User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 2:32:58 AM EDT
[#1]
Yes, the Ruger MKII or 22/45. Aesthetics were not even a factor for me when I bought my MKII. It has superb pointability, easy to strip without tools, reliable, and well supported by the aftermarket. I have a Clark trigger on mine and a Bowen rear sight. I'll put it up against anyone's buckmark anytime, anywhere. The Ruger design has been in production constantly for fifty-three years. Isn't that enough? However, you'll be a "man" in four days, so buy whatever makes you happy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 2:49:21 AM EDT
[#2]
I love my Buckmark. It is by far my favorite pistol thank to certain memories associated with it. You see - it seems the womenz dig it. CAF (Chick Acceptance Factor) is high. The best thing about .22 pistols and rifles is often the "introduce the new girl you met to shooting" factor. It has done it's job admirably - even got me laid once - many, many moons ago.
Your mileage may vary. Adam |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 2:50:43 AM EDT
[#3]
Damn, do you like your Ruger? This is why I posted this question. If I was 100% sure I wouldn't have asked your opinions. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 3:19:41 AM EDT
[#4]
You have understated the obvious, but yes, I firmly believe that the Ruger is without a doubt the BEST .22 autoloading pistol available. Mine got me a woman once, too. Now I just rely on my good looks. At one time AMT made barreled receivers for their Lightning pistols (copies of the Ruger) that will interchange on the Ruger grip frame, thereby expanding your options (they're grooved for a scope, too). If your mind's made up, then by all means get your Browning. If, however, you want a gun with staying power, versatility, and upgradeability, then get a Ruger. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 3:25:08 AM EDT
[#5]
BTW, I learned to shoot pistols on the Ruger Mk II. It is an excellent pistol - probably better, as Jim Dandy said, than the Browning. My main point was that they are both great guns and will provide years of satisfaction. I honeslty picked the Browning because it was available at the gun show at the time and it was sooo perty.
Both have great sights, triggers etc. Why can't someone make a rifle like that. The 10/22 with a trigger and sites comparable to the Mk II - does such exist? Adam |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 4:14:56 AM EDT
[#6]
I have a Buckmark that I love. as a matter of fact, it is one of my favorite pistols to shoot. Super reliable and accurate as hell. I have heard very good things about the Ruger MKII as well, but no personal experience with them. Really, I don't think you could go wrong with either. Just go with the one that feels the best in your hands.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:48:51 AM EDT
[#7]
Why the Browning is not as sweet as the Ruger:
1. Extra mags are more expensive, and you are going to want at least six extra mags. 2. You need an Allen wrench to take the damn Browning down. Then the screws tend to back out while you are firing the gun. The Browning is nice, and it has a nice trigger. But I'd rather have the Ruger, specifically the .22/45. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:51:35 AM EDT
[#8]
Well, I've got both. I bought the Ruger because everyone else said I should, I bought the Buckmark because I wanted it.
Accuracy and reliability are equal in my experience. As for staying power, nobody beats the Ruger. But there have been several "new" .22's intruduced in the past 10 years or so, and the Buckmark is the best of the lot. Most of the others are gone, but it's still going strong. The Buckmark gets the nod for ergonomoics, controls, and asthetics in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:59:31 AM EDT
[#9]
I've owned the ruger and shot the browning. The ruger was a very reliable, accurate pistol. The browning that i shot had a feed problem. Could've just been that one, the ammo we were shooting, the cleaning habits of the owner, etc. Having owned a 10/22 rifle influenced my decision. If I were to do it again, I'd go back to the ruger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 6:18:15 AM EDT
[#10]
I had both. I like the buckmark much better. IMO it is better than the Ruger. The ruger is way more difficult to really strip down then the buckmark. Both are good guns though opinions aside.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 7:47:56 AM EDT
[#11]
I sold my Buckmark and bought a Ruger Mk II earlier this year. The Buckmark was okay but mags were expensive and it's aluminum construction just doesn't stack up to the SS of the Ruger (which is built like a tank).
