Ruger Mark III vs Charger .22lr vs Beretta NEOS

Elliottsdad · January 31, 2016, 08:29 PM

So here's the deal: I have the queen's blessing to pick up a .22 pistol. I can't look a gift horse in the mouth, so I should keep it relatively cheap (for example, I like the Bearcat a lot, but it's waaay overbudget). I like Rugers as a rule, but have read a few things turning me off of their SR22 (and mostly that I handled one and it felt downright chintzy). That leaves these three:

I already have a 10/22 Carbine, so the commonality of magazines/actions with the 10/22 Charger is cool. However, it still seems like more of a short barreled rifle than a pistol. Does anyone else feel that way?

The Mark III is on the table, too, but how is it with different types/qualities of ammo? Also I've read it's a bear to field strip, which isn't a deal-breaker, but a consideration nonetheless.

Which action is better/more reliable? Am I missing anything here that I should be thinking about these two?

Also, and God I hate to say it, but the Beretta U22 NEOS has caught my eye too. It is one of the ugliest MOFOS I've ever seen, but I like Beretta's quality. Do the U22s compare with the two Rugers in your eyes? Why/why not?

Thanks!

osbornk · January 31, 2016, 10:08 PM

The mark even uses the same extractor as the 10/22

gyvel · January 31, 2016, 10:23 PM

So far 3 to 0 in favor of the Mk III.

MkIIIs are not that hard to field strip if you follow the directions. Also, the magazine can be removed and there is an aftermarket drop in insert to take the place of the mag disconnect mechanism. Removing the disconnect improves magazine insertion/removal 1000%.

Your gut feeling about the Charger is absolutely correct. It is, in essence, a short barreled rifle. Not really in the legal sense, but a big clumsy thing to drag around and shoot. If you already have a 10/22, why bother with another one?

Beretta Neos? Besides the parts availability and cost factors, it is a revival of the failed Colt Cadet, which, in turn, was a revival of the old Hi-Standard Duramatic (also known as "problematic). For more info on the Neos, Google "Beretta Neos problems."

My vote, obviously, is for the Ruger Mk III. My Ruger is not a Mk III, but I have had it for over 50 years.

Buzzcook · January 31, 2016, 10:31 PM

The Ruger MK series are solid guns. I've owned a Mk !! for many years and it's more accurate than I am.

The NEOS reportedly had some teething problems, but from what I've heard is they've been taken care of.
My problem with it is weight. it's very light.

I've no experience with the Charger.

Cheapshooter · January 31, 2016, 10:34 PM

Quote:

If you already have a 10/22, why bother with another one?

Ah, because tyey are waaaay cool! Just picked up a new Charger Takedown Friday to complement my 10-22 Takkedawn. Even waaaaay cooler!
However, for a general use, plinking, and informal target handgun, I would suggest the OP stick with the Ruher MkIII. The waaaay cool Charger is kind of a niche gun.
Neos if you must. They are accurate, but they look like something I had as a kid in the 50's that squirted water out the end when you pull the trigger.

TheDevilThatYouKnow · February 1, 2016, 01:30 AM

While the reassembly procedure for a Ruger Mk I/II/III isn't intuitive, you can easily follow along by reading the booklet or watching a video. Or, you can spend a few dollars and get a 'quick take-down' kit from a big catalog store.

That said, I was shooting my MkII for a decade and a half before I did a deep-cleaning on it. A yearly dunk and swish in kerosene kept it quite clean.

kozak6 · February 1, 2016, 02:48 AM

What do you want in a pistol?

You ever see a Charger in person? It's huge, and not designed for offhand shooting. If you want to shoot it from a bench, though, it's the way to go.

There's nothing wrong the the Neos, and there's even a carbine kit for it.

Ruger's MK series pistols set the standard for .22 pistols, and would be a fine choice.

gyvel · February 1, 2016, 03:29 AM

Quote:

There's nothing wrong the the Neos, and there's even a carbine kit for it.

