Your Thoughts On The Ruger & Browning .22s, Please

[Phydeaux642]

Well, I have decided to start shooting .22s for fun to keep from getting all worked-up over the price increases of ammo and new guns. I am actually looking forward to it because I will get to shoot a lot more (although I will actually miss the sharper recoil of the larger calibers - I know, that sounds goofy). I figure $10-$15 will give me a lot of shooting time in an evening at the range shooting paper plates (cheap targets, too).

My question is this: do you have a particular Browning Buck Mark or Ruger 22/45 that you prefer? And, if so, why? This isn't a "versus" question as I know they are both loved by many and I may end up buying one of each at some point anyway, but Ruger has six 22/45s (I like the looks of the 4 1/2" barrel, fixed sight model) and it looks like Browning has 24 variations of the Buck Mark. Or, are they all pretty darn good and I should just shut up and choose one. Thank you for your time.

______________________

"Phydeaux, bad dog....no biscuit!"

 

[Seotaji]

I am also in the market for a .22LR. I have only held the ruger and the grip seems slightly too narrow for me. I have yet to handle the buckmark, but from the pictures I've seen online, it seems to be a perfect fit.

I look forward to the discussion.

 

[GearHead_1]

I have both a Ruger and a Browning though the Ruger I own is a generation before the pistol on the market right now. The Ruger is a slab side Mark II and the Browning is a fluted bull-barrel BuckMark. Sorry I've never even handled a Mark III. They are both very nice guns and very accurate. I think I would give the Ruger a slight edge as my choice between the two. I've changed the grips on it and the thin grip isn't an issue. It isn't as easy to clean (assemble/disassemble) as the Browning, though not as hard as some make it out to be. I like the magazine release on the Browning better. That said the Mark III has fixed the magazine release issue. The Ruger feels better in my hand and is a little easier to group tightly. As I remember these were very similarly priced when I purchased them. My opinion is that you wouldn't go wrong with either of this pistols.

 

[MM]

I have owned a Ruger standard 4" since 1974. Only prob was when I tried to run it with oil that was too heavy too allow the firing pin to accelerate.
MM

 

[akraven]

I have used both and actually lean toward the Buckmark. The grip angle and controls are close to 45 auto style and very convenient. akraven

 

[telecaster1981]

My first pistol that I bought for myself was a Browning Buckmark Target model. Many many rounds later, it's still driving tacks and is extremely reliable to boot!

 

[noskilz]

I luv my Mark III 22/45. Shoot at least 100 rounds out of her on every trip to the range. The rear sight is windage adjustable. Haven't shot a Buckmark, but haven't heard anything but praise. Take your own advice - just shut up and get one!

 

[twolf811]

I have had nothing but great results with my browning buckmark

 

[trackaddict88]

Haven't shot a Buckmark but I love my Ruger SS slabside MK II. My brother has a MK II with a 10" bull barrel. Both shoot awesome and are a ton of fun. They aren't bad to break down and clean once you do it a few times. I almost bought a Buckmark but I found this used at a price I couldn't walk away from. Just find a good deal and get one, I don't think you will be disappointed with either.

 

[Craig M. Arnold]

I love my Browning Buck Marks!

Best regards.

 

[Kor]

As it happens, I ALSO shoot paper plates at my local indoor range, with my newly-acquired Ruger MkII Standard - it was bought NIB and has such a nice trigger, I couldn't resist getting it. I shoot a 40-rd box of Federal .22LR HP through my MkII every night after work...although, I must admit, I've gotten to the point that 8" paper plates @ 25 yds are no longer a challenge, so I've graduated to 3"X5" index cards @ 25 yds.

I used to own a Browning BuckMark, but it got traded for a S&W 042 before I had a chance to fire it...I think I just didn't want to unscrew the sight rib to field-strip it for cleaning.

Also, IIRC the BuckMark owner's manual said that it should not be dry-fired, whereas the Ruger manual specifically recommends that you dry-fire the gun prior to storage in order to de-tension the mainspring. I think I liked that aspect of the Ruger design better than the BuckMark design...

Browning owners - can/should you dry-fire your BuckMarks? If so, I may consider getting another one to supplement my Ruger...

 

[Comanche180]

Buckmark & Ruger

I have a Browning Buckmark Camper and a Ruger MkII. Both have 5.5 inch bull barrels. I bought the Browning new and the Ruger used but lnib. Both are accurate and started out with good triggers. I have used both for Bullseye shooting and plinking. I have put a red dot on the Browning for no other reason than it was easier than trying to put one on the Ruger which would require drilling and taping. I wouldn't part with either.

