Trying to decide on a fixed barrel .22.

I am a fan of the Ruger MK guns and own a small pile. Lots of people talk of problems field stripping the MK I-III guns. That is because they do not understand how the gun works. Once you learn the angle of the dangle of the hammer strut, you will have no issues...Ruger must have listened to those people, though. The new MK IV breaks down at the push of a button. I shot a MK IV Hunter this week. It had nice fit and finish. The finish was better than any MK III I have had my hands on.... With all that said, I prefer the MK II guns.

Regarding triggers. the Browning will generally have a better out of the box trigger than a Ruger. However, a 30 buck sear from VQ will drop right in the Ruger and cut the trigger pull in half.

I have a Ruger Mark 2 Target that has a nice trigger, is accurate, and very reliable. There is a big deal made out of how difficult it is to take the Mark 2's down for cleaning but if you read the owners manual the take down for cleaning isn't that hard at all.

Another big fan of the Ruger Mk.II. I actually like the sharper rake of the Mk.II grip frame and find it very conducive at providing me a stable grip while target shooting. Have also found the trigger to be very clean and crisp and the 5 1/2" bull barrel to be nearly ideal in giving the gun a great balance and feel to it. If one is concerned about access to the upper assembly for cleaning then the new Mk.IV should be just the ticket with it's easy take-down design.

I have two of the Mk-II pistols, a "Standard" and a "Target." I like them a lot but, if the grip angle doesn't work for you, you won't.

I can't see any way you'd go wrong with the Buckmark. The "Buckmark vs. Mk-II" debate has stood for a long time, like "Ruger vs. Marlin" or "Ford vs. Chevy." When debates like these run so long and refuse to die, it's usually for a good reason.

I have had a Ruger Mark II for over 30 years. I put thousands of rounds through it over the years. It's a keeper if used with the vast majority of .22 LR standard and high velocity rounds with bullet weights between 36 and 40 grains.

Because I shot a lot of CCI Stinger hyper velocity and 60gr Aguila SSI (heavy recoiling rounds), I eventually had to buy a bolt stop pin and later a recoil spring. If I had bought a new recoil spring earlier, I probably would not have broken the bolt stop pin. But the extra recoil of the Stinger and SSI compared to Minimags should have hinted that I was pushing things a bit. I am sticking to .22 LR high velocity 36gr-37gr hollowpoint or 40gr solids Remington, Winchester, Federal, CCI or Aguila in the Ruger Mark II. I have rifles for the Stinger and SSI.

I had a Ruger Mark III and it was a good gun, but the take down wasn't my cup of tea, so I sold it. I have a S&W M&P .22 compact that I really like and use it often. As far as cleaning, I found that unless I use plated bullets the barrel will lead up in my semi auto handguns. (using cheap bulk lead ammo) and I have to clean the barrels often. But not with any plated ammo from CCI or Winchester.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Been shooting Buckmarks for 28yrs now and have owned quite a few various Rugers over the years. They're all good guns with pluses and minuses. Accuracy is a wash and will come down to variations between individual guns but I wouldn't keep one that wouldn't do a half inch at 25yds with loads it likes. Same for reliability. Aftermarket support is markedly different. I like to be able to change grips and your options are limited with the Browning. Over time I have been able to slowly accumulate grips that make me happy, including some cocobolo Herrett's and bonded ivory from Altamont, procured before they ever even had a website. Grips are much more prolific for the various Ruger models. Barrels can be easily changed out on the Buckmark but the Ruger requires a whole new barreled receiver and that requires an FFL transfer. I had to have both my Browning triggers professionally tuned but was able to install Volquartsen kits in my Rugers. One was more economical, the other more convenient. A deal breaker for me with the Ruger models is that like you, I do not like the grip angle of the standard model. I've had a MKI and a MKIIGC and while both were accurate and reliable, both had to go because I hate the grip angle. The MKII 22/45 had the right angle but the grip frame was too narrow and slippery. It wasn't until the MKIII 22/45 with replaceable grip panels that I found a Ruger .22 auto I could live with. I now have two and am eyeballing a third.

My advice has always been to pick the one you like best.

No experience with the S&W but think it is kinda ugly.

@CraigC - Out of reflex and the red dot on your 22/45's which one do you like better? I have a 22/45 lite and have a Gemtech gm22 in jail and was wondering between the two you lean towards. My purposes is for target shooting and whistle pigs (townsend ground squirrels) and the like.

What can is that? Surefire?

You have some nice pistols there!

Thanks! I actually like tube-style red dots better. The Bushnell above is what it's wearing now but the Primary Arms Advanced Micro is probably my favorite of the type. I have several of them on both rifles and pistols and really like them. Just put another on a braced Charger. The can is a AAC Element II but I also have a TacSol Axiom and a Silencerco Spectre on the way. Should be getting the Axiom pretty soon but haven't even submitted the Form 4 on the Spectre yet.

Don't overlook the Beretta Neos. Fantastically accurate, modular, and the only semi-auto I have found that will cycle CCI Quiet .22 reliably; the Ruger Mk, S&W 22A, S&W M&P22, Walther P22, Browning Buckmark and everything else I've tried them in becomes a single shot.