Beyond that I was finding that the steel takedown screws were gradually stripping out the aluminum threads in the reciever making the Buckmark's overall lifetime rather short. My gunsmith's answer was to 'not clean it as much'. My answer was to get a Ruger. Yeah, the ergonomics on the Buckmark were slightly better than the Ruger, especially the mag release. But the Ruger is definately more accurate in my hands. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 7:50:45 AM EDT
[#12]
I have owned both and they are both excellent pistols. The Ruger is probably more durable, but I prefer the feel of the Buckmark. The grip angle on the standard Ruger is all wrong to my hand and I don't like the top heavy feel of the plastic framed 22/45 that has a better grip angle. Neither gun is expensive so it's not really a major commitment either way. I shoot 1911s and the Buckmark feels more 1911 like. Some people have trouble getting a Ruger back together after disassembly. It isn't really that hard, but my brother-in-law will not disassable his Ruger for cleaning because he can't get it back together. Kinda sad. You will be well served by either pistol. Best. Watch-Six
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 8:03:26 AM EDT
[#13]
Alright, let me throw another name in the hat.
Last weekend I bought a Walther P22 Target. I've been really impressed with it so far. I've shot both the Ruger and the Browning (never owned them though) and I like the Walther better. It has alot of features. Loaded chamber indicator, 2 different grip sizes (interchangeable), ambidexterous mag release, integral lock, etc. etc. It's really easy to shoot and has a good feel to it. check it out at www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/1200/1204.htm Just my $0.02. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 9:10:53 AM EDT
[#14]
That's because you're not very mechanically inclined. When this forum was first started, there was a topic that went in depth, and I mean IN DEPTH towards breaking down and re-assembling the Ruger. It's not hard. In fact, it's pretty damned easy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 9:26:19 AM EDT
[#15]
Guntest did an article on the many .22 including the MKII, Buckmark, S&W(kinda looks liket he hi-standard with the polymer frame?). This was a few years ago.
They like the Buckmark the most, it is the most accurate. Personally, I would save the $$ and get a pre-sellout S&W model 41. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 9:48:24 AM EDT
[#16]
Mathew,
Just another Ruger endorsement. Love 'em. Easy to care for, shoot great. Get the Target model. The slabside with the target grips is great and out of the box fun to shoot. And as mentioned above - aftermarket stuff is available. James |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 10:18:22 AM EDT
[#17]
I have had the opportunity to shoot a few models of Buckmarks. From my experience they are incredibly accurate, have nice sights, great triggers. Like any 22 they jam if not meticulously maintained. My advice is if you get one do not get the target model.........they suck. All the extras on the target model are very poorly designed. Another thing worth noting is that Brownings service center blows........ If I was gonna buy a new 22 I would get the S&W 41, but that is obviously out of your price range, and my second choice would be the Ruger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 11:33:55 AM EDT
[#18]
YellowLab must have been reading my mind. although i will add that the Ruger firearms that i have had experience with were phenomenal. i wouldn't expect anything different from the MkII. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 12:09:14 PM EDT
[#19]
Huh? I don't think I cleaned my Mk II in 4 + years of shooting (nothing besides occasionally brushing and swabbing - no desassembly anyway). My buckmark I have treated the same way. No jams yet, thousands of rounds trough it. Adam |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 12:11:02 PM EDT
[#20]
One word.. Sweet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 12:19:43 PM EDT
[#21]
Buy a Ruger and then keep an eye out for one of the AMT barreled receivers. Save up and have an integral suppressor (Gem-Tech) installed on the AMT. Now you've got two pretty nifty guns in one. More versatile than the Browning. 'nuff said.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 12:30:10 PM EDT
[#22]
go with the ruger........cheaper mags,more stuff out there for the ruger......
buckmarks......imo.suck the mag release spring is plastic and WILL break............ 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 12:47:28 PM EDT
[#23]
The browning buckmark series is an excellent pistol.
