Which .22LR Pistol?

Which .22 Pistol?

  • Walther P-22

    Votes: 5 3.5%

  • Ruger Mark III

    Votes: 49 34.8%

  • Ruger Mark III 22/45

    Votes: 26 18.4%

  • Browning Buckmark

    Votes: 61 43.3%
  • Total voters
    141
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
The 22/45 are polymer from what I understand, I find that I prefer the grip of the Mark 3 more, the 22/45 is a bit narrow for my hands.
Click to expand...

Yes, the 22/45 is polymer. I've never shot a 22/45, only handled it at a gun counter and I immediately noticed the grip as I really disliked how narrow it is. Also, obviously lighter than the regular all-steel MK III.

After renting an MK III twice I decide to buy one for myself. I went with a 5.5" bull barrel Target version which I love to shoot. Hefty gun at 40 ounces, though so nicely balanced that it doesn't feel heavy in use. The weight is also great for staying on target. The grip just feels right to me, even though it's quite distinctive & extreme in terms of angle.

Stories about disassembly and reassemble are far overblow, especially with Youtube. Just following the manual though will get you there. Read it.
Click to expand...

Some folks make it look easy with practice, but then almost anything is easy with enough practice. (Like how German citizens have no problem speaking German, though I could hardly say anything even after two years of it in high school.) I've only stripped my MK III a few times and I find it to be a royal pain in the ***. To me this is the major downside to Ruger .22s. Could they actually make it any harder? The first time it took me half a week and extreme frustration to finally get it back together. Someone I know who has an MK II tells me this is why it's called "Ruger's Cube," a puzzle that's been frustrating folks since 1949. Another shooter I know who has decades of extensive firearms experience tells me he has to follow the manual to strip & reassemble his MK III. It's not at all simple and intuitive IMO.

It was the first semi-auto I'd ever field-stripped, so I had no basis for comparison. Then I stripped a Taurus PT92, where you push a button, flip a lever, and the gun literally falls apart & putting it back together takes all of a minute even for a clueless novice like me. No need to look at a manual more than once for a gun that easy. Then I had a basis to say an MK III really stands out as a P.I.T.A.

The complaints are legitimate, but it's really fun to shoot!
 
I guess my real question is about the reliability of the 22/45 vs the plain Mark III. Has anyone had any problems with them?
Click to expand...

Yes, me!

My MK III, purchased new at the end of last August, won a free winter vacation to sunny Arizona for 8 weeks to revisit the factory where it was born.

Ruger e-mailed me a pre-paid UPS shipping label and it took off for its winter getaway on January 10.

On February 17 I finally heard back from the nice folks at Ruger. I got a snail mail letter saying:

"After a careful examination of the above referenced pistol, we find it necessary to replace the barrel/receiver assembly at no charge. As the serial number of the replacement will be different than the original, we are required to transfer it through a federally licensed firearm dealer. If you wish to accept this proposal, you must provide the name, address, and telephone number of the licensed dealer you select to receive the replacement.

Please indicate your approval of this offer by signing this letter and return it to the Prescott Service Department at the address listed above. Upon completion of the replacement, the above reference barrel/receiver will by destroyed. We will amend our records to reflect that destruction and the issue of a the new serial number to you in confirmation with the Gun Control Act of 1968."
Click to expand...

I signed it and sent that letter back immediately. 8 days ago (after yet another mandatory Wisconsin-mandated 48 hour "cooling off" period) I picked up my MK III at local shop.

I ran at least 900 rounds through it last week and everything seemed to work fine. Now I'm just waiting for Ruger to send me a check for $42 and change to cover the cost of having that shop transfer my gun back to me.
 
Other Options

I didn read all the replies before responding, so I apologize if I am being redundant.
I reccomend the Ruger MKI or MKII, they both take the same mag, requiring only that the loading button be reversed, I have one of each, my MKI was built in 1969, and it still outperforms my other .22 autos. I like the MKIII I am sure they are every bit as good as the MKI & MKII, but they take a different mag because of the bush button mag release, versus the European heel style mag release on the MKI & MKII, the 22/45 takes yet another different type of mag, I got rid of the MKIII because I didnt see a need for it and I sold my 22/45 because I didnt like the grip frame.
The Browning is another good choice, my dad had 2 and they were both equally reliable and accurate. The P22 is a good choice ONLY if you get a newer production model.
 
Of the ones listed I voted Buckmark, but my favorite is the S&W M22A -- we've got all those in the poll as well.
 
