Ruger Mark III, 22/45, or Browning Buck Mark? - Page 2

gyvel · May 7, 2012, 04:32 AM

Given the choice, I will pick steel over aluminum every day of the week. The Ruger may have some idiosyncrasies, but you can't beat steel.

I owned a Buckmark briefly back in the 80s when they first came out; I was not impressed with the accuracy, which was mediocre at best, although I seem to remember it functioned well enough. I sold it, and never looked back.

Ruger parts and magazines, as a general rule, are a lot cheaper and a lot more common than Buckmark parts and magazines.

Finally, I have owned my Ruger since 1965, and, other than a new recoil spring assembly, and a minor "pinching" of the frame to tighten it back up, it is still going strong after several hundred bricks of .22, although completely devoid of blue in some areas.

johnwilliamson062 · May 7, 2012, 09:33 AM

Used MK II is best.

m_liebst · May 7, 2012, 11:49 AM

Ruger has the accuracy edge.

Browning has the ergonomical grips and easy take down

Ruger at first, can be a pain to learn take down process.

Ruger has the rugged everlasting edge that's been proven for decades.

Browning has the trigger edge....... -then again, there are hundreds of after market mods for the Ruger.

Ruger MKIII can be dry-fired... has safety blocking sear to insure zero over travel of firing pin.

Ruger comes with 2 mags and a sight rail for use of red dots or scopes.../ browning only comes with 1 mag

I picked the ruger.

MythBuster · May 11, 2012, 05:49 PM

"To make the Ruger trigger equal to the Buckmark you have to spend 60+ dollars."

Not true for me. It takes me about a half hour to do the trigger to make it as good or better than the Browning. No parts or anything else to buy.

IMightBeWrong · May 12, 2012, 02:30 AM

M Liebst,

This may sound odd, but NICE BM!

MythBuster · May 12, 2012, 12:08 PM

"Ruger has the accuracy edge."

Some may and some will not.

Stevie-Ray · May 12, 2012, 08:21 PM

Rugers ARE generally more accurate. My 5 1/2" Mark II was more accurate than my buddy's 10" Buckmark; even he agreed. He bought a shorter barrel for his just for the handiness. My Mark II was purchased because I liked my original RST-6 so much. And don't worry about people's reports about tough takedown on Rugers; once you do it a few times it's very easy. But I agree with most, that is, find out which feels best to you. I prefer Rugers, but consider it a toss-up with new shooters.

1-UP · May 12, 2012, 09:05 PM

Both are fine pistols. As has been said many times before, it really just comes down to which one feels better in your hand. Nobody will raise an eyebrow and say you bought the wrong gun if you pick one over the other. Both pistols are held in extremely high regard and are considered head of the class until you go up a couple of price brackets to the S&W 41 and other high end guns.

excelerater · May 13, 2012, 06:03 AM

go buckmark or go home

m_liebst · May 13, 2012, 03:08 PM

I've shot buckmarks, and seen many shoot them..., I'd still pick the ruger if it came down to pin point accuracy.

Rested n scoped, the rugers are tac drivers

This pic. is a 15 shot grouping I did at 25 yards- rested/ scoped with the ruger kp512 5.5 inch barrel. ammo was Fiocchi SM320. grouping measured
.78 inch CTC... thats excluding the 2 shots I pulled.

chadio · May 13, 2012, 05:15 PM

Either - or

... you can't go wrong ...

We can sit here all day and discuss accuracy, reliability, ease of cleaning, etc.

Just get the one that you fancy the most, get on with shooting it.

B.N.Real · May 14, 2012, 11:47 PM

Buckmark or a used Ruger Mark One.

The old Ruger -all steel- with the mag release at the bottom and no new safety crxp to screw up how it shoots or functions.

I had one and it was built like a Sherman tank.

Last year I bought a almost new used Ruger Mk III 22/45 and sold it a thousand unhappy rounds and a month later.

Nothing like my old Ruger at all.

blume357 · May 15, 2012, 04:23 AM

My only experience is with a Ruger MKIII target.... has never failed to preform... can't imagine working on the trigger... it is perfect. I've shot it in a silhouette competition.... which is hitting a very small (think 3") target at 100 yards... free hand.

