.22 Target Pistol Comparisons

[techrestore]

Ok,
I have seen so many 'different' articles about .22 pistols. However I have a very specific request, as I am in the search for a .22 target pistol.

I am familiar with Ruger MK II, but know that there has to be a 'better' gun for the money (which i also realize that personal preference plays a huge aspect).

What my concerns are:
1.) Accuracy
2.) Look/Feel
3.) Price

Here are the guns that I have been made aware of (with scores per http://www.ssaa.org.au/OFFICIALREVIEWS/22lrpistol/22targetpistol.htm )

Smith Wesson 22S - or 22A - 16 out of 20
Ruger MK II - 16.3 out of 20
Beretta U22 Neos - NO SCORE
Browning Buck Mark: 17.5 out of 20

I favor the design of the Beretta the best. Is this a target class pistol? Are there any of the above scores you disagree with? Can you add any to the list - FYI most are $250 price range.

Thanks

 

[Justin]

Don't know about the Beretta, but the Ruger Mk.II and Browning Buckmark are really good .22's for plinking and general target practice.

But out of the box, they won't perform up to the specs of a serious target pistol like a S&W M41 or a Walther GSP.

 

[YodaVader]

Shot this with my MKII a few weeks ago - one handed , bullseye style. Of those you mentioned the MKII is my pick. Is there a better gun for the money? Not for the $225 I spent. I hear a lot of good things on the Buckmark though I have never shot one. I also have a Smith 41 which is somewhat expensive but an excellent out of the box pistol.

 

[HSMITH]

The Buckmark is the best out of the choices. Several shooting buddies had Rugers until they shot my Buckmark for a couple weeks, haven't seen a Ruger since. I shot a Neos and to be fair I only tried it with one kind of ammo. It was OK, felt great in the hand, but the trigger sucked bad and the accuracy was only so-so. The S&W is a clunker, worse than the Ruger even.

 

[Paul "Fitz" Jones]

Opinion from Pistol Grip Company

I have sold thousands of .22 pistol grips from the Ruger to the High Standard and Smith 41.

I feel the Ruger is an excellent choice for a beginner and even a more experienced shooter. My first Ruger was #55255 a long time ago. Today the Rugers need the investment of an improved trigger according to my old customers. I ceased production in 1979 but have a half dozen grips left for the MK1 models for before and after 1972 and a couple of MK 2's. Check at your shooting range for a shooter who can advise you about the source of the better trigger. Other than that I feel the Ruger is an excellent buy.

My company was from 1921-1979 and we invented the thumb rest and palm swell plate for advanced shooters. In my personal collection I have several extra grips for the High Standard Model 102,3,4 and the Smith 41 that could make someone happy. My last ones for the Ruger I got talked out of by several Bullseye list shooters.

Thanks

 

[techrestore]

NEOS

HSSMITH:
The New Neos DLX Model, has an adjustable trigger, which may be the solution. The feel of the gun is what got my attention.

 

[makarov]

If you really want a *target* pistol and not just a .22 plinker, you might consider the IZH-35m it is a Russian target pistol with fully adjustable trigger. Very accurate. They dominate the local smallbore shooting club. Even outshooting the High Standards.

I have an older Browning Medalist made in Belgium. Picked it up for $375, but it was missing the box and the front wood piece. Most go for a lot more.

Used to have a Ruger Govt. Competition MKII. Very nice, but stock trigger left a bit to be desired. There are literally tons of aftermarket parts for the MKII though. I will probably buy another Ruger at some point. I like the design.

May also get a Buckmark if the price is right. And a Kadet kit for my CZ-85.........and a ...???

Did I mention I like .22's!!

- Good Luck,

Makarov

 

[LiquidTension]

Check out the Sig Trailside as well. I've never shot one but I hear they are nice.

When I was doing research for my first .22 pistol I checked on the S&W , the Buckmark, the MkII, and the Sig. I went with the MkII because...well, I just liked it best. The S&W was never really a consideration because 1) it's butt ugly and 2) this was right after they signed the treaty with Satan. I couldn't afford the Sig

 

[Gewehr98]

Ever feel a Buckmark trigger out of the box?

I have.

