to start bullseye shooting with 22As, and all three moved on within a few months, two of them to Rugers and one to a Browning. The trigger on the 22A just doesn't cut it for target shooting.
 
You won't go wrong with any of those choices although I'm not big on the first generation Ruger target pistols (they were never called MkI). The one that I've like the best of all the choices is the Ruger MkII with a bull barrel. It shoots better than any of the other choices. But I also really like the Buckmarks and the Smith's. I had my wife shooting 3" groups at 25 yards with a Buckmark Camper in about 20 minutes. And she had never shot a pistol before. They just work and they do it very well. But the Ruger has been the most accurate for me but that may not always be the case. I haven't shot all of them. But I've shot several.
 
I recently bought a High Standard Sport King of 1955 vintage at a local gun shop that specializes in consignment firearms.

I got this pistol out the door including taxes and tranfer fees for $285. In my world this is such a good value that I bought the gun even though I have a half-dozen other .22 semi-autos. It was too good a deal to pass by
Click to expand...
Sure was. You did well. Welcome to THR

To the OP:

Hard to beat the Ruger or Buckmark, which is why they are always recommended, but another one to consider that you can find reasonable from time to time is the Sig Trailside. It is a superb gun and points much better for me than my Buckmark. And of course, if you can swing a S&W 41, it is superb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Which is better S&W 22A or Ruger mark II
2
Replies
44
Views
3K
Water-Man
W
BP Hunter
  • Locked
Ruger 22LR
Replies
16
Views
764
Cee Zee
C
M
  • Locked
looking for a .22LR pistol
Replies
9
Views
669
twolf811
T
T
  • Locked
Favorite Ruger .22lr SemiAuto
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Doubting Thomas
D
B
  • Locked
Which 9mm semi-Auto should I buy?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
plouffedaddy
P
Back
Top