Best "Old School" .22LR Target Pistol - Page 2

kcub · July 4, 2012, 06:54 AM

I love the feel of the Belgian Browning Challenger grip that flares at the mag well.

Olympus · July 5, 2012, 09:06 AM

I'm a bit of a target .22 fan myself. I come by it naturally I guess. And while I haven't had experience with the Hammerlis, the early Hamden High Standards have easily become my favorites to shoot and collect. There is just a certain level of style and class that is rarely seen. Not to mention they are a finely made piece of equipment. I currently have 5 Hamden High Standards (2 Victors and 3 Trophies). I also have two Ruger Mark II Targets. And while they are great shooting guns, are very reliable, and very affordable, they are nowhere near the quality of my Hamdens.

Now my old man is really a .22 fan and I started out learning to shoot on his S&W 41. Another fantastic gun, just doesn't feel or balance as good as a HS to me. He also has a Browning Medalist that I've shot 2 or 3 times, but it is a safe queen and not a shooter. I've so had the itch to buy a Colt Woodsman Target to my collection, but if you think finding parts and mags for a HS is difficult, it would be even harder I think for a Colt. But for me, give me a Hamden HS over any Ruger, Buckmark, etc. I'm a die hard HS shooter.

Winchester_73 · July 5, 2012, 02:36 PM

I have owned Ruger Standards, a MKII, and I still have a MKIII. I have 5 woodsmans and I've shot S&W 41s. For my money, its high standard. And as others have said, the hamden guns. Their triggers are excellent (better than just about anything) the feel is great, sights are great, etc. Just holding it, you get the feeling that you won't miss or shouldn't miss, like an aura of confidence. I would shoot a high standard if I ever decided to compete.

Here are some of my High Standards:

A model B from the New Haven (prior to Hamden) factory. These look much like a Woodsman. This gun dates from the 1920s most likely. SN - 31XXX

101 Supermatic. These are kind of scarce. In the 102 series, HS debuted the Trophy and Citation and the model "Supermatic" was no longer made. This one has thumbrest grips, a trigger shoe, and one of the best triggers I ever felt. It also has ports on each side of the front sight in the barrel to decrease recoil from the factory.

102 Supermatic Citation "space gun" (yes I know the mag is wrong). This was my first high standard. It feels great, awesome trigger with a compensator and barrel weights with a long sight radius. A great shooting piece.

106 Supermatic Trophy. This gun I bought as a shooter. The rear sight was removed, and the slide was actually planed down. It also was drilled for a sight mount. I put a cheap tasco red dot on it and its a great shooter. My father in law was shooting this one a few months back, after not having shot a pistol since the 1911 in the late 50s early 60s, when he was in the army. It didn't take him long to shoot pretty well which is a testament to how well these were designed. This gun, unlike the 102 is a "military grip" gun referring to its 1911 grip angle. The earlier guns, 105 series and earlier, were "slant grip" which is closer to a luger grip angle. I prefer the slant grip, but the military guns feel great in the hand as well.

Number Series Supermatic Trophy. This one is one of my favorites. I got it for a good deal too, about $400 total after getting some work done (rear sight re-install). I wanted a 7.25 in fluted gun for a long time. I am happy to have this one. This series was after the 107 series and was the last series of HS made at Hamden. Hamden would make their last guns in the ML series (ML a prefix on the SN) before moving production to East Hartford in about 1976. The East Hartford plant would go under in 1984.

This one was the latest one I got. Its a ML series Victor. The first 25k ML guns were Hamden while the rest were East Hartford. The East Hartford guns are known for their hit or miss quality but this one at ML 25450 was most likely made of Hamden parts but the gun itself was assembled at East Hartford. Its a good shooter but its not my favorite of the group. Picking a favorite out of these really is splitting hairs though.

