First .22LR Pistol for Target Shooting

[Sixgun]

Shawn,

It all depends on what type of target shooting you are dowing.  If you want the most accuracy then you should start out with a Contender and a 22 match barrel.  As for the autos, I have a Ruger 22/45 and a Ruger Mark II slabside.  The slabside has a longer match barrel and is most accurate of the two.  It is a mother dog to take down and clean, so I only do it when I have too.  My 22/45 has a 5.5 inch barrel which says "Target" on it.  It is not as accurate as the slabside, but the difference is very small.  It literally falls apart when release the lever to take it down.  I clean it almost every time I get home from shooting.

I have friends that shoot the Buckmark and they like them but most of them have a shorter barrel than the 22/45 which gives them a shorter sighting radius.  

If you are really serious about target shooting, you will probably want to mount a scope on the gun and the slabside is the easy choice in that case.  It comes from the factory with a scope mount rail and is drilled and taped for a scope.  It will also accept a weaver type mount if you don't like the ruger type scope mount.

Have fun
Sixgun

[Sixgun]

It does and it dosen't.  They are almost identical with the re-assembly of the 22/45 a little different.  

What I was trying to point out is that the individual guns are different.  My 22/45 is just a little looser than my slabside.  I'm sure that if you pulled two of the same off the rack and disassembled them, you would have varying results.  If this doesen't make it clearer, then I will keep trying til I get it right.

Sixgun

[KN]

I also have a 22/45 that shot great when it was new, but accuracy fell off as soon as it started to lossen up. Frame to barrel assembly is what I'm talking about. I put a .010" thick plastic shim between the frame and barrel, one at the front and one at the rear and it took all the slop out. Went back to shooting great.  If I had to do over I would opt for the MKII. Just my experience, KN

[22hornet]

I have a Browning Buckmark and its easy as pie to take apart and clean three screws and you have the bolt assebly the barrel and the frame...  Pretty much you just take off the rear sight assembly 2 screws and a screw under the barrel and it all comes apart... I use mine for small game hunting and shoots pretty good to boot...

Mike

[Graybeard]

My personal choice would be the Browning Buck Mark. As a matter of fact it is my personal gun. I've owned several of the Ruger Mark I and II and don't expect I'll be owning another. Get the Buck Mark.

GB

[Graybeard]

There is NOTHING on God's green earth I've ever run into as much hassle as the Ruger Mark I and II to strip for cleaning and put back together.    For me at least. :oops:  I've seen folks do it so fast it is hard to follow their hands. It always took me an hour or more just to get the stupid thing back together and it was always a fight to keep myself from just tossing it in the trash. That's the reason I no longer own them and never will again. Other wise I like them fine.

The Buck Mark is a breeze by comparison. Real simple.

GB

[Graybeard]

Yup Scribbler ya gotta register again for these forums. There was no way to bring the old registrations over to this one. Looks like we're gonna stay with phabb format as it seems to work real well. Matt has even found another phb acccessory called phpnuke that will allow me to easily do all the admin functions on the site I've never been able to do myself so it can take the load off him. Before we go to it we'll make sure all of the current registrations are shared between the data bases so no more registrations should be require for the future changes we make.

Please register on this one again.

GB

[Peakbagr]

Scribbler,

Do yourself a favor and save up for a Smith 41. Besides great accuracy, fit and finish, its a snap to disassemble. Lift the trigger guard, the slide comes right off, and then just take out the recoil spring and guide rod. Comes apart and goes back together as fast as you can read this.

I love the 41's and shoot one. Also a choice though between the 41 and my old High Standard Victor.

[JS44]

I've got two Ruger Mk.II's. One with a 5.5" bull barrel that I've had since 1994 and the other is the Government Competition model (slab side) that I just got in August of this year. I love both of them and my next .22 pistol will likely be another Mk. II or Mk.I. Both of mine are very accurate and the only thing that they could use is a better trigger but the triggers that they came with aren't that bad really. I'll probably get a Volquartzen accurizer kit (trigger, sear, hammer, etc) for the Govt. Comp. eventually but for now the trigger pull it has is tolerable. I put a Leupold 2X scope on the Govt. Comp. and use it for shooting out to 100 yds. Not that I'm that good but the pistol is and it's fun to shoot one at that distance. Why not? The ammo's cheap  :lol: . As far as the Mk.II being hard to disassemble/re-assemble is concerned, yes they are tricky but once you know what goes where it's easy. Honest. It just takes a little practice.
I don't think you'll go wrong with a Ruger Mk.II
JS

[larry]

I got the ruger 22/45 with a 5 1/2" bull barrel.  I like the way it shoots, both accurate and a good feel in the hand.  I will admit that the first few times it is a bit tough to re-assemble but after a few goes it isnt too bad.  the price is right.  I have put over 500 rounds of various ammo through it and havent had any problems with it at all.

Larry

[jim]

ive owned rugers and buckmarks didn't like either of them the smith is faster disassembling and more accurate and less jams .id save your money for a smith , or find someone whoes got one and will let you try it out.

[Gregory]

I've owned my Ruger Mark II for many years and the first few times I took it apart to clean I was very frustrated.  But over time it becomes second nature to break it down for cleaning.  
It's rugged, accurate, and reliable.  I'll never part with it.  Mine is the 5.5" bull barrel target model.  Used it for bullseye competition in the mid 80's.
Now is in "plinker" status.
Greg

[hankbrass]

Though difficult the first time i did not find my Ruger MK2 hard to reassemble after that. I sold it when I bought my model 41. It is a '69 model with the cocking indicator and a 7 3/8 " barrel.

I love the model 41 and it has class no Ruger or Browning can match in my opinion. But I must admit the Ruger was more accurate. :cry:

[Bugflipper]

I've owned several high standards and mark 2s over the years. 5 years ago I bought a buckmark 5.5 target( just a 5.5 field model with an adjustable trigger). I can't believe the acuraccy. I hunt squirrels with this pistol and have had hits out to 63 yards. I even got a rabbit at 86 yards 2 years ago. I have a dot scope on top of it. A friend which can hit absolutly nothing with a pistol can hit 12 ga hulls at 25 yards with consistancy resting the mag on a bench. I take it apart once a year to clean, It's a bit of a problem because I have to take my scope off first. As far as hard to strip, it's not, it can be disasembled cleand and reasemble in a matter of 5 minutes or less. Thats a whole lot better than a high standard or mark 11.

[tominboise]

FWIW, I have both the 22/45 and the Mark II target, both with 5.5" bull barrels. I like them both, but if I had to pick one, it would be the Mark II.  It feels substantially heavier built in hand, which is subjective, I know.  They both shoot fine for me.  I don't strip and clean the .22's every time I shoot, more like when they need it.  I will use a pull thru on the bores when I am done shooting.  No need to disassemble for that.

tom