S&W Model 41 or Ruger Government or ???

[DamnedDirtyApe]

I want a premium .22 autoloader of the Bullseye variety, even though I don't compete right now. I'm leaning toward the S&W 41, but they're a little spendy - around 800 new, 600 used.

The Ruger Government with the 6+ inch barrel looks good, and is significantly less money.

There are others - Hammerli, SIG, (same thing?) Beretta, Buckmark, etc. I don't know enough about them yet.

What say you rimfire shooters? This will be used strictly for range use. I'm not a hunter.

 

[Rembrandt]

Ruger isn't in the same class as the 41....The 41 is more comparable to Hammerli, High Standard Victor, and other higher end .22 autos. A little more money and a lot more quality.

 

[Rembrandt]

.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I own both a Ruger Mark II and a couple model 41s. The Ruger was a total waste of money as a bullseye gun.

I'll never buy anything else from Ruger as long as I live.

 

[antsi]

If you have a 1911 with a good trigger, check out the Marvel Precision .22 upper. Unlike most .22 conversion units, this is a serious match-grade peice of shootin' iron. I found out about them at a bullseye match - there were several competitiors there who had them. They come with either bo-mar type adjustable iron sights or a rail for mounting optics. You order them from the factory; http://www.marvelprod.com/

 

[bwhited]

I have owned a number of Mark II's and one 41.
I spent around 6 months with the 41 before selling it to buy more Mark II's.
The Mark II will actually shoot all day long and take you to a world class level.
At this point you may want to go higher end.

 

[DamnedDirtyApe]

Rembrandt ... thanks for the beautiful pics. The more I see the, the more I want one. I might check out a couple of used ones.

bwhited ... what went wrong with your 41?

Thanks for the replies, all.

 

[Onmilo]

I owned three Ruger Mark ll pistols before I bought a Model 41.

I don't regret selling the Rugers and I have no intention of selling the Smith.

 

[OldNavy]

Ruger Mk II

I've got three of the Rugers (two 5.5" and one 8"). They are all what I call "no alibi guns" (if you miss, you've got nothing to blame it on but yourself)! I haven't handled/shot the Smith '41, but I would guess that the Smith would probably have the better trigger. Still, you could buy the Ruger, spend a little for a competent 'smith to put the trigger where you want it, and still save a significant amount over the price of the S&W. With the S&W you've got choices are far as the grips are concerned. With the plastic Ruger frame, you don't have much choice.

My recommendation? For anything short of formal bullseye competition in the advanced levels, at least consider the Ruger. If you truly like the S&W better and don't mind the price difference, get the S&W. As long as the firearm is both functional and sufficiently accurate, personal preference and price seems to outweigh most other considerations. Me? I've tried real hard to like S&W, but I find I'm selling my S&W's and buying Rugers. I'm down to two Model 649/.38 Spcl that I would swap even for two almost any caliber/barrel length Ruger SP101's. Like the man said, it's a difference of opinion that makes horse races...

 

[MP-5]

I own both the Smith 41 with a variety of barrels and a Ruger MkII 5.5 bull. The Smith does have a slight edge in accuracy plus has the versatility of interchangeable barrels. Might I add the edge is very slight. The Ruger however is extremely accurate in its own right and quite durable in design. That is something to consider. I don’t compete in Bullseye matches but accuracy is important to me. The MkII will put 5 match bullets into 1/2" @ 25 yards off a sandbag while the Smith will do the same and on occasion less that 3/8" @ 25 yards. Rumor has it, Ruger will stop making the MKII for a newer design. Something to consider. You can buy 4 rugers for what you will pay for a 41. Another thing to consider. Although I have never had a malfunction with either pistol, I understand the Ruger is paramount in 22-pistol reliability. I wouldn't want to go without either one. I'd say the Smith is more of a specialist pistol, king of the bullseye circuit. If you need that much accuracy, the $1000.00 price tag is what you will pay (alot of money for a .22 pistol) but worth it IMO. The Ruger is definitely the better value. I know for a fact the SEALS out of Coronado, CA have suppressed Ruger Mk IIs in their inventory, which should be a testament of their reliability in a military/marine environment. Does this matter to you? Problably not but the Special Ops community need equipment that WORKS or the wrong people can get hurt. They picked Rugers for their 22 pistol. Shoot both and see which one YOU like the best .

 

[Khornet]

Shot bullseye matches with both guns

my bull-barrel Model 41 (as in the pics above) and my early 1980s MKII. The 41 is stock except for Herrett stocks which I modified and checkered, while the MKII has had a trigger job, trigger stop, and sear engagement adjusting screw installed (all at the cost of $75).

The two guns are of equal accuracy. That's true of most decent target .22s, though: they are all about equally accurate. It's just that the high-end guns are easier to shoot well because of better triggers, sights, stocks, ergonomics etc.

