Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/26/2003 12:30:14 PM EDT
flame away!!!
Link Posted: 5/26/2003 12:44:06 PM EDT
Buckmark:

Requires tools to takedown
Made of flimsy aluminum
One of five or six .22 rimfire designs marketed by Browning over the last thirty years
A purty gold trigger


Ruger Automatic:

No tools required for takedown (though a paperclip is handy)
Made of steel
Same basic design since 1949
Infinite number of variations
Link Posted: 5/26/2003 1:33:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/26/2003 1:34:33 PM EDT by anothergene]
Having no less than 6 or 7 Browning .22s and dozens of Ruger MkI and IIs, I think the Ruger is more robust, mags are cheaper and is offered in stainless.
And no recoil buffer needed. (as installed at the factory in the Browning)
More aftermarket parts are offered for the Ruger too.
I liked the Brownings I had, being both very accurate and reliable.
I would feel comfy with either of 'em equally, putting the lead to the paper, out of the box.
The only tool needed for the Browning is a screwdriver...no biggy there.
After all, it's just a fun gun, enjoy them both.
Link Posted: 5/26/2003 1:40:14 PM EDT
I like the Buckmark for some simple reasons. It feels, points and operates like the 1911s and Hi-Powers I carry on a daily basis.

Mine has been nothing but totally reliable.

As for the tool take down, it is a pain, but most of the time I just carefully run a rod from the muzzle end a couple of times, scrub the bolt face with CLP and shoot the internals with some gun scrub. Couple drops of CLP and its good to go.
Link Posted: 5/26/2003 2:18:27 PM EDT
MKII only cause that is what i have and luv it..and dont know 5h*t bout the other one
Link Posted: 5/26/2003 2:41:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/26/2003 2:42:23 PM EDT by anothergene]

Originally Posted By die-tryin:
MKII only cause that is what i have and luv it..and dont know 5h*t bout the other one


Now there is an honest man.
Link Posted: 5/26/2003 11:44:37 PM EDT
To me the Buckmark balances much better & its grip alows either a right hand or left hand shooter to be equally comfortable.

I've had Ruger owners outshoot their own guns with my Buckmark.

Other than their Red Labels & Vaquero's, Ruger's just don't appeal to me.
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 3:24:26 AM EDT

I've had Ruger owners outshoot their own guns with my Buckmark.

Only proves those people are easily influenced. Look at the IHMSA match results and you'll see an even split between Rugers and Brownings, with T/C Contenders having a slight edge on both.
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 4:22:38 AM EDT
Buckmaark
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 5:39:41 AM EDT
Buckmark Bullseye!

BKVic
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 11:12:22 AM EDT
I' ve had trigger time with both ..I prefer the Browning


t
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 7:49:51 PM EDT
I own them both:

Ruger:
(Positives)
The Ruger is more rugged. After many thousands of rounds more than the Browning it seems to be holding up better.

I think I shoot better with it than the Browning.

The grips are more comfortable to me. The adjustable sights on my target model have a Patridge style front blade (A plus for me, as I shoot bullseye).

Disassembles quickly w/o tools (doesn't loosen as I shoot it). No problems here.

(Negatives)
Heel clip release (not a big deal to me). In my particular example it requires full power ammo for positive function. This has only been a problem with several boxes of Win. wildcats that chronographed slower than anything I've shot before or after (these did function in the Browning).


Browning:

(Positives)
Has a grip frame that approximates my 1911 but somehow manages to be less comfortable.

Has a thumb release for the clip.

Less expensive than the Ruger.

(Negatives)
Many less rounds through it than my Ruger, yet seems to be shooting loose.

The screws that hold the sight rib on my gun together can't go 1000 rounds without coming loose, causing a wandering zero problem.

The trunion hole in which the slide stop rotates is enlarging in the aluminum frame.

The tabs on both the safety and slide stop have come off and had to be reglued.

The "C" clip that retains the recoil spring took a trip under my stove.

The safety uses friction to hold it in the off position. Lube it so it works smoothly and it turns on while shooting. Skip the lube and its action is very gritty.


Accuracy in the two guns, my examples, is about the same.

Kent
Link Posted: 5/27/2003 8:30:21 PM EDT

This has only been a problem with several boxes of Win. wildcats that chronographed slower than anything I've shot before or after (these did function in the Browning).

FWIW, I've had trouble with Wildcat enough that I don't use it or any other promotional .22 LR ammo anymore. This has been in Winchester 63s, Browning Autos (the rifle, not their shitty .22 pistols), 10/22s, S&W 617s, and on and on.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 6:11:39 AM EDT
My budget can only handle the occasional box of premium ammo. Promo ammo is 98% of what I shoot. Because of my problems with the Wildcat I no longer buy it. I have gotten acceptable accuracy and reliability with the Rem. Golden Bullet bulk packs. With the Rem. I do expirience 2-3% that don't light on the first strike and about 1% that don't light after the 4th strike. At $0.016/shot I accept the problems.

My best accuracy in my Ruger has been with Win. Super-X and Eley standard pistol (I think that's the name).

Kent
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 7:18:57 AM EDT

My budget can only handle the occasional box of premium ammo.

I'm not talking about premium ammunition, I'm talking about using Remington Thunderbolt, Federal Lightning, CCI, etc.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 10:50:24 AM EDT
I just recently (March) picked up my first Ruger 22LR (a 22/45 P512) and have been working my way through a Federal bulk pack, Remington bulk pack, Winchester Silhoutte, Remington Viper, Remington Target, CCI Stinger, and CCI Small Game (probably around 500rds total) without a single malfunction. Can you tell I'm working my way through some ammo that has been lying around for a long time?

I'm really interested in that Aquila but haven't given it a shot yet. Anybody used this in a MKII?

I'll probably buy a Buckmark one of these days, but I'm in no hurry.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 12:11:43 PM EDT

I'm really interested in that Aquila but haven't given it a shot yet. Anybody used this in a MKII?

Very dirty. Reliable and accurate, but dirty. This was never a factor for me until I started dabbling in suppressors, now I go out of my way to avoid it.

There is also an Aguila subsonic load, the SSS with a 60-grain slug. Factory .22 rimfires most likely will not have a fast enough twist to stabilize this load for acceptable accuracy.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 4:43:57 PM EDT
Sold my ruger 2245 and bought a buckmark camper. I enjoy the camper and it returns better targets than I ever shot with the ruger [ in my hands].
The camper I have fails to fully eject a spent case on occation. Also, it has some cheezy parts in there. I like it better though. It does suit me.
Top Top