There's plenty wrong with the Neos: It is the third incarnation of the old Hi-Standard Duramatic (aka "Problematic"), which morphed into the Colt Cadet, another prize that's no longer being made, and has inherited all the faults of its ancestors.

rt11002003 · February 1, 2016, 01:20 PM

I'd have to recommend the Ruger Mark iii. Own two and use them a lot, almost always have one of them with me on a range visit. If not, I have a 10-22, or an Aschutz rifle.

weblance · February 1, 2016, 01:53 PM

I have all 4. The Charger isnt a pistol. Ok... yeah technically, it is, but doesnt really fit the group "pistol" Try shooting it one handed, and you will see.

I like my 2 Neos pistols. They are great for someone on a budget. The trigger however, is very creepy and there aren't any aftermarket parts to improve it.

The Buckmark is a good pistol, but I think the Ruger is a tougher pistol. I bought both my Buckmarks used, and both had the plastic recoil buffer beat out of them, and both the recoil rods were bent. One of the pistols had been shot in this condition for so long, the rear recoil post has damage. This is part of the aluminum frame, and cant be replaced. Its still decent enough that its not a concern, but if the Ruger suffers damage from the bolt beating the recoil pin, that part IS replaceable.

IMHO, the Ruger pistol is best. I have 4 of them, and all 4 are excellent shooters. I dont have any problem with dis/reassembly, but it can be a challenge for some. IF you buy the Ruger, and simply can not figure out how to tear it down, buy the Majestic Arms 3.2 Speed Strip kit from MidwayUSA. It offers a new hammer for better trigger pull, the replacement bushing for removal of the magazine disconnect, AND offers the benefit of the Speed Strip. MidwayUSA has it for $60.

weblance · February 1, 2016, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gyvel

There's plenty wrong with the Neos: It is the third incarnation of the old Hi-Standard Duramatic (aka "Problematic"), which morphed into the Colt Cadet, another prize that's no longer being made, and has inherited all the faults of its ancestors.

Other than a creepy trigger, tell us what specifically is wrong with the Neos...? I have had two of them for years, including the carbine kit. They are accurate, and perfectly reliable. In fact, I dont think I have ever had a malfunction with either of my Neos pistols. I have around 12,000 rounds through the one I keep configured as a pistol, and I see no damage, or unusual wear. For a pistol that shoots straight, goes bang every time, and costs $250, I sure dont see that as having all the faults of its ancestors.

pilpens · February 1, 2016, 02:25 PM

I would stick with a pistol (Ruger MKIII, Ruger 22/45, Browning Buckmark).
5.5" barrel balances best for most user.
Pick the one that fits you best. Do not worry about durability or assembly/disassembly issues -- they are overblown on the internet. Accuracy are equal.
--- Ruger MKxxx is built tougher than buckmark but both will last many many many rounds.

I voted Ruger MKIII from your list.

Pahoo · February 1, 2016, 02:37 PM

Quote:

I voted Ruger MKIII from your list.

Yep and you did not mention a specific model. These are all over the place and of these, the 22/45 would be the least desirable. The top of the line is the Hunters, target or competition models.. ....

The Charger is one of those firearms that is a bit confused as to what it should be. If you already have a rifle, you will find that you won't shoot the Charger, all that much. The Charger is a hoot to shoot but the feeling won't last long ...

Be Safe !!!!

Limnophile · February 1, 2016, 03:02 PM

The Charger and NEOS are jokes, or, at best, niche pistols. I'd opt for a Browning Buckmark over a Ruger Mark III -- better quality.

osbornk · February 1, 2016, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Yep and you did not mention a specific model. These are all over the place and of these, the 22/45 would be the least desirable. The top of the line is the Hunters, target or competition models.. ....

And I bought a 22/45 because it has the feel and angle of a 1911 in case I ever wanted one. The only problem is that I then just had to have a 1911 in 9mm. They do feel, aim and shoot very much the same.

aarondhgraham · February 1, 2016, 03:17 PM

Despite the naysayers,,,
I have three NEOS pistols,,,
And they are accurate performers.

The thing about the NEOS is,,,
You either love them or hate them,,,
There doesn't seem to be any middle ground.

