Decent .22

[QuercusMax]

Of all the handguns I own in various makes and calibers, I have to say that my Browning Buckmark is the piece I like to shoot the best.

As someone else mentioned, the trigger is absolutely wonderful. I can shoot more accurately, more easily, and more inexpensively with this gun than anything else in my collection. Reloading is extremely easy too, due to the magazine design which allows you compress the spring by pushing down on a protruding pin on the side. Cleaning is very simple due to the fixed bull barrel.

My Buckmark is the Camper model in stainless steel, URX grips, fiber optic front sight. I had my doubts about the fiber optic sight, but I liked it immediately.

At the gun club where I am a member, they offered an introductory handgun class a couple years ago in which each participant was given a Ruger 22/45 as part of the course. I did not take this class, but I know the instructor. He said that they will never offer the Ruger again, because that particular model of Ruger was extremely difficult to field strip and reassemble. Maybe that was only true for novice gun owners, but the instructor had problems too. This is just hearsay for which I have no personal experience, but the source is reputable, so I pass it on for consideration or further comment.

Maybe I'll go out and play with my Buckmark now.

[BuckeyeBlast]

Of all the handguns I own in various makes and calibers, I have to say that my Browning Buckmark is the piece I like to shoot the best.

As someone else mentioned, the trigger is absolutely wonderful. I can shoot more accurately, more easily, and more inexpensively with this gun than anything else in my collection. Reloading is extremely easy too, due to the magazine design which allows you compress the spring by pushing down on a protruding pin on the side. Cleaning is very simple due to the fixed bull barrel.

My Buckmark is the Camper model in stainless steel, URX grips, fiber optic front sight. I had my doubts about the fiber optic sight, but I liked it immediately.

At the gun club where I am a member, they offered an introductory handgun class a couple years ago in which each participant was given a Ruger 22/45 as part of the course. I did not take this class, but I know the instructor. He said that they will never offer the Ruger again, because that particular model of Ruger was extremely difficult to field strip and reassemble. Maybe that was only true for novice gun owners, but the instructor had problems too. This is just hearsay for which I have no personal experience, but the source is reputable, so I pass it on for consideration or further comment.

Maybe I'll go out and play with my Buckmark now.

The Ruger IS very hard for the first time. It's built pretty tight, and the first few times disassembling and reassembling can be quite a bear. Once you've done it a few times, the gun loosens up and the procedure becomes second nature. But yes, it is notoriously difficult for new owners, especially on new guns. However, I'm sure Ruger keeps using this design (for decades now) for a reason.

[ripley16]

I have to say that my Browning Buckmark is the piece I like to shoot the best.

As someone else mentioned, the trigger is absolutely wonderful.

I have to agree. My Buckmark Field 5.5 is almost the equal to my Colt Woodsman Match Target in accuracy and trigger quality. That is high praise

[jeepster09]

What do you get with your S&W 41 that I don't get with my MKII slabside?

I guess I have owned most models of 22's and found the Smith to be the best made. I recently had one of the new Ruger 22/45's and was not impressed with it's PLASTIC receiver....I had issues with mag sticking and not wanting to drop out. I even tried a second one with threaded barrel hoping it would be better and it wasn't.....SOOOOO for me, live and learn. I ponied up and spent the money to get another MODEL 41 like I had some 30 years ago. Now I am happy and will never sell this one like in the past. Great shooter, well balanced and well made right out of the box.

[Bawanna]

I guess I have owned most models of 22's and found the Smith to be the best made. I recently had one of the new Ruger 22/45's and was not impressed with it's PLASTIC receiver....I had issues with mag sticking and not wanting to drop out. I even tried a second one with threaded barrel hoping it would be better and it wasn't.....SOOOOO for me, live and learn. I ponied up and spent the money to get another MODEL 41 like I had some 30 years ago. Now I am happy and will never sell this one like in the past. Great shooter, well balanced and well made right out of the box.

The Model 41 breaks down in seconds blindfolded to, very sweet to clean and maintain but far from belong in the inexpensive category. Not on the same planet with a MKII or Buckmark or Neo.
I have a 1973 vintage that is just the sweetest thing, a trigger that is beyond description but I paid the price for it too. Worth every penny.
I still love my Ruger MKII though. It is a bear to dissasemble and I don't very often.

