.22 Pistol Options

UFO

UFO

Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
353
Likes
99
Location
Greater Boston
Feedback: 2 / 0 / 0
My primary goal for a .22 pistol is to master the fundamentals.
Second, is to get one good enough that I could compete with it.
Lastly, if the pistol lends itself to preparing one for a centerfire, that's a plus.

Your opinions on the following considerations welcome:

- Model 41.
- High Standard. -fit my hand better than the 41.
- Ruger Mk III competition. -Cheaper than the 41, hard to clean, & heavier.

Also, I heard that the Walther is popular in Bullseye, but I am not sure which model. The P22 is most like a centerfire, but the small one I saw at KTP can't be the model used in Bullseye!
 
Go with the 41, you'll never regret it. Until you are a master, that gun will always be better than you are. As someone said, you can get different grips.

On the bullseye line, the 41 is one of the most common pistols found. That is for a reason.

To top it off, it is backed by one of the best companies in the business and since they are in MA, turn around is quick.
 
Here's another option: Ruger 22/45.

Same Ruger accuracy, but in a 1911 format; same grip angle and mag release (instead of that clumsy Euro latch on the bottom).

This means you can practice shooting your .45 for the price of .22 (the only other way is to buy a conversion kit for your 1911).
 
Scrivener said:
Same Ruger accuracy, but in a 1911 format; same grip angle and mag release (instead of that clumsy Euro latch on the bottom).
Click to expand...

The Mark III has a normal thumb button mag release. The Euro latch was on the Mark I and Mark II. I went to FS expecting to buy the 22/45 until I handled both. With the plastic frame and bull barrel, the 22/45 balances weird. It's very barrel heavy. Definitely handle both before buying.

People say the ruger 22s are hard to clean because they don't read the instructions before stripping them.
 
jar said:
People say the ruger 22s are hard to clean because they don't read the instructions before stripping them.
Click to expand...

Even after reading the instructions, Ruger auto .22's are a bit of a challenge.

Note that this difficulty is exacerbated in the Mk. III, with its mag safety.
 
one-eyed Jack said:
Why is the Ruger hard to clean? Jack.
Click to expand...

The Ruger isn't that hard to clean if you are reading the manual step by step. But good luck if you don't have the manual with you. I've stripped my MKIII Hunter 3 times already. I attempted it once without the manual...I got it taken apart, but putting it back together was really tough.
 
Am I the only one here who finds S&W Model 41's to be super-finicky about, well, just about everything, especially once they have some wear on them? Magazines, ammo, initial round loading technique, phase of moon... (I also see them shoot a lot of alibi strings in GBPL matches, but that might just be because half the line or more is shooting them.)

The aforementioned Walther that's popular in bullseye shooting is probably the GSP, but prices new are well up in four digits, and with the sinking dollar they've shot up even more. That said, I really like the GSP design, and like most of the European targets guns designed for Standard Pistol competition you can get a replacement upper for it to shoot .32 centerfire. I've also never had GSP ammo problems, which is more than I can say for S&W, Hammerli, Pardini, or, well, anybody else making semi-auto .22s.

I've been looking for a spare semi-auto .22 to keep around as a target-shooting-oriented loaner/teaching gun, and the Ruger is currently my top pick. My objections above don't take the S&W M41 completely out of the running, but its price tag sure does.
 
I like the Browning buckmark, if you can find one... I like the grips better than the ruger (which I have) and the S&W.

Any of those are good choices. The 41 is pricey but will definitely grow with you. The Ruger can be customized to the max by you and or a smith.
 
I have a High Standard Victor, and I cant say enough about them. (Not to sound like I am jacking the thread, but I have one up for sale also). They shoot extremely well, and can be upgraded very nicely. If you want a .22 for more then target shooting, then look else where. Bt if you want something purpose built, from a company that only manufactures (Or atleast did when the gun was made) quality competitive target shooting pistols.. you can't go wrong. I've also shot a Hammerli. Very nice gun. But good luck getting one, and extra mags for a good price. They are an arm and a leg. Good luck with your search.
 
The Browning Buckmark is very nice. One that takes down for cleaning EZ is the Beretta U22 Neos. It's a nice .22 that you can swap barrels on. No tools require.
 
