22 revolver or semi-auto

Agree completely with 44Amp on the Ruger Single Six if you want to go the revolver route. For a semi auto I'd go for the Buckmark.
 
Thanks for asking our advice.

peter d said:
revolver or semi-auto
I want to buy a 22 to carry while camping ,hiking and for plinking. I have looked at the ruger mk111, the browning buckmark, the taurus 94( which looked good,but I understand they have problems)and the charter arms pathfinderI have a 45 and a 380, but would like something less expensive to shoot.The S&W 22 revolver is too expensive. I guess I'm looking for the pro's and con's of revolvers vs semi-auto 22 calibers. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated. Thank You
I would discount heavily any discouragement that did not cite specific failures. One of my standard advices is, "Believe only half of what you see and one quarter of what you hear. That goes double for casual testimony found on the internet."

I have a Taurus 22 revolver. Reliable, light, handy. Not that good a trigger, but not that bad, either. Taurus does have legitimate problems with some of their guns (I do lend credence to the number of posts bashing Taurii), but I observe that most of the complaints are against their compact semi-autos and lightweight centerfire revolvers. Not the 1911, PT92 and PT99 and almost never their 22 revolver. And I have never found the complaints all that credible against their guns, but against their customer service and repair center.

In short, I would not hesitate to buy a Taurus 94 .22 rimfire. Nor Ruger's SP101 (either the earlier 6 shot or the current incarnation), Bearcat, Single Six or Ruger's Mk II or Mk III (I own three Mk IIs, a 10" that shoots like a rifle, but is near impossible to carry comfortably in a holster, a 4" bull barrel and a 6" standard barrel, all with adjustable sights.) You might be able to find a used Dan Wesson 22 revolver if you are luck. They do not seem to command high prices, but are supremely accurate.

I know nothing of the Charter Arms Pathfinder, sorry. Browning makes a fine 22 semi-auto as well.

Good luck. Don't turn your nose up at the fine value of the Taurus just because it is popular to paint all Taurus' guns with the same prejudicial brush.

Lost Sheep
 
I had thoughts similar to Shoobee, are you intending to hunt with it? If you are, you would want a longer sight radius for the small critters - then maybe a 2 inch snub is a bit less useful to you.

If you were considering a .22 because the impression that it would be a smaller, lighter, or cheaper gun, unfortunately they're not really for the initial purchase. But plinking yes!

And finally, i know someone who occasionally will carry a 22 for self-defense because he is confident in his accuracy with it. If you feel like you will be able to defend yourself from a person with a 22 at camp or on the trails then have at it! But if not - or if this is partially for animal protection you may want to also consider larger calibers as most of the creatures that would "attack" are at least as tough as we are! Except Mosquitoes.
 
Shoobee said:
If you are out hiking and camping, then there are probably other people out hiking and camping too. Therefore "plinking" would then be inappropriate, as well as unsafe, so save your plinking for the plinking section of the local gun range.

And if you are out hiking and camping, a .22 is going to do you very little good, so there is no reason even to bring one along.

A .44 or a .45 are the only two calibers that would effectively give you any security while hiking or camping, if security is what you are really worried about. I vote for the .44 in that case, which is exactly what I have too, for camping, or hiking where it is permitted to carry that amount of heat.
Shoobee, you have my sympathies. I used to live in California and love the state, but the government engenders a completely different sentiment.

I used to live in Arizona and now live in Alaska. A 22 is quite useful. One can (if you are into foraging) put some meat in your pot with one. Alaska is one of the few places where you can actually legally hunt the State Bird.

The mere presence of a firearm on the hip of the good guy is quite often enough of a deterrent to your average (opportunistic) miscreant. Now, someone guarding a pot farm is another situation, but I used to have a S&W K-22 that was indistinguishable from a Model 19, 15 or 10 while still in the holster.

Now, in my State, casual plinking spots, indeed, are getting harder to find and to get to. Fact of life and of growing populations. So, the thought of plinking while on a hike is out of the question for me, but that is just a personal preference. I would no more carry a brick of 22 rimfire on a hike than I would carry an ordinary brick. The OP may have a different situation.

Don't get me wrong, Shoobee. I (and I am sure, the entire forum) appreciate your perspective. I just want to say that it is not the only one. There are almost no absolutes. (Note that even my absolute statements allow for variance.)

To the O.P.: Do your state laws allow or discourage plinking in the wild? Will you police your brass and pack it back out? Also part of my perspective.

