Title says it all, I'm just curious what the breakdown is between BM owners vs 22/45 owners. I already own the BM and not really planning on changing.Which do you own?Browning Buck MarkRuger 22/45Both

.

I shot a lot of different Ruger 22's. Every range has one for a rental. I never really liked the grip angle or the look of them, or funky controls for that matter.


I bought a Browning buckmark standard s/s URX grips. I added a truglo front site which just takes an allen wrench to change. I've put close to 20k rounds through it and am very happy with it. Excellent trigger, balance, accuracy, not picky about ammo. etc. etc.


If you already own the Buckmark, why are you asking this question? If you're curious about how the Ruger stacks up, most gun ranges have one as a rental.

Actually, I almost own dedicated .22's from all the big manufacturers, Browning, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, etc. Why? Because I like them all. There are pros and cons to all of them if you get picky, but they all go bang with CCI Mini Mags. The Ruger I have is actually a 1974 MKII, not the 22/45, but the new MKV is on my short list.

The Ruger doesn't require you to remove hex head screws to disassemble it.

My first pistol was a buckmark given to me by my father in law. For this Jersey guy who had never held a firearm before, it was a revelation and snowballed into quite more than a little hobby. Now that is a great gun and a certain heirloom.

Ford or Chevy

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

If you already own the Buckmark, why are you asking this question? If you're curious about how the Ruger stacks up, most gun ranges have one as a rental.

Purely for discussion; my own analysis was the Ruger seems slightly more popular. So far the poll seems to agree. I’ve shot Ruger’s a number of times. They’re reasonably similar in my opinion.

I am a Ruger 22/45 MKIII guy. Bunch of guys at club have the Buckmark. Great gun but every one of them has issues constantly or eventually with that stupid screw. It is also a no brainer decision if you ever decide to upgrade parts, then Ruger wins hands down.

Not enough choices in your poll, I prefer Ruger, but I only have owned MKI, and a MKII pistols. I sold the MKI many years ago to help fund something else.

I’ve always had MKs, specifically 22/45s. I don’t know why I chose that, my buddy had one I believe. My dad has a BM.

Both seem like great choices. My daughter likes the Ruger, she had a hard time reaching the trigger or not enough strength to pull it on other guns when she was younger.

Both, if I could only have one it would be the MK IV

Neither

Ruger MK-IIs and Smith and Wesson Model 41s

I presume that you are limiting your question to auto loaders

Have you considered a wheelgun as your other 22?

Well over half of my 22LR handgun shooting is done with revolvers. Mostly Smith and Wesson Model 17s or Dan Wesson Model 22s

I can shoot faster groups into a ragged group with the auto loaders, but I can shoot smaller groups slow fire with the revolvers and their superior triggers.

Colt_saa, you’re misunderstanding the reasoning for question. I’m just curious about the popularity of these two guns.

I’m not looking for the best 22, not looking for a better option; purely discussion.

I would pick an S&W SW22 Victory.

Of the two you asked about, I own a Ruger MKIV and I've shot Buckmarks quite a bit.

I shoot steel at my club's steel matches and I really want to like the Ruger because it is so simple to take apart and clean. I've spent almost a grand on it with a Volquartsen trigger, a Vortex Venom and Hogue grips. I can still shoot the $350 SW22 faster and more accurately than the Ruger. I can usually hit our eight inch 100 yd gong about seven out of ten times with it, offhand.

While it is a very accurate pistol, the best thing about the SW22 is it's trigger. Its not that it is the lightest trigger but that it is so predictable. You can ride the reset so precisely that breaking the next shot is just a matter of thinking about it. It also has a very short reset.

The SW22 is more reliable than the Ruger. When I shoot a match with it, I know I will complete the stage even if I haven't cleaned it for a thousand rounds. With my MKIV, even right after cleaning, there's no guarantee that I will have a clean run.

I have a Ruger 22/45.
At the time, I had no 22LR pistols and bought it on a whim.

I've got both. They're both good. I need to get the BM cut and threaded to make it gooder.

I prefer the ergonomics of the Buckmark but my 22/45 has been 100% reliable. It is a bitch to disassemble and reassemble though.

I own both. .22LR...neither is reliable.

I have a buckmark with a shoulder stock and a 16" barrel that a lot of kinds have enjoyed with a little red dot on top. It piqued their enthusiasm as all they had to do was put the dot on the golf ball and chase it up the range. That enthusiasm went on to long term interest in shooting.

I've had a 22/45 for a long time. Nice .22, but I'd never call it reliable because it's not remotely so. Neither is the buckmark. I've got a bunch of 10/22's which are the quintessential .22 rifle, and none of those are reliable, either.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
The Ruger doesn't require you to remove hex head screws to disassemble it.

No the Mark II just required 6 hands and 50 curse words to get it back together.

The browning comes with the hex driver. I don't have any issues with taking it apart, it's easy and it's a .22 LR so it's not like I'm using it as a combat weapon in the field.

The Buckmark is more popular by far than the 22/45. Only because they've been making buckmarks for 40 or 50 years and there's a whole lot of them out there, and the rugar 22/45 is less than 10 years old, so a smaller amount produced. But if you're counting all of the ruger models (mark 1,2 ,3 etc.) than I'd ray ruger by far.