If you want a good serviceable pistol to learn the fundamentals of pistol shooting in general and Bullseye competition in particular then there is no need to look any further than a Ruger. Their inherent accuracy is more than adequate for all but the top shooters and the money you save can, and should, be spent on ammunition to train with. Serious training - shooting several thousand rounds or more per year with clear goals in mind - will improve your scores more than any hardware purchase. The top shooter in one of the two Bullseye leagues I compete in uses a Ruger - much modified to be sure in the trigger and grip departments, but it's still the original barrel with the original Ruger accuracy.

On the other hand, if you're reasonably sure that you're going to get serious about Bullseye competition then I'd encourage you to start with a gun that's really intended for target work because that's likely what you're going to want eventually. I started some 25 years ago with a 41, which is clearly the best American-made target pistol. They can be a bit fussy about ammo and you need to keep them clean, but otherwise they're very reliable and accurate and it's possible to get true Bullseye grips for them, which is something you'll want to do - the stock grips are terrible. The 41 also has some limited adjustment for weight of trigger pull - mine breaks at exactly 1 kg, which is the lower limit for Bullseye competition. People will tell you that the 41 is fully the equal of the true target pistols, which are all of European manufacture - that's not even close to being true, but they are good guns to be sure.

If you want to really make a commitment to the sport, then your options are to go with one of the world-class pistols manufactured by Walther, Pardini, or Hammerli. There are others out there, but those three will be the vast majority of what you see on the line at competitions such as the Olympics. I'm currently shooting a Walther GSP Expert, which is the basic GSP with some improved weighting to dampen recoil. Those high-end guns really don't give you much more accuracy - from a rest, my 41 easily puts 10 rounds into one small hole at 50 ft and there's just not much room for improvement (and none that I can benefit from in any case). What you're paying for is improved dependability and a better trigger with a variety of adjustments - not just weight, but length of pull and angle, etc. Some of the newer guns - such as the Walther SSP - allow you to vary the grip angle as well. The top end guns also tend to get the grip up higher (or the barrel down lower in the grip, I guess) to reduce muzzle flip and allow better control in the sustained fire stages.

As mentioned by an earlier poster, imported target pistols don't come cheap, particularly with the Euro hovering around $1.60 - a new GSP Expert, with a few extra magazines (it's nice to have 6 for Bullseye, and they're about $70 each) and quality red dot sight is well north of $2K currently. Pardinis run a bit less, Hammerlis a bit more, when you can find them which isn't often. Good match guns do turn up on the used market from time to time for much less, and there's an older model GSP on the NES classifieds currently at $900, which includes a dot sight. Considering that a decent used 41 these days is in the $700 range for just the gun (no match grips, no dot sight), that looks like a good deal if you want to spend that much money. I also know someone who is looking to move a Pardini for less than a grand, which is also a pretty good price (PM me if interested in details).
 
Try finding a Walther, Pardini, or Hammerli in the Peoples Republic of Mass.


There not approved by mass or the attorney general.

If you do find one be prepared for sticker shock !!!!!


Of course this only applies in Mass where we live under communist rule :(
 
RIFLEMAN1000 said:
Try finding a Walther, Pardini, or Hammerli in the Peoples Republic of Mass.
Click to expand...

There was one in the WTS last week.

There [sic] not approved by mass or the attorney general.
Click to expand...

Which is because none of those manufacturers have ever tried. Each would qualify for the Target Roster, created precisely for such pistols.

If you do find one be prepared for sticker shock !!!!!
Click to expand...

No argument there.
 
Last edited:
The Mark II is a good starter pistol and one you could compete in Bullseye with. The 41 is top of the heap among all the pistols on your list.

I like my S&W 22A, but it is really a starter, plinker pistol, not one designed for competition. Still, I have four of them, and like them very much. Great for NRA Basic Pistol students.
 
Thanks to all for your input. If I end up in Bullseye, I imagine I will end up with a 41 someday. In the mean time, I can explore 2 guns for the cost of one Model 41:
1. the 22A (synthetic target grips & both the 5 & 7" barrels.
2. the Ruger Mk III competition.

After I practice with iron sights, I will be looking at a red dot. Entry level recommendations for red dot sight?

Thx again.

