Author Topic: Can't make up my mind. (Read 1626 times)

coltfan · « **on:** May 13, 2003, 09:11:09 AM »

I’m considering the purchase of a .22 cal handgun. I’m leaning toward a .22 semi-auto, mostly for ease of maintainence. In my mind it’s much easier to clean the bore of a disassembled semi-auto as oppsed to the bore and cylinder of a revolver. I’m leaning toward the Browning Buckmark based first on the supposed ease of dis-assembly and re-assembly and secondly on the grip of the Buckmark being more comfortable to me than the grip of the Ruger Mark II. I’m shying away from the Ruger due to the horror stories of reassembling the pistol after cleaning. Although I did recently come across a stainless Mark II slab sided target version which included a factory scope base and rings, that caught my fancy. I’m looking for feedback regarding the dis-assembly and re-assembly of either model. Is it only the Mark I that has the tricky re-assembly process? Or does the Mark II share the same process? Are the Brownings really easy to take apart and put back together?

My last .22 semi-auto was a high standard Victor (I’m still kicking myself for getting rid of that one) which I could take apart and re-assemble with the push of a button.

ppcrusa · « **Reply #1 on:** May 13, 2003, 09:23:41 AM »

I've had a couple MK-II's in the past and sold them for various reasons (one would not feed reliably and was a tack driver, the other was just terrible on accuracy), and as far as the disassembly goes, it WAS difficult. It's not impossible, but difficult at first. Once you do it enough, it is not as bad on you. You have to practice it.
I too thought about A browning Buckmark, looks good, but I decided on the Ruger based on my past experiences with the factory, and how they take care of their customers. I'm waiting on my permit right now so I can go get my MarkII I ordered last week.
Can't beat Ruger in the service department.

D Pete · « **Reply #2 on:** May 13, 2003, 09:46:46 AM »

I have a Buckmark and disassembly is simple once you do it a couple times, I've had excellent luck with all kinds of ammo, always feeds correctly and seldom jams if kept clean....DP

pjh421 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 13, 2003, 02:00:28 PM »

Coltfan,

There are a few small parts in the Buckmark to keep track of but nothing to go "sproing" and have you crawling around on the floor looking for parts. You will especially like the way the Buckmark barrel is attached. In terms of ease of barrel removal/replacement, this gun is on par with the Ruger 10/22. Sweet! My silhouette model is a good shooter. I wish I had a Colt Woodsman Match model to go with it. At any rate, the Rugers and the Brownings are good guns. You can't wear 'em out. With a can of Gunscrubber and some Break Free or the equivalent, you probably wouldn't really ever have to take them apart.

Paul

Savage · « **Reply #4 on:** May 13, 2003, 02:38:36 PM »

If you can read, (the illustrations are good as well) disassembly and reassembly is quite simple on the Mkll. I have never understood why anyone would think it difficult.
Stay Safe,
Savage

Questor · « **Reply #5 on:** May 15, 2003, 04:31:58 AM »

I'd get the Buckmark. The quality is just so much better. The Rugers can be made into better shooters with a trigger job, and they can be made easier to clean by adding an aftermarket device. But if you're going to do all that, then why not get a better gun in the first place?

Graybeard · « **Reply #6 on:** May 15, 2003, 09:05:22 AM »

Wal now Savage I learned to read at least 2-3 years ago. I find the Ruger MKI and MKII the most difficult guns to reassemble I've ever owned. I gave up on them totally and wouldn't take another for my personal use if it were free. Some folks seem to have a real knack for putting them back together but for most of us it is a real pain.

I've seen one serious Ruger fan who has done it a thousand times and claims to be able to do it in his sleep have major problems getting one to go back a time or two.

For me it is the Buckmark Standard. I love the way the grip feels and the quality of construction of it as compared to the Ruger also.

BUT nothing beats the old High Standards. They were simply the best in my view. Sure wish I'd kept at least one or two of the ones I've owned.

GB

Savage · « **Reply #7 on:** May 15, 2003, 11:24:25 AM »

GB,
The instructions and illustrations in the owners manual are very good. If you do exactly as they say, reassembly is a piece of cake. Of course I have owned a MK l for 40 yrs. Still as much as I hear about it, someone is having trouble! Never owned a Buckmark, I'd probably have trouble with that!

Stay Safe,
Savage

daddywpb · « **Reply #8 on:** May 17, 2003, 02:01:57 AM »

GB,
I agree. Sometimes Ruger auto's go togeather easy, sometimes you can follow the instructions all day and not get it - and for no apparent reason. I traded mine for a Buckmark. I like the feel better, and it shoots great. Nothing beats the old High Standards for accuracy and easy cleaning. I've got a Supermatic Citation that I bought in the late seventies. Luckily, something kept me from trading it away for all these years. I used to see them at gun shows for sale, but haven't seen any recently. Mine has had many thousands of rounds through it, and still cuts one hole - if I can hold it steady enough!

buckweet · « **Reply #9 on:** May 21, 2003, 05:13:19 AM »

guys...i had repete ''had'' a high standard victor....im still crying...
then i ''had a ruger.....
then i bought my buckmark...
i love the buckmark,,,
shoots good,,nice pistol..
but ?? i've lost the litel rubber thingy ?? back of the bolt

ya'll have a part number

i'll call browning
also

who make a good after market smooth side set of grips fer the buckmark

thanx !!!!
buckweet

:shock: :-D :grin:

