22lr Pistols

D

Doug S

New member
I got rid of my Taurus 94 a while back and miss having a 22 plinker. I've decided to try one of the full size 22 semi's (either a Ruger or a Buckmark). I am more concerned with reliability than slight differences in accuracy. I've done some searching on this forum and for most it seems to be a toss up between these two guns. After reading these posts though it appears that the Ruger may have the edge in reliable functioning with most any ammo even when dirty. I have a friend who has a Ruger with the 5 7/8 bull barrel. He has probably thousands of round through this gun without a single cleaning (drives me nuts) but he hasn't had a single malfuntion yet. He has heard so many stories horror stories about disassembling this gun that he's afraid to try. What are the opinions of those who have handled these two pistols? Which would you choose for a reliable plinker?
 
I swear by my Ruger. I don't think any collection can be considered complete without at least one.
 
Ruger .22's and reliability

If reliability is all you want, then you want a Ruger. I've put countless rounds through my Mk II .22LR (I'd estimate 2,000+)and have not had one jam or malfunction yet. This is usually unheard of with most .22 semi-autos (the rimmed ammo makes feeding a little more difficult). I've had a misfire, but that was the ammo's fault IMO. I don't think you can go wrong with a Ruger .22 semi-auto. Oh, and they are very accurate too.
 
Because Bill Ruger doesn't think I'm an honest man due to my 15 round Beretta mags, I don't patronize him. I'm sure you'll be well served by either the Browning or the Ruger, though.
 
I have owned both and prefer the Buckmark. Mine shoots all day with CCI Mini Mags and very accurately. The bulk 22's are not liked ny either of the Ruger or Buckmarks I have owned. I have the Buckmark rifle which handles equally as well.
 
I have owned numerous .22 pistols over the past several decades, Ruger 22/45s, Mk Is and IIs, S&W 2206 and 22S and 22A, Browning Challengers and Buck Marks, Bersas,Tauri, Colt's Cadet (oops, can't all it that), even a Colt Ace, so my opinion comes from a fair amount of experience.

I currrently have three, all Brownings:

A 4" Micro with adjustable sights.

A 5.5" Target with Tasco Accu-Dot

A 10" Silhouette with Simmons 2x scope.

They are each accurate, easy to shoot well, possess nice triggers (adjustble on the Target and Silhouette models) and feel so much nicer to my hand than any of the others I have owned. They are better than most I have owned, and just as good as others, which is why I still have them.

Are the Rugers good guns? Yes.

Do I prefer the BuckMarks to the Rugers? You bet!
FWIW
 
I have a Browning BuckMark Camper, lovely little gun, and the price on it was way too good for me to pass up.

The Ruger is a nice gun, but I have to give my vote for the Browning.

Either way you go, you'll be getting a quality firearm.

Shoot each and decide from there.
 
Just thought I'd mention that High Standard is apparently in production again (or still, whatever). You might want to give them a look.

http://www.highstandard.com/

I've heard nothing but good things about the old ones, and these look excellent too. They were sort of the standard by which other .22s were judged at one time.
 
Check out the new Walther P22. It's just now starting to come into the country, but it looks promising. You can change out the barrels from 3.6inch to a 5 inch. It also has many features that the P99 has. Changeable backstrap, to fit your hand for example.

http://www.waltherusa.net/p22t.htm
 
I've got a Ruger 512-something in my pistol collection (blued w/5" bull barrel). In addition to being very accurate with its adjustable rear sight and heavy bull barrel, it always goes bang when I pull the trigger. As for cleaning, I only do quickie job w/the slide locked back and have never field stripped (really should pull out the manual and do it once ... another day).

Put my vote w/Ruger on this one.
 
Recently traded my Challenger III (predecessor to the Buckmark) for a 22/45. NO contest...the Ruger wins. The Browning just wouldn't feed reliably after 100 rounds or so, despite a little polishing/reliability work.
 
I looked at both last year and ended up buying a Ruger slabside. Heard how tough they were to breakdown so I talked the salesman into showing me how. Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on who's side) he couldn't get it back together after two hours of trying. After quite a bit of swearing he was going to ship it back to Ruger but I talked him into giving me a decent discount and "took it off his hands". Five minutes in the car and it was back together. If you read the directions it's actually fairly simple and quick, the key is holding it in the correct orientation like the directions state. I can now break it down and put it back together in under a minute without a sweat. It ate everything but hollow points out of the box so I shipped it back to Ruger and two weeks later it was back and flawless. I have fed all kinds of ammo through it without any failures including some 1100+ sessions with dirty ammo. Kinda like the Energize bunny, looked like it had been implanted in a dirt pile but still going. Extremely accurate with most any ammo including the super high velocity stuff. Slabside comes with a scope rail and 1" rings which I used to mount an Ultradot red dot scope. Also added Hougue grips. Talk about major fun with metal reactive targets at 25 yards! Only gripe is since it's stainless it's a little on the heavy side but still pretty balanced.
 
I own a Browning Buckmark, my girlfriend a RugerMk.II. So I have some experience with both weapons. Both are fine pistols. I think the Ruger might in fact work longer without cleaning, but we haven't really tried it. (Sounds pretty stupid to me not to take care of your firearms. Especially since you're paying good money for them...) I have also heard stories of how this or that RugerMk.II has been fired a gazillion times and the weapon is still like new - but my Buckmark hasn't fallen apart yet either, and .22LR ammo is something I can actually afford to shoot... And since you say the weapon is going to be a plinker, I'd personally choose whichever pistol is more suitable to me rather than try to find minor differences in reliability. Either weapon will choke sooner or later if you never clean it (the Browning will probably have failures first, OTOH once the Ruger gets dirty enough to choke it'll probably be a real bitch to clean).

So choose whichever suits you, and know you've made a good choice. Happy plinking! :)
 
Didn't I read in "Unintended Consequences" that JM Browning designed the High Standard?

Did he design the Buckmark?

Just curious.
 
I own both. My feelings are that they will both outlast you.
I would recommend that you buy whichever one feels the best in your hand. Save some money and buy a used one since they aren't going to wear anyway.
 
Notice your post. Have you considered the IZH 35 imported by EAA. The gun can be purchased for under 400.00 and it is good enough to that it was shot in the Olympics. In fact it is so good that Walther is now importing the gun and all they did was change the grips, and add a different finish. The gun will group under 1 inch at 50 yards and will eat any type of ammo you can feed it. It will shoot sub 1 inch groups with any cheep ammo at 25 yards. The trigger is adj and set at 2 pounds from the factory. My shooting buddy has a Buckmark and he can't come close to shooting with the IZH. I also have a Rugger with a Clark trigger and it will not touch the IZH 35. I have let about 10 shooters at the range shoot the gun and all of them were impressed. You can check out the IZH 35 club on Yahoo it has a lot of info about the gun.

David.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top