22LR pistols, an incomplete journey

[spawndn72]

I am in complete paralysis by analysis mode. I started off thinking I knew exactly what I wanted; a Ruger Mark IV target. Of course with the internet, I started looking at comparison videos and forums and have now gone from knowing exactly what I wanted to, I have no clue what to buy or even why I wanted to buy it in the first place.

First the aluminum lower on the Mark IV target bothered me, so I looked at the stainless. That was a lot of money for a 22.

Then I looked at the Victory. It has a polymer lower which bothers me, but it is a lot cheaper.

Looked at buckmarks, but none of them just scream "buy me"

Went back to the stainless Mark IV target and then started thinking, for that amount of money, maybe a used High standard or Colt woodsman might be better.

Then I started thinking, that for that amount of money, I could buy the Victory and have enough money left over to buy a suppressor. OOOHHH suppressor...drool...

I have an old 3 screw flat gate Ruger single six that my two kids are already fighting over who gets it when I die, so I have even started looking at single 6's and 10's and S&W model 17's and 617's.

And I haven't even discussed the fact that I have also looked at all the Tandem Kross and Volquartsen upgrades for the Victory and the Mark IV's.

Now, mind you, all this started off with me wanting to buy a Ruger Mark IV target to shoot at cans in the back yard with my kids and has grown into a suppressed race gun or expensive collectors item.

The internet is great, but I kinda miss the days of just going into your local hardware store and buying whatever gun they had on the shelf that interested you.


UUGGGHHH.

[T. O'Heir]

"...for that amount of money..." Decide how much that will be first. The absolute max you want to/can spend.
"...why I wanted to buy it in the first place..." "I want one." is a reason.
"...your local hardware store..." Did not carry high end .22 target pistols. Ever see a Smith M41 or a Hämmerli or a Walther GSP in a hardware store? A Walther GSP starts at 2 grand.
"...who gets it when I die..." That's what pyramids are for. snicker.

[Ricklin]

I have 4 .22 pistols. Or 5 maybe, but def. not 6......i think.

[hot chili powder]

Get the Mk IV.....you'll be glad you did!

[tallball]

I may have owned a dozen. My favorites, in no particular order:

Browning Buck Mark
Ruger Mark II (belongs to my FiL)
Ruger Single Six
Smith and Wesson K22 Masterpiece

In no particular order turned out to be alphabetical.

I've not shot a Victory.

I take the K22 and Buck Mark with me on every range visit. (The Single Six is a great revolver, but a little bit small for my hand.)

I probably shoot the Buck Mark the best of the four.

[AzShooter]

Get the Mark IV 22/45. You can add a suppressor to it if you like, At least on the Lite version. Even though it polymer I've shot over 25,000 rounds out of mine so far and it's holding up great. If you don't want the comp or suppressor just get the Mark IV target model and be happy.

[DaleA]

You don't think this will be your only .22 pistol, do you? In which case the question is just which to buy first. I'd have no problem at all with the Ruger aluminum lower OR the S&W Victory polymer lower...but my allegiance is to Ruger.

[GarandTd]

The victory has polymer grips. Not the same as a polymer lower. Fwiw, rosewood grips are available aftermarket.

[bn12gg]

Recommendation -- Take a look at the S/W M41 and M46's on Gun Broker etc sites. One will set you back a grand but the quality is obvious after a range trip.

.02. David.

[tony pasley]

auto loading pistol my favorite is Ruger Mk II bull barrel.
Revolver is Colt Frontier Scout

[CDR_Glock]

I have a Ruger Mark II Target Competition in SS. It has a Volquartsen Trigger. Best pistol I have owned ever for a 22.

I have on order, a Ruger MARK IV SS with an integrated Suppressor. It will be a while before I get it. I just paid the taxes a month ago.

I have tried a S&W Victory. Great pistol for the money.

I have a Taurus 992 Tracker 22 LR/WMR. Great 10 Shot revolver.

Never shot a Buckmark.

I’ve owned an Advantage Arms 22 conversion for a Glock Gen 3 Compact. I have had a 22 conversion for a Sig P220. I’ve owned a Walther P22. I’ve have a Ruger Mark II 22/45.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Pathfinder45]

Well, local hardware stores have changed a lot. My folks bought a brand new Colt Woodsman at their local hardware store. But that was the in the town of Seward, Territory of Alaska, back in 1953. Sadly, that Generation has passed, but I am left as the custodian of this particular family heirloom. It's up to me to make sure the Woodsman stays in good working condition until it's properly handed off to the next generation. It's the shorter barreled sport-model, but it shoots like a target pistol. In the box there is a factory target proving it met Colt's accuracy standards, so they could let it out of the factory with their name on it and not be ashamed of it. Yep, things have changed since then. Some thing are better; many things are not. Go vintage, I say.

[johnwilliamson062]

Stainless MKIV. You may be shootign tens of thousands of rounds through the thing. The cost of the pistol is a small part of it.

[boondocker385]

The only 22 pistol I have kept has been a Buckmark (had rugers, walthers, smiths). My wife likes it she went out and bought one too as she wanted a red dot on it.

[Hal]

Then I looked at the Victory. It has a polymer lower which bothers me, but it is a lot cheaper.

Over a decade ago, I bought a Ruger .22/45 Mark II - just because it was a "plastic fantastic".

