Firearms Talk banner
21 - 40 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
aandabooks said:
Ruger Mark III with a bull barrel. Most accurate .22 I own or have shot. A Browning Buckmark would be a good choice.
Another vote for either. There are cheaper .22s and there are more expensive ones but I don't think you can beat the value of the Ruger or Browning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,822 Posts


Colt UMAREX 1911-22 Gold Cup!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
So no SW M&P 22 fans? Well, since I am a beginner I can always upgrade... But I would like to see more discussion on this; primarily around why "you" are passionate about your brand with details on the attributes that make you go "this is my 22."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,598 Posts
So no SW M&P 22 fans? Well, since I am a beginner I can always upgrade... But I would like to see more discussion on this; primarily around why "you" are passionate about your brand with details on the attributes that make you go "this is my 22."
Based on my other experiences with S&W, I would buy one in a heartbeat if I were in the market. I would definately want one if I shot a M&P9, 40 or 45. I shoot an SR9 and unfortunately Ruger doesn't make a .22 version.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
GlockBurg said:
So no SW M&P 22 fans? Well, since I am a beginner I can always upgrade... But I would like to see more discussion on this; primarily around why "you" are passionate about your brand with details on the attributes that make you go "this is my 22."
Well I like my brand because the slide is made of 7075-T6 aircraft aluminum and the barrel is heavy stainless its really thick for a .22 barrel plus it's reliable as hell never a jam or nothing like that. plus it has weight to it and feels more like a glock to me in terms of thumbs out grip it's a good training tool for me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
I have two Smith & Wesson M&P 22's. Both have been nothing but a pleasure to shoot and very reliable. One has over 1,000 rounds through it and shows no wear whatsoever. The other one, my son's, has around 600 rounds thought it, again with no wear or other problems. After renting a variety of guns he chose the M&P 22 and could not happier. Regardless of where it is made, who made it or what it is made out of, the M&P 22 is an excellent gun. Every bit the equal of the Ruger SR22 in a larger sizes package. I know a few other M&P 22 owners, none of whom ever complain about them. And even of one did develop issues, S&W has one of the best warranties and customer service in the business. So no worries.

Congrats on your purchase! I have no doubt that you will love it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Sentry18 said:
I have two Smith & Wesson M&P 22's. Both have been nothing but a pleasure to shoot and very reliable. One has over 1,000 rounds through it and shows no wear whatsoever. The other one, my son's, has around 600 rounds thought it, again with no wear or other problems. After renting a variety of guns he chose the M&P 22 and could not happier. Regardless of where it is made, who made it or what it is made out of, the M&P 22 is an excellent gun. Every bit the equal of the Ruger SR22 in a larger sizes package. I know a few other M&P 22 owners, none of whom ever complain about them. And even of one did develop issues, S&W has one of the best warranties and customer service in the business. So no worries.