[Too Tall Todd]

I had my daughters tryout several .22 for the same reason. The ruger, browning sig and a Walther, they both liked the Walther so that's how I went. It is a good little pistol, accurate and reliable but that whole zinc slide thing still worries me (I still see my dads old zinc toy soliders break at the slightest rough handling). Again there is nothing wrong with the Walther but if I could do it again I would probably opt for a ruger or browning. Well that's my .02 ot .22's

[SmokingGun]

I've had great luck with my Walther P22 - not one hiccup.

[bigmacque]

I went through a couple of .22's before I finally bought a Ruger MKIII 22/45. I bought the lowest cost version available. With the trade of another brand that I had grown to dislike (the second brand that I now would not buy again), I only paid $185.00 plus the trade for it. I've been very happy with this gun, outside of pulling it apart and putting it back together to clean it, which really takes some getting used to.

[bigmacque]

I actually made some handmade tools, a small piece of fitted hardwood and a very specific dowel, that I use to break down and reassemble the 22/45. I'll post some pics later.

It was a bear to disassemble and reassemble, especially at first, but once I got the hang of getting the trigger block in the right place at the right time, it comes apart and goes back together very easily. Not as easily as a PM9, but very easily.

It just takes some getting used to. The tradeoff is it's a sweet little shooter that never hiccups .... so it seemed worth the time to learn how to clean it well, at least to me.

[rwblue01]

I guess I have owned most models of 22's and found the Smith to be the best made. I recently had one of the new Ruger 22/45's and was not impressed with it's PLASTIC receiver....I had issues with mag sticking and not wanting to drop out. I even tried a second one with threaded barrel hoping it would be better and it wasn't.....SOOOOO for me, live and learn. I ponied up and spent the money to get another MODEL 41 like I had some 30 years ago. Now I am happy and will never sell this one like in the past. Great shooter, well balanced and well made right out of the box.

I always thought the 22/45 Ruger was the bastard step child of the MKII. It just lacked .... Especially when comparing the high end slabside MKII vs. a standard 22/45.

I will also give you the take down on the Rugers is less than easy, but once you get use to it, it isn't bad. (This isn't to say I would like to do it while being timed, but comparing time to clean the gun vs. put it back together.....)

My question on the S&W 41. I was once told that it was a true target 22LR. If I ran hot ammo I would mess it up fairly quickly. Is this true? Can you/Should you run Stingers and Aguilla MAX ammo without screwing up the pistol?

[mr surveyor]

bastard step child or not, the 22/45 was designed for one single utilitarian purpose... to emulate the grip feel of a 1911...and it does that very well.

[rwblue01]

bastard step child or not, the 22/45 was designed for one single utilitarian purpose... to emulate the grip feel of a 1911...and it does that very well.

Maybe that is why I dislike it as I never liked the feel of the 1911 grip.

[Bawanna]

Maybe that is why I dislike it as I never liked the feel of the 1911 grip.

Dislike a 1911 grip? I've always prided myself on being a little different. I think your different too. Good for you.

Just out of curiosity what kind of grip do you like? Since you came thru and spoke your truth I'll boldly state that I never got along with a Sig grip, I've tried several and we just don't mesh. But I still want a 220SAS with a DAK trigger even though I doubt we'd get along.

[jlottmc]

Maybe that is why I dislike it as I never liked the feel of the 1911 grip.

Sacrilege, and hearesy!!!! If it doesn't work for you then, then it doesn't work, and that happens some time. Find the stuff that does work for you and go there.

[rwblue01]

Dislike a 1911 grip? I've always prided myself on being a little different. I think your different too. Good for you.

Just out of curiosity what kind of grip do you like? Since you came thru and spoke your truth I'll boldly state that I never got along with a Sig grip, I've tried several and we just don't mesh. But I still want a 220SAS with a DAK trigger even though I doubt we'd get along.

The 92FS is ok, but the DA/SA trigger was an issue in DA.
The Sig 226 and 228 were OK. (I think it is a mistake, but I never ended up purchasing these. )
The Luger08 points well for me, but the action is not something I would trust my life to.
Then I found the Glocks. The trigger isn't target grade, but the grip on the small are large frames works for me. IMHO, it is the best combat gun going.

I am still working hard to like my little Kahr PM9, but grip is sooooooo small, and the trigger.