High Standards do not universally get the respect that they deserve. Too many people put their 22 autos in the same category as their revolvers, shotguns, 22 rifles = mediocre guns. Their bread and butter were the 22 autos and the last American to win a gold medal for pistol in the Olympics used a HS. Check out this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqIuapx37So

Quote:

What I mean by underrated - it SEEMS, just my take on things, that people as a whole do not view High Standards with the same respect as other Target pistols. However, the folks that own them often end up getting several as they find out what a gem they truly are. The following is not as wide as other pistols but the ones that know......know why.

+1. This is exactly it. Many people only know about the high standards were so so in latter years, but forget that high standard was around producing top of the line 22 autos for decades before the East Hartford guns.

Many people feel this way about High Standards:

Quote:

I always thought High Standard as a cheap Colt knock-off

There is a reason that the majority of the older bullseye shooters had either a High Standard or a S&W 41, and not some Colt or Browning. High Standards are tough to beat, and are better shooters than Woodsmans IMO. Woodsmans, like many other Colts, are at their best when they're being looked at. When it comes to everything else, you'd be surprised. I have several woodsmans and I prefer High Standards.

Quote:

My want to consider a Colt Diamondback or Python in .22LR

Diamondbacks are over rated. I recommend a K-22 or a Colt Officers model or OMM when talking 22 revolvers. A 22 Python? Hopefully you can shell out the $15,000 or so for one of the very few prototypes that were ever made.

Quote:

Colt's model match and the two before it (im to sleepy to remember) are better then diamondbacks also cheaper.

Before WWII there several different Officers Model generations, followed by the post war Officers Model Special, and then finally the Officers Model Match. These were all fine revolvers. I have a 1956 OMM and I love it.

Winchester_73 · July 5, 2012, 02:39 PM

As I said, I do also have Woodsmans. They are nice, but not my favorite.

Botswana · July 5, 2012, 02:41 PM

That ML series Victor looks an awful lot like the S&W 22A. Inspiration for the 22A or is the 22A a direct rip-off? I bet the Victor doesn't have a god awful plastic recoil buffer in it.

Winchester_73 · July 5, 2012, 02:45 PM

Quote:

That ML series Victor looks an awful lot like the S&W 22A. Inspiration for the 22A or is the 22A a direct rip-off? I bet the Victor doesn't have a god awful plastic recoil buffer in it.

I know it doesn't because the Victor replaced the Trophy as the High Standard top of the line deluxe model. The Victor was later supplanted by the 10x. I hope to someday find a 10x.

dgludwig · July 5, 2012, 03:04 PM

Quote:

It's weird for me to hear the Ruger MK II described as "old school".

The pistol is well over half a century old; older than the Smith Model 41 and older than the Browning Medalist

Olympus · July 5, 2012, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgludwig

The pistol is well over half a century old; older than the Smith Model 41 and older than the Browning Medalist

Maybe the general design is that old, but not the actual Mark II model. That was introduced in the early 1980s.

dgludwig · July 5, 2012, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgludwig
The pistol is well over half a century old; older than the Smith Model 41 and older than the Browning Medalist

Maybe the general design is that old, but not the actual Mark II model. That was introduced in the early 1980s.

The Mark II differed little from its predecessor (the Mark I, manufactured from 1951 to 1982)) and all the "Marks" (I, II and III) varied little from the original 1949 design (bull barrel and adjustable rear sight being the only substantive differences). Even the Mark II (circa 1982) is thirty years old and, for many of us, can be dubbed "old school" without apology. As mentioned previously, the pistol in all of its variations is essentially a 63 year old design.

Venom1956 · July 5, 2012, 07:57 PM

Win73 beat me to it. I was thinking of the post war Officers Model Special (OMS) Officers Model Target (OMT) and the Officers Model Match (OMM) all fantastic guns and will leave a Diamondback in the dust. Only thing I would compare it to is a K-22. Or earlier Colt/S&W .22s

Dondor · July 5, 2012, 08:09 PM

You guys hurt my feelings with all of those beautiful guns.

5R milspec · July 6, 2012, 07:08 PM

I love my dads S&W 622.we shoot hanging golf balls with.