OOBuckshot · « **Reply #10 on:** May 21, 2003, 06:36:51 AM »

Coltfan, Is my honest opinion that you would be happier with a mod 41 S&W or a Colt Woodsman Match Target. Neither of these are made anymore so you will have to cruse the gun shows. My family has used these pistols since I was a child.( 50yrs) We have three mod 41s and two Colt Match targets. :grin: OO

coltfan · « **Reply #11 on:** May 21, 2003, 05:01:14 PM »

Buckshot,
About 25 years ago, Colt Woodsman match target pistols could still be had with relative ease, and I spent many hours drooling over them. My wife wanted the Victor, so in an effort to get her more involved in shooting we went that route. I got so hooked on the hi-standards that I bought a Citation for myself. So now I'm kicking myself for getting rid of both of them and for not ever buying a woodsman. However, a bit of redemption might just be in sight. I recently found a Colt target model .22 semi-auto (the one with no name that they discontinued about 5 or 6 years ago) at the local gun shop. I'm torn between that and a Hi-Standard Victor (Houston manufacture) that I located at a second shop. According to the guy at the second shop the Victor will only function with CCI ammo. If I can talk him down enough in price, I might take a risk on the Victor, if not the Colt might come home with me. Although the grip on the Buckmark is more comfortable to my hand. Wish I had the money to buy all three.

ftstinyc · « **Reply #12 on:** June 05, 2003, 04:41:34 PM »

According to the S&W web-site the model 41 is still being made.

Chris · « **Reply #13 on:** June 05, 2003, 07:47:19 PM »

coltfan:

I'm partial to the Rugers...especially the Govt. Models.

If you've got the bucks, a Model 41 can be had for $800 retail in either barrel length. Maybe someday.... :lol:

...Chris

redial · « **Reply #14 on:** June 10, 2003, 04:17:11 PM »

I think I've had or have every .22 mentioned thus far (including the S&W 41 and the Woodsman 2nd Model Target!) and guess what - they'd all be hard pressed to shoot as well as the couple Rugers I've tried.

I normally say snide things about Ruger and boyhowdy they are a PITA to reassemble for former Jarheads, but for $200 or so you can't beat it. I only clean them when they malf and even then only enough to get them running again, thus minimizing the Rubic's Gun problem.

Hold your nose, buy the Ruger (I like the 22/45 better) and be done with it. It'll work for the next jillion rounds, I'll betcha.

Redial

Questor · « **Reply #15 on:** June 11, 2003, 02:55:11 AM »

I disagree with the premise that a semi-auto is easier to maintain. They certainly are not. Routine cleaning of a revolver is little more than wiping it down with an oily cloth. Bore cleaning of a rimfire is seldom necessary, but even if it were, it's much less time consuming to clean a revolver than a semi auto-- even a semi-auto that is easier to disassemble than the Rugers and Buckmarks.

Savage · « **Reply #16 on:** June 11, 2003, 03:12:03 AM »

Questor,
I would have to agree that a revolver is easier to clean/maintain than a semi-auto. This is due primarily to the fact that the internals are protected from powder residue and other debris. If someone wants a gun to shoot occasionally, toss it back in the truck and forget about it. The revlover is the way to go. Stainless of course. The down side of that is, the revolver is fairly fragile. It doesn't take much physical abuse to put it out of service.
Stay Safe,
Savage

TravisM. · « **Reply #17 on:** June 29, 2003, 12:53:29 PM »

I've never had any problems putting my ruger back together yet......

Savage · « **Reply #18 on:** June 30, 2003, 07:01:18 AM »

Travis,
Me either!
Stay Safe,
Savage

Old Griz · « **Reply #19 on:** July 01, 2003, 01:07:54 PM »

I bought a new Ruger Mark II and it was a major pain in the posterior. Feeding problems, extraction problems, and real finicky on what it would shoot. AND (yes Savage I too can read) after four hours of trying, I called a friend to get it back together after field stripping it. Traded it for a Ruger .22 revolver. Before you buy the Buckmark, take a look at the S&W 22A. It's a fine shooter and inexpensive as well.

Good luck. You have sooooooooooo many scholarly opinions to choose from!

Savage · « **Reply #20 on:** July 01, 2003, 02:10:31 PM »

Griz,
The remarks I made in the earlier post were in no way intended to be a slam. The illustrations and text of the assembly/disassembly process are well done, and that was the point I was trying to make. Sounds like the revolver is a good choice in light of your experience with the Mark II.
My apologies to anyone I might have offended with my remarks.
Stay Safe,
Savage

Old Griz · « **Reply #21 on:** July 01, 2003, 06:23:27 PM »

Ah Savage, I wuz just funnin' back! I hope no one takes ME too seriously at times. Getting to talk to folks about GUNS is one of my favorite things to do. I can't imagine getting upset over it! The guy who put my Mark II back together for me did it in less than 30 seconds. So for some folks it's quite easy. I just ain't one of em, but I bet I can still do a M-1 blindfolded (but not as fast as I used to)!

Have fun yawl--that's what we're here for!