I own one version of all of the Big-Five pistols,,,
As far as overall quality and performance,,,
I would probably give the nod to Ruger.

I personally like the 22/45 version better than the MK version,,,
But some people hate the polymer frame of the 22/45.

My Buckmark hunter is a fantastic shooter,,,
It's longer barrel give it an easy-to-hit-with sight radius.

My S&W 22A is a very nice pistol,,,
But it just doesn't ring my chimes at all.

Now back to the Beretta NEOS,,,
You really need to hold one before you buy.

Actually you should hold/heft/fondle any pistol you consider,,,
Buying a handgun by specs alone is a very "iffy" thing.

NEOS' have an extremely slender grip,,,
With an angle of grip that is extremely raked,,,
In ten seconds you will know whether you like it or not.

All three of my NEOS (4.5" - 6" - Carbine) eat bulk ammo like crazy,,,
Shooting at 25 yards (from a pistol rest) they group just as tightly as my other pistols.

So don't take the NEOS bashing as gospel,,,
I often wonder if the bashers have ever fired one.

Aarond

.

Cheapshooter · February 1, 2016, 03:20 PM

First, for the OP, as I said, MK III, or Neos. Maybe look at a Buckmark as well.
Now, to the Charger. I'm sure mine will be shot a lot, and fill it's role well.
Walther P22--- SD practice, and target busting @10 yds
Buckmark Camper---reactive target, and can bouncing@25 yds.
Charger--- Bullseye, reactive targets, can bouncing, and an occasional squirrel&gravy dinner out to 5O yds.
T/C Contender 14" 22 Long Rifle Match----Bullseye, and reactive targets out to 100 yds.
So you see Elliotsdad, like potato chips, one 22 handgun just isn't enough!

dgludwig · February 1, 2016, 03:23 PM

I voted for the Mark III because I've had great success using Ruger .22 semi-auto pistols over the past fifty years or so. Very accurate and reliable from the box. Their triggers can sometimes benefit from a little help and the take-down/reassemble field-strip is a little more involved than some other pistols. My favorite Mark iteration is actually the Mark II variant.

Admittedly, a totally subjective opinion here but I can't bear the pretentious, over-wrought looks of the Neo. For those who can get past the looks (or even like them

), I'm sure the futuristic, Wolverine-wannabe looking Beretta is a fine pistol for all the things that really count (accuracy, reliability, durability, etc.).

Elliottsdad · February 1, 2016, 05:37 PM

Well, I guess that's that. I'll be checking out the Mark III next chance I get! I'll let you know what I end up with either way. Thanks for your opinions!

Venom1956 · February 1, 2016, 05:39 PM

I have all three but if i had to pick one id would be a Mk2 its better then a mk3 but you can take out and replace most of what makes the mk3 worse.

samsmix · February 1, 2016, 06:21 PM

I voted MKIII. Accurate, tough, reliable, classic, classy.

The Neos...well, if it's B-list sci-fi looks didn't turn me off I'd own one. It isn't as rugged as the Ruger, but they are reportedly capable of good accuracy. If someone said "Let's go rabbit hunting, I'll let you use my Neos" I wouldn't feel screwed over.

The charger is..I..I just... No.

James K · February 1, 2016, 06:23 PM

I don't recommend the NEOS. The design started out as the High Standard Dura-Matic, a made-to-a-price competitor to the Ruger standard model. The NEOS worked or it didn't; when it didn't, it was a real PITA for the owners. The design was later bought by Colt, then unloaded on Beretta; the changes of manufacturer didn't resolve the problems. For a .22 general purpose autoloader, get the Ruger, preferably the Mk II if one can be found,

Jim

samsmix · February 1, 2016, 06:50 PM

JamesK,

Since we are talking Ruger MK's elsewhere as well...

What is your preference for the MKII over the MKIII?

Ocraknife · February 1, 2016, 07:51 PM

You might want to check out the S&W Victory if you can find one. I'm a fan of the Ruger MK series but that Victory caught my eye.