Winchester_73 · July 8, 2012, 11:30 PM

Anyone else have any other vintage 22 autos to post? Like an old Walther or something? Lets at least see more High Standards!

darkgael · July 9, 2012, 05:01 AM

My Victor in its two guises:
Factory.

And wearing a Falcon match barrel and Ultradot along with a set of Herrett grips.

The other is a Ruger MK.II frame with a Volquartsen upper.
Pete

rodent.22 · July 9, 2012, 05:18 AM

A 1928 vintage H&R 22Special breaktop, a Rolling Block .22....

bsherrer · July 9, 2012, 02:02 PM

anybody consider the smith m-17, had a 6 in. it was killer on bullseye.

PeterGreg · July 9, 2012, 02:11 PM

A couple of HS for sale here:

http://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/lis...num=1025663219

http://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/lis...num=1026072502

TxFlyFish · July 9, 2012, 08:26 PM

erob3 · July 9, 2012, 08:44 PM

My High Standards...

http://s1066.photobucket.com/albums/...t=IMG_2671.jpg

A long sought after prize I just got today....

http://s1066.photobucket.com/albums/...t=IMG_2657.jpg

RUT · July 10, 2012, 04:19 PM

>>I love the older "High Standards" but would have a hard time recommending them. I recently retired mine due to lack of support. Finding mags that will feed (or fixing them) is getting harder and quite a hassle. Also, many local smiths stopped working on them as quality parts are getting scarce and expensive.<<

I can agree with this. I got rid of mine for the same reasons, plus they're "jamomatics" in my eyes. Yeah, I know about the touchy magazine feed lip issues, but life's too short.

dgludwig · July 10, 2012, 04:48 PM

For reliable feeding purposes, the condition of magazine followers/lips on High Standard pistols can be even more important than magazines on other pistols are due to the lack of feed ramps on the High Standard pistols. Their magazines are designed to do everything in terms of dependably delivering the cartridge to the chamber.

Rifleman1776 · July 11, 2012, 08:26 AM

I shot a Ruger Standard in competition for years.
My team took sixth place in world wide postal competition for six straight years against 120 other teams. That ain't chopped liver.
Only downside to that pistol was interchangability of magazines. I regret selling it.
Some of the others mentioned are excellent.

erob3 · July 12, 2012, 10:24 AM

NICE Rifleman...... I actually own a 1952 Ruger Standard but always thought of it more as a plinker than a Bullseye pistol. You obviously shot competition seriously, I shoot for fun. I'll give my Standard a run this weekend as a matter of fact and see how it does, it should be interesting. Thanks for the input.

Blue Duck · July 21, 2012, 04:24 PM

The High Standards were fine pistols, but for me it's the Smith 41. I shot competition for several years, and some of the reasons I liked the 41 better is the quick change barrel option, and it was so easy to take down and clean, also because I was left handed the grips on the 41 were far more friendly. And the magazines are eaiser to reload, then the Rugers or the High Standards.

As far as I was concerned the 41 was the best, and very reliable also, and it was just easier to use. For one thing the slide is a lot eaiser to pull back on a 41, also. As far a accuracy, it had all of the accuracy I could use, and I never felt like I was taking a back seat to any other pistol in competiton.

OcelotZ3 · July 21, 2012, 11:50 PM

I don't do any competition shooting but have a variety of 22's (High Standard, Browning Challenger, Colt Woodsman Match Targets, S&W Straightline, etc.).

The High Standards I've bought (something like 7 of them) are all old (1960 or older) and shoot very well and are very accurate. I've had no feeding problems, but then again I'm not put thousands of rounds through them in a year. And from looking at the gun shows, they keep going up in value.

I like them a lot and they are some of my favorite 22's.

