Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 5/10/2001 12:30:38 PM EST
i asked this a good while back and got some good input, but wanted to see if i could get more input since the trailside has been out some time now. how does it stack up against the ruger 22/45? i'm looking for an accurate, yet reliable .22 pistol. i've had some concerns over the plastic mags. the thing fits my hand liek a glove (much better then the ruger) but then again i don't want an unreliable .22. in my opinion a .22 is a work type of gun that you keep around and expect to go bang when you need it to. i know the rugers are reliable but like i said earlier, i'm unsure about the trailsides. thanks again. sloth
Link Posted: 5/10/2001 1:05:18 PM EST
Link Posted: 5/29/2001 10:20:41 AM EST
btt...the funds are starting to come together for this little project. so any imput would be appreciated. what do you think if i threw a browning buckmark into the list? experiences, opinions? also i found a trailside that was traded at my local gunshop. it is the 4.5 inch target model and is selling for $350. good or bad deal? again thanks, sloth
Link Posted: 5/29/2001 11:23:36 AM EST
22/45 torments stationary clay pigeons, in spite of the simple sights. I don't know anything about the Trailside, but I recall reading some unpleasant things like peeling finish and broken slides. I think somebody else posted on that. I hear great things about the Buckmark's accuracy, but I'd still only consider the Ruger. They work, they are tough, and they are accurate. Make sure you set aside a couple of thorazines and a couple of days the first few times you try to dissemble the Ruger, though. Why mess with success, unless you want something "different."
Link Posted: 5/29/2001 11:34:14 AM EST
Short version of a long story. Bought a new Trailside. Many problems. Sent it back to SIG. They replaced it. New one was better, but also started jamming. Probably those plastic mags. The gun itself is beautiful. Sold Trailside. Bought a new Buckmark to replace the one I had sold to get the SIG. Happy ending. The Rugers I have owned have also been great guns, and are probably more durable than the Buckmarks. I don't like the plastic lower on the 22/45 or the grip angle on the standard Ruger. That is why I went back to the Buckmark.
Link Posted: 5/29/2001 11:55:28 AM EST
Bought a Sig Trailside last year, before the handgun DOJ fiasco here in CA. Don't regret it for one second. The Sig Trailside are assembled and fitted by hand. They are EXTREMELY accurate. As for reliability, that I'm unsure. I don't have more than 50 rounds through mine, but love it both times I've shot it. SIG DOES NOT MAKE JUNK! For $350, it's a good buy. Early versions had mag problems...solved by now. If you want a REALLY durable trail/backpack gun, the Beretta 87 Cheetah is outstanding. ***ptp
Link Posted: 5/29/2001 12:13:33 PM EST
I have the 4 inch Trailside with fixed sights, have quite a few hundred rounds through it so far, everything from Winchester to cheap Russian ammo, not a single problem yet. Also, some of the groups I have shot with this thing have just totally impressed me and my buddies. I have also had the Browning auto, and it was a very fine gun as are the Ruger's. The one thing that I like about my Trailside is the size, it is a small trim holster gun, just what I wanted for having with me when I am out in the bush. Tuco
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 5:35:24 AM EST
thanks all for the input. i'm going to goto the indy 1500 gun show this weekend at the state fairgrounds. with any luck grand inspiration will strike me and i will just know which one i should buy. again thanks. sloth
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 5:56:05 AM EST
I'd skip the Buckmark. A friend of mine has one and because it disassembles by unscrewing screws, they, of course, come unscrewed when you don't want them to. It does have a nice trigger though. Also the Ruger mags are cheaper and you are going to want a half-dozen or so.
Top Top