BUMPY ...

***Daily Bump From Here Until Poll Close***

Also, I checked out the Browning Buckmark. I like it. Which model do you guys like best? I saw one with a threaded barrel. Is that a standard factory production model? I don't want to spend more then ~$400.
 
I've shot all of them except the P22

I have a Mk. II Target Model, which is similar to the Mk. III you're considering.

I've shot Mk. IIIs and 22/45s.

My wife just bought a Buck Mark, which I put a couple hundred rounds through today.

The P22 is not comparable to the others. It is designed to look and feel like a combat pistol, but not to compete, accuracy-wise to the others you mentioned. For small hands, it feels good. Previous reports indicate that it can be ammo-finnicky. So unless it is just going to be a fun plinker or carry gun, it is out.

The Buck Mark is a very nice gun, and is the softest recoiling of the bunch. But that is not saying much, as they are all 22s. ;) The Buck Mark needs an allen wrench to take it down, and the manual doesn't even give instructions on how to do that. They just say to clean it by brushing off the breech face and the bolt face. Way to cop out, Browning. The sight rail has to be taken off for disassembly. When the slide is taken off, the ejector pin looks really cheesy; just a thin piece of wire; not as substantial as Ruger's. The trigger is very good. The fiber optic sight on the model we got is also very good.

22/45s to me are very nice guns, but they don't feel as good in the hand as the Buck Mark (especially with the newer finger groove grips) or the Mk. III. The grip is just too narrow; it feels like there's a bunch missing in the palm. It was made originally to offer a push-button mag release in the usual spot, as opposed to the bottom magazine latch of the Mk. IIs. It also replicates the grip angle of the 1911, but other than that, it in no way resembles the 1911.

Now, onto the Mk. III. It has the super-comfortable grip angle that was started by the Luger back in 1908. It is very naturally pointing. Now, it has the magazine latch in the "proper" position. It has the trademark (and always-elegant) tubular receiver. The sights are mounted right to this receiver, so they do not come off and on every time you field strip the gun. Maybe it is just because my Mk. II is old now, but it is less ammo-sensitive than the Buck Mark. The Buck Mark, on its first outing today, had many problems. One of the two factory new magazines sometimes doesn't allow the bolt to strip off a round. But you won't know it until you sqeeze the trigger and get only a click, then pull back the bolt to eject the culprit round, only to find nothing there. It has a couple failures to fire, which I attribute to the crappy Winchester Xpert ammo. Also a couple of stovepipe failures to eject, which I attribute to it being new.

I switched to Federal bulk, and stopped getting dud rounds immediatel, but still had stovepipe failures to eject and the problem with it not stripping off the top round in the mag.

Take-down on the Mk. III is easy, but will require a mallet or block of wood the first few times you do it, as the receiver is a VERY tight fit to the frame. After it is broken in, it just falls apart in one's hand, after the disassembly pin is pulled out.
 
Get the Browning Buck Mark and be done with it already! I've had my Buck Mark for 20 some years now, 10000 rounds thru it, only thing to do after shooting is clean it, ready to go the next time. Quit worrying about the other stuff, Rugers are good also, I just chose the Browning because I like the heft of it better.
 
Another suggestion

Smith & Wesson will be shipping the M & P .22lr pistol at the end of April. MSRP is $419.00. Shown at the Shot Show 2011 and will be at the NRA convention, I'm sure.
If you can wait, it may be worth a look. Check out their website.
 
I had a P22 and it was junk, I don't think it ever finished a whole mag without a malfunction of some type. It was definitely the most unreliable gun I have ever owned or shot. I sold it for $150+ loss and still feel bad.....for not melting it down and saving someone else the trouble.

With that said I bought a Buckmark and have been happy with it, it's no super gun I would join a cult over but I haven't had any big problems with it. Just a FTF every now and then, not real often probably every 100-150 rounds, maybe more.

BTW:
There is a recall out for the NEOS I do believe.
 
If money is an issue, it's hard to beat the Buckmark Camper with the fiber-optic green front sight. When my daughters were home they loved shooting mine. Great feel, reliability, and accuracy.

But if money isn't as tight, I always recommend the Beretta Model 87 (not the Target version, which is a specialized pistol). Terrific ergonomics, exceptionally reliable, and more accurate than it has any right to be. The only problem with the Beretta M87 is that, when you're at the range, other shooters will always be bugging you to let them try it...

beretta87cheetah.jpg
 
Last edited:
You won’t go wrong with either the Buckmark or the Ruger. Get whichever feels better to you.

