Good .22 Target Pistols?

I was in the same boat, I looked at a Beretta at a gun show a while back, but it was a little out of my price range. I ended up buying a Ruger KMK-678GC - the stainless slabside model. I think you get a lot of gun for the money. Very accurate for my purposes (informal paper punching) would also serve a person well in competition - they may outgrow it, but it would take quite a while. It also comes with scope rings, which is a nice addition. I'm planning on getting a 2x Swift scope soon. Grips and accessories are abundant. I also think it will prove to be more durable than some of the finicky competition only guns. I had also considered the Russian IZH-35, I'm glad that I bought the Ruger. They are currently priced from $350 to $375 here in my area.
 
One last suggestion. Don't overlook revolvers. I'm keeping my eye out for a nice S&W K-22 (M-17 or 617) - would like to find the 10-shot stainless model for a good price. 6" barrel. Taurus also made a copy called the Model 96 - currently out of production I think. May be good options for a lefty - no brass in the face. I'm left handed but shoot right (also right eye dominant)
 
For an inexpensive 22 I would vouch for the Ruger KMK-678 (Mark II 6-7/8" barrel). It's rugged and is easily maintained. Many after market parts are available for what ever customization you want ie. triggers, iron sights, scopes, suppresors, grips, etc. I opted for putting on a red dot scope for my tired ol' eyes. Sure makes for an inexpensive day of shooting pleasure.

As for the S&W 22s, I would avoid this gun. The recoil pads shred after less than 1000 rounds and then the recoil rod and spring assembly move all over the place causing the pistol to jam frequently. The integral rail that runs along the top of the barrel can easily be cracked too (once cracked, your gun can be used as two or three paper weights - because you can not reassemble it to form one paper weight). The rubberised plastic grips start to disintegrate after a few months also. Granted it did shoot fairly well before things started to fall apart (one month lifetime). The 22s is supposed to steel ("s" for steel), but actually appears to be an alloy of some sort. The 22a ("a" for alloy)is made of an alloy. (What alloy? I don't know). The correct designation for these (IMHO) should have been "22POS". :mad:

The more pricey guns may well be worth the money you pay but I can not make any personal observations about those. I'll leave that to others that know first hand.

Good luck and safe shooting.
 
Hmmmm, my 2206 still seems to be in one piece. I guess the newer/younger 22s and 22a aren't as rugged.

Pic

[This message has been edited by jcoyoung (edited March 15, 2000).]
 
Group,
Heavens skunniren, what did you do that poor little pistol to have it treat you so shabbily? I can't imagine what would cause the top rail to fracture like you describe unless the casting was flawed from the factory.

I bought mine because of the fit...seemed to fit my paw better than any of the Rugers or the Browing. Plus, it has the best trigger that I've ever seen on an 'out of the box' pistol.

But, likewise, I'm not all that impressed with the overall quality of my 22A...which, unfortunately, after only 500-600 rounds is on its way back to Maine for repair under warranty.

It seems that the extractor claw, spring and plunger went MIA one afternoon at the range.

For me, the jury is still out.

Ragtop
 
AHHHH...a topic from the grave!! I had to let you know I bought an older model, 7 1/2" M41. There has been no comparison between it and the Ruger 22/45 when bullseye shooting. NO comparison...

I have had the opportunity to shoot the Mark II and was very impressed with it as well.

------------------
Shooter's Enrichment Program/Forum

[This message has been edited by LadydeeJ (edited March 15, 2000).]
 
I go with OSSI, I have been there and done that. Ruger, Hi-Standard, S&W 41, and finally with a Walter, interchangable, RF to Standard diciplines for ISU shooting.

HJN
 
CZ kadet. Read the recent review in the American Rifleman. Converts from 9mm to .22. very accurate in both calibers but much more accurate in .22. -ddt
 
Well I think almost every good target pistol has been named. I shoot bullseye with the ruger(kmk-678g), I also have the S&W 22S. The ruger is easyer to keep mantained and can take 1000's of round without showing any effects. I have at least 20,000 round through the pistol and it looks like it did when it came out of the box. Accuracy, The gun can shoot better then I can. With a triger job and some minor poishing It is my favorate.

