Mark III vs. Neos

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

osteodoc08

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
1,261
I finally got my budget 45. Now I want a budget 22lr pistol. I am contemplating the two pistols in the header. Here are the qualifications for the pistol.

1. Good ergonomics including trigger, sights, etc.
2. Accurate
3. Red Dot sight capability
4. Fun

My primary usage of the pistol is for plinking and hunting. I'm not to concerned with weight, however I don't want a long barrel. I don't want a Buckmark as I had one and had so many problems with it I eventually sold it but I won't digress.

I'm not sold on the either one's styling. I'd like to have a recessed or protected muzzle (unlike the Ruger) and a decent trigger. I am also trying to stay under $300. I know I'm asking for a lot, but perhaps you guys can shed some light.
 
I'll start the responses by probably being the odd ball. Most responders likely will recommend the MK III, and it is certainly a fine choice. However, I have the Neos, son has a Neos, and we both have about 3-4000 rounds in them w/zero problems. Built in rail for a red dot, very easy to field strip and clean, inexpensive etc. What's not to like? Some users complain about the trigger, but either my son and I got lucky, or the issue may have been resolved; our triggers are light and break crisply.

I struggle with the doofy look, but with the red dot it is very accurate and fun to shoot (well, without the red dot too, but the red dot makes me look good, and I use just the cheap BSA from Wal-Mart...about $30).
 
i've never fired a mark III but if the mark II is any comparison then it wouldn't be a bad choice. fair warning though, if you get the bull barrel its like putting a rock in your pocket if your walking around. if your wanting a plinkin/ camp gun, i'd lean on the neos
 
I have both. My NEOS is fun to shoot, but it came with two burrs that made it unreliable until I tracked them down and ground them off. It's still only reliable with hot ammo and when clean and well lubricated. The grip is an odd shape that is only comfortable for average to small hands. But it is indeed very easy to strip and clean, unlike the Ruger, and just about the same in terms of accuracy.
 
Of those two, I'd pick the Neos. Fewer Lawyer features, plus easily added optics. And maybe a carbine kit, but then again, maybe not.

Now if you said "MKII", my answer would be totally different :)
 
I like the looks of the Hunter models, but they're above your price point.

I have a Mark II, so I'm biased toward them. Also, it seems a lot of folks that buy Mark IIIs are replacing the internals with Mark II components to eliminate the magazine safety. I'm also not real wild about the LCI the lawyers made them incorporate (just think it doesn't serve a useful purpose if you remember the safety rules. Handle ALL guns as if they are ALWAYS LOADED)

I'd look for a lightly used Mark II.
 
... My NEOS is fun to shoot, but it came with two burrs that made it unreliable until I tracked them down and ground them off. It's still only reliable with hot ammo and when clean and well lubricated. The grip is an odd shape that is only comfortable for average to small hands. But it is indeed very easy to strip and clean, unlike the Ruger, and just about the same in terms of accuracy.
Click to expand...

No burrs on mine.
Better with hotter ammo first 150 rounds but now eats ANYTHING.
Yes, the grip is odd.
Yes, soooooooooooooo much easier to strip and clean than a Ruger.
Accurate enough for me. Fun with a red dot, but I took it off and STILL fun.

FWIW,

Frandy
 
MrTuffPaws, I specifically didn't want the Buckmark because of previous experiences with one. I am open to other models, but I specifically don't want another Browning. My Buckmark example left a lot to be desired when it came to reliability.

How much is a good used Stainless Mark II going for these days?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top