Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/24/2017 4:44:23 PM
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 10/18/2004 6:43:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/18/2004 7:53:33 PM EST by fizassist]
Howdy folks,
I'm looking for a reliable .22 LR pistol that can easily be adapted for suppressor use (1/2"x28). I have a P-22, and it's a jam-o-matic. Clean, dirty, it doesn't matter. I have the newst mags, I've polished the feed ramp, I've beefed up the extractor spring, I've tried every ammo I can get my hands on. It still sucks for reliability. I know there are folks out there who swear by their P22s, and I'm happy for them, but mine ain't like that.
Does anybody have any suggestions for a reliable .22 pistol?

Thanks,
fiz
Link Posted: 10/18/2004 7:03:19 PM EST
My buckmark has never choked on me in over 30k rounds. You could have it turned down and threaded
Link Posted: 10/18/2004 7:46:23 PM EST

Originally Posted By LHD:
My buckmark has never choked on me in over 30k rounds. You could have it turned down and threaded



I've got a Ruger MkII that's the same way. Either of those would be excellent.
Link Posted: 10/18/2004 7:48:12 PM EST
I was going to say dont get a P22, but I see you already know that.

I hate mine too
Link Posted: 10/18/2004 8:01:00 PM EST

Originally Posted By Taxman:
I was going to say dont get a P22, but I see you already know that.

I hate mine too



Well, at least it's better than the POS Glock 19 conversion I had from Ceiner. That thing wouldn't fire 2 consecutive rounds to save its life. I finally tuned it to the point where I could get a whole mag to go without jamming.
Link Posted: 10/18/2004 8:36:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/18/2004 8:37:09 PM EST by Scollins]
I've got a Ruger Mark II with a 4.5" Pac-Lite threaded upper. It has been 100% so far, but I've only put 100 rounds through it (with a Gemtech Outback II.) Before that, the factory 5.5" upper performed flawlessly, with or without the suppressor, for 1,000's of rounds. Mine (both factory and the Pac-lite) like Aquila Sub Sonic, which is nice because it is cheap. A little dirty, but at $1.69 or less per 50, I can clean the gun....

The Pac-Lite is THE shit in my opinion. Switching to it saved me 15 oz over the all steel 5.5" bull. It is by no means cheap (I paid $300 for the upper after tax, plus the cost of the original Mark II, $250, minus the cost of the factory upper, -$145.) I sold the factory upper to a friend. I'm into the "new" gun for about $400. www.tacticalsol.com/products/PAC-LITEs.htm

A thread job on a Mark II barrel will run around $65 from a Gemtech certified dealer....

Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:11:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By Scollins:
The Pac-Lite is THE shit in my opinion. Switching to it saved me 15 oz over the all steel 5.5" bull. It is by no means cheap (I paid $300 for the upper after tax, plus the cost of the original Mark II, $250, minus the cost of the factory upper, -$145.) I sold the factory upper to a friend. I'm into the "new" gun for about $400. www.tacticalsol.com/products/PAC-LITEs.htm



That does look nice. Is the threaded end steel or aluminum?
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:12:28 AM EST
BTW, do you Mark II guys have an opinion on the 22/45?
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 5:17:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:
BTW, do you Mark II guys have an opinion on the 22/45?





I like mine. I just picked it up a few days ago. I prefered it over the Mark II for the mag release.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:26:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:


That does look nice. Is the threaded end steel or aluminum?



The threads are anodized aluminum, like the rest of the upper. The barrel is steel lined, and I wish the threads were steel too. I took it to my Gemtech dealer (who also does R&D work for Gemtech) and he said while he would have preferred the threads to be steel, the aluminum threads will be fine, just to be careful. "Don't torque the can on with a pipe wrench or anything, and you should be fine."

The length of the threads of the Pac-Lite are longer than the length of the threads that were put on the original steel upper. That gives them much more bearing surface, and spreads the load over more area. I think that should prevent any problems with the aluminum threads.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 2:25:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By MadProfessor:

Originally Posted By fizassist:
BTW, do you Mark II guys have an opinion on the 22/45?





I like mine. I just picked it up a few days ago. I prefered it over the Mark II for the mag release.



Ruger just came out with the MK III. The regular version now has the button mag release behind the trigger guard along with the 22/45.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:44:23 PM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:
BTW, do you Mark II guys have an opinion on the 22/45?



