Ruger 22/45 or Browning Buckmark?

S

Stretch

New member
I'm getting a .22 pistol for my son (and me) to plink with at the range. The choices are narrowed down to a Ruger 22/45 or a Browning Buckmark; does anyone have good or bad stories they want share about either one?
 
Stretch, This is a subjective matter. I've owned both, found both to be very reliable and accurate. Having said that, my preference is for the Buckmark for the following reasons. On the stardard models of both, my Buckmark had a much better trigger, was easier to strip for cleaning and has adjustable sights. Either will serve you well.. Handle both, shoot both if possible and get the one you and your son like... Mark / FL
 
Stretch, I too have owned both. I too would concur that the BM is easier to field strip. It's also quite easy to change out its barrel. That said, I'd have to give the nod to Ruger in terms of sheer reliability. Yes, I know that it's not for defense. But, it is quite annoying to fuss with malfunctions, especially if a new shooter is learning on that gun. I lost count of the ammo types that would not cycle the BM, everything I tried cycles my Rugers. My $.02
 
I fully agree with you guys on the Ruger.
Mine has adjustable sights and a tapered barrel, it's a very accurate and reliable 22.
Too bad that Ruger parts (extra magazine for my 22/45 ) are hard to come buy in my country
 
Like them both, prefer the Buckmark. Mine (box stock) has an excellent trigger, and is the most accurate pistol I own. I think that it is mostly a matter of personal and subjective feel. Reliability has been good, except for when you don't tighten the screws on top enough after field stripping, and you get light firing pin strikes. Not a big deal once you figure it out, and thats the only problem I have ever had with mine.
 
I am not familiar with the BM, but the main attribute of the Ruger is that its grip angle is basically the same as a Government style 45; hence the name 22/45. This provides an inexpensive way to practice with a Government style grip if you are a 45 shooter.

My 22/45 is great. Accurate, reliable and backed by Ruger's excellent customer service.


Frank
 
Stretch, I'd like to throw in my opion. I haved owned a Smith & Weeson, a Browning, and a Ruger(which I still have). My recomendation is a Ruger Mark II with adjustable sights. The 22/45 Ruger grips just are downright uncomfortable and all of that plastic doesn't seem natural. To me the Ruger Mark II has no peers and I will never part with mine. It has performed flawlessly. Field stripping is a bit tricky on the Rugers, but a small price to pay for such a great gun. Why do you need to clean a Mark II anyway?
 
Well now. Although I'm a long-time fan of the Ruger, still owning two of the half-dozen Standards and Marks that I have bought/traded for over the years, I would have to give the nod to the Buck Mark over the .22-45. I like the Micro...it looks and will probably handle and shoot much better than the legendary Colt Sport Woodsman of fond memory, and it's very reasonably priced for a nicely finished, walnut-gripped plinking/fun gun. I like the looks of it, and I've never been impressed by a Browning BM before. slabsides

------------------
If they take our guns, I intend to let my hair grow long and acquire the jawbone of an ass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top