Which first .22 LR pistol?

[SKILCZ]

So in follow-up of my previous poll (standalone .22 LR pistol vs. conversion kit), which standalone .22 LR pistol for plinking. Not intended for competition or anything crazy. Just having fun shooting targets, pop cans, etc. and introducing new shooters to shooting.

If you pick the Ruger, which model? Can anyone make sense of all the different Ruger models out there? I know there are a million Mark models, and I don't know the difference.

What's a good price for a Ruger or a Buckmark? What are the advantages/disadvantages of one over the other?

Thanks!

 

[Average Joe]

Mk III

 

[scrat]

i havent shot a mark III. but i do own a bull Barrel mark II target pistol and man i can tell you its very well balanced. Very easy to shoot and is really accurate. So hands down heck if i found another good one at a reasonable price i would probably buy it so i can have two of them.

 

[JHansenAK47]

Beretta 87 Target
Best pistol I have ever owned after my 1911. Plus it gets shot more than any other gun I own. I've had a ruger and a buckmark and they were alright. I had a SW 422 and that was a great pistol for the money. Glad I bought the beretta but they cost around 600 to 700 new. So if cost is a factor I would look for a SW 422. my .02 cents

 

[theotherwaldo]

The Ruger Mark I and Standard pistols were the first guns made by Ruger. Efficient and handy, their main problem is there was no hold-open mechanism to indicate an empty magazine. Ruger changed this and a few other, minor items after about twenty years and called the result Mark II. This lasted about another twenty years, then they recently came out with the Mark III that had a few minor design patches to cover liability threats, engineering changes, and consumer demands (in that order of importance).

I still carry and use a Mark I Target. I'm used to it and I see no reason to change... except that it sometimes gets supplanted by a stainless Single Six.

 

[Ed from Maine]

22/45 MkIII, 5.5" bull barrel

I vote for the above, based on experience with :
High Standard Supermatic Trophy
Browning Buckmark
Ruger Mk II long bull barrel
Ruger Mk II long heavy taper target model, stainless
Ruger Mk II long slabside barrel, stainless competition model
Ruger Mk III long fluted barrel (Hunter) 22/45, stainless
ruger Mk III 22/45 5.5" bull barrel, blue, for $249.50 new

The last one has the best balance, has great iron sights, very accurate, easy to demo to a beginner, easy to change mags, and it works every time. And it was the least expensive, and is the least fussy about what ammo to feed it.

 

[bannockburn]

SKILCZ

I've always gravitated to the Ruger 5.5" bull barrel models over the years. I guess I just like the way they balance in my hand, plus the sight radius seems about optimal, at least for my corrected vision.

 

[CHEVELLE427]

I HAVE a Ruger Mark II target and a BROWNING NOMAD,

that old browning is hard to beat

 

[Pilot]

Ruger MK II Target 5.5 inch bull barrel. Its an all around great shooter for target work or field use. If its a little to big and heavy then a 4 inch bull barrel 22/45 would be my next choice. I actually have both.

 

[GZOh]

Can't go wrong with the Ruger Mark III... basic, durable .22 shoot, under $300... if you like the looks and feel... will last forever! Great place to start.

 

[Matt Dillon]

CZ Kadet, or a CZ75 with a Kadet kit!

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I would never buy a Ruger, but if someone forced me to, the Bearcat is pretty cute.

Kinda depends on the budget. If you've got over $800, then Walther/Pardini/RWS/Anschutz, etc. If you've got $700-$800, then a S&W model 41. If you've got $500-$600, then a CZ Kadet. If you've got $300-$400, then a nice Browning Buckmark. If you've got less than $300, then the Taurus 94 revo is pretty decent if you have small/medium hands, or a basic Buckmark.

 

[weisse52]

Mark II. Rugged, accurate. Low cost. I have the bull barrel Government model. I also have a fixed sight regular barrel and it is accurate as well.

Either of your choices are good ones.

 

[GZOh]

Ditto Matt Dillon... if you wanna forget you're shootin a .22 and $$Dollars are no problem... the CZ Kadet can't be beat!!

 

[PCFlorida]

Ruger

Since this is in the autoloader forum, I'll go with my Ruger MKII 5.5" bull barrel. I've taught several people to shoot with it. It's reliable, has a decent trigger out of the box and good ergonomics.

If this was in the wheelgun forum I'd tell you about my Single-Six

 

[mgregg85]

Go for any of the ruger .22 autoloaders.

 

[Vicious-Peanut]

I had the same question a few months ago. I went with the Buckmark, and it is absolutely awesome. 100% reliable with Mini-mags and about 98% with cheap bulk ammo. I can get an easy 3" group at 10 yards with 200 rounds. No joke.

 

[cerberus65]

Beretta NEOS. It's a bit cheaper than the Browning or Ruger. Mine's treated me well. I remember reading somewhere that one or the other that you mentioned is tough to break down. The Beretta is very easy. .22's don't get cleaned much usually but that might be a consideration.

 

[bgeddes]

Shooting my brand new S & W 22A tomorrow I'll let you know how it goes.
,

 

[slustan83]

s&w Model 41

ETA: WOW, did not realize how much these are running now, I'd probably go ruger.

 

[jjohnson]

USED Ruger 22/45 Stainless

I don't like the MK III......

But I've had several Ruger autos, and the 22/45 is very ergonomic, does resemble a .45 as far as the controls go (well, sort of) and is way more accurate than I am. Mine is of the same vintage as the MK IIs.

I've spent 40 years trying to wear out Ruger products. This is still in progress. :banghead: I haven't worn one out yet. My point here is that if you want a Ruger, chances are that buying a used one will both save you some money and entirely likely the product won't have any real wear on it anyway. The just keep on ticking.

My 22/45 stainless has the 5 1/2" bull barrel, and it is a very handy informal target pistol. Tens of thousands of rounds out of mine, still no signs of wear.

 

[jjohnson]

Good Question.

I am pleased to see that my own choice - the Ruger - equals the others (in total).

You asked a good question, first with the conversion kit versus the pistol. If the price means anything to you, I think you're going to be hard pressed to beat the Ruger.

 

[3KillerBs]

Ruger Mark III Hunter with 6 7/8" barrel and hte high visibility, adjustable sights.

I chose that one because after borrowing several .22s to try I shot best with the Rugers. Of the Rugers the Mark III Hunter suited my hand better than the .22/.45. I chose the long barrel for the accuracy gain because its so beautifully balanced that when I held one in each hand I couldn't feel the difference in weight.

The one thing its important to know (other than the disassembly issue (I bought the bore snake that was recommended and its doing a great job)), is that all the Rugers I tried misfeed or refuse to extract the bulk-pack, Remington golden bullets. My Hunter eats Winchester white box, American Eagle, Federal Bulk Pack, and all the other ammos I've tried just fine. But not the Remington.

 

[gcrookston]

my first was a 1950's vintage 2nd series Colt Match Target...

Today I have S&W model 41's, a Model 17-2, and a Hammerli Trailside

 

[AMBASSADOR]

RUGER MARKIII,Great looking,shooting.