Deciding on a .22LR semi auto ... Walther, Bersa, Ruger

Bjw741 beat me to it. The M&P 22 Compact is another poly framed option, but it's a good one and can be found for $300 if you shop around. Comes with 2 mags, adjustable sights, and threaded barrel. I have one and like it. I also have a Ruger 22/45 target model. It is very accurate and mine isn't picky about ammo. At $25 each, I didn't think extra mags were too expensive either.
 
Last edited:
It is very accurate and mine isn't picky about ammo. At $25 each, I didn't think extra mags were too expensive either.
Click to expand...

GarandTd - In that last statement, are you still talking about the S&W, or the Ruger?

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions. You have given me lots to think about. I've been looking up all of the mentioned models, and reading a zillion reviews.

A couple of things I've have now re-considered. One, I'm not so concerned with avoiding a polymer frame as I was with something like the .38 spl when they first came out ... and the reason I had that concern was being unsure how they would hold up over time and use. Also the fact that most of my revolvers are pre 1980 S&W pinned barrel models, so polymer was not even in the picture.

I'm also now strongly considering the S&W M&P .22 Compact. I don't really know why I wasn't considering it before. I think I just always sort of wanted a Walther for my collection, and took a liking to it when I first started looking at .22 models.

After looking and reading, I noticed the connection between S&W and Carl Walther GmbH, and Umarex, partially for US distribution purposes. This 2012 article from "The Truth About Guns" site provides some info about the connection and partial separation. Notice this sentence in the article: "Smith & Wesson will continue to manufacture the PPK for Walther Arms, Inc. and CARL WALTHER will continue to manufacture the M&P22 handgun for S&W." It's almost comical. By now, in 2020, it's hard to tell who is licensing who.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/walther-splits-smith-wesson-mostly/

I'm not overly concerned about the licensing agreements, and in this low of a price range I'm not expecting $1200 results. I'm really just looking for something to try out with suppressor shooting, and before it's all said and done, I may end up with 2 or 3 different brands / models. At this point, from just reading reviews, I'm liking the S&W, so that is a turnaround from where I was at when I started this thread.

My next step this week will be to visit some LGSs and see if I can get some of these in my hand and evaluate from there.

Thanks again, will update.
 
Last edited:
I have the Ruger Mark IV 22/45 Target and it is a very good shooting and accurate 22. I have used several high velocity ammo brands and have had no problems that I can remember. But CCI MiniMags is about the only 22 LR I ever use.

I also have the Ruger SR 22 which, after getting some issues fixed by Ruger, has proved to be a fun shooting plinker. Not super accurate in my hands, but a lot of fun.

I also have a GSG 1911-22. Made by Sig Sauer I believe. Initially it was a PITA until I got the paint off the slide and lower frame and shot it a lot. Still has some failures, but it is heavier than the other two so I can use it to practice for my other guns that are heavier.

Te 22/45 Target has only failed on less than desirable amm.

Now, OP, you got me thinking I should shoot them all a little more....been over a year since I shot either of them, but I have purchased several semis and revolvers in that time frame and concentrating on them.

Good luck in your search.
 
Last edited:
I have a recently made Walther PPK/S 22 and it has been boring reliable and seems to like any ammunition I've tried in it.
 
The new Walther P22qd are much better over the original P22's. You can get them with a threaded barrel too. The SR22 from Ruger is also a nice small .22 that eats everything. And also take a look at a few Browning Buck Marks. S&W Victory are good to go, but you said you wanted something small.
 
guitar1580 said:
I'm also now strongly considering the S&W M&P .22 Compact. I don't really know why I wasn't considering it before. I think I just always sort of wanted a Walther for my collection, and took a liking to it when I first started looking at .22 models.

After looking and reading, I noticed the connection between S&W and Carl Walther GmbH, and Umarex, partially for US distribution purposes. This 2012 article provides some info about the connection and partial separation. Notice this sentence in the article: "Smith & Wesson will continue to manufacture the PPK for Walther Arms, Inc. and CARL WALTHER will continue to manufacture the M&P22 handgun for S&W." It's almost comical. By now, in 2020, it's hard to tell who is licensing who.
Click to expand...

To add even more confusion to the Walther and S&W licensing agreement, the M&P 22 Compact is entirely American made at the factory in Springfield, Massachusetts. The regular M&P 22 is made in Germany by Walther.
 
metric said:
The fact that 1) Walther will not answer a point-blank question if the alloy contains zinc, and 2) Their sales and prices of the Umarex-produced model have dropped due to claims that it is a zinc alloy should make everyone extremely suspicious.