Congrats on your purchase! I have no doubt that you will love it.
I just don't like the idea if my weapon being made from an airsoft company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
I just don't like the idea if my weapon being made from an airsoft company.
Glock used to make window fittings before entering the gun game. Tons of non-gun companies, like Smith Corona the type writer company, made 1911's and/or rifles during WWII. None of that has anything to do with their ability produce good guns. Umarex makes guns for Walther, S&W, Colt, H&K, etc. If they were not producing good guns why would all these major gun manufacturers still be contracting with them to make guns they put their own brand names on? The answer is they wouldn't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Sentry18 said:
Glock used to make window fittings before entering the gun game. Tons of non-gun companies, like Smith Corona the type writer company, made 1911's and/or rifles during WWII. None of that has anything to do with their ability produce good guns. Umarex makes guns for Walther, S&W, Colt, H&K, etc. If they were not producing good guns why would all these major gun manufacturers still be contracting with them to make guns they put their own brand names on? The answer is they wouldn't.
LOOK it's made if an inferior metal called ZAMAK a zinc alloy many people have stated and documented that there P-22's and other Uramex brands have either blew up in there face, slide cracks, stress fractures in the frame, bad magazine dimensions and not to mention some of these guns have low round count in them there is no reason for it to happen. I would understand if it was far and few between but there is a lot if cases of this happening to UMAREX products just cause a brand is stamped on the guns I.e H&K, S&W, COLT and etc does not make them a well made gun. I am sure there is great quality ones but there is to many reports of these things happening with these guns especially the P-22, I chose RUGER because of the quality materials used and the good reviews on them an I only bought it cause it is a second generation of SR-22 with its upgraded and improved parts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
All in all, if your going to make your own weapons then you should make them yourself not contract them to a third party because it is "CHEAPER" to manufacture solution! Everybody loves what they have because it's theirs and they cherish it so naturally there going to defend it from bias and criticism I'm just trying to give some insight into what certain weapon materials are used to manufacture guns. Most UMAREX guns use ZAMAK-2 which is the hardest of them as there is different ZAMAK strengths #2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 are the qualities. ZAMAK-2 has Brinell strength if 130 and decreases as it ages to @ 80-85 Brinell it's shear strength is about 35,000 PSI so it can more than withstand the .22lr but I just prefer aluminum 7075-T6 used in my slide, but hey man the S&W 22 is a beautiful gun and I'm shure you will have tons of fun with it all I wanted to do before it became a huge argument was to tell you some specs now that you have them do with them what you will just trying to help you out on the different .22 pistols enjoy your firearms brother.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,292 Posts
I had a bad experience with a Umarex Colt Gold Cup a few weeks ago. Someone brought one to a ccw class. Good looking gun, but it was a POS in my opinion. It would not reliably feed or cycle. We tried several different kinds of ammo. It was enough to make we steer clear of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Olympus said:
I had a bad experience with a Umarex Colt Gold Cup a few weeks ago. Someone brought one to a ccw class. Good looking gun, but it was a POS in my opinion. It would not reliably feed or cycle. We tried several different kinds of ammo. It was enough to make we steer clear of them.
Well glad you saw the light my friend like I stated in my comments earlier they have a bad reputation for using sub-quality materials and feeding issues could be an exact result of this!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
I get it, you hate Umarex and want to make sure that the OP comes to regret his purchase. Loud and clear several times over. Just the same I have an M&P 22 sitting in my safe right now with well over 1,000 rounds down range it somehow, someway it has still not blown up, shattered into a million pieces or beat up any other kids on the playground. Apparently it is just a matter of time. I will be sure and let the MANY people who own an Umarex made gun that are very pleased with them that they made a mistake and should not enjoy their guns. Thank you for rescuing us. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Sentry18 said:
I get it, you hate Umarex and want to make sure that the OP comes to regret his purchase. Loud and clear several times over. Just the same I have an M&P 22 sitting in my safe right now with well over 1,000 rounds down range it somehow, someway it has still not blown up, shattered into a million pieces or beat up any other kids on the playground. Apparently it is just a matter of time. I will be sure and let the MANY people who own an Umarex made gun that are very pleased with them that they made a mistake and should not enjoy their guns. Thank you for rescuing us. :rolleyes:
The truth only offends
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
All in all, if your going to make your own weapons then you should make them yourself not contract them to a third party because it is "CHEAPER" to manufacture solution! Everybody loves what they have because it's theirs and they cherish it so naturally there going to defend it from bias and criticism I'm just trying to give some insight into what certain weapon materials are used to manufacture guns. Most UMAREX guns use ZAMAK-2 which is the hardest of them as there is different ZAMAK strengths #2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 are the qualities. ZAMAK-2 has Brinell strength if 130 and decreases as it ages to @ 80-85 Brinell it's shear strength is about 35,000 PSI so it can more than withstand the .22lr but I just prefer aluminum 7075-T6 used in my slide, but hey man the S&W 22 is a beautiful gun and I'm shure you will have tons of fun with it all I wanted to do before it became a huge argument was to tell you some specs now that you have them do with them what you will just trying to help you out on the different .22 pistols enjoy your firearms brother.
Not really wanting to be anti here, but you seem to be a chicken little - running around saying the sky is falling. You seem to to trying to talk about things you don't really understand or know anything about - for the purpose of - what ? As one poster remarked - to make someone feel bad - or a bunch of someones.

Points:

One - Ruger does not specify their slide material - only that it is "aerospace aluminum" - not some specific like 7075 T6 aluminum - as you stated. You cannot know what Ruger's precise slide material is.

Two - Smith and Wesson gives their slide material of Their M&P22 as "aerospace aluminum". Sounds the same as Ruger's to me. No mention of a "Zamak". And Zamak is not an aerospace aluminum. So you have accused Smith and Wesson improperly.

Three - Your description of "Zamak" is confused - indicating that you do not understand material properties.

- Material hardness is measured in Brinell units.

- Brinell has nothing to do with strength.

- Your "look-up of Zamak shear strength is incorrect - it is 46k psi not 35k psi.

- How do you judge that 35k psi is sufficient for 22LR? This has no meaning without knowing specifics of the mechanical design. Where is shear important? What are the dimensions?

- Did you know that your 7075 T6 Al material has a shear strength of 48k psi? That is, for all practical purposes, the same as the mysterious Zamak material shear strength you are concerned about. But you say your 7075 is better. Why is it better? What is your design concern?

Four - Where is your Zamak information on all these guns coming from - it's not in the M&P22? What's with this concern?

Five - Why do you care what your slide material is made of - aluminum or any other material, for that matter? Why are you second guessing the designers of these high quality guns?

As far as concern of other companies making pistols - add the Singer Sewing Machine company to those which made Colt 1911's for the U. S. Army.

Most companies buy products made to their specifications from other companies.



Is the sky falling?
Or is it just to make people feel bad?

There are some people here that actually are engineers...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
LOOK it's made if an inferior metal called ZAMAK a zinc alloy many people have stated and documented that there P-22's and other Uramex brands have either blew up in there face, slide cracks, stress fractures in the frame, bad magazine dimensions and not to mention some of these guns have low round count in them there is no reason for it to happen. I would understand if it was far and few between but there is a lot if cases of this happening to UMAREX products just cause a brand is stamped on the guns I.e H&K, S&W, COLT and etc does not make them a well made gun. I am sure there is great quality ones but there is to many reports of these things happening with these guns especially the P-22, I chose RUGER because of the quality materials used and the good reviews on them an I only bought it cause it is a second generation of SR-22 with its upgraded and improved parts.

Ditto Colby!

FivefourfiveX39, where are you getting this information? I have not read anything to the scale of catastrophe you describe. While I have read some mechanical problems in some 22 caliber guns, they certainly didn't appear to be beyond the proportions of other gun complaints, as I see it.

Also, guns don't blow up, ammo does. I have read reports of steel guns being blown apart from bad ammo. So don't blame the gun for that.
 
21 - 40 of 59 Posts
Top