I find the 41 is superior in timed and rapid fire because that thick muzzle is so steady. In slow fire the MkII and 41 are about equal.

My advice would be to get the 41 bull barrel if you can; if not, get a MkII, preferably the 6 7/8" barrel, and have a trigger job done. You'll do just fine.

 

[Majic]

The Ruger is basically nothing but a plinker. For competition the S&W M41, several of the orginal High Standard models, and the Colt Woodsman Match Target would be ideal for US made guns.

 

[pete f]

If you want quality look at an 60's vintage 41 or a colt matchtarget woodsman. Rugers are great teaching guns and field guns. i have a
MK II that went to Iowa and Volquartsons to get cleaned up. I Love my 41 and 2nd model match target, but I carry the MKII in the field, simply for a replacement issue. I have a nephew in class now to become a tool an die maker, He says his instructors can not do the T&D work necessary to make a 41 or MT W, so just think about that .

 

[Khornet]

I must take issue

with those who write off the MkII as a 'plinker'. May I live to be able to 'plink' as well with my 41 as some of my colleagues at Canton-McKinley did with their MkIIs!

The Ruger is, in my experience and that of many better shooters than I, a highly accurate and match-capable pistol. There certainly is a competitive level at which the Ruger shooter is handicapped, but almost none of us will ever reach that level. Good technique and frequent practice matter more than whether you shoot a 41 or a MkII.

That said, I still treasure my 41. And I wouldn't mind having a Hammerli or one of the better High Standards.

 

[DamnedDirtyApe]

So, I picked up an A-series 7-3/8" barreled M41 at the OGCA show yesterday (Ohio Gun Collectors Association) that is identical to Rembrandt's second pic up above. It's 98% cherry, came with the box, manual, adjustment tool, and cleaning mop for 600 bucks OTD.

I'm happy with the deal. Now I have to wait for some esoteric alignment of the stars between the horrible weather here and my horrible work schedule so I can get out to shoot it. I can't wait - there's something about a .22 that's very "Christmas morning" jump up-and-down exciting. Whee!

Thanks for the replies & good discussion, everyone.

 

[Pilot]

The S&W M41 sounds like a great .22 target pistol. I've never shot one, so I am at a disadvantage. The Ruger MK II or 22/45 is more versatile, but as someone else said the the Smith will be better for higher level, competition target shooting and that's what you eventually want. When I was competing I ended up buying a Benelli MP95E. I still have it, but don't compete anymore, so what do I shoot? Yep, my Ruger MK II's. You made a great choice with the Smith if you're just going to do indoor, target shooting and not field work. Sounds like you got a pretty good deal on it also.

 

[Onmilo]

If I was forced to sell all my .22 handguns but one, I will keep the Model 41.

 

[bwhited]

It just would not stay running for any length of time.
It was back to S&W 3 times along with a couple of other well known gunsmiths and the firearm just would not keep running.
Some of the problems were that the chamber had to be spotless (clean chamber and within 100 rounds problems would start up again), failure to eject (leaving brass in the chamber) and failure to fire.
I tried over 30 different types of ammo in it and never had any kind of reliability.
Went with Rugers and am a very happy camper. Ranson Rested at 1" at 50 yards for a 10 shot group with CCI SV.
41 Ransom Rested at 1-1/16" with Wolf Match Target at 50 yards for a 10 shot group.

 

[saltydog452]

Ruger Mk 1..and National records..

Jim Clark Sr. set a few National records with the Ruger Mk 1.

salty.

 

[jefmad]

If its for bullseye I would suggest an IZH-35. A great .22 pistol for about $450. It is an exceptional pistol for all but the BEST bullseye shooters in the country.

 

[Chris Rhines]

My old, worn-out MkII will happily shoot 1" 10-shot groups at fifty yards off a solid rest.

I had a Smith and Wesson Model 41 for a while. It was okay. For the price, it should have been better. I sold it to buy a used Pardini SPE, and never looked back.

- Chris

 

[Dees]

Which of these guns is more lefty friendly?

 

[rick_reno]

I've never owned a 41, but I have shot bullseye for a number of years. The recent 41's I've seen come thru our club have had problems - one back and forth to S&W 3 times before the owner finally had enough and sold it. Another one last was having feeding/ejection problems, it left for college with the kid who bought it. Last time he tried to shoot a match with it there were multiple alibis.
I'd 2nd the recommendation for the IZH-35M. It's a great pistol, the only problem I've seen with them is certain SV won't run them (Wolf is one we tried). The Ruger is a good pistol if you replace the trigger assembly, a replacement runs about $35. At the range bullseye is shot, most guns we've tested in the ransom rest perform about the same - there are differences in the ammunition that are obvious when test firing them.