Opinions sought on .22 competition pistols.

[real_name]

I'm thinking about buying a .22 competition pistol next spring, I have no previous experience with them but do currently own a 3.5" .22 pistol.
I'm looking for opinions of the different brands, of the types (mag vs single shot) and what I can expect at different price levels.
I'm not sure how much I will be spending at this point and am open to all suggestions.
Thanks.

Links to other sites are welcome too.

 

[HSMITH]

What type of competition do you intend to pursue?

 

[real_name]

I don't intend to compete initially. I want to own and shoot an accurate .22 pistol. If I compete at all that will follow.
I made a similar move with a Glock 34 earlier this year, I just enjoy shooting it and so far haven't entered competitions.
That isn't to say I never will, but it isn't a reason to include or exclude any particular gun.

 

[Standing Wolf]

The type of competition you pursue will define the type of pistol you may and may not shoot with, at least to some degree.

NRA bullseye shooting, for example, imposes a .22 caliber barrel length of about 7.5 inches, but accepts scopes of all types, as I recall, whereas Olympic shooting limits barrel length to 6 inches and excludes scopes.

It would definitely be worth your while to start hanging out at: http://targettalk.org

Personally, I've been an NRA bullseye shooter for 30-odd years, and have always favored High Standards. That said™, all my High Standards are tired and getting fragile. I've been shooting a pre-agreement Smith & Wesson model 41 the past few years. Out of the box, it was a dog, but with a bit of work, it became a pretty good shooter; its trigger, however, doesn't compare well to those in my best High Standards. I have a Browning Medalist with a trigger from heaven; unfortunately, I can't hang onto it, since the stocks were designed for a significantly larger hand than mine.

There are no more top quality American match .22 caliber pistols on the market, sad to say. If and/or when I buy another match pistol, it will have to be a Walther, Pardini, Benelli, or other European import: all horrendously expensive, some more reliable than others.

A friend recently bought a top of the line Walther, and is very happy with it. I'm doing most of my practice shooting these days with a Kimber model 1911 with a Kimber .22 slide and a hot-rodded Ruger Mark II. I'm trying to save wear and tear on the model 41. If I could coax the last of the creep out of the Kimber's trigger, it would be the best of the bunch.

No easy answers. Sorry.

 

[Majic]

Well you can spend from $300 to several thousand dollars. So if you don't know what type of competition you are interested in you should pick a price range so folks will know what to suggest.

 

[real_name]

Thanks Wolf.
Majic, I'm really just fishing for opinions rather than recommendations. I'm not looking to buy yet and so I'm just trying to get a feel for what is out there and give people a chance to talk about their gun(s).

 

[browningguy]

The top guns will all run a grand or more, I've had good results with Pardinis in centerfire and rimfire. The Benelli is also a good gun as are Morini's. But you don't have to do anything to them to make them shoot, no trigger jobs, accurizing etc.

Below that is the S&W model 41 probably around $750 these days.

Then you get into the lower end target pistols, Browning Buckmark, Ruger's, etc. all around $3-400 for the target models. To be at all competitive you will probably need a good trigger job on all of these, but that's not really a major expense.

 

[BlkHawk73]

I was gonna suggest target talk as well. Like mentioned a few times already, you need to determine what area you want to get into and also how serious you want to become involved. You're unlikely to be too competitive with the Buckmarks and Rugers in a competition with everyone shooting the Pardinis and Morinis. Yeah they cost more but like everything, you get what you pay for. This is very evident with the higher end models from the European manufacturers.

 

[Justin]

If you're just looking at getting started, my recommendation would be for a S&W Model 41. They're good pistols, and can be had for a decent price if you're willing to shop around for a used one.

The 41 is the best US-made .22 pistol, and is good for plinking as well as competition.

If you know for sure that you're going to be competing seriously in ISSF Standard Pistol, NRA Bullseye, or ISSF Rapid Fire, start looking at Pardini, Morini, Walther, etc. Those pistols will run between $1500-$2000+ but are absolutely top of the line.

Target Talk is an excellent resource for this kind of competition, but it is a fairly small board, so don't expect a ton of quick responses.

