Thinking of Buying a 22LR

[98SS1LWEE]

Okay, so just got a little thinking goin on upstairs and I got kinda worried. I figured I woudl get your guys opinions. here's what I'm wanting.

Cheap to shoot.

Dead on accurate

Fun for a little exhibition shooting

Dependable

Able to accept optics for lack of better reasoning...Cheating!

Any suggestions? I was thinking maybe a Browning Buck Mark or Walther. What you guys think? Or is .22LR the wrong direction to go?

[Garufa]

Ruger Mark whatever or the Browning if you want a semi.

Edited March 30, 2012 by Garufa

[Jonnin]

Most of these guns do not take optics out of the box. It does not cost much at all to cure that: a smith adds a rail with 2 screws and its done, all the modern optics for a pistol fit on a rail. Might cost like $25 to get that done. It may be better to have it done afterwards on the gun you want rather than seek the few that have a rail, in other words.

For sure some ruger mark 3s have a rail, but I think they tacticool up the frame a bit and ugly it up. I am not aware of a rail only version, but it may exist.

The S&W 22a has a rail on all versions.

I am not aware of any buckmarks that come with a rail.

Walther bought hammerli if I am not mistaken, but those are high dollar guns. Walther makes some cheap .22s but they are NOT accurate target guns, they are at best toys/plinkers. Those high dollar guns are great, if you can afford them. The triggers are out of this world, and the accuracy and fitted grips and all make a great package.

I cannot tell any real difference between a buckmark and a ruger mark, apart from the look and feel. They are both dead on, about the same price, well made and reliable, and so on. If you are on a budget, the S&W 22a is also a very good choice, esp if you get the wooden target grips model. For low end guns (under $1000), these are the 3 I recommend and nothing else. There are others out there --- the beretta neos which is accurate but jamtastic, or a sig mosquito which also can be ammo picky and troublesome, but I just cannot recommend these others over the 3 I listed.

If you are serious about it and on a budget, get a ruger mark 3, gut it of the extra safetys, plop in a volquartsen trigger kit, get some good grips, and pop on an ultradot red dot sight. It will take you a long, long way --- if you can master this cheap gun, then you can start to look at the $2500 ones to upgrade. If you are serious and not on a budget, go for the $$$ ones right away.

Edited March 30, 2012 by Jonnin

[Jonnin]

There is one other option. You could look at the 1911 styled .22s. I have not seen one yet that I would have; the only one I would shoot is an expensive kit that goes onto a true .45 1911 frame and makes for a high dollar gun. But there are some modestly priced ones, colt is making one, several others as well. Someone might know more if you are interested in such.

[TNWNGR]

Ruger 22/45 with or w/o a rail, it's no big deal to drill and tap one and install mount's or an aftermarlet rail.

[Jonnin]

the 22-45 is stuck with the original grips though. If you like them, that is fine, but if you ever wanted to upgrad to ergos, you are outta luck. Unless they changed this on the mark 3 (???).

[1gewehr]

We have a Beretta Neos which has been both accurate and reliable. It has a built-in rail.

For a bit (2X) more money, you could look at a HighStandard Victor. It's hard to get more accurate than that without going to a match-only pistol for a LOT more money, and it's already drilled and tapped for a rail.

For about the same money as the High Standard, there is the S&W M41. Rails are available for it as well, and it is as accurate as the High Standard. In my experience, the H-S is a bit more reliable with different ammo. If you go with the S&W, find out what ammo it likes and pile it deep.

My advice is to go to a range that rents a selection of .22 pistols and try a bunch out. See what you like or don't like.

[Dolomite_supafly]

the 22-45 is stuck with the original grips though. If you like them, that is fine, but if you ever wanted to upgrad to ergos, you are outta luck. Unless they changed this on the mark 3 (???).

A few years ago they began making a 22/45 that accepts standard 1911 grips. They are about the same price as a standard pistol. Every MKII or later is drilled and tapped for a rail. ANd if the gun is bought new it includes that rail as well as mountaing hardware.

Very few 22's are made of steel, the Ruger is. This means it will last a lifetime. I have had aluminum guns and have had durability issues. I do like the idea of being able to replace the barrels on a lot of other guns.

Dolomite

[nightrunner]

The only steel .22 pistols im aware of are the ruger mkii and iii and the cz75kadet. Dont think the cz takes optics though

[Backon4]

The smith and wesson is a fine shooter. The ruger Mark anything is an investment though. Prices keep climbing and will only get higher, regardless of condition as long as it shoots it's still holding value.