J_wood · February 1, 2016, 08:08 PM

IMHO you shouldnt dismiss the sr22. Its not a "target pistol" like your other choices, but super fun to shoot and 99% reliable with any ammo. I've had mine for almost 3 yrs and 2k+ thru it of any kind of ammo I can find and it all works.

View Poll Results: Which of these three rimfires?
Ruger Charger	2	6.90%
Ruger Mark III	24	82.76%
Beretta NEOS	3	10.34%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

January 31, 2016, 08:29 PM	#1
Elliottsdad Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2010 Location: Glenwood, Iowa Posts: 238	Ruger Mark III vs Charger .22lr vs Beretta NEOS So here's the deal: I have the queen's blessing to pick up a .22 pistol. I can't look a gift horse in the mouth, so I should keep it relatively cheap (for example, I like the Bearcat a lot, but it's waaay overbudget). I like Rugers as a rule, but have read a few things turning me off of their SR22 (and mostly that I handled one and it felt downright chintzy). That leaves these three: I already have a 10/22 Carbine, so the commonality of magazines/actions with the 10/22 Charger is cool. However, it still seems like more of a short barreled rifle than a pistol. Does anyone else feel that way? The Mark III is on the table, too, but how is it with different types/qualities of ammo? Also I've read it's a bear to field strip, which isn't a deal-breaker, but a consideration nonetheless. Which action is better/more reliable? Am I missing anything here that I should be thinking about these two? Also, and God I hate to say it, but the Beretta U22 NEOS has caught my eye too. It is one of the ugliest MOFOS I've ever seen, but I like Beretta's quality. Do the U22s compare with the two Rugers in your eyes? Why/why not? Thanks!

January 31, 2016, 10:23 PM	#3
gyvel Senior Member Join Date: August 30, 2009 Location: Northern AZ Posts: 7,172	So far 3 to 0 in favor of the Mk III. MkIIIs are not that hard to field strip if you follow the directions. Also, the magazine can be removed and there is an aftermarket drop in insert to take the place of the mag disconnect mechanism. Removing the disconnect improves magazine insertion/removal 1000%. Your gut feeling about the Charger is absolutely correct. It is, in essence, a short barreled rifle. Not really in the legal sense, but a big clumsy thing to drag around and shoot. If you already have a 10/22, why bother with another one? Beretta Neos? Besides the parts availability and cost factors, it is a revival of the failed Colt Cadet, which, in turn, was a revival of the old Hi-Standard Duramatic (also known as "problematic). For more info on the Neos, Google "Beretta Neos problems." My vote, obviously, is for the Ruger Mk III. My Ruger is not a Mk III, but I have had it for over 50 years. __________________ As always, YMMV. __________________________________________ MIIAA SIFE

February 1, 2016, 03:17 PM	#16
aarondhgraham Senior Member Join Date: December 1, 2009 Location: Stillwater, OKlahoma Posts: 8,638	Despite the naysayers,,, Despite the naysayers,,, I have three NEOS pistols,,, And they are accurate performers. The thing about the NEOS is,,, You either love them or hate them,,, There doesn't seem to be any middle ground. I own one version of all of the Big-Five pistols,,, As far as overall quality and performance,,, I would probably give the nod to Ruger. I personally like the 22/45 version better than the MK version,,, But some people hate the polymer frame of the 22/45. My Buckmark hunter is a fantastic shooter,,, It's longer barrel give it an easy-to-hit-with sight radius. My S&W 22A is a very nice pistol,,, But it just doesn't ring my chimes at all. Now back to the Beretta NEOS,,, You really need to hold one before you buy. Actually you should hold/heft/fondle any pistol you consider,,, Buying a handgun by specs alone is a very "iffy" thing. NEOS' have an extremely slender grip,,, With an angle of grip that is extremely raked,,, In ten seconds you will know whether you like it or not. All three of my NEOS (4.5" - 6" - Carbine) eat bulk ammo like crazy,,, Shooting at 25 yards (from a pistol rest) they group just as tightly as my other pistols. So don't take the NEOS bashing as gospel,,, I often wonder if the bashers have ever fired one. 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)