I used a 5.5 gold target in 22 bullseye competition for years with good results before upgrading to a S&W model 41. the buck mark didnt wear outi just couldnt squeeze anymore accuracy out of it maybe one of these days upgrade drom there to a pardini HOWEVER.... I would highly suggest you spend the extra coin and purchase one of the 5.5 Target models.as opposed to a plane buckmark or buckmark plus. You get more options for you money with the 5.5 . Their the ones with the walnut target grips, bull barrel, scope/sight ramp they also come with an adjustable trigger. just a thought you may want to look at the hammerli 22 trailside too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 1:00:25 PM EDT
[#24]
You must be the only one on earth that has experienced this success. Most serious shooters will tell you to break down your 22's frequently. This is primarily due to the "cheepness" of 22 ammo. I am glad to hear your guns are so reliable, but I know that this is not typical of most. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 1:10:01 PM EDT
[#25]
The one thing I truly hated about the 5.5 Target was the sight hoods. I talked with Browning and there was no good way to remove the hood without scaring the finish on the scope rail. It just so happens that to break down the gun you have to remove hood to loosen the allen screw at the back of the rail. Very poor design. The grips are nice, but for a serious bullseye shooter custom Fung grips are better. As for the Trailside, it is a great gun. It has gotten good reviews. If I am correct however it is made by Sig Sauer not Hammerli. And yes they are different companies. The only connection that I know of is that Hammerli machines the barrels for Sig pistols. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 1:14:48 PM EDT
[#26]
Well I've got a few comments given all the rhetoric ...
I'm not sure what you folks consider expensive for magazines, but Buckmark Mags are not really big dollars. Try Glock Mags, or real pre-ban mags for my STI Limited Gun - over $100 a pop. Buckmark mag release spring - mine is a flat spring steel spring not plastic. Accuracy - Rugers, Buckmarks, Sig Trailside, Colt Woodsman are all about the same. I feel that the best accuracy for the dollar, something that will outshoot most folks is a good S&W Model 41. If you want olympic accuracy you get into a custom high standard (I know they are no longer made), Walther, Pardini, Hammerli, etc. Takedown - S&W 41 is positively the easiest in existance, I can field strip my 41s in well under 10 seconds (magazine out, bolt back, trigger guard down, barrel up, bolt off). Ruger gets easier the more times you do it, buckmark requires tools. Ergonomics - By far the largest weighting factor when selecting a handgun should be how it points/handles for it's primary owner. I'm a 1911 kinda guy ... 11 degree grip angle for me. The S&W and the Buckmark are closest to the 1911 and therefore get the ergo nod for me. If you prefer a steeper grip angle, the standard mark II is a good choice, I think the .22/45 plastic frame is kinda cheesy. Ryan |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 1:41:55 PM EDT
[#27]
I have to agree with CR. I own one of each, and prefer shooting the Buckmark, BUT the design is a POS. Can't tighten the allen screws too much or the slide quits working. Use locktight to keep the screws in place. Can't imagine what the designers were smoking when this was designed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 1:46:55 PM EDT
[#28]
I agree totaly on the sight hoods they are a pain. On the sight rail though, every browning has its quirts, thats part of their charm  you are also correct about the trailside. I looked it up on www.sigarms.com and it was stated that hammerli merly designed the pistol. Thanks for keeping me honest fung grips? You got a link? Ive been using morini 208 style (man size) grips on my 41. but they have always been quite snug for me. causing that damm heel on the rear of the 41 frame to push quite agressively on that big muscle inbetween my trigger finger and thumb. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 2:54:03 PM EDT
[#29]
po89mm,
Do I have a link?.....but of course. I have a link to everything! I think if you look at these grips you will agree that they are awesome. They are completely adjustable and look sharp. However, like the 41 they are not cheap. Gonna set you back 145 bucks.....if Randall is still alive . Take a look.www.jnb.com/~funggrip/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 3:03:07 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 4:01:41 PM EDT
[#31]
i have a buckmark bullseye with 7" fluted bull barrel and rosewood grips, cant get much better for the money. however, the new thing on the market is the 22 conversion for your 45 caliber 1911. its the conversion by Marvel. a little costly, but you can get your trigger down to a pound and the accuracy is guarenteed to be less than 1 moa at 50 YARDS. bullseye shooters are looking to this conversion now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:09:37 PM EDT
[#32]
My wife and I each have a Buckmark for pin shooting (one Challenge and one 5.5 Field).