[Slpeod]

the 22-45 is stuck with the original grips though. If you like them, that is fine, but if you ever wanted to upgrad to ergos, you are outta luck. Unless they changed this on the mark 3 (???).

The 22/45 for the past three years has had removable grip panels. It accepts all .45 grips with a minor mod made to the slide release area.

Also out of the two 22/45 models only the railed version includes a top rail. However, the threaded only model is already tapped for a rail (which is $20 from Ruger) and includes dovetailed fixed sites which the railed version doesn't. You could also then push the rear sight out and use one of several aftermarket mounts to direct attach a red dot.

Edited March 30, 2012 by Slpeod

[Jonnin]

Good to know. Having had the same ruger for like 20 years, I was not sure what they have been doing to the details. Not *every* mark 2 is set up for a rail. Mark 3 maybe, but I can assure you that my mark 2 had to be drilled out by a smith.

the buckmark is not solid steel but the slide and important parts are. Just the lower part of the frame is alum. Its the aluminum and similar slides that I worry about. I doubt they would wear out.

Cz kadet is AWESOME but even with the single action conversion, you get a lot of pretravel in the SA pull. Wife loves hers, its as accurate as can be. It does NOT easily take a rail, it took the custom shop a *while* (2, 3 months??) to get it railed for a large ultradot (and the result was great, they balanced the gun using the optic). Because of the trigger slop, its hard to recommend as a "target" gun though.

[subsonic]

I was going to suggest High Standard, but just looked at their prices. I bought a Sport King back in 1976 for $96.00, they're now ten times that. Never mind.

[Oh Shoot]

I am not aware of any buckmarks that come with a rail....

Hunter:

Contour (2 different barrel lengths):

[Mark@Sea]

If you change your mind on the optics... with a little shopping, you can get a good used Colt. Series II woodsman or the Challenger. If you can accept some cosmetic issues you can get one very reasonably, and they are fine shooters.

A few years back I shelled out big bucks (for an E-5 at the time, it was big bucks, anyway) and I've never regretted it. They are a little hard to find, maybe, but I'll put my Browning Medalist toe to toe with any pistol - and most .22 rifles - you can think of.

[98SS1LWEE]

If you are serious about it and on a budget, get a ruger mark 3, gut it of the extra safetys, plop in a volquartsen trigger kit, get some good grips, and pop on an ultradot red dot sight. It will take you a long, long way --- if you can master this cheap gun, then you can start to look at the $2500 ones to upgrade. If you are serious and not on a budget, go for the $$$ ones right away.

This might just be the way to go. so i'm guessing .22LR is the choice for cheap target shooting? I'm not one that can handle a throw-away. I already have a P22 that i'm sure won't outlast my K Frame, so something like the ruger sounds pretty good

[lshel]

The Ruger Mark II is drilled for a rail and the Mark III comes with one or you can add a mount that clamps over

receiver and barrel.

[Garufa]

The Ruger Mark II is drilled for a rail...

No, it is not. That started with Mark III's.

[gjohnsoniv]

I wish the Hunter Mark III came with a threaded barrel.

[rab]

I have a Mark IITarget Stainless Slab side,Competition Target Model, it can with adj. rear sight and drilled with a Ruger rail, but not a weaver style. that I have a Aimpoint red-dot mounted on now . I am thinking of changing to a weaver style so that I can replace the Aimpoint with a reflex, I hope this will make it a little faster getting on target. Also Jonnin had commented back in post #3 on replacing the trigger with a Volquartsen trigger,is this something that the average person can do or do I need a gunsmith and whats the estimated cost?

[SonnyCrockett]

i bought a buckmark,loved it..even better than a ruger

IMO you have Browning and then you have everyone else

Edited March 31, 2012 by SonnyCrockett

[hous95]

bought a ruger mk iii 22/45 with replaceable panels, and it is extremely accurate and seems very well built. It came drilled and tapped with a rail. cost me 330 otd, and I would certainly do it again. This is competing with my m&p as my favorite gun

[Guest motonut]

Personally the Ruger doesn't fit my hand nearly as well as the Browning Buck Mark. I love it, it's a tack driver.

[Jonnin]

The trigger kit for a ruger is $$100-120 and you can do it yourself.

[crossfire]

Ruger Mark III

I put the Volquartsen trigger kit in, pulled out the mag safety and put on a Bushnell mini red dot and a set of

Altamont grips. It shoots better then I do.

If

Edited March 31, 2012 by crossfire