.22 LR pistol: Buckmark or Ruger

S

Spydiefan04

Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
819
I already have a 1911, so I've been thinking about maybe getting a Ruger 22/45 Mark III or a Mark III or a Browning Buckmark, I just can't decide which one I want. I have seen the Mark III and Buckmark and like the Buckmark better but have never fired either. Also the 22/45 appeals to me for mimicking the grip of a 1911. Any reviews or opinions would be appreciated.
 
Both are great guns. Shoot both. Pick the one that feels better in your hand.

That's how I picked the Browning, and I've been very happy with it.
 
johnniet said:
Both are great guns. Shoot both. Pick the one that feels better in your hand.

That's how I picked the Browning, and I've been very happy with it.
Click to expand...

Very good advice. I picked a MKII Ruger over the Browning because it fit me better, and a Ruger MKI started it all for me. However, my brother along with my best friend went with a Browning over the Ruger.
 
It kinda depends on your priorities. If you're numero uno mission is to mimic the grip of a 1911, the Ruger 22/45 is your gun of choice. (even though they've never felt good in my hand, and I've spent quite a bit of trigger time behind a 1911) But, then if that were a priority a .22LR conversion for your 1911 would seem the way to go.

As far as Browning Vs. Ruger...well....If ya' look at the thread below I rant and rave about my Ruger Mk I quite a bit, but....that's mainly from a standpoint of sentimental value. in handling qualities, it falls far behind my wifes Micro Buckmark. In the area of inherent accuracy, it falls a smidge behind, in dependability, they're both excellent, but the nod there would go to my Ruger. For ease of maintenance the Buckmark gets a big nod over the ruger. Oh, an idiosyncracy on the buckmark is that the slide can be a bugger to cock, especially if dryfired (on empty .22 brass, so as not to damage your firing pin) The Rugers alot easier to cock, especially if you have large forepaws. As I recall, there's alot more of a gadget market aimed at the Rugers than the Buckmarks as well.

The most recent production trigger I've fired on a Ruger had a pretty rough trigger also. Whereas I've had gunsmiths look at my wifes Buckmark and wonder how the hell it got out of the factory with a trigger that light. (it is a very sweet trigger) The trigger on my buddy's Buckmark isn't much heavier.

So, here's the breakdown of my experience

Ruger- slightly more reliable, more sturdy,

Buckmark- better ergonomics (for me) and more inherently accurate (by just a little)

You really can't go wrong with either of them, about all I can say is paw 'em both at your local gun shop and see what you think.
 
shappa said:
Spydie, how did you come down to your choices?
Click to expand...

Well, at first I WAS looking at a .22 conversion kit for my Colt BUT after finding out I could buy another gun for about the same price I decided to do that. At my local gunshop I was able to handle both the Mark II/Mark III and Buckmark, preferred the Browning but all 3 were impressive. Haven't seen a 22/45 but am interested bc of the 1911 mimicking grip. I want a good semi-auto that shoots cheap 22 ammo.
 
The most accurate .22 pistol I own, indeed the most accurate pistol I own period, is a Marvel .22 conversion unit I have permanently mounted on a Springfield 1911 frame that I had worked over by a local smith. I've used the conversion unit with several different 1911 frames, and it's always accurate. I did some careful bench comparisons at 15 yards with six grades of Eley ammo, and while the Practice ammo (the cheapest) shoots great, the Tenex (top of the line) was so accurate it was eerie. Also, by replacing the top rib, I can switch the Marvel from standard sights to a scope in about ten minutes. I have a Buckmark Camper (the cheapest one), also, which shoots quite well, but for a 1911 shooter, I can't recommend the Marvel highly enough.
 
When the Buckmark first came out about 15-20 yrs ago, I read several reports on its fickle reliability. Everyone now claims they are great guns.

I have a Ruger MKII Gov't Target model and it is quite accurate and easy to shoot. I don't believe it has ever jammed except with CCI Stingers, which are actually slightly longer than regular .22LR rounds.
 
I have a strong sentimental attachment to the MKI/II, so I'm kinda biased. In the interests of objectivity, a good friend has a 22/45 that I've put rounds through, and it's a great, accurate pistol. He too got it because it mimiced the angle of his beloved Kimber and he wanted to stop going,'BANG .25cents BANG .50cents BANG .75cents ...' when he was working out with the .45.

Dad picked up a Walther P22 a while back, "for Mom", and it's also a great shooting little pistol, worth including in your pre purchase range trials. Dad and I have big hands, Mom's are fairly small, but all of us get pretty good mileage out of it, nice ergos.
 
komondor said:
I have a Ruger MKII Gov't Target model and it is quite accurate and easy to shoot.
Click to expand...

Ditto. My Govt Model shoots far better than I can...

Nails thumbtacks at 25 yds with consistency.
 
Ruger, hands-down. The OLD High-Standard Throphy models were pretty darn good, too.
 
I have the Buckmark with a red dot sight on it. It is a real tack driver and great for squirrels. I would recommend them highly. (I like the action similarities with other autos including the mag release.)
 
Just as said before, try each on for size. When I went shopping for a .22 pistol, I tried the Buckmark & the Mark II, both w/ approx. 5.5" barrel. I found that the Buckmark pointed better, had a much better trigger, and nicer sights - in my opinion. Firing them side-by-side - I had better groups off the bat w/ the buckmark. I also liked that the buckmark had very similar controls to my 9mm.

I went w/ the buckmark and am very pleased (with thousands of rounds down-range, it's proven very reliable & accurate).

Downsides to the buckmark is that there are much fewer accessories, and mags are a bit harder to find.

I don't think you could claim either as being significantly better than the other (objectively), but I felt that the Buckmark covered what I wanted in a .22 pistol completely (and at about a $50 savings over the comparable Ruger - but prices have since seemed to level out), whereas the Ruger didn't.

Sam
 
I prefer the Buckmark for ease of takedown, mag release location, and sweet trigger.

Regards,

Jeremy
 
Jerok said:
I prefer the Buckmark for ease of takedown, mag release location, and sweet trigger.
Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly. I HATE the mag release on the Rugers. The Browning feels much better in my hand and is amazingly accurate. I have the basic modelbut would like to one day add a longer bull barrel target version with the adjustable trigger and put a scope on it, but for now the plain model does me just fine.

Everyone I know who has a Mk I/II/III complains about what a pain it is to break down for cleaning.

YMMV.

John
 
I've heard the Rugers were hard to take down before, is the Browning that much easier? Also I MUCH prefer the grip angle/position of the Browning as well as the mag release on it. Was just wondering about the 22/45 which I haven't ever seen or held?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top