The narrowed .22 search

S

Steelers252006

New member
I was in Bass Pro today, held the Ruger Mark III Hunter (seriously beautiful gun) and Browning Buckmark (very nice grip, nice, too!!). I am torn between these two, but there's more. I also would love to investigate the S&W 617; and if I could, I'd like to find the Ruger SP101 .22. If I found that one, I'd buy it on the spot. I am researching everything I can find on these four guns, accuracy, ease of cleaning, ease of overall ownership, whatever, and would love to hear some different opinions from everybody that has any experience with any of them and which they think would be the best option if you factor in the old bang for the buck philosophy on top of everything else. Which one should I get?????? :D
 
ruger mark 3 for hunting/target-accessories. shoots well and functions with just about anything you can feed it. s & w for target--also as "investment"--had a couple of k22's in my life--now they are big bucks. 617's--good gun. buckmark--no experience- heard good things--but harder to suppress if you were so inclined.

ruger sp--have seen new release in ct gun shop--looks well made--seems to be more of a plinker.
 
ruger mark II/III are good shooters, the ones i've shot have digested anything put through them.

not real familiar with a buckmark other than running about 50 rds through it. (also not on your list would be a smith/wesson 22A)

smith 617, I haven't shot one, or a full lug version, either in 6 rds or higher capacity. I can only relate to a model 17 (6"), or 18-3 (4") and those are keepers, there is a reason you don't see them used often.:) I'll not part with mine as I enjoy it. a used early model 17 is as much as a new one.:eek:

ruger sp 101, i'd like to shoot one, have no experience with one, interesting.

yes i know that "why $$$ for a 22 revolver, I can get a centerfire for that!"

well if you think of it this way, the only thing diffrent about the revolver is the bore.. all the rest is nearly the same.
 
Last edited:
Picked up a Mk III 22/45 Hunter a few weeks ago, have about 500 rounds through it so far. Great little gun.
 
If you have the funds, get the 617 or something in the K-22 family. I own one and am very happy with it.

If you have less money get the Ruger. I've had a Mark II for many years.

The Buckmark is a real good gun and many people prefer it to the Ruger.

Don't know about the Sp-101
 
Two guns that are not for sale: my Browning Buckmark Hunter and S&W 6" model 617. The op mentions ease. The revolver is the easiest to deal with in numerous ways. But the auto-loaders can be fun and fast shooting, especially with a dot of some type.
I would tell the OP that there times and places where both kinds of guns prevail and a person should have a revolver and an auto loader- but not just one gun alone.
 
I still have my Buckmark I bought back in 1987, and it's still the tackdriver it was when I bought it... even after about 25K rounds through it. Easy to fieldstrip, easy to clean... it's a fine pistol!
 
I own a 5 1/2" MkIII and a 4" 10-shot 617. I've shot a Buckmark & SP101 (though not the .22 version).

MkIII pros: Accurate, reliable, lots of aftermarket parts. Accessory rail screws right on top, without interfering with the iron sights, so it stays on, and makes mounting optics very easy.

MkIII cons: A serious PITA to breakdown & reassemble, though it doesn't need to be broken down for routine cleaning.

617 pros: Very accurate. Very reliable. Very versatile. Terrific factory SA trigger, too. It's every bit as accurate as it's great grand daddy (my vintage 5-screw K-22), but with 10-shots, offers more versatility. A k-frame, it's my understudy to my IDPA/USPSA revolvers. And it can be used for rimfire steel challenge, teaching new shooters, plinking, hunting, and target shooting.

617 cons: I admit to being a double action trigger snob, but I felt the factory DA trigger could use some 'smithing. Some seem to feel cleaning a 10-shot revolver is a PITA, but honestly, I feel it's no biggie. Then there's the cost. But considering how much I use mine, it's easily one of my wiser firearms purchases, easily being my "best bang for the buck". Depends how much you'll use yours, though.

Buckmark: I love the ergonomics of the Buckmark. And accuracy was fine, too. I understand they're a lot easier to breakdown than a MkIII, too. Between the Buckmark & MkIII, the factory triggers felt about the same, but I went with the MkIII and dropped in a Volquartsen trigger kit and planned on using it for bullseye competition. I wouldn't hesitate buying a Buckmark if I were buying another .22 semi-auto, though.

SP101: The SP101 has a lot of fans, but frankly, I've never been one of them. The larger GP100 is a fine wheelgun, but I have issues with the SP101's ergonomics, size & capacity.
 
It's a tough, tough call. Seems I'd be crazy not to at least look at the S&W 22A as well. Seems like a great gun for the price tag. This will be the gun I use the most as the ammo is so much more affordable. If I spend the money, I really, REALLY liked the feel of that Ruger Mark III Hunter, and it would familiarize me with the semis. However, that 617 has me drooling, too. If I bought either one of these, I'm sure I'd be happy. I have $1,200 put away for this gun purchase, but bear in mind I want to purchase myself and my wife two CCW guns as well eventually. I'm taking the CCW class on the 22nd. There are SOO many choices it's unbelievable!!
 