Does anyone find it likely that their $250 version is made out of a high-quality alloy that they don't want released to the public (despite the fact that it would be trivial for any lab to determine the composition)? So much so that they are willing to suffer reduced sales and price drops, rather than simply state the basics of the metal?

Why do you think they don't want us to know?

When a manufacturer uses quality materials, it becomes a point for marketing, not a trade secret. Especially if they are suffering under misconceptions.

Draw your own conclusions.
Click to expand...

Is it really so hard to write a sentence long e-mail asking them yourself that you're going to presume that they won't answer when I already told you that they will in the first place?

I don't see where you're coming from here, lots of companies have secret recipes for all manner of things for any number of reasons including just plain marketing, which is hardly a reason to be suspicious.
I suppose we should all be suspicious about what's the secret ingredient in Cocacola as well? Or the secret sauce on the Big Mac? Or any of the other number of products that don't disclose every little detail concerning the precise composition of everything/anything they make.

The bottom line is this, the PPK/S .22 has been on the market since March of 2013, yet to this very date not a single report of slide failure has been made that I can find, and on the echo-chamber that is the internet in which a single report of something failing often gets copy/pasted ad nauseam or otherwise is brought up at every available opportunity by dissatisfied customers, that's saying something.
In other words, there's no tangible reason to doubt the structural integrity of the alloy Walther is using, regardless of what it's exact composition may or may not be.

Last but not least, pricing is not a measure of overall quality in the modern-day firearms market. There are lots of high quality yet low cost firearms on the market, including ones which arguably function as good or even better than higher priced firearms.

But hey, if you want to believe that Walther is the new Jennings, that's your prerogative.

guitar1580 said:
After looking and reading, I noticed the connection between S&W and Carl Walther GmbH, and Umarex, partially for US distribution purposes. This 2012 article provides some info about the connection and partial separation. Notice this sentence in the article: "Smith & Wesson will continue to manufacture the PPK for Walther Arms, Inc. and CARL WALTHER will continue to manufacture the M&P22 handgun for S&W." It's almost comical. By now, in 2020, it's hard to tell who is licensing who.
Click to expand...

Walther's current affiliation with Smith & Wesson extends no further than the fact that Walther supposedly manufacturers the M&P22 for them, but that may have ended. Currently, Walther is producing the PPK(/S) in .380 ACP out of their facility in Fort Smith, Arkansas. All other Walther brand firearms are imported from Germany, but are marked "Walther Arms - Fort Smith, AR" because Walther USA is the importer.
 
Last edited:
I have two of the BERSA .22's, one with the threaded barrel, and one without.

The non threaded barrel tends to prefer hotter ammo, but I've found it will feed and fire most standard velocity ammo if the mag is only loaded to 5.

The threaded barrel model has fed everything I've tried so far, with or without a silencer/suppressor. One thing worth noting, the threads are a little rough on the barrel, not enough to cause any issues for me however.

Personally I think the BERSA .22's are great pistols for the money, unless you have an extreme aversion to trying out different velocity .22 ammo to find out what feeds, I think they would serve anyone quite well.
 
If you go to a Rimfire Challenge or Steel Challenge match, you will see a lot of choices, but the Ruger pattern is #1 and Browning is #2 with nothing else even close. Most of that is reliability. I went with the Ruger 22/45 and we have 4 of them. One is all steel for the suppressor, the other three are Lites. Two of those have trigger jobs.

The Walther, SIG, Smith did not cut the mustard for me. But I might try the new KelTec P17 if the initial reviews hold.
 
If you are thinking about the S&W M&P 22s, you should probably take a look at the Taurus TX22 as well. It has gotten some pretty rave reviews.

My preference is the target style (non-22/45) Ruger Mk series. They aren’t the smallest options, but they have been my most reliable semi-auto 22s. I’ve have 5 of the target frames and 2 of the 22/45s. All of them would run whatever I would feed them, but I have pretty much settled on just CCI SV as my ammo choice for daily plinking as it runs in every 22 I have and has the fewest ammo related issues.
 
I have several Ruger mark ll's and the sr22 as well as two Bersa 22's, one standard and one target model with the 6" barrel. The Ruger's are by far the most accurate but for a smaller carry type, I like the Bersa. Decent accuracy at close range and easy to carry. The sr22 is not as accurate but easier to carry as it is a bit lighter. I can't speak to the Beretta 71 as I don't own one but I did find them for sale here---https://www.classicfirearms.com/beretta-model-71-pistol-22lr-8-round-with-faux-suppressor-surplus/
 
I have a S&W Plastic M&P Compact.
It is very reliable, 100% with Minimags and good with nearly everything else.
HOWEVER, it is not a particularly easy gun to shoot well, light and with an indifferent trigger. I find myself shooting my full size guns a lot more; out with the Colt SM ACE yesterday.