When I bought mine I went in and handled both side by side. I liked the grip and the controls of the Buckmark better so I bought that one.

I have the basic Buckmark Camper model. I wish I’d bought the stainless version but they were out of stock and I didn’t want to wait. I upgraded the sights on mine to fiber optics and I’m glad I did.
 
I have a Ruger MK. III (stainless 5.5" Bull Barrel Target model) and love it. My brother has a Browning Buckmark (stainless 5.5" tapered Bull Barrel) and he loves it.

As far as comparisons go, the Ruger is a bit heavier (steel vs. aluminum frame) but it costs a bit more (but will clearly last just about forever).

The grip angle is a little different, and I actually find the rubber grips on my brother's Buckmark to be a little more confortable than the wooden grips on my Ruger (or plastic grips on my father's Mark II). However, the grips are starting to erode a bit on the Browning from contact with plain old Hoppe's solvent. I really don't think this should happen.

Don't belive the myth about the Ruger being impossible to field strip. Just buy a small mallet, always keep the instruction manual handy, and move on. The Buckmark isn't really that much easier to strip - allen wrenches are required, and the tiny nylon recoil buffer is a part that is easy to lose.

Accuracy between the two is about identical. The Ruger's stock trigger has a better feel to me, but there is a little more recoil (of course we are talking .22 LR here, so the recoil is still almost non-existent.)

The Ruger has been more reliable. It seems like the Buckmark's ejector port design (open on both sides) contributes to a lot of (sideways) stovepipes, and it has to be kep very clean inside to function properly (especially the firing pin).
 
Can't go wrong with the Rugers for accuracy, and willingness to eat ANYTHING. My brother has a 22/45 I bought him for his birthday about 15 years ago, he occasionally has a problems with the mags not latching securely if he doesn't seat them well on insertion, but that's it.

Around home, the Mk III guys are jealous of the Mk II guys, and the Mk II guys are jealous of the Mk I guys. If you can get hold of a Mk I or Mk II, get it.
 
i voted for the walther p-22. i have one, and really like it. i have also had a ruger mkII, which was a nice little gun. but i like the way the walther feels a lot better. for whatever reason, i have seen a lot of people dog the walther. but mine has worked very well indeed. it has well over 7000 rounds through it (conservatively), and i have had no issues other than the typical powder residue build up from 22lr ammo. i guess if you were going to do a 20 year long torture test with a 22 pistol, the ruger is a better built gun. but how many people really do that. i shoot between 200 and a 500 round brick at a trip typicaly. mine works fine, and i like the way it fits. for me, it is the right one.
 
Wanting to get the browning this weekend. I already have the P22.

I am not sure that I will sell the p22. It isn't a target pistol, but then again neither are almost all handguns people buy (glocks, etc) and yet people seem to have a jolly time with them :)

So yes, surprise, the replication of a non target gun P22 isn't a target gun. That wasn't the point. In all respects the buckmark and MKIII aren't target pistols either. Anyone using those pistols at the olympics?

P22 gets high marks for fun. What I don't like is the Buckmark and MKIII weight more than a S&W 44 magnum revolver.
 
Last edited:
CZ Kadets are awesome. Great looking, hand filling in all the right ways, accurate, reliable CZ Kadets. I have a kit I use on a PCR frame, it's so much fun.
 
CZ Kadets are awesome. Great looking, hand filling in all the right ways, accurate, reliable CZ Kadets. I have a kit I use on a PCR frame, it's so much fun.
Click to expand...

I agree. But I mounted mine on my CZ-75B, as my PO-1 is a daily carry gun. The Kadet has become my favorite .22 pistol, easily eclipsing a Ruger Mk. II with 5 in. bull barrel, and our Walter P22.
 
I owned a Smith & Wesson 622 and have never been satisfied with any other 22 cal pistols since.

Funny thing is I generally don't don't like S&W pistols, not that there is anything wrong with them they just don't feel good for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
  • Locked
Which .22 pistol is best for me.
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
stinger 327
stinger 327
Grayrock
  • Locked
How about a 1922?
Replies
11
Views
620
Grayrock
Grayrock
T
  • Locked
Ruger Mark II vs Mark III
Replies
15
Views
5K
Grizzly Adams
G
M
  • Locked
Full sized .22 caliber pistol?
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
arcticap
arcticap
A
  • Locked
What's the best modern .22LR semi-auto Pistol Plinker?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
5K
Archer1945
A
Back
Top