All around .22

What would be a good one that is fun and accurate to shoot but easy to carry with me when I'm kayaking? I should take this into consideration as well since I do a lot of stuff outside. Thanks.
 
A good ol' H&R 949 or convertible 676 would do. They don't cost too much, work well and are pretty rugged. Also, you won't be so put out if they get a scratch or two.

My 7.5" 676 is a killer accurate gun.
 
Last edited:
You might mistakenly think that a revolver would be better due to the water. That would not be the case. Most autoloaders can be easily detail stripped down to bare parts if they ever get dunked. However, most revolvers (at least S&W revolvers), have very complicated innards that are behind a cover plate. Getting in there to dry it out takes a bit of gunsmithing skill.

For a pure "water gun" in .22LR, I'd pick a 1911 with a .22 conversion kit. You can easily learn to totally strip and reassemble it.
 
Steelers252006 said:
Seems I'd be crazy not to at least look at the S&W 22A as well.
Click to expand...

I have almost no experience with the 22a, but my impression after checking one out at my LGS and reading on-line reviews is that they're the next step down from the Ruger Mks and Buckmarks. Fine if you want to plink, but wanting if you're wanting more.

Steelers252006 said:
I have $1,200 put away for this gun purchase, but bear in mind I want to purchase myself and my wife two CCW guns as well eventually. I'm taking the CCW class on the 22nd. There are SOO many choices it's unbelievable!!
Click to expand...

Doyle said:
You might mistakenly think that a revolver would be better due to the water. That would not be the case. Most autoloaders can be easily detail stripped down to bare parts if they ever get dunked. However, most revolvers (at least S&W revolvers), have very complicated innards that are behind a cover plate. Getting in there to dry it out takes a bit of gunsmithing skill.

For a pure "water gun" in .22LR, I'd pick a 1911 with a .22 conversion kit. You can easily learn to totally strip and reassemble it.
Click to expand...

The CCW and the water issue are significant, and IMO, Doyle had the best idea yet. A conversion kit also lets you get lots of trigger time with the same gun you'd press into serious duty.

The only thing I'd change in Doyle's recommendation is to consider a Glock (and conversion) instead of a 1911. Nothing against 1911s, but the manual of arms of a Glock is simpler, the polymer construction is more resistant to corrosion than a steel 1911, and Glocks are renowned for their reliability, even when sunk in muck & mire. And takedown is ridiculously simple.

The S&W M&P series would be another option (another striker fired polymer gun) if .22 conversions are available and as reliable as the Glock versions.

In the end, much has to do with how your needs & intended use balance against...

1. expense (separate .22 & CCW guns for you and your wife)
2. target grade accuracy
3. reliability (± exposure to harsh conditions)
4. ease of breakdown for clean up
5. the likelihood of needing to break the gun down for cleanup.

Getting all 5 is a tough order. IMO, the Glock + conversion route is the best if 4 of the 5 are important. If target grade accuracy is most important, the MkIII, Buckmark & 617 are good candidates, but their compromises have been discussed.
 
For .22LR ---- get a Browning Buckmark Bullseye.
1. 1911 grip angle.
2. accurate (very good with cheap ammo, better with good ammo)
3. easy to clean.
4. good out of the box (both of mine were great out of the box, triggers were clean, no creep, minimum (unnoticeable) over-travel.

For reference,
I have:
2 Ruger MKIIs (7" slabside, 5" bull+vq comp) + 1 NIB 7" slabside
2 Browning Buckmark Bullseye 7" Blue Fluted (old grip style).
1 S&W 5.5" heavy barrel.

I had:
1. S&W 617-1 4" --- Had timing issues, sent back to s&w twice which smith fixed for free. Sold after the 2nd trip.
2. Browning Buckmark Hunter 7" - good and accurate but trigger does not compare to the Bullseye trigger even after the sear spring flip. At some point, 7" barrel was changed to a 4" then I traded it to a friend.

Of the Ruger MKII, S&W 41, and Browning Buckmark Bullseye:
1. The S&W 41 is the smoothest shooting and best rear sight but it only likes the more expensive Standard Velocity ammunition. Well built but HV feels too much for it. Very good trigger.
2. The Ruger MKII - built like a tank. Both of mine required tirgger work. Disassembly required for cleaning after several range trips (approx 1000 rounds).
3. The Buckmark Bullseye - more expensive then ruger MKII (when I got mine) but with Ruger trigger part/work ended up the same price as ruger. Good out of the box. Possible issues is loose sight rail screws but easily fixed with blue locktite.
==================
.22 Revolver - hmmm - more to clean: barrel + 10 chambers (not difficult, just more). My 617, cylinder would start binding at around 300 rounds. Also, spent cases would start to stick at about the same time. Lead build up on the top strap. I shot DA with it mostly which might explain the out of time issues. S&W service was very good but after it was fixed the 2nd time, I decided to sell the 617 and stay with semis when it comes to .22s.
==================
If I were to buy one .22 now (pretending I do not have any, yet). I would get the Browning Buckmark Bullseye. It is just as accurate as the Rugers and the S&W 41. Very nice trigger out of the box. Just pick the grip style new or old.
==================
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top