That's not been my experience w/the 4 Ruger Mark I and Mark II that I've owned.
All 4 suffered from the Ruger "after thought feed ramp"...the little piece of the reciever that Ruger stamps out and calls it a feed ramp.
My one .22/45 Mark II is worlds better about it than the other three - but - even it will hic up sometimes on less than 40 grain hollow points.
I've shot a few MK's including the MK2s', and considering ammo- most of the bulk stuff I normally use is RN because of the power facter in having less then 40 grains go down a short non rifle barrel. I have shot hollow points too, just not as much as the RNs. Though I can't say that I've had any glitches even with that cept for maybe the real loose type crap.
Considering the S&W- found it to not feed properly(fully chamber)and eject certain varieties of lubed/ lead/ match like type ammo. Just was finicky with that.
Some Ruger owners polish the feed ramp which takes but a few minutes- then wow- you have a superb feeding machine that eats just about
I haven't found the need to polish mine. I often go to the range and spend in excess of 300+ rounds with the ruger MK3 with not one single hitch.
None of my Buckmarks do either
I've seen and used buckmarks that have had issues with various ammos.
The point I'm legitimitely trying to make is: If you were to put the MK3, 22a, and Buckmark together- and try 10 different brands of various ammo ( Bulk/ Premium/ HP/ RN/ Lead/ copper washed etc.: It's just my opinion resulting from personal experiences/ ammo testing, and what I see -that the Ruger would edge the other 2 out.
You can have a different opinion. I'd say most opinions on action reliability results from idividuals keeping to a certain ammo type diet saying their pistol has a flawless action.
I've tested various ammo through different pistols just out of curiosity to see the results. I'm not saying the Rugers have perfect actions. I'm saying that the Ruger is probably the least finicky using all variations of .22lr ammo thats out there.