July 5, 2012, 02:39 PM	#29
Winchester_73 Senior Member Join Date: December 20, 2008 Location: Pittsburgh PA Posts: 2,863	As I said, I do also have Woodsmans. They are nice, but not my favorite. __________________ Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west

July 5, 2012, 07:57 PM	#35
Venom1956 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2008 Location: WI Posts: 3,656	Win73 beat me to it. I was thinking of the post war Officers Model Special (OMS) Officers Model Target (OMT) and the Officers Model Match (OMM) all fantastic guns and will leave a Diamondback in the dust. Only thing I would compare it to is a K-22. Or earlier Colt/S&W .22s __________________ E-Shock rounds are engineered to expend maximum energy into soft targets, turning the density mass into an expanding rotational cone of NyTrilium matrix particles, causing neurological collapse to the central nervous system.- Yeah I can do that. I guarantee you will know it if a bicyclist hits your house going 1000 mph. -Smaug

July 6, 2012, 07:08 PM	#37
5R milspec Senior Member Join Date: December 11, 2009 Location: South Carolina Posts: 360	I love my dads S&W 622.we shoot hanging golf balls with. __________________ life is great but its better when you can own as many guns you wish to own.for me I haven't bought enough yet.

July 8, 2012, 11:30 PM	#38
Winchester_73 Senior Member Join Date: December 20, 2008 Location: Pittsburgh PA Posts: 2,863	Anyone else have any other vintage 22 autos to post? Like an old Walther or something? Lets at least see more High Standards! __________________ Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west

July 9, 2012, 05:01 AM	#39
darkgael Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2006 Location: Homes in Brooklyn, NY and in Pennsylvania. Posts: 5,473	Old school My Victor in its two guises: Factory. And wearing a Falcon match barrel and Ultradot along with a set of Herrett grips. The other is a Ruger MK.II frame with a Volquartsen upper. Pete __________________ “Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports ... all others are games.” Ernest Hemingway ... NRA Life Member

July 4, 2012, 06:54 AM	#26
kcub Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2010 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 3,318	I love the feel of the Belgian Browning Challenger grip that flares at the mag well.

July 5, 2012, 09:06 AM	#27
Olympus Senior Member Join Date: December 15, 2008 Posts: 770	I'm a bit of a target .22 fan myself. I come by it naturally I guess. And while I haven't had experience with the Hammerlis, the early Hamden High Standards have easily become my favorites to shoot and collect. There is just a certain level of style and class that is rarely seen. Not to mention they are a finely made piece of equipment. I currently have 5 Hamden High Standards (2 Victors and 3 Trophies). I also have two Ruger Mark II Targets. And while they are great shooting guns, are very reliable, and very affordable, they are nowhere near the quality of my Hamdens. Now my old man is really a .22 fan and I started out learning to shoot on his S&W 41. Another fantastic gun, just doesn't feel or balance as good as a HS to me. He also has a Browning Medalist that I've shot 2 or 3 times, but it is a safe queen and not a shooter. I've so had the itch to buy a Colt Woodsman Target to my collection, but if you think finding parts and mags for a HS is difficult, it would be even harder I think for a Colt. But for me, give me a Hamden HS over any Ruger, Buckmark, etc. I'm a die hard HS shooter.

July 5, 2012, 02:41 PM	#30
Botswana Senior Member Join Date: July 4, 2012 Posts: 203	That ML series Victor looks an awful lot like the S&W 22A. Inspiration for the 22A or is the 22A a direct rip-off? I bet the Victor doesn't have a god awful plastic recoil buffer in it.

July 5, 2012, 08:09 PM	#36
Dondor Senior Member Join Date: February 23, 2006 Posts: 226	You guys hurt my feelings with all of those beautiful guns.

July 9, 2012, 05:18 AM	#40
rodent.22 Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2010 Location: virginia woods Posts: 129	A 1928 vintage H&R 22Special breaktop, a Rolling Block .22.... __________________ NRA, VCDL, USAF 1970-76 6200FMS CLARK FIELD,P.I.'71-'72- 18 SOS, NKP, THAILAND '72, BASE FLIGHT,KEESLER AFB,MISS '72-'74, CARSWELL AFB,TX '74-'76 Last edited by rodent.22; December 2, 2014 at 12:51 PM.

