New 22LR Pistol

[General Tso]

I'm gonna get a 22 pistol. I currently do not have one. I used to have a Walther P22 and SP22. Here is what I've narrowed it down to. It will mainly be for plinking and maybe carrying while fishing.

 

[Rail Driver]

I had a S&W 22A-1 (5" barrel) that was accurate with irons out to 100 yds or more (I couldn't see well enough to go any further than that). I was shooting tennis balls. With a scope, no golf ball would be safe out to at least 150 yds with light to no wind!

 

[GunTech]

If you don't mind the grip angle of the Ruger, it's the top selling 22 auto pistol for a reason. The all stainless heavy barrel will perform just about any duty admirably.

If you prefer a more traditional grip angle, the Buckmark is a very good gun as well and either would make an ideal all purpose 22. I currently have a Buckmark for general field duty since I don't like to carry my S&W 41 around - it's strictly a range gun.

I don't have a lot of trigger time with the S&W but I don't care for their grip.

The Ruger has been in production for something like 50 years and are still one of their top sellers. There are lots of aftermarket parts for them, as well as holsters and accessories.

If I could only own one 22 pistol, I would probably pick the Ruger Stainless Target.

 

[mljdeckard]

My dad carries a Ruger single-six for fishing, because he likes snake shot, and his autos don't cycle it very well.

 

[Phoenix 6.0]

I love my buckmark. i was goin to get a ruger 22/45(1911 grip angle), but didn't like the thin grip. buckmark felt perfect in my hand and shoots great

 

[Naybor]

Yeah, either a Ruger Mark II or III, OR a Browning Buckmark.

Those were mine and the wife's choices. We settled on the Mark III. Stainless.

 

[Tomahawk]

I recently purchased a Ruger Mk III from a member here. Probably the moct accurate pistol out of the box I've ever owned. Never had any trouble in the 400 rds. I've put through it. I did do the washer trick to get rid of the magazine disconnect and make empty mags fall free. Excellent pistol.

 

[rbernie]

I have a MkII (22/45) and a Buckmaster. I vastly prefer the Buckmaster; it has a nicer trigger and a much more solid feel and fit.

 

[jcwit]

I have one of each and out of the 3 I'd pick the Buckmark. If for no other reason than the trigger.

 

[lobo9er]

for the price my SW 22-A has been lights out. hardly clean it always works

 

[General Tso]

Thanks guys. Sounds like as long as I get one of these, I can't go wrong.

 

[BCRider]

All the guns mentioned so far are superb guns. I've had the opportunity to shoot examples of them all. My own preference is more tuned towards the more vertical 1911 grip angle since it fits in with the other center fire pistols I have. But if that isn't a concern for you then the Ruger Mark guns in any version are superb shooters. But because for me the grip is an issue I prefer the Buckmark or my own S&W 422 and 2206 older used guns. If you should manage to come across a used 422 in good shape I can strongly recomend it. The aluminium frame with the shorter 4.5 inch barrel option would give you a gun that shoots well and is both light and compact enough for comfortable woods carry. They are a very "flat" shape.

There is ONE issue though. You mentioned that you'll want to carry them during fishing or hiking trips. In that case the weight and size may become an issue. They are all fairly bulky and heavy other than the S&W 22A which is light and bulky. By all means buy one of whichever option mentioned so far fits your hands well as they'll all shoot well. Try it out for carrying. If what you get seems too bulky or too heavy AND too bulky then look at other smaller options.

Since you're in the US you have the option of buying smaller guns that I can't buy due to how our gun laws are written. A smaller compact .22 for fishing trips may be a better option for you. A stainless Model 63 with short barrel would be a good revolver option since it'll handle snake shot loads without worrying about cycling. And there's a lot of compact and flat lightweight semi pistols as well. It would mean getting a second gun for woods use but this may work out as a better combo for you. But at first you can try carrying your bigger full size "plinker".

Don't give up on the bigger full size plinker before you try it with a good holster. A poor holster badly mounted on your belt will be in the way all the time and just generally weigh you down. A well fitted holster that holds the gun in a spot where it won't dig in can go a long way towards becomeing user friendly and could well avoid the need for a smaller second gun. It may take you a couple of holsters to find the right one. But try moving each around to find the best spot that is the most comfortable for you.

 

[InkEd]

Ruger for sure.

 

[MrWesson]

on a strict budget - S&W 22a

otherwise - buckmark

I have a S&W 22a that I got on a trade and its a great gun but I voted buckmark. They just look the part and aren't crazy heavy although the S&W was going for 199.99 at cabelas.

i'm sorry the ruger just doesnt get much love from me. I know they are great guns but IMO overshadowed by the buckmark in price and aesthetics.

