Ruger MKII vs Browning Buckmark

I have no experience with the Browning, but I can tell you that you can't possibly go wrong with any of Ruger's 22LR semi-auto pistols. I have yet to see one that isn't an absolute joy.
 
At last count, I own 3 Rugers and 3 Buckmarks. The Buckmarks are a cut above the Rugers in looks and feel. The Rugers are a cut above the Buckmarks in overall accuracy, at least in my hands. The Ruger's toughness is legendary. One of my Rugers, a .22/45 has over 35,000 rounds through it in a little over 2 1/2 years and shows very little sign of wear. One thing the Rugers offer that the Buckmarks don't is stainless versions, if stainless is a preference. In extended sessions, ie: >500 rounds at one sitting, the Ruger's takedown lever on the backstrap becomes uncomfortable and digs into my palm, whereas the Buckmark's solid frame doesn't seem to do this. The Ruger design is a bit tricky to field stip until you get used to it. The Buckmark's field strip by removing the barrel retaining screw and the rear sight ramp screw. Lots of folks rate the Buckmark as being easier to field strip, but being the fumble fingered old fool I am, I know it's only a matter of time until I cross thread one of the screws. If you remove the left grip of the Buckmark, the little pieces parts are going to make it a possibly long day for you to put it back together again.(see ref of FFOF above) If you take a Ruger down any farther than removing the barrel/reciever from the frame, you may be in for an equaly long day (ditto ref above of FFOF).

Bottom line: The Buckmarks come in a wider selection, from a basic Camper version to the outstanding 5.5 Target model. A friends 5.5 Target can rival my High Standard on a good day. Ruger also offers a wide selection, but a Ruger trigger is always going to be a Ruger trigger. My friends 5.5 proves that a Buckmark can be made with an exceptional trigger. My Buckmark plus is a very purty gun, is beginning to be broken in enough to shoot like a dream but can sometimes be a bit picky about ammo. My Ruger "slabside" is also a purty gun, but isn't as pickey about ammo. On a really good day on my part, consistantly putting 10 shots(from a rest) into a quater sized hole or smaller, at 25 yards is possible with either line. All my Rugers have passed my informal "shoot a penny off-hand at 50 yard" test, but none of my Buckmarks have yet. Since most sane people don't try to hit a penny at 50 feet off-hand, much less 50 yards, this isn't usually a concern for most, but it does show what a Ruger can do.
 
Go with the Ruger----I had a Buckmark that wouldn't stay together---the screws kept on backing out---nothing would work short of loctite-----having to carry all the time the hex wrench that came with it was a pain in the rear----the only thing I liked about the Buckmark was the mag release-----overall the Buckmark is an inferior design compared to the Ruger. Right now- I have a standard model--fixed sights and all---that will out shoot my buddy's target model.
 
The Buckmark is the better gun. I once test fired mine off the bench at 25 yards with 18 different .22 loads ranging from the super cheap bargin stuff to Eley Tenex. Only two PMC loads grouped over one inch. Most averaged about 1/2 to 3/4 inch and Winchester Super X and the Eley Tenex both turned in 1/4 in groups. Hard to argue with results like that.
 
I've owned both and like them both.

I favor the Buckmark by a slight margin because it has a much friendlier trigger and also because the grip angle and controls more closely mimic standard defensive handguns - it makes a good trainer.
One flaw with the Buckmark is that they don't run dirty - they need to be cleaned more often than a Ruger or they'll begin jamming. I shoot Blazer .22's in my Buckmark when I want to do extended shooting - this stuff has some kind of weird propellant that just turns to dust with a consistency of talc and just blows away as you shoot - if it gunks up, you're putting too much oil in your gun.
That's my two cents worth - but you won't go far wrong with either gun.
 
Another vote for the Buckmark line. I have the same issue as Keith, just can't get used to the grip angle on the Ruger. This does not mean the Ruger is not worthy of consideration, it's a great pistol. My advice, pick the model which is most comfortable, as you're the one shooting it. Either is a good choice.
Take Care
 
Ruger vs Browning Buckmark

I have owned both but prefer the Buckmark. On my amd my wife's part, the Buckmark is more accurate. The variations meet individual needs. Ours shots CCI mini mags with no problems. Other brands give some problem but a friend was having trouble with his Ruger with various brands so it becomes what the gun likes. also, the Buckmark rifle is excellent, light and takes the same magazines.
 
Consider spending a few more bucks and look at the Sig Trailside. I have a Mrk11, taught two kids to shoot with it and it is no dought a fine gun. The trigger on the Sig is so smooth I hardley ever shoot the Ruger anymore.
 
This is a good question... Which One?
There are a lot of VERY good high quality .22 autopistols out there. The problem is selecting one.
Here is the list of worthy .22 autopistols suitable for general use:


Ruger MkII
Browning Buckmark
Sig Trailside
S&W model 41
High Standard (There are more models and versions and clones than Kennedy Conspiracy theories)
Bernardelli P018
Colt Woodsman
Or a .22 Conversion kit for your favorite 1911 or Glock.

Out of all these fine .22's I'm somewhere in the middle of selecting a Buckmark or a Trailside.


(There are a lot of other good .22 autos - but it would be a very long list.)
 
Ruger MKII's and Browning Buckmarks

A comparison of the Ruger MKII and Browning Buckmark tells me to buy the Ruger Mk-II. There is a catch to that! You have to be able to take it apart and put it back together. Don't laugh, there are thousands of Ruger MKII being shot that nobody has the courage to try to clean.

Write Ruger for a manual.
 
I have the Ruger Target model (slab side) with a red dot scope and love this pistol. So far no failures to feed or eject, only problem is that the pistol is by far more accurate than I am!
 
I have both. My Ruger MK II is the stainless bull barrel model 512. I love it. I just got it last year. I have owned a Buckmark since 1980 or 81. At that time, it was called the Challenger III. It was your basic blue 5 1/2 bbl Buckmark with wood grips. It sitll looks like new.

If I had to choose between them, I would get the Ruger. I like the stainless and I think it is a more durable gun. The Buckmark is put together in such a way that some screws come loose if you're not careful.

They are both nice guns. The Browing does fit my hand a little better.
 
If you don't have either one, buy the Ruger

Cleaning it isn't half as hard as people make out. To close the latch on the back, you stand on one foot, point the gun up, point the gun down, wave the gun all around (in a safe direction), pull the trigger, hold the bolt in and press down with your thumb.

Seriously, the Ruger is a more robust and trouble free design. Fewer tiny little screws, washers and other parts, including the Browning c-shaped recoil spring retaining clip, which is this size: c. I lost one the first time I took mine apart.

I own both and prefer the Buck Mark for shootability, but it is more prone to screws loosening, etc., while you're firing at the range.

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