July 9, 2012, 02:02 PM	#41
bsherrer Junior Member Join Date: May 16, 2010 Posts: 3	anybody consider the smith m-17, had a 6 in. it was killer on bullseye.

July 9, 2012, 02:11 PM	#42
PeterGreg Member Join Date: February 24, 2012 Posts: 71	A couple of HS for sale here: http://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/lis...num=1025663219 http://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/lis...num=1026072502

July 9, 2012, 08:26 PM	#43
TxFlyFish Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2011 Posts: 1,246

July 9, 2012, 08:44 PM	#44
erob3 Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2010 Location: East Tn. for 56 years Posts: 540	My High Standards... http://s1066.photobucket.com/albums/...t=IMG_2671.jpg A long sought after prize I just got today.... http://s1066.photobucket.com/albums/...t=IMG_2657.jpg __________________ If something is worth doing well, it is worth failing at to get there.

July 10, 2012, 04:19 PM	#45
RUT Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2004 Location: NH, USA Posts: 812	>>I love the older "High Standards" but would have a hard time recommending them. I recently retired mine due to lack of support. Finding mags that will feed (or fixing them) is getting harder and quite a hassle. Also, many local smiths stopped working on them as quality parts are getting scarce and expensive.<< I can agree with this. I got rid of mine for the same reasons, plus they're "jamomatics" in my eyes. Yeah, I know about the touchy magazine feed lip issues, but life's too short. __________________ Liberals don't care what you do... as long as it's mandated.

July 10, 2012, 04:48 PM	#46
dgludwig Senior Member Join Date: February 12, 2005 Location: North central Ohio Posts: 7,486	For reliable feeding purposes, the condition of magazine followers/lips on High Standard pistols can be even more important than magazines on other pistols are due to the lack of feed ramps on the High Standard pistols. Their magazines are designed to do everything in terms of dependably delivering the cartridge to the chamber. __________________ ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED ...Aristotle NRA Benefactor Life Member

July 11, 2012, 08:26 AM	#47
Rifleman1776 Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 3,309	I shot a Ruger Standard in competition for years. My team took sixth place in world wide postal competition for six straight years against 120 other teams. That ain't chopped liver. Only downside to that pistol was interchangability of magazines. I regret selling it. Some of the others mentioned are excellent.

July 12, 2012, 10:24 AM	#48
erob3 Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2010 Location: East Tn. for 56 years Posts: 540	NICE Rifleman...... I actually own a 1952 Ruger Standard but always thought of it more as a plinker than a Bullseye pistol. You obviously shot competition seriously, I shoot for fun. I'll give my Standard a run this weekend as a matter of fact and see how it does, it should be interesting. Thanks for the input. __________________ If something is worth doing well, it is worth failing at to get there.

July 21, 2012, 04:24 PM	#49
Blue Duck Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 2006 Posts: 402	The High Standards were fine pistols, but for me it's the Smith 41. I shot competition for several years, and some of the reasons I liked the 41 better is the quick change barrel option, and it was so easy to take down and clean, also because I was left handed the grips on the 41 were far more friendly. And the magazines are eaiser to reload, then the Rugers or the High Standards. As far as I was concerned the 41 was the best, and very reliable also, and it was just easier to use. For one thing the slide is a lot eaiser to pull back on a 41, also. As far a accuracy, it had all of the accuracy I could use, and I never felt like I was taking a back seat to any other pistol in competiton.

July 21, 2012, 11:50 PM	#50
OcelotZ3 Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 2008 Posts: 229	I don't do any competition shooting but have a variety of 22's (High Standard, Browning Challenger, Colt Woodsman Match Targets, S&W Straightline, etc.). The High Standards I've bought (something like 7 of them) are all old (1960 or older) and shoot very well and are very accurate. I've had no feeding problems, but then again I'm not put thousands of rounds through them in a year. And from looking at the gun shows, they keep going up in value. I like them a lot and they are some of my favorite 22's.