Friend of mine went whole hawg on a Ruger Mark II, with the Volquartsen alloy upper, Volquartsen trigger kit, freestyle grips, red dot sight, you name it. I loaned him my Buckmark one evening for his session at the local indoor range. The Ruger is now for sale, the proceeds of which will help him purchase his own Buckmark.

 

[Tamara]

Beretta offers the Neos as a plinker; the 87 Target Cheetah is their target pistol.

 

[Okiecruffler]

The Ruger and the Browning are both nice pistols. I had a S&W 22A for awhile, very nice pistol with a grip like a 2X4 and no way to fix it. Tried out the Neo, but the trigger was terrible (to be fair it was a range rental gun). Any of them will work for a good plinker and probably last longer than you do. But for a few dollars more you can buy a competition grade pistol that already has the features on it that you'll have to pay to add to a plinker. My favorites are the Hi Standards, mainly because of the trigger. You can adjust it down to practically nothing, not a good thing on a field pistol, but great on a range pistol. I just had to buy a Mitchell Trophy II for nostalgic reasons, but looks like I have to buy another. The wife just bought a set of left handed grips for it,m and put them on MY pistol. Boy that woman has alot of nerve.

 

[gvass]

"If you really want a *target* pistol and not just a .22 plinker, you might consider the IZH-35m "

Yes!
According to my view, the Ruger MK2, the Beretta 87 or the Neos, SW 22 etc are _good_ plinkers or club-grade target guns.

But the <b>real bullseye target</b> guns are the IZH-35, the SW 41, Hammerli 208, 280, Walther GSP, Feinwerkbau AW93 and so...

IZH-35 (in Walther costume):

Link for more pics:
http://www.kaliber.hu/kaliber/68/cikk68.html

 

[rick_reno]

.22 target pistols

You listed -
What my concerns are:
1.) Accuracy
2.) Look/Feel
3.) Price

Since price is last and you want a target pistol I'd suggest you expand your list to include the already mentioned Baikal IZH35M, it's about the same price as the Ruger. A fellow I shoot with shot a 100 rapid fire target with one Sunday. You can read about here http://izh.petebrunelli.com/

Other guns to look at are the Pardini SP. Don Nygord imports them and has a picture of one here http://www.nygord-precision.com/22pistols.htm You could call him and discuss these guns with him, or ask here - there are a couple of people using them that post here.

Another one is the discontinued Hammerli 208S. I recently saw a used one sell for about $1200, which looked like a good price. They are considered by many to the best .22 target pistol made. Larry Carter imports Hammerli and sometimes has leads on used ones. You can contact him here http://www.larrysguns.com/hammguns.asp

A good source of info on this is the Bullseye Encyclopedia http://www.bullseyepistol.com/ Lots of info there.

You can turn the Ruger into something resembling a target pistol, but by the time you're done you'd have spent as much as one of the guns above might cost. There are "kits" that facilitate these conversions.

 

[Ala Dan]

Wonder how come no one has mentioned the famed
Colt Match Target Woodsman ? Excellent target
pistol, for precise work; this weapon is a tack driver
for sure. It has long since been discontinued, and it
is a bit pricey! I bought one NIB years ago, and it
never let me down. Another one I wish I had back.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[techrestore]

Buck Mark Camper?

Ok: if i choose a browning, is the buck mark camper sufficient- does it shoot as good as a ruger MKII?

 

[techrestore]

Beretta NEOS DLX

Here is the neos as mentioned: I would love to find someone that has purchased one. No one yet has said that they have actually done a field report. I have read a few and see that many are happy, some are not. These field reports are strickly of the NEOS non DLX model. The DlX does have adjustable sights and ADJUSTABLE trigger. The main complaint of the neos from people is that they dont like how it looks: to each his own! I favor its looks- it looks 'different'.

Has anyone shot a Neos, and more specifically, has anyone shot a DLX and done a field report on it. What is the range of adjustment of the trigger. The few reports i have seen are on the standard model and the complaint being that the trigger is stiff.

 

[SnWnMe]

Since price is the last consideration you can eschew the MkIIs and the Buckmarks, leaving them for the unwashed masses and go straight to a Sig Trailside, a Model 41, a HS or as Ala Dan said, a Target Woodsman. If your groups are not up to snuff then at least you know it ain't the gun.