The only down side to the pistol, I think is the take down and reassembly.... a real pain compared to 'normal' semi-autos.... then again I finally figured out the 'dirty little secret' with the Rugers... you really don't need to clean them but maybe every 5-10 THOUSAND rounds.... just keep spraying break free in the chamber every so often and it will keep running.

I really am not a fan of the 22/45... too much plastic.

Cornbread · May 15, 2012, 07:07 AM

Never owned a Buckmark. Recently purchased a Mark 3 Hunter because I really liked the Mark 2 that I have had for years. 1500 rounds later very pleased with it too. As for the take down after it’s not that bad after you do it a couple of times. As others have said be best to try both. For me if it was any better than the Hunter wouldn’t be able to stand it !!

Don P · May 15, 2012, 07:21 AM

I'll just report what I see at our steel challenge match's. Seems the shooters using the Buck Marks are having more issues than the Ruger shooters with ammo related issues feeding jams extracting, and yes the shooters are NOT all using the same ammo. They are using different brands of ammo. Just what I see at the match's

m_liebst · May 15, 2012, 10:48 AM

Rugers don't get fussy with ammo. I can't say that for all the other brands i've seen at the range.

In the 8000+ rounds I've put through mine, less hitches than I can count on all my fingers...- most due to cheap loose ammo like remington subs.

I stick to one brand now which is CCI blazer and the gun has been shooting flawlessly since.

Fishbed77 · May 15, 2012, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Seems the shooters using the Buck Marks are having more issues than the Ruger shooters with ammo related issues feeding jams extracting, and yes the shooters are NOT all using the same ammo.

This has been my experience with Buck Mark pistols as well. It's a fantastic pistol, but seems more prone to stoppages (especially sideways stovepipes) than the Ruger pistols. I think it's a result of the slide design - the brass has to get thrown a bit further to clear the side of the ejection port in the Borwning pistols.

MythBuster · May 15, 2012, 06:19 PM

No semi auto .22 will run on junk ammo. NONE. The Ruger is no more reliable with such ammo than the buckmark or any other gun.

JimPage · May 15, 2012, 06:40 PM

I have two mark one Rugers. -- a field model, 4.5" bbl (I think) and a target model. Best guns I have ever shot for accuracy, toughness and reliability. And I have about a dozen pistols.

BillyJack3 · May 15, 2012, 08:43 PM

Just finished researching and looking at both. Came home with the Buckmark. Both are top of the line. The Buckmark just felt so much better in my hand. Went straight to the range and put down 300 flawless rounds after 1 failure to feed in the first mag. Federal bulk. Love everything about this gun.

Next purchase will be a 10/22 so I'm still high on Rugers.

idek · May 15, 2012, 08:57 PM

Like many others have said, it came down to the grips for me. The browning with the URX grip filled my hand the best and I liked the angle. The MkIII was second place, and the 22/45 was a distant third.

I will admit that my Buckmark doesn't seem to like some types of cheap ammo (Remington gold plate and Winchester Wildcat), but it does very well with inexpensive CCI Blazer ammo. From my perspective, if I've found some types of ammo that DO work well, it doesn't really matter much if other types don't work well. I just buy the stuff it likes and both me and the gun are happy.

m_liebst · May 16, 2012, 10:14 AM

Quote:

No semi auto .22 will run on junk ammo. NONE. The Ruger is no more reliable with such ammo than the buckmark or any other gun.

depends on what your definition is of junk ammo. I'd like to know what that is? My definition is remington bulk( especially- thunderbolts/ an subsonics).

zincwarrior · May 16, 2012, 10:42 AM

Copy them then block the copy and hit the little quote icon is one way.

Quote:

Just finished researching and looking at both. Came home with the Buckmark. Both are top of the line. The Buckmark just felt so much better in my hand. Went straight to the range and put down 300 flawless rounds after 1 failure to feed in the first mag. Federal bulk. Love everything about this gun.

Next purchase will be a 10/22 so I'm still high on Rugers.

Indeed, I think the grip difference is the key factor. Neither is better, its justa personal preference thing. Others, like myself can be fine with either, although I did have a preference for the sharper angle on the Ruger III (and berette NEO as well).