CraigC said:

Thanks! I actually like tube-style red dots better. The Bushnell above is what it's wearing now but the Primary Arms Advanced Micro is probably my favorite of the type. I have several of them on both rifles and pistols and really like them. Just put another on a braced Charger. The can is a AAC Element II but I also have a TacSol Axiom and a Silencerco Spectre on the way. Should be getting the Axiom pretty soon but haven't even submitted the Form 4 on the Spectre yet.

Click to expand...

If you don't mind a little weight, give the TBAC takedown a look. It's the quietest .22 can I've ever heard, and is rated up to 5.7x28mm & .22 Hornet. We just tested one on my 22" Hornet yesterday, and it made it sound like .22 CB caps from a rifle.

I have a Buckmark and Mark I. I can't say there's a difference between them as far as accuracy or reliability, but are great guns and sometimes I stare at my safe for several minutes trying to decide which one to shoot.

If Ruger ever made a 22/45 with a steel or aluminum frame I'd probably get one of those, but I'm not a fan of the polymer.

MachIVshooter said:

If you don't mind a little weight, give the TBAC takedown a look. It's the quietest .22 can I've ever heard, and is rated up to 5.7x28mm & .22 Hornet. We just tested one on my 22" Hornet yesterday, and it made it sound like .22 CB caps from a rifle.

Click to expand...

Who makes that one?

CraigC said:

Who makes that one?

Click to expand...

TBAC (Thunderbeast Arms Co)

https://thunderbeastarms.com/products/22-take-down

I "have" one, as in paid for. It was another guy's we played with yesterday, first time I'd had a chance to put one on a .22 Mag & .22 Hornet. They're movie quiet on .22 LR pistols. Impressive, to say the least. TBAC stuff is spendy, but awesome. They're Ultra 9 makes full power .300 Win Mag totally hearing safe, much more effective than my Silencerco Hybrid. Of course, the Ultra 9 can't handle the abuse the Hybrid will, nor is it as flexible.

I have had great luck with the Ruger SR22 I purchased 4 years ago. Its lightweight at about 17ounces. The polymer frame and aluminum slide eliminate the possibility of external rusting and it's been extremely reliable and accurate. The barrel is fixed in place but is made so it can be replaced if need be. I have run a few thousand rounds through mine and most of it was cheap bulk ammo

I have a Buck Mark. My friend has a Mark II. They are both excellent pistols. It's win/win.

MachIVshooter said:

TBAC (Thunderbeast Arms Co)

https://thunderbeastarms.com/products/22-take-down

I "have" one, as in paid for. It was another guy's we played with yesterday, first time I'd had a chance to put one on a .22 Mag & .22 Hornet. They're movie quiet on .22 LR pistols. Impressive, to say the least. TBAC stuff is spendy, but awesome. They're Ultra 9 makes full power .300 Win Mag totally hearing safe, much more effective than my Silencerco Hybrid. Of course, the Ultra 9 can't handle the abuse the Hybrid will, nor is it as flexible.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that is not a complete firearm, merely a suppressor.

One thing I don't like about the Buckmark is that routine cleaning takedown leaves a couple of loose screws which can get lost. The same is true of some other guns. I vote for the Ruger and the new Mk IV even more so. The fewer small parts that need to be removed for routine cleaning the better.

Jim

beag_nut said:

Unfortunately, that is not a complete firearm, merely a suppressor.

Click to expand...

So? I addressed the OP (see post #11), and his post also included:

GoInnaWoods said:

I am looking for something that is (1) reliable (especially with cheaper ammo) (2) can get buy with moderate cleaning (i.e. isn't a pretty princess that needs to be wiped down every 75 rounds, (3) accurate. Fit and aftermarket support/whizz-bang gadget are welcome, but take a back seat to the first three (though I would like to be able to suppress it eventually).

Click to expand...

So suppressors of interest to the OP. Furthermore, I was responding to another member's question.

Jim K said:

One thing I don't like about the Buckmark is that routine cleaning takedown leaves a couple of loose screws which can get lost. The same is true of some other guns. I vote for the Ruger and the new Mk IV even more so. The fewer small parts that need to be removed for routine cleaning the better.

Click to expand...

Taking those screws out is rarely necessary and if you can't be counted upon to take a firearm apart and not lose screws, maybe you shouldn't be using a screwdriver???

I have owned a Buckmark or two, but nothing yet has left me as happy as my old stainless MkII with the bull barrel. Definitely not a picky princess, dead nuts reliable, accurate beyond my capability, easy to find parts and grips for. If I am being honest, it's a matter of taste, but I will likely never own another buckmark unless I get a screaming deal, and I will always own that Ruger.

That said, I do like the Neos, and I am very interested in this new S&W Pistol.

TimboKhan

I have owned a Buckmark or two, but nothing yet has left me as happy as my old stainless MkII with the bull barrel. Definitely not a picky princess, dead nuts reliable, accurate beyond my capability, easy to find parts and grips for.

Click to expand...

I totally agree! My Ruger Mk.II with the 5 1/2" bull barrel has been my favorite .22 target pistol for many years.

Ruger MK II (or III, etc) is very hard to beat when you look at value. Inexpensive, all steel, accurate, and after market parts for about anything if you feel you need to change something.

I've been hemming and hawing over the S&W Victory and Browning Buckmark to replace my Neos over the last few months.

Ruger has now released the Plain Jane 22/45 MK IV. Not the Lite, just a MK IV with 5.5" target barrel. They are going for $355 out the door around here. The temptation is strong.