What I least like about the Browing is that tools are required for take down, and re-zeroing the sights is then necessary. What I least like about the Ruger is that after a couple hundred rounds the extractor will start to miss a few extractions due to crud building up on the face of the bolt and breech. This is a minor complaint, just time to clean. The Buckmark is more tolerant of being dirty. A lot of people complain about the takedown of a Ruger; I say read the manual and follow the simple instructions carefully. It's not intuitive, but it's not hard.

The Buckmark should not be dry fired which will damage the firing pin and/or the breech face. When I'm done shooting, I always drop a snap cap in the chamber, close the bolt and pull the trigger. The Ruger has a stop pin in the bolt that prevents damage to the firing pin in dry fire.

Both came with adjustable rear sights. The Ruger came with plastic grips which I replaced with Hogue rubber grips with finger grooves and a thumb rest, very nice for $15. These things will shoot and shoot and shoot.

There are other good .22 pistols, I don't have any experiece with them. Good luck.

 

[greyling22]

i have 2 buddies w/ buckmarks and I have a ruger mk2. we shoot the cheap federal walmart ammo. every time we go shooting at least one of their guns (usually both) has at least 1 jam or failure to fire. sometimes when clean, sometimes when dirty. if it's a FTF it always goes bang in the ruger. the bownings also like to be really really clean or else the problems seem to multiply. I'm not making broad generalizations, but in my limited experience the ruger has been more reliable and shoots better when dirty. that said the browning feels better in my hand. also on both their guns, the nickel has flaked off the bolt face from slamming against the barrel. I do like both guns and think you won't really go wrong with either.

 

[khunter73]

My friend has a buckmark and I have a MkIII. I almost like the grip on the buckmark better. But I can hand the Ruger to any one of my friends and they can all shoot it better. I like them both though. Since my friend had the buckmark and I was undecided I went with the Ruger and am happy! Once you have field stripped to clean a couple of times it is not that bad.

 

[SGW42]

I have a 6" standard Mark II and a 6 7/8" slabside Mark III. I love them both. I have to keep myself from posting on how much I like them on all the "Which .22?" threads that appear. I've never had a problem with takedown or reassembly.

The standard model Mk II feels perfectly balanced in my hands and seems to have a better trigger, but the Mk III slabside was more accurate out of the box. The heavy 6 7/8" barrel on that one makes it feel a little front heavy in my hand, but it reduces what little recoil there is and I can hit the bullseye very consistently with it...so oh well. If Ruger offered the 5 1/2" slabside barrel on the regular Mark III frame that might have been perfect for me. I think they do offer a 5.5" slabside on a 22/45 model, but I am a "metal and wood" type of guy.

I love going to gunshows and finding just tons of stuff for it. You have your pick of about a bazillion different grip options and everyone seems to own one or owned one and wants to talk to you about it.

There's an uninteresting story behind why I got a MK III slabside instead of a Mk II. Honestly I would rather have had a Mk II but with the deals I had in front of me it had to be a Mk III. And honestly I don't find the changes to be a big deal at all. It's the same quality. My only quibbles with it over the Mk II have been having to buy new magazines (not a problem if this is your first), and the loaded chamber indicator makes the chamber harder to clean. Specific to the slabside I have - the thumb rest grip actually blocks easy access to the new magazine release button, lol. I have to wrap my middle finger around under the trigger guard to pop it. On all other models it shouldn't be an issue. What I'm saying with all that is if I were in the market for a new Ruger, I would try to find a Mk II, but I wouldn't think to pass up any deals on a Mk III.

 

[Byron]

I have owned both and found the Buckmark more accurate and reliable.I have the Buckmark rifle also. I shoot the Walmart Federal Bulk and have had no problem with it. The Buckmark is easier to disassemble and clean. Byron

 

[pendentive]

I am looking for answers to the same question(s) as you, Phydeaux642.




Guys - I think what he wants to know is:




1 - Which Buckmark is the BEST Buckmark and WHY?


and...


2 - Which Ruger .22/45 is the BEST Ruger and WHY?











I'm pointing this out only because I too have the same question.

I know they're hard to find right now...but does the Buckmark Damascus barrel shoot as good as the rest?
http://www.impactguns.com/store/023614255741.html


Also, does anybody have experience with the Ruger Mark III Hunter? (22 not 22/45......shorter barrel, laser grips)
http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=10123&return=Y#

 

[jakeswensonmt]

I slightly prefer the Buckmark over the Ruger Mk*.