May 7, 2012, 11:49 AM	#28
m_liebst Senior Member Join Date: February 2, 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 301	Ruger has the accuracy edge. Browning has the ergonomical grips and easy take down Ruger at first, can be a pain to learn take down process. Ruger has the rugged everlasting edge that's been proven for decades. Browning has the trigger edge....... -then again, there are hundreds of after market mods for the Ruger. Ruger MKIII can be dry-fired... has safety blocking sear to insure zero over travel of firing pin. Ruger comes with 2 mags and a sight rail for use of red dots or scopes.../ browning only comes with 1 mag I picked the ruger. Last edited by m_liebst; May 7, 2012 at 02:22 PM.

May 12, 2012, 02:30 AM	#30
IMightBeWrong Senior Member Join Date: March 22, 2009 Posts: 814	M Liebst, This may sound odd, but NICE BM! __________________ "Intelligence is nothing more than discussing things with others. Limitless wisdom comes of this." - 山本常朝

May 12, 2012, 08:21 PM	#32
Stevie-Ray Senior Member Join Date: May 22, 2007 Location: The shores of Lake Huron Posts: 4,783	Rugers ARE generally more accurate. My 5 1/2" Mark II was more accurate than my buddy's 10" Buckmark; even he agreed. He bought a shorter barrel for his just for the handiness. My Mark II was purchased because I liked my original RST-6 so much. And don't worry about people's reports about tough takedown on Rugers; once you do it a few times it's very easy. But I agree with most, that is, find out which feels best to you. I prefer Rugers, but consider it a toss-up with new shooters. __________________ Stevie-Ray Join the NRA/ILA I am the weapon; my gun is a tool. It's regrettable that with some people those descriptors are reversed.

May 13, 2012, 03:08 PM	#35
m_liebst Senior Member Join Date: February 2, 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 301	I've shot buckmarks, and seen many shoot them..., I'd still pick the ruger if it came down to pin point accuracy. Rested n scoped, the rugers are tac drivers This pic. is a 15 shot grouping I did at 25 yards- rested/ scoped with the ruger kp512 5.5 inch barrel. ammo was Fiocchi SM320. grouping measured .78 inch CTC... thats excluding the 2 shots I pulled. Last edited by m_liebst; May 13, 2012 at 03:55 PM.

May 13, 2012, 05:15 PM	#36
chadio Senior Member Join Date: June 29, 2011 Posts: 931	Either - or ... you can't go wrong ... We can sit here all day and discuss accuracy, reliability, ease of cleaning, etc. Just get the one that you fancy the most, get on with shooting it. __________________ Ex - Navy, Persian Gulf Veteran. Loved shooting the M14, 1911, M60, M2

May 7, 2012, 04:32 AM	#26
gyvel Senior Member Join Date: August 30, 2009 Location: Northern AZ Posts: 7,172	Given the choice, I will pick steel over aluminum every day of the week. The Ruger may have some idiosyncrasies, but you can't beat steel. I owned a Buckmark briefly back in the 80s when they first came out; I was not impressed with the accuracy, which was mediocre at best, although I seem to remember it functioned well enough. I sold it, and never looked back. Ruger parts and magazines, as a general rule, are a lot cheaper and a lot more common than Buckmark parts and magazines. Finally, I have owned my Ruger since 1965, and, other than a new recoil spring assembly, and a minor "pinching" of the frame to tighten it back up, it is still going strong after several hundred bricks of .22, although completely devoid of blue in some areas.

May 7, 2012, 09:33 AM	#27
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	Used MK II is best.

May 11, 2012, 05:49 PM	#29
MythBuster Senior Member Join Date: March 8, 2007 Posts: 629	"To make the Ruger trigger equal to the Buckmark you have to spend 60+ dollars." Not true for me. It takes me about a half hour to do the trigger to make it as good or better than the Browning. No parts or anything else to buy.

May 12, 2012, 12:08 PM	#31
MythBuster Senior Member Join Date: March 8, 2007 Posts: 629	"Ruger has the accuracy edge." Some may and some will not.

May 12, 2012, 09:05 PM	#33
1-UP Senior Member Join Date: April 14, 2008 Location: Southern MI Posts: 250	Both are fine pistols. As has been said many times before, it really just comes down to which one feels better in your hand. Nobody will raise an eyebrow and say you bought the wrong gun if you pick one over the other. Both pistols are held in extremely high regard and are considered head of the class until you go up a couple of price brackets to the S&W 41 and other high end guns.