 

[Majic]

For models that will get you into the entry level of high competition and be in the top level of the lower competitions you have the S&W M41, the Browning Medalist, several of the High Standards, and the Colt Match Targets. Most of these will run you around a $1000 in excellent condition. Only the S&W M41 is still in production.
The Rugers are a cheaper way to get into competition, but by the time you finish swapping out everything to make it a decent competition shooter you won't have much of the original pistol left. You can though do the work a little at a time and spread the cost out.
Most if not all US made pistols today are nothing more than plinkers (the exception being the M41, but it needs work IMO). The top European pistols are truly ready to run right out of the box. You just adjust them to your preference, determine what load you will use and step up to the line. You will have to dig deep in your pockets for these models, but one thing you generally can't do is lay blame on the pistol for bad scores.

 

[rockstar.esq]

So I've got a completely different take on "target" .22LR pistols. I have a Beretta 87 Target
http://www.commandsurplus.com/cs/be...ght-hand-409oz-adjustable-sights-p-22138.html

The premise for this pistol was as an "understudy" piece for practicing "tactical" marksmanship. The end result is that the gun is substantially more accurate than my old Browning Buckmark and feels better than my buddy's Ruger. It's price seemed pretty steep to me at the time but I figured that I shoot something like 10 times the amount of .22LR as I do all other calibers combined, the gun doing all the shooting should be of high quality. I will freely admit that at this point I have absolutely NO interest in olympic style pistol shooting. I'd rather move around and get excited about hitting something on my first try with regularity. Sure that'd be most folks view of plinking but I pick small targets at uncertain ranges to add to the challenge. One thing that I feel is frequently ignored by .22LR pistol manufacturers is that grown folks do shoot these guns and some of us have large paws. The Beretta's grip could be a little larger still but it doesn't feel toylike or cumbersome like the Walther, the Neos, or the Plastic Ruger.

 

[Smokey Joe]

First target pistol

Real-Name--If you just want to start learning to shoot a .22 pistol accurately, there is no reason you shouldn't start with a Ruger. As has been said, there is quite a bit of tweaking you can do with it, which can be done as you grow into it.

If you have large or even medium hands, get it a set of Herrett stocks--Herrett makes a generic stock for Ruger Mark pistols that adjusts to the exact width of yr hand.

The Mark III is the one currently in production. The Mark II is just like it except for the California. You may find a Mark II used.

I shot a Ruger Mk I when I shot bullseye pistol in college, 100 yrs ago. Re-started with bullseye a few years ago and bought a Ruger Mk II, which I tweaked as I advanced. (BTW, my old Mk I was a better target gun than any Mk II or III I've ever handled. You MIGHT find a used one but don't bet on it.)

Recently upgraded to a S&W Mdl 41, but I'm quite happy I started with a Ruger Mark. They're good for starting on. You won't win the Nationals with one, but as a new competitor, you won't win the Nationals anyhow. If you decide you hate the whole business, or when you decide to upgrade, Rugers are always salable.

You don't buy a Ferrari Testarossa to find out whether or not you like auto racing.

Edited to add: I neglected to say that for target work you want a bull barrel on yr Ruger, not the slim tapered barrel--makes the gun heavier and holds down the bounce of the recoil. A heavy barrel is almost mandatory for any sort of target shooting.

 

[deadin]

Good advice from Smokey Joe. I see a lot of Rugers at our local league.
Absolutely nothing wrong with them to see if you want to shoot Bullseye or other competition seriously. They are so popular you will have no problem selling one to help finance a more expensive gun at a later date.

One target gun that hasn't been mentioned is the Russian Baikal IZH35M. I've got one that I use as a back-up for my Benelli and it will shoot right up there with the best of the dedicated target guns. When I bought mine, I didn't have to pay a whole lot more than the cost of a new Ruger. Apparently Walther thought enough of the design to copy it in their newest $1500 target gun.
Unfortunately, I don't think the're being imported anymore and with the new Walther coming out, the Baikal is getting a little scarce and the price is starting up on used ones.