I have the same Q.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:50:36 PM EST
I had a 22/45 suppressed because of the mag release...I wound up not liking it. The best .22 pistol for a muzzle can, IMO, is the heavy Mk2 stainless cut to 4" and threaded. That keeps high velocity rounds subsonic, is low maintenance, and is usually dead-nuts reliable and very accurate. I have a Beretta 87 that I just HAD TO HAVE because it was SO COOL....and it is cool. But it's finicky about ammo and nowhere near as accurate as a Mk2. It's way more reliable than the P22, though...
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:58:00 PM EST
It sounds like the MkII's (maybe MkIII's) have it. Thanks, guys!
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 5:30:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 5:37:22 PM EST by rocko]
I vote for the buckmark - the bbl is easily removed vs. the ruger. If you'll be sending it out to get it threaded, it will need to be shipped via carrier since it is a pistol, and the big guys require overnight. That in and of itself can be a big cost savings - when I sent my P7M8 to Ford's (PA to FL), shipping was nearly $70 roundtrip.

As for the gun itself, I feel it is a better out of the box pistol than the rugers. While the ruger certainly gets the nod for aftermarket parts, I believe it can be argued that the buckmark doesn't have as much of a selection as it doesn't need them. It also points better than the MkII for me, and I like the 1911 style controls. The MkIII is makes some of that a non-issue, but I had heard of problem w/ the loaded chamber indicator. Apparently it is a pretty simple mechanism - the indicator rests directly on the rim of the cartridge. If a round is chamber, it is exposed. Hello?! This is a rimfire cartridge, and your loaded chamber indicator is resting on the rim, and sticks out the side of the frame? Yes, it is anecdotal, but at least one person was purportedly able to get his to repeatedly fire by whacking the indicator.

Link Posted: 10/20/2004 9:40:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/20/2004 9:43:17 PM EST by Scollins]

Originally Posted By fizassist:
It sounds like the MkII's (maybe MkIII's) have it. Thanks, guys!



I don't like the MkIII for three reasons:
Mark II mags won't work in it.
It has a magazine disconnect (worthless piece of shit "safety" device, no thanks.)
External loaded chamber indicator that may potentially ignite a round if struck under the right circumstances.

I like the fact that the mag release has been moved, but I don't plan on doing quick mag changes with the Mark II anyway, so what does it really matter? The Mark III has been completely "lawyerized." Part of it due to some state laws that require this shit (loaded chamber indicators, mag disconnects) in order for a gun to be sold in their state. I honestly think these things make firearms less safe, as people will come rely on them instead of using proper safety handling. "It shouldn't have fired! The loaded chamber indicator didn't say it was loaded, and there was no magazine. It shouldn't have fired! It's not my fault I blew my kid's brains out, it is the GUN'S fault and the company who made it! I'M the VICTIM here!"

Since it is cost-prohibitive to have two versions of the same gun, the rest of us get stuck with shitty guns because of the laws in a few states. Thanks a lot Kalifornia and Massofchewshits!
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 9:43:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By rocko:
I vote for the buckmark - the bbl is easily removed vs. the ruger. If you'll be sending it out to get it threaded, it will need to be shipped via carrier since it is a pistol, and the big guys require overnight. That in and of itself can be a big cost savings - when I sent my P7M8 to Ford's (PA to FL), shipping was nearly $70 roundtrip.

As for the gun itself, I feel it is a better out of the box pistol than the rugers. While the ruger certainly gets the nod for aftermarket parts, I believe it can be argued that the buckmark doesn't have as much of a selection as it doesn't need them. It also points better than the MkII for me, and I like the 1911 style controls. The MkIII is makes some of that a non-issue, but I had heard of problem w/ the loaded chamber indicator. Apparently it is a pretty simple mechanism - the indicator rests directly on the rim of the cartridge. If a round is chamber, it is exposed. Hello?! This is a rimfire cartridge, and your loaded chamber indicator is resting on the rim, and sticks out the side of the frame? Yes, it is anecdotal, but at least one person was purportedly able to get his to repeatedly fire by whacking the indicator.

www.rock-stars.org/buckmark.jpg




rocko, That is a sweet looking Browning
Link Posted: 10/21/2004 3:20:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By fizassist:
BTW, do you Mark II guys have an opinion on the 22/45?



I have had my Mark II 22/45 for about 10 years, and I love it. I like the way it fits my hand; much better than the regular Mark II. It almost never jams. I can't say the same thing about my P22.
Link Posted: 10/22/2004 8:52:15 AM EST
just my $.02 but
go with a ruger mkII or a
high standard (new or old)
i have both, and jams or mis-feeds are very rare,
rc
Link Posted: 10/22/2004 7:26:20 PM EST
Since someone posted some gun porn, here's mine......

Top Top