[Rman]

Originally Posted by WILDCATT

I have 3 mark ones used two in compitition.get an american gun,the histandard is a great gun I have a super matic.BUT they are no longer made
the real ones.other wise get a S&W 41 they still make them.I have no real trouble puting the rugers together,but I dont wear them out taking them apart.I shoot the whole season without breaking them down.

How does the Mark I compare to the Mark II ? Just curious.

[dragonfly]

It is interesting to see these discussions. The selection of a .22 handgun can be based on a lot of factors. Cost, accuracy, dependability, fit, manufacturer preference, oldies, but still goodies, etc. I had a HS Sentinel years ago that I wish I still had because it was such a fun gun to shoot and fast draw. But some midnight bandit got it and several others while I was in college. I have a Ruger standard I bought in 1981 or so, and was never really happy with the way it shot until I put some Millett sights on it. The standards did not have the adjustable rear sight. More recently I have purchased a couple Buck Marks. Super guns right from the get go, and no trigger work required, though I did flip the sear spring on both. I have a red dot on one and can eat a hole in a 50 ft. bull in no time at all. Personally, I like the feel of the BMs over the Rugers. Then I got a deal on a 1977 Browning Challenger II which is even better than the Buck Marks. The Buck Marks are decendents of the Challenger III in the mid '80s. My only complaint with the Challenger II is the rear sight gap is a little narrow for my old eyes. My last acquisition a few months ago was a 1963 Browning Medalist. This is where arguments go on for days and weeks of which is better, the Belgium Brownings or the Model 41s. Truth be known, if you own either one, you are a very lucky individual. I do (and why not, I have one) believe the Medalists are finer. The gunsmithing on the Belgium guns is par excellence. But, I also must be fair in saying I have never had the opportunity to shoot the 41. But if I had $1200 to spend, I think I would find me another Belgium Medalist rather than a new Model 41. Shoot all that you can afford to buy if you have the opportunity. I prefer the Ruger Mark II over the III because of all the lawyer crap on the the IIIs which make them more of a pain to take down. The Ruger 22/45 is also very nice and some folks like the feel of the grip better than the Ruger IIs and IIIs. I have not seen a general acceptance of the Neos and some of the other .22s. I am emmently happy with what I have, and could not ask for more. Or until I win the lottery... DF

[Rman]

Originally Posted by dragonfly

It is interesting to see these discussions. The selection of a .22 handgun can be based on a lot of factors. Cost, accuracy, dependability, fit, manufacturer preference, oldies, but still goodies, etc. I had a HS Sentinel years ago that I wish I still had because it was such a fun gun to shoot and fast draw. But some midnight bandit got it and several others while I was in college. I have a Ruger standard I bought in 1981 or so, and was never really happy with the way it shot until I put some Millett sights on it. The standards did not have the adjustable rear sight. More recently I have purchased a couple Buck Marks. Super guns right from the get go, and no trigger work required, though I did flip the sear spring on both. I have a red dot on one and can eat a hole in a 50 ft. bull in no time at all. Personally, I like the feel of the BMs over the Rugers. Then I got a deal on a 1977 Browning Challenger II which is even better than the Buck Marks. The Buck Marks are decendents of the Challenger III in the mid '80s. My only complaint with the Challenger II is the rear sight gap is a little narrow for my old eyes. My last acquisition a few months ago was a 1963 Browning Medalist. This is where arguments go on for days and weeks of which is better, the Belgium Brownings or the Model 41s. Truth be known, if you own either one, you are a very lucky individual. I do (and why not, I have one) believe the Medalists are finer. The gunsmithing on the Belgium guns is par excellence. But, I also must be fair in saying I have never had the opportunity to shoot the 41. But if I had $1200 to spend, I think I would find me another Belgium Medalist rather than a new Model 41. Shoot all that you can afford to buy if you have the opportunity. I prefer the Ruger Mark II over the III because of all the lawyer crap on the the IIIs which make them more of a pain to take down. The Ruger 22/45 is also very nice and some folks like the feel of the grip better than the Ruger IIs and IIIs. I have not seen a general acceptance of the Neos and some of the other .22s. I am emmently happy with what I have, and could not ask for more. Or until I win the lottery... DF

Nice pistols! I guess I'll have to save up for awhile to see if I can acquire one of these.

[jwhirl413]

Originally Posted by dnthmn2004

I love my Walther P22. Although an Mark II or Mark III is more accurate, its not far off. I originally got it because its a heck of a lot cheaper to practice with and I wanted a 22lr handgun with a slide.

My wife also has a walther P22. I've got a XDM9 and everytime i go to the range, i take her p22 to warm up. not to mention it is fun as he!! to shoot, and cheap to boot. I would definitely recommend it. my good friend has a ruger 22, not sure which model, but it is quite a bit longer and thus more accurate, but not nearly as fun to shoot as the walther. I've also seen a P22 that comes with a light as part of the stock. Quite bad a$$ in my opinion. If you want it strictly for accuracy i'd say the Ruger, but fun wise I love the walther.

[m72law]

ruger mark3 all the way!...i bought mine from basspro a few years back for only 140.00bucks...(target model)..just as cheap & accurate as the 10/22 with a red dot sitting on top...well they're prob not that cheap anymore...plus the basspro around here sometimes sells benelli auto shotguns for 300.00bucks...on sale of course..i love the prices on guns in the southeast compaired to most anywhere else as for the mark3 being hard to tear down and clean....??when i clean mine,i take the whole thing apart,trigger,hammer,sear,ect...my only prob i have when it goes back together is lining up the Mainspring Housing Assembly...it can be a little painnthe@zz...i just hate i didnt buy the competition model a couple of weeks back from my local gunshop...it looked like it had never been fired and could have got it for 200.00 out the door.....i stewed about for an hour or so at work...went back to get it...well of course it was gone bought a pretty nice NEF handi rifle (45-70gov) to make up for the loss of the ruger..but hey...the rifle was 50.00bucks cheaper...

[CCW357]

Originally Posted by Rex in OTZ

High Standard .22 caliber Supermatic Tournament
Supermatic Citation
Supermatic Trophy
Olympic I.S.U.
Victor Target
These handguns have the rear sight fixed to the frame not the slide for enhanced accuracy.

mine is a U.S. Military marked 107 Supermatic Citation a wonderfully crafted .22 handgun, It shoots better that I can.
You will be doing darn good to find one for less than $400 in good shape.

I have a Supermatic Tournement Model, and It doesnt get any better, 69's Vintage..

[Agent_H]

Isn't a S&W model 41 but I get a lot of shooting in with my Mark3. Once you get the take down/reassembly dialed it's not really an issue.

[m72law]

amen to that Agent H....

[GRUMPN]

Love my Buckmark with light dot. More accurate than me, smooth and reliable. The best for accuracy? No question its the Smith & Wesson model 41. JMNSHO Ric

[JTGant]

Pistol...Ruger Mark III.
Revolver... Colt Diamondback .22LR..