User Panel
Posted: 1/17/2016 8:36:29 PM EDT
The first .22 pistol I shot was a Ruger MKII my neighbor had when I was a kid.
I went through all of the tacticool .22lrs, all junk, inaccurate and jam-o-matics. Then I ended up with my MK III hunter. A few months ago I held a Buckmark... Now Ive had dirty thoughts about another pistol... ...I just found they have buckmark pistols and rifles... |
|
I went thru the same experience back in the 80's when I discovered Buckmarks. I saw the light.
|
|
I've owned both. I only own Rugers now. If you've got the scratch, nothing wrong with picking up a Buck Mark. Personally, I think the Ruger is the better pistol. Maybe not quite as elegant as the Buck Mark, but more durable and more of a selection of aftermarket parts in my opinion. I REALLY don't like how you have to remove the rear sight base and sight to fully disassemble for cleaning on the Buck Mark. Screws have a tendency to work loose too.
|
|
I own all sorts of rimfire pistols. I really like my Buckmark (5.5 Target), but I really wish a screw wasn't necessary to strip it. I also like the Ruger being all steel. I know it doesn't make difference in a rimfire, but that's what I like. I would say the Buckmark is more refined though.
Then I got a S&W 41... |
|
I really like my Buckmark. It improved my overall handgun shooting dramatically. I had the problem with the rear rail screw. I use locktite now. No problems since.
I want to get another 22 pistol of some kind. It will probably be a 1911 style, or the new Ruger. Hard choice. |
|
Ruger is a better pistol, durability and reliability.
Buckmark is still a decent 22. Get both. |
|
They both have their strengths and weaknesses but I wouldn't call either one necessarily "better". As for reliability, there are plenty of Buckmarks out there that have been 100% reliably and plenty of Ruger that have been jam-o-matics and vice versa.
Its all comes to what you plan to do with it, which specific models you are looking at and personal taste and a little bit of luck. |
|
I might have to rent one and shoot it a bit before I jump in...
|
|
Had both, only have Rugers now...
The Buckmark is a great gun, but I don't like that the barrel is held in by a screw...a steel screw, into an aluminium frame. I didn't like that you have to remove the rear sight and barrel to properly clean it (well, to ME, properly clean it). YMMV obviously; if you're one who doesn't scrub their guns detailed clean every time you take it to the range, or is content with a boresnake to clean a barrel, then you won't have an issue. Me...I'm one of those "carbon attracts moisture which attracts rust" people, so I always detail clean everything after a range trip. Having said that, the Buckmark does have a lot of things going for it. I really liked mine. I just didn't like how it disassembled. Then again I'm one of those guys who has no issues with stripping a Ruger, unlike some folks who find re-assembling it requires some sort of witchcraft... |
|
I've also owned both. Some of the Buckmarks were beautiful guns, but I prefer the Rugers.
|
|
Love my 22/45, love my Buckmark, love my High Standards, love my model 41, love my.....22lr's...
When it comes to 22's, variety is the spice of life for me. I love them all equally. |
|
I am with 724 on this- while I can do quite nicely with just a couple carry guns .22's you can't have too many. I am a fan of old school all steel classics and at one time or another have owned high standards model 41's Colt woodsman smith 422 smith revolvers and some others I don't recall plus conversion kits for some of the centerfires. For me while I throughly enjoy shooting other pistols, the .22's still are where my heart lies.
|
|
We have both in our club. Tens of thousands for rounds through them. The Rugers hold up better to long term abuse. The Buckmarks are "nicer" if that makes any sense.
|
|
Quoted:
The first .22 pistol I shot was a Ruger MKII my neighbor had when I was a kid. I went through all of the tacticool .22lrs, all junk, inaccurate and jam-o-matics. Then I ended up with my MK III hunter. A few months ago I held a Buckmark... Now Ive had dirty thoughts about another pistol... ...I just found they have buckmark pistols and rifles... View Quote Step in to the light. They are just amazing guns and better than the Rugers IMO Just don't shoot a S&W 617 then you will forget about rimfire autos. Ask me how I know. |
|
The Buckmark is held together by two screws that also hold the sight base in place. The Ruger is held together by a massive steel latch integrated into the mainspring housing. Also, the Ruger barrel is screwed into a concentric tubular receiver that receives a cylindrical bolt. It can never wear out, always remains aligned, won't shake itself apart, and can be stripped without tools. The Browning has a better trigger.
|
|
I own both, and like both.