So what I recommend is a Ruger Standard or 22/45 or a Browning Buckmark. S&W Victor has a following, too. Stay off the option list, the Buckmark in particular has nearly a 2:1 price range for the same action in different dress.
 
Guitar1580, the magazines @ $25/each are for the Ruger 22/45. I haven't been able to find mags for the m&p 22 compact for less than $35 or $40.


Edit: I guess I haven't looked for a little while. Now, I'm finding the M&P 22C mags for $20-$30 on various online retailers such as Palmetto State Armory and GunMag Warehouse.
 
Last edited:
And yet, these two little suckers run like champions. And made with Zinc. Have been running strong for 10 yrs. Nice triggers, nice sights. I use a 22.cal for one thing. Training, I like shooting samll barrel guns and like fast point and shoot. These fill the bill 100%. They love standard ammo, and have a lifetime warranty. Guntest mag said "Quite frankly we did not expect much from a gun with a street cost of $140.00, but when it out performed guns costing 4 times as much, it got our attention." I could not agree more.
I also love shooting the Ruger LCR22 as a trainer for my Smith and LCR9.
I also have a Bersa and SR22.

RzYOtua.jpg
 
I have several Gillette razors with Zamac heads that were made around the time of the Korean War and that are still going strong.

If it's good enough to trust with a razor blade at my neck it's good enough to trust in a 22LR frame.
 
Don't get me wrong, guys. I've got nothing against the use of ZAMAK for firearms, as it seems to work just fine so long as the proper amount of material is used or the task. Hi-Points have ZAMAK slides, and while they certainly aren't the most aesthetically pleasing firearms out there, by all accounts they're reliable firearms.
In fact, my last point was basically me trying to say; even if Walther is lying through their teeth as metric is suggesting and the PPK/S .22 is made of zinc, who cares if it has been on the market for about 7 years without a single reported failure? It's not like they expensive.

And yet, these two little suckers run like champions. And made with Zinc. Have been running strong for 10 yrs. Nice triggers, nice sights. I use a 22.cal for one thing. Training, I like shooting samll barrel guns and like fast point and shoot. These fill the bill 100%. They love standard ammo, and have a lifetime warranty. Guntest mag said "Quite frankly we did not expect much from a gun with a street cost of $140.00, but when it out performed guns costing 4 times as much, it got our attention." I could not agree more.
I also love shooting the Ruger LCR22 as a trainer for my Smith and LCR9.
I also have a Bersa and SR22.
Click to expand...

Neat. Those are made by Phoenix Arms, right? I've seen them on sale for as low as $115 BNIB on Buds, which is tempting, but I already own the PPK/S, so I'd probably get a Heritage Arms Rough Rider Combo instead if I were going to get another rimfire handgun, just for the sake of variety.
 
I disliked two things about it.

First, I'm a 1911 guy. I just wasn't happy with a semi-auto that doesn't have a full, reciprocating slide. I replaced the Ruger with a Ciener .22 conversion on a mongrel 1911 receiver. It's probably not as accurate as the 22/45, but I don't shoot bullseye. With .22s, I plink, and the Ciener is more than accrate enough for my purposes and I'm just happier shooting it.

Second, the 22/45 (and all the Rugers up until the current generation, I believe) are a bear to take apart and reassemble. There's an aftermarket kit to address that, but it's not cheap. I wasn't happy with a pistol I couldn't easily take apart and reassemble for cleaning or maintenance.

I have read that Ruger finally addressed the difficulty of detail stripping the .22s, but I haven't ever worked on one so I don't know if that's correct.
Click to expand...

I found my mk3 to be quite easy to take apart, its the putting it back together that was quite difficult.:D:D
 
Another vote for the Phoenix Arms HP22 if you want a non-plastic, low priced, plinker that has some weight and is about the size of a PPK or Bersa. Sweet trigger is a surprise.
It's easy to swap barrels between the 3" and the 5"and has adjustable rear sight.
You will have to learn how to deal with the two safeties, and absence of panache.

If you can spend twice as much and tolerate some plastic, the S&W M&P 22 Compact might be the best in class.
 
I own 2 of the suppressor equipped pistols discussed in this forum - 22/45 lite and S&W M&P Compact. If I were to pick just one for use w a suppressor it would be the 22/45 Lite as it has a better trigger, greater accuracy, and I don’t need a wrench to take it apart. The S&W comes with a pot metal cone wrench for use in removing the suppressor adapter from the barrel. My supplied cone wrench broke the first time I tried to use it. I ended up grinding the thickness down on a spare wrench I had so I could get that suppressor adaptor off. I don’t know why the barrel doesn’t come threaded wo an adapter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top