We bought the Ruger, the wife liked it better. I'll install a fiber optic front while we search for the right red dot and I'll put a Volquartsen kit in if only to remove the magazine disconnect.



I have a Ruger MKII Competition Target that is awesome, but with the changing of the magazine type for the MKIV, the SW caught my eye. I don't know anyone that has one and only one report locally that it's not so good.

Volquartsen makes parts for both so that's good. Reliability is key, it will be used for gun games for. Y wife and end up with a fiber front sight or a Fastfire red dot.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Riley,

My wife has a new victory and I have a MK iv. They both perform without a hitch. I think the Ruger is built a little better and comes apart so easy.

Small sample from Saturday at Speed Steel.
A Mk II and a later Ruger, I don't know if it were a Mk III or IV, had several malfs each.
The one Victory I saw in action shot reliably.

As did my S&W M41.

My vote would be for the Ruger. Just be sure that it is a post recall model when buying.
See the link if you need the info:

Ruger recall and new serial number info

Get a few extra new mags if you want, and you should be good to go for decades.

I see both at steel matches with guys who do 20K rounds a year. Nothing that's a .22 runs perfectly but both seem about the same in reliability. I have both personally and prefer the balance of the 22/45 lite at least if the victory is in stock form, it feels front heavy to me. But I replaced the barrel and its certainly usable. I was a bit p****** that the Ruger had to go back but OK.
The aftermarket is a bit better on the ruger.
I don't see a downside to either and if you are price sensitive the S&W is likely to be cheaper.

I'm leaning heavily toward the Ruger. I've yet to have an issue not related to cleaning or cheap ammo.

The S&W Victory looks like a "Egg Beater." Stop Ugly Guns should be a nationwide movement. Aesthetics count.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
I see both at steel matches with guys who do 20K rounds a year. Nothing that's a .22 runs perfectly but both seem about the same in reliability.

I wouldn't say that. At 13,000 plus rounds shot through my S&W 617 in the last year, I would have to say it runs perfectly. I do have the occasional, although rare, cartridge that fails to fire but nothing that is the guns fault.

I don't own a Ruger Mark IV or S&W Victory but having shot both, I would prefer the Victory. It's just my personal preference. Either pistol is good.

quote:

Originally posted by Riley:
I have a Ruger MKII Competition Target that is awesome, but with the changing of the magazine type for the MKIV, the SW caught my eye. I don't know anyone that has one and only one report locally that it's not so good.

Volquartsen makes parts for both so that's good. Reliability is key, it will be used for gun games for. Y wife and end up with a fiber front sight or a Fastfire red dot.

Tough call--

I have a Ruger Mark-3, 2 Ruger Mark 4's, an S&W Victory, & an old Browning Buckmark plus some older 22 pistols.

My favorite for shooting is the Mark-3, great .22, shoots to POA, never jams, digests about anything. (just a bitch to clean)

I have to say the Mark-4 hunter feels real good to shoot & so far has been a solid performer (I'm just not as used to it as my old Mark-3) --Much easier to clean though.

My S&W Victory has also been a good performer that feeds great. It just doesn't feel quite right to me when shooting. I don't think it is the gun but more me & how I haven't fully adapted to it yet.

I also have a Mark-4, 22/45 lite-- great feeling gun to hold but I just didn't shoot good groups with it (just too light to hold steady). I recently added a suppressor & that added barrel weight & longer effective length turned that 22 lite into one of my favorite 22 guns (with the suppressor it now shoots super small groups with consistency).

No Volquartsen parts in any but I did do trigger jobs on all & removed the magazine safety's. I basically set my .22's to 4.5 lb trigger pulls to match my other pistols. No doubt they might shoot a little better with 2.5 lb triggers but I like trigger pull consistency across all my pistols.

I was a huge Ruger fan till I handled and shot a Victory. While the grip looks awkward, it feels great in the hand.

quote:

Originally posted by SSAreGreat:
The S&W Victory looks like a "Egg Beater." Stop Ugly Guns should be a nationwide movement. Aesthetics count.

Seriously? I think it is a pretty decent looking handgun.
I suppose beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.



The stock victory trigger beats the Ruger trigger by a country mile.
Take down is one just one bolt.
The accuracy is phenomenal and my Victory has been reliable with any ammo (except Remington Thunderbolt/Golden Bullets). It has never failed me at a match.
At my club steel matches now, I see three Victories to every Ruger. At one time it used to be mostly Rugers.

If customer service means anything to you by the Ruger and stay away from S&W.

I've been the beneficiary of Ruger's excellent customer service and I've got to say that it is exceptional.

However, the one time I did need to contact S&W, I founf then to be very responsive.
A year or so ago, I sent a pistol in, to them, and they had is back to me in seven days, including shipping both ways. ... and it was fixed at no charge.
I have absolutely no complaints about S&W's customer service.

BTW, Here is .22 Plinksters review of the S&W Victory.

I really like my Victory. I also have a Buck Mark, but the Victory is my goto .22lr pistol. The one thing I do not like is the very, very light safety. It seems to engage far too easily and I often unintentionally engage it during a range session. Generally, I have compensated by lowering my hand down the grip just a tad.

quote:

I don't know anyone that has one and only one report locally that it's not so good.

Right out of the box, the Victory by a country mile. Triggers matter, and it's not even close. I will admit that my initial experience with my Victory wasn't that great; the takedown screw was torqued on so tightly that S&W CS immediately requested that I send the gun back to them when I called to complain. This all before I even took the first shot. But two weeks out and back, the gun was up and running. Since then it's been a marvelous pistol to shoot. Right with my Buck Mark Hunter, except with a sweeter trigger.

As for the Vic's looks...I agree a bit with the negative comment regarding its aesthetics; the Vic is kinda weird, particularly where the barrel ties into the receiver. I don't see the 'egg beater' imagery (more like a skinny solder gun); the step where the barrel and receiver tie in together seems a bit awkward to my eye. But it shoots so well that this stylistic 'oops' is easily forgiven.

Besides, there's aftermarket means to address that.

Understand one difference between the two, if it is important to you.

The serialized part for the S&W is the grip, where with the Ruger, it is the upper.

So, without a transfer you can buy barrels and even customized uppers, with the Ruger, the barrel unit requires a transfer.

Though I like the Ruger better, I like the Victory's modularity best.

Another vote for the SW22 Victory. Mine has also been flawless. I've added a Burris Fastfire III. Because I can't leave things alone, I added the Tandemkross Halo, mag release and Volquartsen extractor. Victory is happy with and achieve excellent results from CCI Minimags and Winchester M22.

We went with a Ruger MKIV Lite. The wife liked it better.

It will need a Volquartsen kit, if only to remove the mag disconnect.

I will be adding a fiber optic front sight while I shop for a red dot.