Lost Sheep
 
Im a revolver guy, but a .22 revolver just doesnt do it for me. Never has, Never will.

Wow... I'm more of a semi-auto guy (though I love my .357 security six) and I would much prefer a handgun in .22 to be a revolver. Semi's are way too finicky about ammo, IMO. Also heaven forbid the feed lips on the magazine see so much as a scratch and it starts to double feed. Not a fan of rimmed rounds out of a semi. 22 semis are fun, don't get me wrong... just "fragile" to a degree. Revolvers... not so much.

And if you are out hiking and camping, a .22 is going to do you very little good, so there is no reason even to bring one along.

I disagree. Not everyone has to deal with brown bears, wolves, and feral homeless folks camping. A .22 has lots of uses... plinking, meat in the pot, poisonous snake control, other smaller critter control, finishing animals while trapping, and even SD against humans if need be.
 
22 revolver or 22 semi-auto for camping,hiking and plinking

I have both. I have a Ruger Single Six .22 lr/.22 mag convertible and a Ruger MK II semi auto. And they will both work for those activities.

But I have another that to me is better than either of the Rugers for that (and I am a Ruger fan. I own more Rugers than any other brand). It is a Smith & Wesson Model 317 Airlite. Is an 8 shot double action revolver with a three inch barrel and adjustable sights. It weighs only 9.9 ounces. I carry it in a nylon holster on my belt most of the time. Or if I want to keep it concealed, it is small enough to stick in my pocket.

It is so light that I don't even notice it is there. Working or playing it doesn't interfere with anything I am doing. It is very versitile. It will shoot long rifles, longs, shorts, CB caps, even shot shells.

I was wearing it a couple of weeks ago when riding my four wheeler on my hunting land. I came around a corner and saw a possum. (The owner of the land wants me to shoot any possums, cooons, skunks, etc. that I see.) I pulled the 317 and down went one possum.

P4170022.jpg
 
I've carried a Ruger Mk. II for many years as I mentioned on the other thread with the same title.

I've filled the pot a few times with it. Squirrel, rabbit, one time a blue grouse. Mostly though we've killed a lot of beverage containers.

The .22 revolver I have now is also real fun to shoot. But it's a bit on the weighty side for packing around.
 
I have a Ruger Single Six with an extra cylinder
for 22mag--plink with the 22lr cyl and hike with
the 22 mag cyl----fits the bill nicely.
Have a Happy New Year!
 
A beat up Ruger 22/45 stainless is my nearly constant companion on the farm. The only time I'm not packing it is when I carry a bigger caliber. Accurate, dependable, easy to handle, and shrugs off abuse and weather. The only thing it doesn't do as well as a revolver is handle sub loads. Aguila Colibri doesn't feed well, Winchester subsonic doesn't work the action every time(no surprise), but Remington C Bee HP is just right for a lower report application(requires manual slide operation so no question as to whether there's round in the chamber). Remington high velocity will ring an 8" gong at 115 yards 80% of the time if I'm not jumpy. Any number of other choices might do the same thing but the Ruger does it for me.
 
I would go with the Ruger MK II (plenty of used ones around), or some version of the Browning Buckmark. They both have an excellent, time tested record of accuracy and dependability, and parts are easy to find. The auto will be easier to load and clean without all those cylinder holes.
 
When I think about a camping or outdoors gun I think revolver. You might want a snakeshot load for snake country, some .22 shorts for low noise shooting or to pop a squirrel for dinner, and maybe some Vipers just in case you might need it for SD. You can't get that function in a semi auto. Even if you carry a snakeshot in the chamber, some designs (Federal and Winchester) will stick and be hard to extract. Its hard to get a little .22s into the chamber with gloves on if you're packing a Ruger. Loose a magazine and the gun will still work as a single shot, unless you've got a Smith, Walther, or MKIII. The revolver will run better and is more versatile with multiple loads, and will still function dirty or abused. It can still be made to function with a minor broken part as long as you can line up a cylinder with the firing pin.
 
Woods walking or desert hiking? Revolver.

I really try to avoid leaving empty brass cases everywhere I've been shooting. Judging by the desert (in my example) there's a lot of slobs who shoot and leave all sorts of crap behind. I truly despise those who litter.
Please do not be one of those slobs.

So... if you choose a semi, will you be policing up all your brass? Wheelguns tend to not leave empties all over except in your hand. (Not talking tactical reload here)

But that's just me. YMMV

I enjoy shooting them all (but hate picking up .22 empties and will not leave them)
 
Back
Top