I wanted to see just how durable a "plastic gun" is/was.

On my way to well over 100,000 nearly flawless (the gun never faltered, but, rimfire ammo being what it is, the ammo was always to problem) rounds later - - I bought a second one ~ a year later.
(yes - that's correct - I shot the first one > 100,000 rounds in the first year I owned it)

I began not really liking that gun much & ended up viewing it as an extension of my arm.

If the durability of the poly is at question, I believe you can put that fear to rest.

OTOH - S&W has a pretty bad record of hanging onto .22 pistols (w/the lone exception of the M41) so the American may or may not have a parts issue some years down the road.

My old .22/s has a healthy appetite for eating up the little nylon shock buffers. Used to be a call to S&W got you a whole bunch sent out @ N/C.

Now they send you one - - two if you beg, whine and plead....

As far as how many,,,10, 12, maybe? Haven't counted them in a while. I have a CZ Kadet and Ciener conversion also.

[sparkyv]

My MK IV Hunter is beautiful, but the trigger is abysmal. I will spend another $100 to upgrade the trigger.
My stock S&W 22A shoots lights out, but is ugly as sin (similar grips to the Victory), but at half the cost of the Ruger!
So, it depends on what you want/need the pistol for...always compromises.

[KLCane]

Just got the Buckmark. Beautiful gun and shoots great.

[NoSecondBest]

spawndn72,
Here's the thing about .22lr handguns: you buy the one for what you want to use it for. I've been hunting and competing with handguns for going on fifty years. During that time I've found that some guns work better for one thing than another. When I was shooting silhouette I shot best (by far) with a Buckmark. They were the most accurate pistols I ever shot regardless of brand or price. I set several records in my Zone with those guns. However, I didn't like them for hunting. Too clumsy and complicated. For small game hunting I preferred the Ruger autos. For paper targets I used SW 41s, but have found that the newer (and way cheaper) Victorys shoot every bit as accurately believe it or not. For shooting steel plates I went back to the Buchkmarks and cut the barrels back to five inches and put red dots on them. Decide what you want it for and get one to fit the bill. If you decide you want a "woods walker" get something like the Ruger. If you want to punch holes in targets get either a model 41 or a Victory and add a few gadgets like the better trigger to it. I've owned three different SW revolvers ( all K frames) and really liked those for small game hunting along with the Rugers. Rugers are a tank, but won't compete with the Buckmarks for accuracy. I tried them for several years off and on in silhouette and they just weren't capable, but they are more than adequate for small game and plinking...and they're generally very reliable. Give it some thought about what you'll be doing with it and go from there. Good luck.

[johnwilliamson062]

yes - that's correct - I shot the first one > 100,000 rounds in the first year I owned it

That is more than 250 rounds a day. At my best I shot a bulk pack a week in the Summer. You, sir, are my hero.

[saleen322]

We have quite a few 22 target pistols and, for the money, you can't beat a Ruger Mark series. If you spend more money you can get a better trigger but it is hard to beat the accuracy of the Ruger. But if you want a higher end 22 pistol, look for a High Standard or something made in Europe. They are more adjustable and you can shoot them for years and sell them for more than you bought them for if you lose interest.

[Hal]

That is more than 250 rounds a day.

I shot one night a week with my wife, then every Saturday with her and on Sunday by myself. I went through a brick and a half each day. Sometimes more/sometimes less.

My wife went through a half a brick per day that she shot.

This was in the "good old days" when both K-Mart and Dick's had sales on .22 ammunition & you could pick up a brick for ~ $7 or $8. We'd each buy the 10 brick limit, then hunt down a different store & buy 10 more each.

We pretty much kept a stock of 50,000 rounds on had at all times, just so we had enough to keep having fun!

The downside of all that was the lack of trigger time many of my other guns missed. Oh well, can't undo that.

The Ruger really handled it well though. Outside of a very, very,very, very small blemish on the barrel - the gun looks perfectly brand new.
I have a twin to it that has less than 1000 rounds through it & you really have to look hard to see the difference.

I bought the newer one ~ midway through the marathon - after I'd grown respect for the Ruger & half way in fear of it "shooting out". My fears were foundless though. The gun is fine. I've only put a few hundred rounds through it since that year though.

[Danoobie]

If you don't make a selection, the choice of "not getting anything" will make you.
I would see if MK IIs and MK IIIs are as common, at the pawn shops there, as they
are here. You would get a small price break, and still get a pretty decent gun.

[Cheapshooter]

First the aluminum lower on the Mark IV target bothered me

Then I looked at the Victory. It has a polymer lower which bothers me

Your problem is obvious.....You let inconsequential things bother you!
Get the Ruger, and be happy!

[rpenmanparker]

The Victory is super sweet. I have a Bushnell Trophy red dot on mine and a Volquartsen carbon-wrapped, lightweight threaded barrel with included compensator. Oh man, that thing can shoot. Don’t let the polymer bother you in the least. I like the grip and size of the Victory much better than the Ruger and Browning alternatives...and I own both those brands in other models. In fact Ruger is my favorite gun maker. But not in the target .22.

[LilPewPew]

Brother, I feel your pain if it's a starter pistol just go for the cheaper version until you get good w it then sell it (or not) and get like a 9mm and just keep expanding. But the main idea is to just go w your original choice