I prefer the Buckmark as it has been more dependable than the Rugers I own. The Rugers have more after-market parts available. I shoot a lot and will never be able to wear either one of them out. Hold them both and pick the one you like! |
|
I own a Buckmark & love the feel & balance. I don't field strip mine to clean it, so the screw removal is moot for me. I've also had Ruger owners outshoot their own guns the first time they used my Buckmark. They were not pleased but were surprised.
There's a reason there's a slew of aftermarket options for the Rugers: it needs them! |
|
I've got 3 Buckmarks. Don't own any Rugers anymore.
Buckmarks are a little more ammo sensitive, but I thinks that's a bi-product of 22lr inconsistencies. Ever since I started running a can I have had zero failures other than the occasional dud primer ignition. I found Buckmarks more ergonomic. And you don't need to be a wizard/machinist/guy with big pipe wrench to change a Buckmark barrel (ask me how I know) |
|
I "Got Both" and ended up selling the Buckmark after a few years because the aluminum frame was starting to show wear. My Mk II is at around 80,000 rounds and does show wear but not the type that will eventually effect function.
|
|
Quoted:
I've owned both. I only own Rugers now. If you've got the scratch, nothing wrong with picking up a Buck Mark. Personally, I think the Ruger is the better pistol. Maybe not quite as elegant as the Buck Mark, but more durable and more of a selection of aftermarket parts in my opinion. I REALLY don't like how you have to remove the rear sight base and sight to fully disassemble for cleaning on the Buck Mark. Screws have a tendency to work loose too. View Quote This, and I like and own Buckmarks. On the other hand, they are a very open design. This makes it very easy to spray them out, lube them, use q-tips on them, and run a boresnake. There is little need to completely disassemble the pistol. They now use allen head fasteners. A small drop of locktite helps, but just a bit. The idea is to make it not back out, not lock it down. |
|
Quoted:
Had both, only have Rugers now... The Buckmark is a great gun, but I don't like that the barrel is held in by a screw...a steel screw, into an aluminium frame. I didn't like that you have to remove the rear sight and barrel to properly clean it (well, to ME, properly clean it). YMMV obviously; if you're one who doesn't scrub their guns detailed clean every time you take it to the range, or is content with a boresnake to clean a barrel, then you won't have an issue. Me...I'm one of those "carbon attracts moisture which attracts rust" people, so I always detail clean everything after a range trip. Having said that, the Buckmark does have a lot of things going for it. I really liked mine. I just didn't like how it disassembled. Then again I'm one of those guys who has no issues with stripping a Ruger, unlike some folks who find re-assembling it requires some sort of witchcraft... View Quote I would say the same applies to me. I had to come to terms with not disassembling the gun every time I shot it. The gun seems to work well without tearing it down. But, it has taken be a bit to get used to the idea with my BuckMarks. I would also agree that the Rugers are not bad, though some have fits with them. I do think it is best to pick one platform between these and stick with it. |
|
Quoted:
The Buckmark is held together by two screws that also hold the sight base in place. The Ruger is held together by a massive steel latch integrated into the mainspring housing. Also, the Ruger barrel is screwed into a concentric tubular receiver that receives a cylindrical bolt. It can never wear out, always remains aligned, won't shake itself apart, and can be stripped without tools. The Browning has a better trigger. View Quote How does one change the barrel on a Ruger? |
|
Quoted:
I own both, and like both. I prefer the Buckmark as it has been more dependable than the Rugers I own. The Rugers have more after-market parts available. I shoot a lot and will never be able to wear either one of them out. Hold them both and pick the one you like! View Quote I really like the Ruger design. But, during an extended shooting session, I just spray the Buckmark out and it keeps running. |
|
Every time I see Buckmark thread I am amazed that no ever mentions it's habit of peppering the shooter's face with powder. I have owned both the pistol and carbine versions of the action and they both relentlessly spit powder back at the shooters face. They are ammo picky, the bolt face get fouled easily and they are no were near as rugged as Ruger MK pistol. They are gone now for that reason and the screwed together aluminum construction. One can customize a Ruger in every way imaginable, they are ruggedly built and reliable and they do not spit powder at you. |
|
I've never experienced the powder spitting problem. None of ones I have shot exhibited that including my own.