The Buckmark URX standard has incredible ergonomics.
If you've got more to spend, a Buckmark Hunter or Target are beautiful guns.
Would skip the short barreled guns, gives up too much sight radius.
Would also skip the Buckmark Camper, the sight base is plastic, prone to breakage.

 

[Shawnee]

I've shot both for years and prefer the Buckmark but either is just fine.

As for "which Ruger is "best" or "which Buckmark is "best" - each person will simply have to make that decision all by themselves. And, with all due respect, any person ought to be capable of making that much decision on their own.

 

[Phydeaux642]

As for "which Ruger is "best" or "which Buckmark is "best" - each person will simply have to make that decision all by themselves. And, with all due respect, any person ought to be capable of making that much decision on their own.

Well, I probably could make that decision on my own if there were any dealers in my area that carried every option that is available. As it is, .22 handguns are not all that sought after in my area, so, local dealers have only a couple to choose from. Consequently, I have to ask questions in order to make an informed decision.

________________

"Phydeaux, bad dog....no biscuit!"

 

[denfoote]

I have 5 Ruger .22's.
I have 0 Brownings.
Nuff said!!

My fave is this one.

 

[wally]

Got both, can't really go wrong with either. Both are among the largest PITA to take down for a thorough cleaning.

Be careful if you remove the Buckmark right side grip panel, there are small parts and a spring held in by the grip which can fall out easily and get lost. If the right side grip panel gets loose, the trigger can stop working so you need to be aware of this before attempting to put things right again.

The Ruger adjustable sight models are much easier to add a scope or red dot too as they include mounts.

--wally.

 

[Kor]

The Buckmark should not be dry fired which will damage the firing pin and/or the breech face. When I'm done shooting, I always drop a snap cap in the chamber, close the bolt and pull the trigger. The Ruger has a stop pin in the bolt that prevents damage to the firing pin in dry fire.

Comanche 180 - muchas gracias! That's what I thought I remembered...guess the Alzheimer's ain't got to me just yet...

I have a 6" standard Mark II and a 6 7/8" slabside Mark III. I love them both.

SGW42 - will your MkII accept/function with the MkIII magazines? My guess is YES, but I'd like to hear your real-world experience.

Apologies for hijacking Phydeaux642's thread, but one reason I got my MkII is because I knew the MkIII would NOT be able to use pre-existing MkII or MkI magazines, whereas the MkII IS capable of using both pre-existing MkI mags AND(theoretically) MkIII mags, in addition to its own magazines.

That being the case, I would tend to recommend a fixed-sight, tapered-barrel MkII 22/45 for self-training or teaching others, as the fixed rear sight gives a cleaner, less-cluttered sight picture IMO than the adjustable rears. Should your interests extend to competitive bullseye shooting or hunting with your 22/45, the heavier bull-barrel with adjustable sights should allow the gun to "hang" on target better and allow for more precise zeroing with different loads. I used to have a slab-side MkII Government Target model, and it was too heavy for some beginning shooters to hold up for extended periods of offhand shooting, so I prefer the lighter-weight tapered-barrel Standard model for teaching novices.

Now knowing that the Browning BuckMark should not be dry-fired, I no longer have any interest in the design, so I will not try to recommend a specific model to you. Seriously, though, dry-fire practice at home, and "ball-and-dummy" drills at the range, are important parts of correct marksmanship training - and the fact that the Ruger design facilitates this, is a big plus IMO. Although not a deal-breaker, the magazine safety on the MkIII would complicate dry-firing and field-stripping, which is yet another reason I gravitate towards the older MkII design.

 

[bigmike45]

I have been shooting my Browning Buck Mark Target, either in informal Rimfire Handgun Sillouette competition or squirrel & rabbit hunting for almost 20 years, and some 5000+ rounds and you could not give me another brand. If I remember correctly, in all those rounds I have had only a dozen or less malfunctions, that were caused by a dirty gun after a brick or two of ammo in one session. When I take it to the woods I mount a Burris 2X Pistol Scope atop the rib, otherwise the superb adjustable iron sights take care of business more than adequately. It's actually been shot so much the gold paint is peeling off the other side of the trigger. Gotta get that fixed one of the old days. Here is my pride & joy:

 

[SGW42]

Kor - My first thought would also be yes, they would, but I suppose I never thought to try. I will try it out first-hand when I get home from work tonight and report definitively for you.