February 1, 2016, 03:20 PM	#17
Cheapshooter Senior Member Join Date: December 2, 2007 Location: Missouri Posts: 8,306	First, for the OP, as I said, MK III, or Neos. Maybe look at a Buckmark as well. Now, to the Charger. I'm sure mine will be shot a lot, and fill it's role well. Walther P22--- SD practice, and target busting @10 yds Buckmark Camper---reactive target, and can bouncing@25 yds. Charger--- Bullseye, reactive targets, can bouncing, and an occasional squirrel&gravy dinner out to 5O yds. T/C Contender 14" 22 Long Rifle Match----Bullseye, and reactive targets out to 100 yds. So you see Elliotsdad, like potato chips, one 22 handgun just isn't enough! __________________ Cheapshooter's rules of gun ownership #1: NEVER SELL OR TRADE ANYTHING!

January 31, 2016, 10:08 PM	#2
osbornk Senior Member Join Date: August 11, 2012 Location: Mountains of Appalachia Posts: 1,598	The mark even uses the same extractor as the 10/22

January 31, 2016, 10:31 PM	#4
Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 6,126	The Ruger MK series are solid guns. I've owned a Mk !! for many years and it's more accurate than I am. The NEOS reportedly had some teething problems, but from what I've heard is they've been taken care of. My problem with it is weight. it's very light. I've no experience with the Charger.

February 1, 2016, 01:30 AM	#6
TheDevilThatYouKnow Member Join Date: November 22, 2015 Posts: 89	While the reassembly procedure for a Ruger Mk I/II/III isn't intuitive, you can easily follow along by reading the booklet or watching a video. Or, you can spend a few dollars and get a 'quick take-down' kit from a big catalog store. That said, I was shooting my MkII for a decade and a half before I did a deep-cleaning on it. A yearly dunk and swish in kerosene kept it quite clean.

February 1, 2016, 02:48 AM	#7
kozak6 Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2005 Location: AZ Posts: 3,113	What do you want in a pistol? You ever see a Charger in person? It's huge, and not designed for offhand shooting. If you want to shoot it from a bench, though, it's the way to go. There's nothing wrong the the Neos, and there's even a carbine kit for it. Ruger's MK series pistols set the standard for .22 pistols, and would be a fine choice.

February 1, 2016, 01:20 PM	#9
rt11002003 Senior Member Join Date: June 25, 2014 Posts: 524	I'd have to recommend the Ruger Mark iii. Own two and use them a lot, almost always have one of them with me on a range visit. If not, I have a 10-22, or an Aschutz rifle.

February 1, 2016, 01:53 PM	#10
weblance Senior Member Join Date: October 3, 2012 Posts: 1,229	I have all 4. The Charger isnt a pistol. Ok... yeah technically, it is, but doesnt really fit the group "pistol" Try shooting it one handed, and you will see. I like my 2 Neos pistols. They are great for someone on a budget. The trigger however, is very creepy and there aren't any aftermarket parts to improve it. The Buckmark is a good pistol, but I think the Ruger is a tougher pistol. I bought both my Buckmarks used, and both had the plastic recoil buffer beat out of them, and both the recoil rods were bent. One of the pistols had been shot in this condition for so long, the rear recoil post has damage. This is part of the aluminum frame, and cant be replaced. Its still decent enough that its not a concern, but if the Ruger suffers damage from the bolt beating the recoil pin, that part IS replaceable. IMHO, the Ruger pistol is best. I have 4 of them, and all 4 are excellent shooters. I dont have any problem with dis/reassembly, but it can be a challenge for some. IF you buy the Ruger, and simply can not figure out how to tear it down, buy the Majestic Arms 3.2 Speed Strip kit from MidwayUSA. It offers a new hammer for better trigger pull, the replacement bushing for removal of the magazine disconnect, AND offers the benefit of the Speed Strip. MidwayUSA has it for $60.

February 1, 2016, 02:25 PM	#12
pilpens Senior Member Join Date: April 24, 2008 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,696	I would stick with a pistol (Ruger MKIII, Ruger 22/45, Browning Buckmark). 5.5" barrel balances best for most user. Pick the one that fits you best. Do not worry about durability or assembly/disassembly issues -- they are overblown on the internet. Accuracy are equal. --- Ruger MKxxx is built tougher than buckmark but both will last many many many rounds. I voted Ruger MKIII from your list.

