M&P22 or Browning Buck Mark

soapboxpreacher · April 13, 2012, 03:12 PM

Posted this question elsewhere to get as much info and thinking as possible. A little background I have an M&P9 Full Size...so I am strongly considering the M&P. Initially I was simply going to get the Buck Mark. I also considered the Ruger MKIII but several people commented on the picky ammo issues and the nightmare taking apart to clean. I know the Buck will be more accurate and the M&P will probably be more fun. The M&P22 is new yet getting very good reviews for reliability and ability to shoot damn near any type of Ammo. What am I going to miss with going with the M&P over the Buck? I was considering getting both but not sure about that either if that is just foolish. Let me know what you guys think. Thanks

zincwarrior · April 13, 2012, 03:20 PM

The Buckmark, in addition to being inexpensive, has a fixed barrel. Like the Ruger you noted, the Beretta Neo, the S&W 21 (I think its called a 21), they are more accurate than most people are. Add to that uniformly good triggers and adjustable sights and most people swear by them. As a reference, with a simple Buckmark camper I routinely will freehand a half inch group at 7 yards (I like to shoot the small sized hole fillers from shoot n see targets).

The S&W would be a better choice if you are specifically looking to replicate the M&P in all aspects and have lots of practice on a less expensive budget. Still fun to shoot, just not as awe inspiringly accurate as the above pistols.

aarondhgraham · April 13, 2012, 03:21 PM

But I'm a notorious proponent of matching rimfire/centerfire handguns.

I firmly believe that lotsa practice with the affordable .22 ammo,,,
Translates to better performance with the centerfire pistol.

You might (and I stress might) lose some pinpoint accuracy with the M&P 22,,,
But not enough to make practice with the M&P unproductive.

Besides,,,
A buckmark isn't that costly,,,
Buy the M&P 22 first as an understudy,,,
Then later (if you feel you want it) get a Buckmark for fun.

Either way you'll get a nice handgun,,,
It's just a matter of which one you get first.

Aarond

.

GaryH · April 13, 2012, 03:30 PM

Browning Buckmark is what I'd choose because of barrel length and reputation.

Shyzzy · April 13, 2012, 08:44 PM

I've shot the Buck and own an M&P22. I think your comment that the M&P would be more fun seems like you know what you should do.

soapboxpreacher · April 13, 2012, 10:52 PM

Shyzzy whats your take on both?

chuckles · April 14, 2012, 12:03 PM

I'm not shyzzy but both is what I did. I love my Buckmark, just got a MP.22 and haven't fired it yet but soon. I'm also going to get a MKIII hunter when I find one. Can't have too many rimfires. I have several.

MythBuster · April 14, 2012, 12:07 PM

"I also considered the Ruger MKIII but several people commented on the picky ammo issues and the nightmare taking apart to clean."

They are no more "picky about ammo" than any other .22 auto.

Also if you have average intelligence, you can read and follow simple instrustions, and can understand basic gun design they are not a problem to field strip.

GaryH · April 14, 2012, 12:50 PM

I've kinda have too many .22s at the moment. Two revolvers and 5 semi autos so far. I can't seem to help myself. When I find one at a price I consider fair I buy it. It's a sickness I think.

mitchntx · April 14, 2012, 03:55 PM

Quote:

They are no more "picky about ammo" than any other .22 auto.

Also if you have average intelligence, you can read and follow simple instrustions, and can understand basic gun design they are not a problem to field strip.

This

Further, the Ruger doesn't require a tool to "field" strip like the BM.
I have both and both are very nice 22s.

Can't go wrong with either one.

TacticalDefense1911 · April 14, 2012, 04:22 PM

Both are great guns and completely different platforms. Do you want a target gun or something that mimics a defensive handgun. If you want the former then get a Buckmark, if you want the latter get the M&P 22. I have shot or owned both and they are both very good .22 handguns. Neither would be a bad pick, just depends on what you will be using them for.

TacticalDefense1911 · April 14, 2012, 04:23 PM

Quote:

I also considered the Ruger MKIII but several people commented on the picky ammo issues

I'm not sure about other people but my Mark II will swallow anything I give it and I've ran some truely crappy ammo through it before. I think they are about as reliable as a .22 handgun can be.

whippoorwill · April 14, 2012, 04:34 PM

This morning, I did some target practice with my S&W 41, Ruger MK III (5.5 inch bull barrel), and S&W M&P22 (first time out). The ammo I was testing included Winchester Target, Remington Target, CCI Standard, CCI Green Tag, Aguila Pistol Match, Federal Gold Medal (700), and Federal Auto-Match. Here are a few comments on each pistol.

S&W 41 - Smoooooth. Best group obtained with CCI Green Tag. No FTFs or FTEs.

Ruger MKIII - A bit heavy, but a classic. Best group obtained with Remington Target. No FTFs or FTEs.

S&W22 - Not as heavy as the other two. No clear winner on best group, as several brands of ammo shot about the same. Experienced a few FTFs with the Federal ammo.

In my opinion, the S&W 41 is more of a bench pistol, the S&W M&P22 is more of a carry pistol, and the Ruger MKIII is in between. If this were about Goldilocks and the three Bears, the Ruger would be just right.

Regarding which is more fun... it depends. If you like making the smallest groups possible, then the S&W 41 followed by the Ruger MKIII are more fun. If you prefer extended carrying on a belt holster and plinking, the the S&W M&P22 is definitely more fun.

A few final comments:

1) The Ruger MKIII is not finiky about ammo. It eats anything.
2) The Ruger MKIII is not that difficult to field strip.
3) The accuracy of the S&W M&P22 (from the bench) was much better than I anticipated. It's a keeper, as are the other two.

Sorry, I've not owned a Buckmark. I hear they're very similar in performance to the Ruger.

As an aside, my Kimber 82 (Varmint Classic) preferred the Federal Gold Match of the ammo I was testing.

Crunchy Frog · April 14, 2012, 05:01 PM

I shot a Steel Challenge match today and a guy on our squad was shooting his new M&P-22. It was the first one I have seen in action. Pretty nice; he had some feeding issues but of course that could be ammo and the gun was not broken in yet (my Ruger ran great out of the box).

Shyzzy · April 14, 2012, 05:33 PM

The buck I shot was a range gun. Plenty more accurate than I am. My M&P needs some sight work before ill be happy with it. But for the most part where I pointed it hit. I enjoy shooting something closer to what I plan on owning as opposed to a different grip and sight setup.

Aeelorty · April 14, 2012, 06:03 PM

I was just wondering what are the prices on these guns? i just ordered a gsg 1911 .22 but i am thinking of something more accurate for competition in the future.

tubeshooter · April 14, 2012, 07:35 PM

Quote:

I've kinda have too many .22s at the moment. Two revolvers and 5 semi autos so far. I can't seem to help myself. When I find one at a price I consider fair I buy it. It's a sickness I think.

I've gotten this way too. My original plan was to buy one kit gun .22 revolver and that would be it for life.

Now I've added 4 semis to the list. Still want 2 other revos but it can wait, like you say kinda have more than I need right now. Plus prices are so daggone high right now anyway...

I'll bet that I'll get them eventually though. As stated, it's a sickness.

Two of my semis are Buckmarks. Fine guns; no issues.

barstoolguru · April 14, 2012, 08:53 PM

I bought my buckmark back in 1986 and still have it. It does range duty every time I go, someone is shooting it.; Has been a faithful companion

SRH78 · April 14, 2012, 09:44 PM

I can't compare the two as I haven't shot a buckmark but I also have an M&P full size and recently shot the M&P 22 and was very impressed with it. It is definitely on my list now. The buckmark may have more mechanical accuracy but the M&P 22 shot very well for me and obviously felt great in the hand, much better than the buckmark, imo. The trigger was also much better than my centerfire M&P. My suggestion is to try both but I will cast my vote for the M&P 22.

Fishbed77 · April 14, 2012, 09:45 PM

Quote:

I also considered the Ruger MKIII but several people commented on the picky ammo issues

My Ruger Mk III will eat any .22LR ammo you can feed it. Round nose, hollow point, light target ammo, cheap bulk. It doesn't care.

On the other hand, my brother's Buck Mark has always been pretty finicky. Not to the point of being frustrating, but definitely not as reliable as the Ruger. It's still a great .22 though. Fun to shoot with a great trigger.

excelerater · April 14, 2012, 09:55 PM

buckmark ,by far the ebest 22 handgun on the market

vyse.04 · April 15, 2012, 08:43 PM

If you want something close to your M&P (which seems like you do), go with the M&P .22. It's not the best choice when it comes to carry, but you will get much cheaper practice with a similar platform. To me that is the real benefit of buying most of the .22's not named Mark III, Buckmark, Neos, etc.

The target .22's fill their role just fine too, but it really depends on your intended purpose.

farmerboy · April 15, 2012, 08:50 PM

cant speak of the m&p but my buckmark is awesomely accurate and will eat any 22 ammo you feed it. I use my for plinking and for an all purpose gun to tote in the woods.

Pilot · April 16, 2012, 04:43 AM

Another vote for the Buckmark. Time tested, more accurate, and a better trigger.

PPBart · April 16, 2012, 09:08 AM

Quote:

go with the M&P .22. It's not the best choice when it comes to carry, but you will get much cheaper practice

I don't see much value in carrying a .22, but I did look at/handle a M&P.22 yesterday at Cabela's and really like it. Probably will go back and get one sometime this week.

April 13, 2012, 03:12 PM	#1
soapboxpreacher Member Join Date: March 22, 2012 Posts: 24	M&P22 or Browning Buck Mark Posted this question elsewhere to get as much info and thinking as possible. A little background I have an M&P9 Full Size...so I am strongly considering the M&P. Initially I was simply going to get the Buck Mark. I also considered the Ruger MKIII but several people commented on the picky ammo issues and the nightmare taking apart to clean. I know the Buck will be more accurate and the M&P will probably be more fun. The M&P22 is new yet getting very good reviews for reliability and ability to shoot damn near any type of Ammo. What am I going to miss with going with the M&P over the Buck? I was considering getting both but not sure about that either if that is just foolish. Let me know what you guys think. Thanks

April 13, 2012, 03:21 PM	#3
aarondhgraham Senior Member Join Date: December 1, 2009 Location: Stillwater, OKlahoma Posts: 8,638	I would advise for the M&P 22,,, But I'm a notorious proponent of matching rimfire/centerfire handguns. I firmly believe that lotsa practice with the affordable .22 ammo,,, Translates to better performance with the centerfire pistol. You might (and I stress might) lose some pinpoint accuracy with the M&P 22,,, But not enough to make practice with the M&P unproductive. Besides,,, A buckmark isn't that costly,,, Buy the M&P 22 first as an understudy,,, Then later (if you feel you want it) get a Buckmark for fun. Either way you'll get a nice handgun,,, It's just a matter of which one you get first. Aarond . __________________ Never ever give an enemy the advantage of a verbal threat. Caje: The coward dies a thousand times, the brave only once. Kirby: That's about all it takes, ain't it? Aarond is good,,, Aarond is wise,,, Always trust Aarond! (most of the time)

April 16, 2012, 04:43 AM	#24
Pilot Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2000 Posts: 4,193	Another vote for the Buckmark. Time tested, more accurate, and a better trigger. __________________ Pilot

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

April 13, 2012, 03:20 PM	#2
zincwarrior Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2011 Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex Posts: 2,259	The Buckmark, in addition to being inexpensive, has a fixed barrel. Like the Ruger you noted, the Beretta Neo, the S&W 21 (I think its called a 21), they are more accurate than most people are. Add to that uniformly good triggers and adjustable sights and most people swear by them. As a reference, with a simple Buckmark camper I routinely will freehand a half inch group at 7 yards (I like to shoot the small sized hole fillers from shoot n see targets). The S&W would be a better choice if you are specifically looking to replicate the M&P in all aspects and have lots of practice on a less expensive budget. Still fun to shoot, just not as awe inspiringly accurate as the above pistols.

April 13, 2012, 03:30 PM	#4
GaryH Senior Member Join Date: November 7, 2011 Posts: 134	Browning Buckmark is what I'd choose because of barrel length and reputation.

April 13, 2012, 08:44 PM	#5
Shyzzy Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2008 Posts: 7	I've shot the Buck and own an M&P22. I think your comment that the M&P would be more fun seems like you know what you should do.

April 13, 2012, 10:52 PM	#6
soapboxpreacher Member Join Date: March 22, 2012 Posts: 24	Shyzzy whats your take on both?

April 14, 2012, 12:03 PM	#7
chuckles Senior Member Join Date: October 26, 2005 Location: Great American Western Desert Posts: 228	I'm not shyzzy but both is what I did. I love my Buckmark, just got a MP.22 and haven't fired it yet but soon. I'm also going to get a MKIII hunter when I find one. Can't have too many rimfires. I have several.

April 14, 2012, 12:07 PM	#8
MythBuster Senior Member Join Date: March 8, 2007 Posts: 629	"I also considered the Ruger MKIII but several people commented on the picky ammo issues and the nightmare taking apart to clean." They are no more "picky about ammo" than any other .22 auto. Also if you have average intelligence, you can read and follow simple instrustions, and can understand basic gun design they are not a problem to field strip.

April 14, 2012, 12:50 PM	#9
GaryH Senior Member Join Date: November 7, 2011 Posts: 134	I've kinda have too many .22s at the moment. Two revolvers and 5 semi autos so far. I can't seem to help myself. When I find one at a price I consider fair I buy it. It's a sickness I think.

April 14, 2012, 04:22 PM	#11
TacticalDefense1911 Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,277	Both are great guns and completely different platforms. Do you want a target gun or something that mimics a defensive handgun. If you want the former then get a Buckmark, if you want the latter get the M&P 22. I have shot or owned both and they are both very good .22 handguns. Neither would be a bad pick, just depends on what you will be using them for.

April 14, 2012, 04:34 PM	#13
whippoorwill Senior Member Join Date: June 6, 2008 Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia Posts: 521	This morning, I did some target practice with my S&W 41, Ruger MK III (5.5 inch bull barrel), and S&W M&P22 (first time out). The ammo I was testing included Winchester Target, Remington Target, CCI Standard, CCI Green Tag, Aguila Pistol Match, Federal Gold Medal (700), and Federal Auto-Match. Here are a few comments on each pistol. S&W 41 - Smoooooth. Best group obtained with CCI Green Tag. No FTFs or FTEs. Ruger MKIII - A bit heavy, but a classic. Best group obtained with Remington Target. No FTFs or FTEs. S&W22 - Not as heavy as the other two. No clear winner on best group, as several brands of ammo shot about the same. Experienced a few FTFs with the Federal ammo. In my opinion, the S&W 41 is more of a bench pistol, the S&W M&P22 is more of a carry pistol, and the Ruger MKIII is in between. If this were about Goldilocks and the three Bears, the Ruger would be just right. Regarding which is more fun... it depends. If you like making the smallest groups possible, then the S&W 41 followed by the Ruger MKIII are more fun. If you prefer extended carrying on a belt holster and plinking, the the S&W M&P22 is definitely more fun. A few final comments: 1) The Ruger MKIII is not finiky about ammo. It eats anything. 2) The Ruger MKIII is not that difficult to field strip. 3) The accuracy of the S&W M&P22 (from the bench) was much better than I anticipated. It's a keeper, as are the other two. Sorry, I've not owned a Buckmark. I hear they're very similar in performance to the Ruger. As an aside, my Kimber 82 (Varmint Classic) preferred the Federal Gold Match of the ammo I was testing.

April 14, 2012, 05:01 PM	#14
Crunchy Frog Senior Member Join Date: December 26, 2008 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 591	I shot a Steel Challenge match today and a guy on our squad was shooting his new M&P-22. It was the first one I have seen in action. Pretty nice; he had some feeding issues but of course that could be ammo and the gun was not broken in yet (my Ruger ran great out of the box).

April 14, 2012, 05:33 PM	#15
Shyzzy Junior Member Join Date: December 3, 2008 Posts: 7	The buck I shot was a range gun. Plenty more accurate than I am. My M&P needs some sight work before ill be happy with it. But for the most part where I pointed it hit. I enjoy shooting something closer to what I plan on owning as opposed to a different grip and sight setup.

April 14, 2012, 06:03 PM	#16
Aeelorty Member Join Date: April 5, 2012 Location: Monroe Ohio Posts: 17	I was just wondering what are the prices on these guns? i just ordered a gsg 1911 .22 but i am thinking of something more accurate for competition in the future.

April 14, 2012, 08:53 PM	#18
barstoolguru Junior member Join Date: May 31, 2011 Posts: 180	I bought my buckmark back in 1986 and still have it. It does range duty every time I go, someone is shooting it.; Has been a faithful companion

April 14, 2012, 09:44 PM	#19
SRH78 Senior Member Join Date: April 18, 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 517	I can't compare the two as I haven't shot a buckmark but I also have an M&P full size and recently shot the M&P 22 and was very impressed with it. It is definitely on my list now. The buckmark may have more mechanical accuracy but the M&P 22 shot very well for me and obviously felt great in the hand, much better than the buckmark, imo. The trigger was also much better than my centerfire M&P. My suggestion is to try both but I will cast my vote for the M&P 22.

April 14, 2012, 09:55 PM	#21
excelerater Junior member Join Date: June 27, 2011 Location: Memphis TN Posts: 694	buckmark ,by far the ebest 22 handgun on the market

April 15, 2012, 08:43 PM	#22
vyse.04 Senior Member Join Date: February 10, 2011 Location: Virginia Posts: 685	If you want something close to your M&P (which seems like you do), go with the M&P .22. It's not the best choice when it comes to carry, but you will get much cheaper practice with a similar platform. To me that is the real benefit of buying most of the .22's not named Mark III, Buckmark, Neos, etc. The target .22's fill their role just fine too, but it really depends on your intended purpose.

April 15, 2012, 08:50 PM	#23
farmerboy Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2009 Location: Central Texas Posts: 1,343	cant speak of the m&p but my buckmark is awesomely accurate and will eat any 22 ammo you feed it. I use my for plinking and for an all purpose gun to tote in the woods.