OR: Go to rimfirecentral.com and ask the bullseye shooters there what they use.

 

[BillL223]

My first pistol was a S & W 41 purchased used in 1994. I had no idea of the number of rounds through it but the wood and bluing were in very good condition. I put thousands of rounds through it and had a lot of fun shooting .22 9 pin and pin tops. I sold it last year to raise cash for more then I paid for it. I doubt that any gun on your list could be sold for more then you paid in the future. My wife has a Buckmark, the 41 is far superior.

 

[tsenn]

What about basic maintanence, ease of takedown between the Ruger and the Buckmark. Thanks

 

[DougCxx]

-Ummmmmmmmmm-----the Beretta NEOS looks cute, but it is most certainly NOT a target gun!
--------
-I will also suggest the IZH35M: its ergonomics and trigger are definitely better than the Mk II Gov't Target 6-7/8, which I also own (which is stock, except for Volquartsen target grips). It is a "real" target pistol and comes with a fully-screw-adjustable match trigger (mine came at about 2/2.2 lbs), and you will have a hard time finding anyone on the web complaining of its lack of accuracy. The biggest problem you may have is if you are left-handed or simply cannot bear the factory (right-hand only) grips--there are better grips available but they cost $150-$200 (but then again, real match-grade grips would cost that much for any pistol, and other guns still wouldn't have the low boreline that the IZH has). About the only other problems are that the action is rough out of the box (you can fix this yourself with just a flat riffler file) and there are three screws that tend to come undone that need to be changed out with hex-head screws (this cost me fifty-eight cents, plus I had to cut the screws down with a Dremel tool).
---------
The "main" IZH customer-info site: http://izh.petebrunelli.com/
...in particular, read through the "scrapbook" page. Also note that this gun has gone through several small improvements since it was first available back around 1997-1998, so some of the features and problems people mention there are no longer present.
~

 

[Penforhire]

I gotta try the IZH. There's too many people who say it is the real deal for a cheap competition gun.

I probably spent too much on the 6 7/8 Mark II Gov model with VQ guts & grip but it shoots a MUCH tighter group on a rest than I can do off hand. I want to add the SoLow mounts and an Ultradot scope, (Homer Simpson "beer tone" here) ... yummy.

The reviews on the Neos and the Baretta all speak of them as plinkers, not target shooters.

 

[Standing Wolf]

The best of all my best .22 caliber pistols is this 1978 High Standard Trophy. There's nothing wrong with the original fluted barrel, but this one now sports a Volquartsen barrel and mount, an Ultra Dot red dot scope, and Nill Grips stocks.

I finished the painting just this morning, in fact.

 

[HSMITH]

The Ruger is MISERABLE to take down and clean, the worst out there in the class. The Browning has screws in the top strap that come loose unless you use a dab of nailpolish, but it takes down VERY easily.

I just cannot understand why anyone would own the Ruger after trying a Buckmark, and if the Buckmark takedown was shown to a Ruger owner it would get traded off. I have had both....

 

[XavierBreath]

I like my Ruger MKII's. Take down is fairly simple as is reassembly once you've done is a few times. The main problem is managing the hammer while reinserting the mainspring housing. OnTarget guns has a slick trigger sheild that will make cleaning very simple. After I installed that, all I've had to do was use a boresnake and wipe down the bolt and chamber face.



http://www.ontargetguns.com/index.html

 

[Chris Rhines]

Between the Ruger MkII and the Buckmark, I greatly prefer the Ruger. The Ruger tends to have the better trigger out of the box, and the three Buckmarks that my old club had, well, they would shoot themselves apart on a regular basis. They had many reliability problems.

The club that I shoot in now tends to heavily favor MkIIs and IZH-35Ms on the low end, and Smith M41s and Pardinis at the high end (of price; at least one High Master shoots an IZH-35.) I've never seen a Buckmark on the line.

My personal Ruger MkII, with the half-shot-out barrel and scrubbed chamber, will shoot 1-inch ten-shot groups at fifty yards. Accuracy isn't going to be a problem.

- Chris