Dean

 

[22-rimfire]

I have a High Standard Victor and have always been happy with it. Trigger is adjustable and is quite good. Very accurate. Find a good clean used one and start shooting. Then pick up another if you like the feel. Look over the High Standard molels of the 70's and early 80's. Those were the golden years. Pick up a couple of old Gun Digests on ebay to study the moldels offered. Go over to the rimfire central forum and read read read.

 

[Khornet]

I second Ruger

having shot many a bullseye match with my 1980s MkII. They are every bit as accurate as the top-of-the-line pistols out there. The real difference in the high-end guns is ergonomics, adjustability, and trigger.

You can get a good used MkII and spend maybe $100 on a trigger job and better grips, and do just fine.

Model 41 is, in my opinion, an excellet target pistol, especially for timed and rapid fire.

Among the high-end guns, don't overlook the Hammerli 208 family. Superb.

 

[bdutton]

If you have a 1911 you should get a marvel .22 conversion. It is arguably the most accurate .22 'hand gun' available.

I have a pardini SP. That costs about $1000. You can get a Baikal IZH35 for under 400. Get a used one if you can... the new ones are a little 'rough' and needs to be worked on by a good gunsmith to get smooth.

 

[TonyT]

There are several good 22 pistols for bullseye shooting. The S&W 41, Walther GSP, Pardini SP, Baikal. They will run from about $500 to in excess of $1000. It takes a lot of $ (at least mentally) to consistently hit the 10 ring!

 

[Standing Wolf]

I have a High Standard Victor and have always been happy with it. Trigger is adjustable and is quite good. Very accurate. Find a good clean used one and start shooting. Then pick up another if you like the feel. Look over the High Standard molels of the 70's and early 80's. Those were the golden years.

High Standard's golden years were the 1950s and 1960s. By the middle 1970s, the company was jobbing out much of its production, trying for Sears private label business, and trying to make too many models to please too many prospective buyers.

If you're interested in High Standards, it's worth your while to hang out at the High Standard sites:

http://www.tm-techmark.com/jspacek.htm
http://www.histandard.info/

Caveat emptor! Mitchell so-called "High Standards" and so-called "High Standards" manufactured in Texas aren't real High Standards, all of which were manufactured in Connecticut. The original High Standard company went broke in 1984. Mitchell and the purported successor company made decidedly inferior products.

 

[Khornet]

Also check out

Pilkington Competiton. Mostly air gun oriented, but serious guns. They always have a used gun section with a few gently used match .22s. They are good folks to do business with.

www.pilkguns.com

 

[Khornet]

Right now

Pilkington has a Hammerli 208 International for under $1100. You can't do better. I've shot matches with this gun, owned by a team mate. I'm a lefty, so I had to use my weak hand, but it was superb. Ten years from now you will have forgotten the rather spendy price, but you will be enjoying that gun for decades.

 

[Justin]

Everyone I know who shoots a 208 absolutely loves them.

 

[ctt]

What are your opinions regarding the Thompson Contender 22LR?

Recently I contacted a local club that shoots NRA small bore hunter's pistol silhouette matches, and I got the response that "the most popular" pistol is the above.

I'm curious why nobody mentioned this pistol.

 

[deadin]

I believe we were all thinking "Bullseye" and Contenders offer a real challenge in the Timed and Rapid fire stage.

Dean

 

[Furncliff]

Hi Standard. One made in one of the two locations in Ct. (1950's-60's). Perhaps a Victor or a Supermatic. When these were being made they were the cream of the crop. I own a Supermatic 101 that my father left me, it's well made, feels good in the hand, accurate, has a great trigger (spoil you trigger) and is the most fun to shoot. I have started all the girls in my family with this pistol and they all really like it. When I find a Victor I like, I'll add it to the collection. The can be had with barrel weights, compensator, many grip configurations, changeable barrel (4+6 in.??). Not too expensive, seem to be appreciating a bit. The only negatives I can think of ...they can be a little finiky about ammo, magazines are expensive.

 

[dam8]

I was faced witht the same thing a few years back. I did a lot of research and ended up buying an IZH35m. Used I paid 650 with a dot scope. I love the Benelli, but at the time I couldn't shell out the extra dough:banghead: