thoughts on a long-term, high-round count .22 pistol?

Every firearm will need parts replacement eventually. Given that’s the case and I have yet to hear of someone wearing out an aluminum frame on a 22LR pistol I still believe your concerns are moot, as has been pointed by others too. The only way to never wear out a pistol is to never shoot it, which then defeats the point.

If it bothers you that much then buy a Ruger Mk series pistol to ease your concern. But I stand by the notion that it’s unnecessary and a construct of your own beliefs more than reality.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure everyone will agree there are real differences in quality and expected longevity, amongst various .22 pistols. "They all wear, so therefore there is no difference" is not an argument I take seriously.

It is possible that I will never even get close to the expected maximum round count of a stainless MK II -- in fact that's the idea. I'm less confident that I could treat one of my excellent aluminum-frame Beretta 71's in exactly the same way and expect exactly the same result.
 
My argument isn't that there is no difference. My argument is the difference isn't nearly as dramatic as you're making it out to be and not in a cartridge with the pressure of 22LR. You're not comparing a $50 Saturday night special to a $1000 super pistol in comparing a Buckmark to a Ruger Mk pistol.
 
We do not know Metric (OPs) age but all of us can tell many stories for exceptional 22s we had that ran decades with little problems given proper maintenance

Is there ONE best 22 pistol that will eat every thing and Never wear out...?
No but a few will come pretty close from my scant 50 years of experience with early Ruger pistols and some real old rifles... models not relevant

The real issue ---given a desire for ultra long life expectancy for a TOOL is simply what will wear ? Can I get the replacement parts?

I have a early 1970s Ruger MK I from Western Auto $59 out the door that has been abused and put away dirty for years and years as I was assigned over seas with no personal weapons allowed.... OK --the truth is I always do clean and oil all my guns... but this pistol was never thoroughly OCD cleaned...

There are a lot of other brands I would be happy to own...but MY experience with this ONE Ruger has me always adding to my acquisition the same brand... 5 versions right now with a new to me 22/45 Lite MK 11 for $150

No reason to believe a Colt or BuckMark guy would NOT have the same brand loyalty

OF course academic...cuz I am 63...but I bet I could buy ANY current or older 22 Pistol and make it last a few decades beyond any grand children's need or future sale

I just do not think there are many bad designs, construction, or terribly inferior 22 pistols out there...From the top of the line MFGs....Browning, Colt Ruger, Taurus, Volquartsen...and quite a few others

I am not really a brand loyal Ruger snob... but I am exceeding happy with each I own...this thread got me seriously looking at some various Buckmarks...and Volquartsen options

I really am a 22 pistol junkie
 
The new S&W Victory? No.
Click to expand...
Can you elaborate? Have you had problems with a Victory? My experience with it has been positive and I'm not aware of any significant problems.
I know the Victory is more on par with the below but it doesn't inspire confidence in me. YMMV.
Click to expand...
Why the lack of confidence?

I'm not trying to come off as a "fanboy". It just happens that the Victory is the one I've had experience with. I'm curious about the negativity towards it.
 
The Ruger pistol has basically four generations, by those of us with hands-on experience and a long time love of the platform, we GENERALLY agree (not totally, all the time) that the Mark II generation was the pinnacle of the four. With the Mk II you find (arguably) the best features, still with quality parts and workmanship and yet without added intricacies forced by gun control agendas.

Given this (apparently emotionally driven) outline of demands from the pistol, I think a fantastic solution might be to find a high grade used Mark II stainless, which could likely be done for $400-$450 and then immediately find ANOTHER exactly like it, and I do mean exactly, for similar money.

You'd have two of them under a thousand, one that takes everything you can give it and the other that never leaves it's box, left in pristine condition, for which to ease the psyche. In for under a thousand, and you'd be left with a pistol that eats up all the use and wear and STILL an entire pistol that remains in 100% condition.

There exists never in man's history... a handgun ever made that could eat 100,000 rounds of ammo and show zero wear.
 
Victory problems? If you hang out in the S&W forum you get to see all the dirt that folks care to post. These are people that are typically life long S&W guys who absolutely love the brand.

Smith & Wesson has an excellent reputation for customer service and I believe it is well earned, as the service department seems to ship more guns than the factory does. Their QC would be pathetic except that you can't label their QC when it does not exist.

I have zero intention of offending anyone who reads my post, and my love for this brand spans three decades and a larger number of guns than I would care to say. Over HALF of my safe is genuine S&W and I love most of these as much as any enthusiast could.

S&W ships shoddy stuff right now. Some are fantastic designs but there is no evidence that they are assembled by skilled craftsmen and a ton of evidence that supports the assertion that putting them together and shipping them as fast as possible with ZERO care whatsoever that it was assembled properly is the current directive.
 
Metric said:
I'm pretty sure everyone will agree there are real differences in quality and expected longevity, amongst various .22 pistols. "They all wear, so therefore there is no difference" is not an argument I take seriously.

It is possible that I will never even get close to the expected maximum round count of a stainless MK II -- in fact that's the idea. I'm less confident that I could treat one of my excellent aluminum-frame Beretta 71's in exactly the same way and expect exactly the same result.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I've owned 2 Rugers in my lifetime, a model 77 rifle and a Red Label All Weather O/U. The 77 stock cracked the first time out, the Red Label worked for 2 years and I couldn't get parts for it. I wouldn't take a Ruger as a gift after those 2.

But, a lot of you seem to believe in the Mark series. I'll trust all of you that they are decent.
 
My argument isn't that there is no difference. My argument is the difference isn't nearly as dramatic as you're making it out to be and not in a cartridge with the pressure of 22LR. You're not comparing a $50 Saturday night special to a $1000 super pistol in comparing a Buckmark to a Ruger Mk pistol.
Click to expand...

If you're just saying the Buckmark in particular will go for extended round counts, I'm sure you're right -- its block of aluminum is quite chunky and I can believe it. The thing is, since I own one, I know how they age under sub-standard care and attention. The aluminum frame does the usual aluminum frame stuff -- the sharp edges have lost their black anodizing, and it looks rather ugly. The steel parts developed some pretty heavy rust at one point, and required some heavy mechanical cleaning, which damaged the bluing in some areas. The round count has not been the limiting factor on the way my personal example has aged. I'm sure there are some modern variations that would do better.

I have other .22 pistols that I like for "reasonable" round counts, and less abusive treatment. Since I'm now thinking in terms of something that will last for the full long haul, I'm thinking full stainless construction is desirable. I could be wrong, since I've never had a stainless MK II, but I have the impression that it's the best I'm likely to do with this kind of durability in mind.
 
As long as you understand that stainless is rust resistant, not rust proof. Nor is it impervious from wear. What you're describing, decades of use and heavy use at that with frequent camping trips, will lead to scratches, scuffs, etc. Those are spots that can still rust, certainly more than aluminum. Even a pistol with a stainless slide/upper and frame likely has non-stainless internal parts. Those can and will rust if not cleaned and lubricated, at least periodically. You make it sounds like you want it to take decades of use with a certain degree of neglect and yet never rust and never show any wear. I don't know of any pistol that will do that. If your argument is that the stainless Ruger Mk pistol will hold up to that wear better then that may be true, just understand that even better will not be pristine.
 
Simple, stainless MK II. And don't rule out the bull barrels. My 5" target model shoots amazingly. At 15 yds I can shoot a 1" dot completely out of the paper by just picking at the small pieces as they are remaining on the target. Of course this is on a really good day.
 
Circa 1975, my dad bought a Ruger Standard Model 4” 22 from an acquaintance, for $40. I took it with me when I went to college, where it served as my SD pistol. Living on the edge of town, I found I could walk out my front door, hike a mile, and shoot my Ruger as much as I wanted, and I did.
I’ve continued to shoot it ever since.
That Standard Model had thousands of trouble free rounds through it before I ever took it apart to clean it properly. I honestly don’t recall it ever jamming or failing to fire, but I have always used mostly CCI products.
As for newer guns, I did buy a Ruger SR22 shortly after they were introduced, and it has been a very satisfactory shooter. I’ve put a few thousand rounds through it without issue...stingers, minimags, and Aguila’s hot Interceptor and Supermax loads...no failures whatsoever. The known problem of the takedown latch breaking worries me, but I have run an 0-ring on the recoil spring as a buffer almost since it was new, and I don’t see any cracking. And I do look at it after every Range Trip.
 
Last edited:
My MKII was my second or third pistol. I was intimidated by the takedown which was pretty complicated compared to My first, a P22, or second, a Glock. I probably put 5k rounds through it before it was cleaned and it ran just fine. Accuracy did improve once cleaned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top