May 13, 2012, 06:03 AM	#34
excelerater Junior member Join Date: June 27, 2011 Location: Memphis TN Posts: 694	go buckmark or go home

May 14, 2012, 11:47 PM	#37
B.N.Real Senior Member Join Date: February 22, 2008 Posts: 4,092	Buckmark or a used Ruger Mark One. The old Ruger -all steel- with the mag release at the bottom and no new safety crxp to screw up how it shoots or functions. I had one and it was built like a Sherman tank. Last year I bought a almost new used Ruger Mk III 22/45 and sold it a thousand unhappy rounds and a month later. Nothing like my old Ruger at all.

May 15, 2012, 04:23 AM	#38
blume357 Senior Member Join Date: August 2, 2005 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 3,943	My only experience is with a Ruger MKIII target.... has never failed to preform... can't imagine working on the trigger... it is perfect. I've shot it in a silhouette competition.... which is hitting a very small (think 3") target at 100 yards... free hand. The only down side to the pistol, I think is the take down and reassembly.... a real pain compared to 'normal' semi-autos.... then again I finally figured out the 'dirty little secret' with the Rugers... you really don't need to clean them but maybe every 5-10 THOUSAND rounds.... just keep spraying break free in the chamber every so often and it will keep running. I really am not a fan of the 22/45... too much plastic.

May 15, 2012, 07:07 AM	#39
Cornbread Senior Member Join Date: January 12, 2012 Posts: 103	Never owned a Buckmark. Recently purchased a Mark 3 Hunter because I really liked the Mark 2 that I have had for years. 1500 rounds later very pleased with it too. As for the take down after it’s not that bad after you do it a couple of times. As others have said be best to try both. For me if it was any better than the Hunter wouldn’t be able to stand it !!

May 15, 2012, 07:21 AM	#40
Don P Senior Member Join Date: December 17, 2005 Location: Swamp dweller Posts: 6,187	I'll just report what I see at our steel challenge match's. Seems the shooters using the Buck Marks are having more issues than the Ruger shooters with ammo related issues feeding jams extracting, and yes the shooters are NOT all using the same ammo. They are using different brands of ammo. Just what I see at the match's __________________ *NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer, ICORE Range Officer, ,MAG 40 Graduate* *As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.*

May 15, 2012, 10:48 AM	#41
m_liebst Senior Member Join Date: February 2, 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 301	Rugers don't get fussy with ammo. I can't say that for all the other brands i've seen at the range. In the 8000+ rounds I've put through mine, less hitches than I can count on all my fingers...- most due to cheap loose ammo like remington subs. I stick to one brand now which is CCI blazer and the gun has been shooting flawlessly since. Last edited by m_liebst; May 15, 2012 at 11:47 AM.

May 15, 2012, 06:19 PM	#43
MythBuster Senior Member Join Date: March 8, 2007 Posts: 629	No semi auto .22 will run on junk ammo. NONE. The Ruger is no more reliable with such ammo than the buckmark or any other gun.

May 15, 2012, 06:40 PM	#44
JimPage Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2010 Location: Rome, NY Posts: 941	I have two mark one Rugers. -- a field model, 4.5" bbl (I think) and a target model. Best guns I have ever shot for accuracy, toughness and reliability. And I have about a dozen pistols. __________________ Jim Page Cogito, ergo armatum sum

May 15, 2012, 08:43 PM	#45
BillyJack3 Senior Member Join Date: May 2, 2012 Posts: 423	Just finished researching and looking at both. Came home with the Buckmark. Both are top of the line. The Buckmark just felt so much better in my hand. Went straight to the range and put down 300 flawless rounds after 1 failure to feed in the first mag. Federal bulk. Love everything about this gun. Next purchase will be a 10/22 so I'm still high on Rugers. Last edited by BillyJack3; May 16, 2012 at 09:04 AM.

May 15, 2012, 08:57 PM	#46
idek Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2009 Posts: 903	Like many others have said, it came down to the grips for me. The browning with the URX grip filled my hand the best and I liked the angle. The MkIII was second place, and the 22/45 was a distant third. I will admit that my Buckmark doesn't seem to like some types of cheap ammo (Remington gold plate and Winchester Wildcat), but it does very well with inexpensive CCI Blazer ammo. From my perspective, if I've found some types of ammo that DO work well, it doesn't really matter much if other types don't work well. I just buy the stuff it likes and both me and the gun are happy.