The big selling points for me over the Ruger were: - Fit in hand - Controls in "right place" (Ruger "European" mag release on bottom of grip was just too unnatural). At about 2000 rounds, they've starting having failures to fire. Haven't done a full takedown and cleaning on them yet, but hopefully this will be easy to fix, as I've heard rumors that their repair facilities are a bit slow. At our club, the pinshooters are primarily using Rugers or revolvers - I've only seen two or three other Buckmarks. All (Buckmarks, revolvers, Rugers) have performed well. I think it really comes down to personal preference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:13:52 PM EDT
[#33]
xring,
those fung grips are almost identical to my morini's. but the fungs are a lot more sexy  lets see IF can post a pic of my baby... ttp://community.webshots.com/storage/1/v1/4/59/10/28445910MALrSyVDVB_ph.jpg[/img or http://community.webshots.com/storage/1/v1/4/59/10/28445910MALrSyVDVB_ph.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:28:32 PM EDT
[#34]
grrrrrrr
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 5:47:05 PM EDT
[#35]
I took my ruger markII to the range yesterday. Its a stainless steel with a 10 inch bull barrel. At 100 yards, off sand bags I was getting ten shot groups measuring between seven and nine inches. This was at zero degrees F. and no gloves. My gloved finger would not fit in the trigger guard. This is with the standard factory sights. I wonder if this is standard accuracy with this type of firearm? The fellas next to me with scoped deer rifles were not impressed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 6:32:22 PM EDT
[#36]
Just my opinion, I have fired both over the years but I chose to buy the Buckmark. I just found it more appealing. Either should give a lifetime of service.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 6:46:10 PM EDT
[#37]
Gee, those are such ideal conditions. I'm surprised you weren't shooting sub-MOA groups. Buy the Ruger. Rimfire pistols come and go (High Standard, AMT, etc.), but the Ruger remains. Small wonder. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 7:05:15 PM EDT
[#38]
I hadn't realized that could be an issue, but the ammo "cheapness" may actually have had a lot to do with it. Rarely did anything but match grade ammo go throught the Ruger. Maybe my Buckmark is at the point where it will start failing on me? (if I ever get to home to shoot it!) Adam |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 9:11:17 PM EDT
[#39]
Jim_Dandy
I have to take what range days I can get. Would you believe I had the range to myself for over four hours. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2002 9:34:26 PM EDT
[#40]
D348,
I think you will have better results if you take the Ruger out under slightly less adverse conditions! OTOH, you could further challenge yourself by sighting the pistol in the reflection of a mirror or something. As a wild guess, I imagine that your bullet drop would be about 1-1.5 feet at 100 yds. Pistol = Fun Toy Also, while there are no doubt people who can do wonderful things with a .22 pistol, 7 inches at 100 yards doesn't sound that bad especially considering a short sight radius and the implication that you haven't shot with the pistol much at that range. Try shooting some steel plates. That will make you forget about paper targets. Sounds to me like you did fine! I have had a couple of problems with Mark IIs, but accuracy has not been one of them. They are no Erma or Hammerli, but I didn't pay Euro prices for them either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2002 3:38:37 AM EDT
[#41]
po89mm,
I don't have the Fung grips, but I wish I did. I plan on ordering a set in the next couple months. The one thing I do have that I like a lot is a Clark Custom barrel. I like the fact that the optic rail is milled into the barrel. Looks sharp and I get better accuracy from the match barrel over the stock smith barrel. Looking at your setup though this would not be an option since they only offer a 5.5". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2002 3:59:33 PM EDT
[#42]
Is the clark really a custom barrel, I thought Clark was just buying factory barrels from Smith, milling in the sight rail and refinishing it? Answered my own question ... the blanks are rifled by S&W and Clark reams a match chamber and target crown. Ryan |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2002 5:18:48 PM EDT
[#43]
I have been fortunate to own Rugers, Buckmarks, and 41's over the years. If you are buying new, I'd get the Ruger or the S&W because of the higher resale value (if you ever decide to sell). If you are buying used, the Buckmark will offer the best value for the money (unless someone is willing to take a bath on the Ruger or S&W). If you have the opportunity, try all three and see which you prefer. Most of the comments you have heard are true, but there is some bias showing through. When I shoot rimfire pin matches, I'll probably use a Buckmark first, S&W second and Ruger third. I'd buy any of them if the price is right. Pays your money and take your chances.
SRM |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2002 4:08:13 PM EDT
[#44]
Just to update all I bought a Browning Buckmark Standard today. Thanks for all the info. That does suck though that you have to have an allen wrench to break it down. Oh well, hope to take it to the range this week.
P.S. I will take the advice to buy all three, it will just take me a little while to do.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
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.