The S&W 22s just doesn't Feel as good in my hand's although it is a very accurate gun. But as mentioned above the S&W has been completly remade by S&W for many problems, including the barrel braking in the back. but got exellant customer service.And my wife shoots bullseye with it.
Our team consist's mostly of rugers and S&W41s we have taken many medal's with them. so If your headed for the Olympic's buy better, if you just want a exellent gun at a good price that can shoot better the most people can shoot.

Then I vote for the ruger :cool:

Tony Z

------------------
www.vote.com



[This message has been edited by tonyz (edited March 16, 2000).]
 
I have the new Hammerli Trailside, albeit with the short barrel. It seems very accurate to me, but I really have nothng to compare it to - I just know it is fun to shoot and looks good too.
 
I was looking at the Beretta Model 89 which a local dealer had in stock. However, I was unsuccessful getting any information about the gun or finding any owners who could share experiences. I learned the model 89 is out of production (or at least not being imported).

Now, I'm looking at the Trailside, High Standard, Ruger, Browning. I was considering the S&W 41 until their recent deal with the devil. The High Standard guns from the 60s-70s are apparently excellent target pistols (Trophy, Citation, Victor, Olympic).
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 2cats:
I'm shopping for a good .22, for the range. Anyone have experience with the Beretta Model 89 Gold Standard?[/quote]

Every now and then, you can find a Colt Woodsman.
I've had one for 12,13 years now. Sweet gun...pain to break down though (IMHO).

However, for today...it'll be a .22 conversion kit for a Glock 17. Any body tried one of these?
 
Another vote for the bull barrel Ruger Mark II. It probably the toughest and most reliable of all 22s. Yes, you can get left hand grips for it from Ruger.
 
p512b.gif


I can't give an opinion on any others, but for a general cheap & accurate range gun the Ruger fits the bill nicely. This model (P-512) with the 5 1/2" bull barell is easy to carry & shoot, has decent adjustable sights, will digest any .22 round it is fed, is extremely reliable and Ruger's suggested price is $265. I haven't looked lately, but I would bet you can find them all day long for just over $200 new. Mine has given me great service for many years.

Mak

------------------
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work"
Thomas Alva Edison
 
Since no mention was made in the original post about hardcore competition shooting IMO the Rugers and Brownings are just the ticket here. Either will outshoot 80%+ of the shooters out there with the right ammo. I`ve had both and they`re both very fine pistols. I`ve come to prefer the Buckmark for purely personal reasons. I prefer their controls,trigger pull,sights and overall feel. The objections that have been sighted about taking the grips off and the rear sight rail are simply bunk. The grips don`t have to be removed to clean them and there`s nothing under there that needs cleaning anyway. There are a few springs in there but they don`t fly out even if you do dislodge them they just fall on the table and you stick em back in. Anyone who can`t handle that shouldn`t even be holding a handgun.
wink.gif
Complaints about removing the rear sight rail for cleaning get a lot of milage but the tapered screws and countersunk holes assure that it goes back exactly the way it came off and I haven`t detected even the slightest change in adjustment even after hundreds of cleanings. So basically if it comes down to Ruger or Browning decide based on how the gun feels to you and the features you like but don`t let the rumors scare ya.
smile.gif
Marcus
 
I agree with Marcus...nothing was said about competition. So, I take it that it is for fun. With that, my choice is the Buckmark for a handgun. I like the feel of the Buckmark or Ruger. But Ruger has more accessories availibable. Both are cheap to own and use (I bought mine for $150) Or a Ruger 10/22 for a rifle.

Take Care
 
Has anybody out there shot the Walther GPS? I have seen used versions in the $995 price range. And some as high as $1750. Recommended? Or not??
 
I prefer the Buckmark to the Ruger even though I made the mistake of ditching the mark for the 22/45. If you have the funds I guess getting a Sig/Hammerli or SW41 would be a good choice, but with the money you save by getting a Browning or a Ruger you could get deadly proficient when you find the right recipe. Well then again if you have the funds to buy those expensive ones, you probably have the money to buy eley and all those other match bullets, and a ton of training ammo.
 
Way back when I shot bullseye, I first used a Ruger Govt. Target model, then a Ruger bull barrel. The shorter bull barrel was easier for me to shoot, but the Govt. Target was incredibly accurate-it would outshoot many semi-auto .22 rifles.

Trigger wasn't too bad, but there are many pistols with better triggers.

BTW, I shot the centerfire stages with my M66 (I refuse to say the brand name), shooting DA in the rapid fire, one handed. Didn't do too badly, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top