 

[minutemen1776]

Definitely the Buckmark. If it needs to be compact, opt for the Micro version.

 

[wally]

S&W for their warranty service.

Browning Buckmark would be my second choice.

None of my Ruger .22s can match either of the above or our Beretta Neos for reliability with the cheap bulk pack ammo.

 

[MostlySurly]

dunno

I'm partial to revolvers in .22lr.
My Buckmark is extremely picky about what it eats, and what it doesn't quite spit out. Cheap, bulk ammo stovepipes regularly. More consistently loaded stuff does just fine. As always, ymmv.

 

[KJS]

None of my Ruger .22s can match either of the above or our Beretta Neos for reliability with the cheap bulk pack ammo.

I found that my Ruger MK III simply loves to eat 525-count Federal bulk packs of 36 gr copper plated HP high velocity, that also just happen to be the least costly .22 ammo I can find. I was thrilled to find that what works best is also the least expensive.

Within the last month I've seen Federal bulk pack on sale as low as $14.99. My MK III demands hotter ammo to cycle reliably and this stuff seems to perform as well as Mini Mags, though at half the cost. Given how Mini Mags are made by Federal as well, I'm tempted to think Federal bulk packs might just be Mini Mags minus the pretty plastic boxes to individually hold each round and missing the more up-scale Mini Mag name to bulk up the price.

If you don't mind the grip angle of the Ruger, it's the top selling 22 auto pistol for a reason.

I can tell you the reason for their popularity definitely isn't for ease of field stripping, a hellish process which has been frustrating Ruger .22 owners since 1949.

As for the grip angle, I find that that gun just feels right in my hand. The grip angle definitely is extreme and stands out so much that any of us could instantly ID a Ruger .22 from across a room without needing to see the name and logo on it. When holding it I don't notice the angle at all. It just feels natural to me. That might explain why they've kept that same angle for the last 61 years.

Other than to drive owners insane, I can't explain why they've kept other parts of the design that probably make it the most difficult pistol around to field strip. If there is any gun that's even more of a pain in the *** to strip, I sure don't want to meet it.

 

[KJS]

i was goin to get a ruger 22/45(1911 grip angle), but didn't like the thin grip.

I've never shot the 22/45, but did have them take it out of the display case so I could feel it. Two things struck me immediately:

-really light (polymer frame unlike the all steel MK III)

-the grip is really narrow and I didn't like that

I have the MK III Target model with 5.5" bull barrel, so it's a hefty 40 ounces of all steel (other than plastic grip panels). Doesn't feel nearly so heavy though as the balance is really good.

 

[sxcamaro05]

I vote for the S&W 22a. I have the camo variant and I have fed now 600+ rounds through it. I bought it due to price (considerably less than the other two) and have been very pleased with the performance. It feeds well (I've had 3 FTF in the 600+ rounds all out of some old remington viper .22 a friend gave me) and it shoots well. The major selling point is the ease of takedown. Push one button clean two spots of oil and your basically finished.

On a side note the Buckmark is also nice, my buddy shoots one and I do enjoy it for plinking. Honestly, both are solid choices but S&W wins this one for me.

 

[BluesDancer]

I voted for the 22A. Great, inexpensive .22 pistol. Only had some FTF's and FTL's with Winchester bulk pack ammo, all other ammo fed fine. Only downside is that the stock sights are absolutely horrid.

 

[group17]

If all you are going to do is plink with it and carry while fishing might I suggest an inexpensive alternative. Phoenix Arms 22A.
Fits in your pocket, eats bulk 22 ammo reliably, accurate, has a lifetime warranty and only costs $150.

You can add the 5 Inch target barrel later.

 

[GunTech]

Ooh, pictures.

OK, probably way out of your price range, and I won't carry mine in the field, but if S&W is your choice, you need one of these.

 

[sansone]

the Phoenix 22a is a good shooter and inexpensive. The s&w22a is a better gun and less expensive than Ruger or Browning. Price being not a factor:Browning, simply because those rugers can drive you to drink on reassembly

 

[bannockburn]

I voted for a Ruger, preferably a Mk.II. The Buckmark would also make for an excellent choice, especially the Micro version. I don't care for the grip angle of the S&W 22A. Another budget .22 you might want to consider is the Beretta Neos. Decent design and quality construction, good balance and handling, and very reliable. Maybe go to a gun shop or store that has several different models to try them on for size.