I can say the same for the "picky ammo" situation. However, I have heard some people say that about the Buckmarks... and the Rugers. I have a relative that just recently traded his way out of a 22/45 because of issues he had with it. He sent it in to Ruger for repairs knowing he would never be comfortable with it. After he got it back, he traded it away. I have seen Rugers get gunked up in long shooting sessions as they have a far more enclosed action. Then again, I tend to like an enclosed action on a combat pistol. (The Ruger being like a typical 9 or 45, and Buckmarks being open like a Beretta 9.) I know if I had those problems with the Buckmarks, I would certainly not keep them. The whole Ruger versus Browning seems to be like Chevy versus Ford. It is going to come down to personal experiences. The situation is strange. There is a strong aftermarket for Rugers. Yet, it is Browning who's components are easier to switch out, such as the barrel. I like my Buckmarks. I love the triggers. On the other hand, to me, it appears Ruger has more suppressor ready hosts from the factory. Neither can match a S&W 41. Yet, guess which of my 22 pistols get shot more. I think I could live with either Rugers or Browings 22s. I just have ended up falling in love with the Brownings first. |
|
Quoted: I own all sorts of rimfire pistols. I really like my Buckmark (5.5 Target), but I really wish a screw wasn't necessary to strip it. I also like the Ruger being all steel. I know it doesn't make difference in a rimfire, but that's what I like. I would say the Buckmark is more refined though. Then I got a S&W 41... View Quote |
|
My Dad has a Stainless Mark II w\bull barrel and I have newer Buckmark URX practical and we shot a lot of rounds through them this weekend. Both are accurate and ran flawless with cheap CCI blazers. I like the Buckmark's factory fiber optic FS, trigger, thumb safety, mag release, and ergonomics by far. The ruger is well built but I don't like the button safety or slide release controls, trigger, mag release at the bottom of the frame, or the grip angle, & ergonomics.
If you shoot 1911's a lot you would probably prefer the Buckmark since the grip angle is closer and the controls are similar. |
|
Quoted:
The first .22 pistol I shot was a Ruger MKII my neighbor had when I was a kid. I went through all of the tacticool .22lrs, all junk, inaccurate and jam-o-matics. Then I ended up with my MK III hunter. A few months ago I held a Buckmark... Now Ive had dirty thoughts about another pistol... ...I just found they have buckmark pistols and rifles... View Quote Welcome to shoot mine OP. I really like it. Where are you in VA? Hate Ruger disassembly. |
|
Quoted:
Regarding grip angles and mag releases, there is the 22/45. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
If you shoot 1911's a lot you would probably prefer the Buckmark since the grip angle is closer and the controls are similar. Regarding grip angles and mag releases, there is the 22/45. I tried the 22/45 but hated the polymer frame. It's too top heavy and it still has the push button safety and slide stop. Ruger might be built stronger but it's a 22 and I don't believe it will matter in the long term. Barrels still have a life cycle as well as other components so it was a non factor in my decision. There is also more aftermarket available for the Ruger but I don't think the Buckmark needs anything really. All I know is the Buckmark felt the best out of the 2 in my hands. Buy the one you like the most OP or get both. Can't go wrong either way. |
|
The issue with aluminium frames on the Buckmarks has me wondering. If I were to get rid of my aluminium framed 22s, then several others should go, such as my Sig 226. Oh, the ARs have go too. The Berettas are just paper weights. The "plastic fantastic" guns like my Glocks will be even worse; they will have to go into the trash.
I'm glad I've read about this. It really has me thinking. |
|
Quoted:
The issue with aluminium frames on the Buckmarks has me wondering. If I were to get rid of my aluminium framed 22s, then several others should go, such as my Sig 226. Oh, the ARs have go too. The Berettas are just paper weights. The "plastic fantastic" guns like my Glocks will be even worse; they will have to go into the trash. I'm glad I've read about this. It really has me thinking. View Quote Agree. People worry too much. Just keep it lubed and shoot it. I doubt those worrying about wearing out aluminum frames even shoot much. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.