P22, Ruger MKII or Buckmark?

C

Carbon_15

New member
Thinking about getting a .22 pistol soon. My gun shop has all three of the above mentioned for about the same price. They all have good and bad points. I already have (and love) a P99 9mm. My concern with the P22 is that they are quite similar in feal but pretty different in operation. Standared DA/SA with a hammer vs Striker DA/SA, very different trigger pulls, P22 has a safety but no decocker..P99 vise versa..etc. I would hate to pull the P99 in an emergency and have my brain and reflexes think it was the P22. Should I be worried about that or not.
Any general input on these 3 pistols for general plinking, small game hunting? BTW, looks wise, I prefer the classic, almost Luger-like looks of the Blued MKII, So I'm leaning that way.
 
I like the MK II. I have a Buck-Mark also and it is nice but overall, I like the Ruger. I prefer the stainless KMK 512.
 
Mk.II gets my vote. Very reliable, very rugged, very much fun.
Of course, the same could be true for the others..but I haven't actually tried them. You're welcome to send me samples, that I could make a more educated recommendation. ;)
 
I really like my P22. I'm finding that it likes hotter ammo however. And it really likes the match grade stuff.

I wouldn't worry about the P22 compared to the P99. That's one reason why I got mine, because it is similar to the P99. Yeah it has a hammer, but it still works DA/SA like the P99. The grip and feel are about the same as the P99. With the P22 being smaller.

The DA on the P22 isn't all that good. But the SA is just like a P99, awesome!

P99
 
My vote goes to the Browning. I have been using a Buckmark, Silloette Model, for NRA Bullseye for 2 years now. The gun is extremely accurate, especially with the Tasco PDP-3 Red Dot sight on it. It will put 10 rounds into a group about the size of the fingernail of your little finger. The gun is very reliable even after shooting 1,000 round of Federal Match 711B ammo. It has almost no recoil, due to the 10 inch heavy barrel.
 
Ruger MkII: Rugged, accurate, and reliable. If all three guns are about the same price, hold each one in your hand. The Ruger is a more substantial, sturdier gun. I like the stainless models: the KMK-512, KMK-678, KMK-678GC. However, if you are not in a hurry, Beretta has two new .22LRs: The Beretta 87 Target is finally available and the U22 Neos is coming.
 
I would reccomend the Ruger . I shot a Buckmark in the past
and it Jammed quite often . I currently Have the Mk 2 and it's
a better gun . But i have found that most all 22's Jam to some extent. Except for the Beretta iam told . Anyway i would get a ruger .
 
Carbon_15

Go with the Ruger MKII series. I have over 15,000
Rounds through mine and it still looks and functions like new.

Tony



20254488SFVcNVbczz_ph.jpg
 
Thanks for all the input guys. I'm 99% desided on the MK II, I was origonaly about 80% sure anyway. I generaly get stainless if its available in most other guns, but for some reason the blued standared model MKII just looks better to me. I has a very simple, classic style that is in sharp contrast to my mostly modern handgun collection. Some Mamoth Ivory grips/magazine follower might even look good against the almost black blueing. If it was a perfect world, I would get the P22, Buckmark, MKII blued, and MKII stainless slabside w/ the wood thumbrest grips and a nice scope. However, I live in a One-gun-a-month only state, and have a hard time investing 4 monthes wait on .22 pistols. The frustrating thing is, all 4 would cost about the same as one of my nicer centerfire handguns. I could probly aford one per payday if it wasnt for that damnable law..I feel infrindged!!
 
Another cool thing about the Rugers is that there are tons of accessories out there.

I'm having Randall Fung build me a set of anatomic match grips. Expensive, but very very nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top