Looking to purchase a 22 for the range. I prefer the shorter barrel versions of both. Opinions, please.
Buckmark here. To me it felt like a much better built and ergonomic gun.
1 Like
I made this choice very recently myself. I ended up going with a Mark IV because the price was right and the aftermarket support/choices were much better.
1 Like
Get the Ruger Mark IV. I have a Buckmark for about 25 years now (and a Ruger Mark II.) The Browning requires tools for disassembly. Ruger improved the takedown with the Mark IV so I’ve been considering one myself. Ruger also has top notch support/service if you ever have an issue. Browning has discontinued some parts on the pre-2000 Buckmark and support is not as helpful.
1 Like
Also was looking at the S&W Victory and the Ruger SR22 but probably will be a Mark IV lite.
Full take down on the Buckmark can be a pain without a special tool, which I don’t know if you can even find anymore.
The sr22 is a very small pistol.
1 Like
Try both at a local gun range that rents firearms and has both options available.
Gonna see if RTSP has them to rent this week
1 Like
Former 22/45 MKIII and current MKIV Target owner here. I can’t speak to the quality and accuracy of the Browning or others, but my stock guns were super accurate and reliable. I changed out most internals with Volquartsen parts as a matter of preference (don’t like the mag disconnect and the stock trigger does get improved with removal) and threw a red dot on the MKIV. I can mag dump on reduced silhouette steel at 100 yards and hit 10/10.
I sold off the 22/45 to find the MKIV when they came out because the simplified takedown appealed to me at the time. Truth be told, the MKIII was just as nice and I regret letting it go.
My only advice if you get a Ruger is to Loctite every pin and screw.
1 Like
I went to the range this morning and rented the Mark IV 5.5 and the Victory. I thought the Victory mechanism to hold the slide open was awkward and that it didn’t hold open on the last round, but the trigger and accuracy were excellent. The mark was more ergonomic and functional but the trigger reset was not very good. I was surprised by that and the rental sights were off. I actually liked them both.
A trigger job will make that Ruger a real shooter. Also has a massive aftermarket. I don’t think you can go wrong either way though.
Sounds like you should purchase both!
Just kidding. They are both good pistols.
I shot a friend’s Buckmark (Hunter model I think??) years ago and it was super accurate. Also very nice looking.
I own several Rugers. Haven’t shot a Mark 22 yet. But really like the way the Mark 4 Hunter looks. And the breakdown looks super simple on them.
It’s really a personal choice. I don’t think you can go wrong either way. Enjoy either one you purchase!
The Mark with the trigger upgrade is almost twice the cost of the Victory
I don’t have a Buckmark - I do have a Mark III – the standard version; short barrel (4 3/4”), fixed sights, and a luger style (not 1911) grip. The cheap one.
Even though it’s the cheapest version; the thing will effortlessly shoot-out the x-ring at 7 yards.
See if you can find a volquartsen, black mamba anywhere or even a smith 41
It’s above my paygrade.
Does anyone recommend any .22 semi autos like the SIG 322 or Walther PPQ 22 more than the Ruger Mark III/IV? I don’t find it the Ruger Mark III/IV a good looking gun, but that’s just my personal opinion..
I have a GSG 1911 and a Taurus TX 22, both really great pistols but I’m looking for a more accurate pistol.
Ruger MKIV for me. Breakdown is so easy. It’s literally one button and like everyone else mentioned Ruger aftermarket support is strong. Tandemkross and Volquartsen are two popular options.
1 Like