February 1, 2016, 03:02 PM	#14
Limnophile Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2015 Location: Issaquah, Washington Posts: 1,032	The Charger and NEOS are jokes, or, at best, niche pistols. I'd opt for a Browning Buckmark over a Ruger Mark III -- better quality.

February 1, 2016, 03:23 PM	#18
dgludwig Senior Member Join Date: February 12, 2005 Location: North central Ohio Posts: 7,486	I voted for the Mark III because I've had great success using Ruger .22 semi-auto pistols over the past fifty years or so. Very accurate and reliable from the box. Their triggers can sometimes benefit from a little help and the take-down/reassemble field-strip is a little more involved than some other pistols. My favorite Mark iteration is actually the Mark II variant. Admittedly, a totally subjective opinion here but I can't bear the pretentious, over-wrought looks of the Neo. For those who can get past the looks (or even like them ), I'm sure the futuristic, Wolverine-wannabe looking Beretta is a fine pistol for all the things that really count (accuracy, reliability, durability, etc.). __________________ ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED ...Aristotle NRA Benefactor Life Member

February 1, 2016, 05:37 PM	#19
Elliottsdad Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2010 Location: Glenwood, Iowa Posts: 238	Well, I guess that's that. I'll be checking out the Mark III next chance I get! I'll let you know what I end up with either way. Thanks for your opinions!

February 1, 2016, 05:39 PM	#20
Venom1956 Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2008 Location: WI Posts: 3,656	I have all three but if i had to pick one id would be a Mk2 its better then a mk3 but you can take out and replace most of what makes the mk3 worse. __________________ 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

February 1, 2016, 06:21 PM	#21
samsmix Senior Member Join Date: June 29, 2006 Location: Montana (Montucky?) Posts: 1,273	I voted MKIII. Accurate, tough, reliable, classic, classy. The Neos...well, if it's B-list sci-fi looks didn't turn me off I'd own one. It isn't as rugged as the Ruger, but they are reportedly capable of good accuracy. If someone said "Let's go rabbit hunting, I'll let you use my Neos" I wouldn't feel screwed over. The charger is..I..I just... No. __________________ You'll probably never NEED a gun. I hope you never do. But IF you do, you will need it worse than anything you've ever needed in your life. IF we're not supposed to eat animals, howcome God made 'em outta meat?

February 1, 2016, 06:23 PM	#22
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	I don't recommend the NEOS. The design started out as the High Standard Dura-Matic, a made-to-a-price competitor to the Ruger standard model. The NEOS worked or it didn't; when it didn't, it was a real PITA for the owners. The design was later bought by Colt, then unloaded on Beretta; the changes of manufacturer didn't resolve the problems. For a .22 general purpose autoloader, get the Ruger, preferably the Mk II if one can be found, Jim

February 1, 2016, 06:50 PM	#23
samsmix Senior Member Join Date: June 29, 2006 Location: Montana (Montucky?) Posts: 1,273	JamesK, Since we are talking Ruger MK's elsewhere as well... What is your preference for the MKII over the MKIII? __________________ You'll probably never NEED a gun. I hope you never do. But IF you do, you will need it worse than anything you've ever needed in your life. IF we're not supposed to eat animals, howcome God made 'em outta meat?

February 1, 2016, 07:51 PM	#24
Ocraknife Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2002 Location: Nashville Posts: 1,117	You might want to check out the S&W Victory if you can find one. I'm a fan of the Ruger MK series but that Victory caught my eye. __________________ "The loudest sound you'll ever hear is a "bang" when you weren't expecting one." -Jimro

February 1, 2016, 08:08 PM	#25
J_wood Member Join Date: October 19, 2015 Posts: 23	IMHO you shouldnt dismiss the sr22. Its not a "target pistol" like your other choices, but super fun to shoot and 99% reliable with any ammo. I've had mine for almost 3 yrs and 2k+ thru it of any kind of ammo I can find and it all works.