-UFO
 
I'm using a Browning Buckmark. I bought it from a friend. It is not MA compliant for new dealer sales but he bought it back in '95. I have only shot one match which was also my first time shooting one handed. My score was not great but I had no malfunctions and I was using bulk ammo. My score was actually only 20 points off the lowest regular shooter's score for the night.
I lightened the trigger with a mod I read about on rimfirecentral. I am using a Millett SP1 red dot that I got from Midway.
For now it is capable of more than I am. I may add Nill Griffe target grips as I become better or move on to a S&W 41. I'm not sure which way I want to go.
For now I need to practice.
Here's a site with alot of information on the sport of Bullseye.
http://www.bullseyepistol.com/index.htm

Here's a pic of my current setup.
100_1594.jpg
 
Browning

Thanks, EDD. Nice setup & photo. I liked what I read about the Buck Mark but they do seem rare in MA. The one on the Approved list is the "Buck Mark SE MS Lt Splash 7.25". MSRP is about $100 less than the Ruger Mk III. About the same in take down and cleaning, I imagine.
 
The takedown on the Buckmark is easy but does require tools. I saw one like mine but with a shorter (4 inch I think) barrel on it for $250. I'm pretty sure all the actions on the different Buckmark models are the same. The differences are in barrels, sights and grips. Mine is the standard model which is on the low end of the model list. I added the weigand rail for the red dot.
I believe the Buckmark is similar in design to the S&W 22A and the various High Standard pistols. Until this came along I was pretty much set on buying a Ruger MKII or MKIII.
 
Follow Up on .22 w/Trigger Pull Weight

Prior to purchasing, I have been shooting a friend's 22A. It's a good intro for me into handgun shooting. My shot groups indicated that I am guilty of snatching. I am trying to concentrate on squeezing with the pad of my index finger. Still, even as a newbie, I can tell the trigger on the 22A isn't that smooth. From my googling, I find the below re trigger pull. Can anyone confirm?

-Trigger pull on the 22A is almost 4 lbs.
-The Ruger Mk III is 'just under' 3 lbs.
-The Model 41 is set between 2.75 to 3.25 and stop is adjustable.
-Browning Buckmark is around 4 lbs.

From a fun factor, the Ruger and the Buckmark rate higher for me.
What Tactical Solutions offers for customizing these is intriguing. :)
The 41 is the better and more expensive long term buy.
The 22A is cheap. Not many Buckmarks in Mass. :-(

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
The "feel" of a trigger for Bullseye shooting is a very personal thing, and lighter is not always better. Equally important is how cleanly the trigger breaks, regardless of the weight needed to get there, and also whether the trigger pull is consistent from shot to shot. Triggers that have a gritty feel or creep noticeably before breaking are obviously to be avoided. It's not particularly difficult for a manufacturer to make a light trigger, but making one that's clean and consistent is a bit harder.

As a point of reference, the lowest legal trigger weight allowed in NRA Bullseye competition is 2.25 pounds for the .22 and 3.5 pounds for the .45. I prefer a very light trigger, so my guns are set at exactly those weights, but I know of very good shooters who like a bit heavier trigger and good shooters are going to shoot well regardless of trigger weight, within reason.

I have no experience with a 22A or Buckmark, so can't comment on those. Most of the shooters I know who are using a Ruger in competition, and there are several of them, have replaced the Ruger trigger with an aftermarket adjustable trigger, usually a Volquartsen. You could get a Ruger and replace the trigger and a few other components (grips for example) for well less than the cost of a 41 or other higher-end gun and have a very competitive setup for Bullseye. I don't know if those options are available for the other less-expensive guns you've mentioned, but I doubt it.

The Model 41 trigger is somewhat adjustable for pull weight, but does not have the fine adjustment of the best target pistols, and is also not adjustable for length and angle. My 41, which I no longer use in competition, breaks very cleanly at exactly 2.25 pounds, but I don't know if that's typical of 41s generally. As an aside, many world-class guns, such as the Walther GSP, have an optional two-stage trigger that in effect provides the feel of a much lighter trigger while still conforming to the 2.25 pound rule - again, it's a personal thing and some top shooters don't like them.
 
UFO said:
Prior to purchasing, I have been shooting a friend's 22A. It's a good intro for me into handgun shooting. My shot groups indicated that I am guilty of snatching. I am trying to concentrate on squeezing with the pad of my index finger. Still, even as a newbie, I can tell the trigger on the 22A isn't that smooth. From my googling, I find the below re trigger pull. Can anyone confirm?

-Trigger pull on the 22A is almost 4 lbs.
-The Ruger Mk III is 'just under' 3 lbs.
-The Model 41 is set between 2.75 to 3.25 and stop is adjustable.
-Browning Buckmark is around 4 lbs.

From a fun factor, the Ruger and the Buckmark rate higher for me.
What Tactical Solutions offers for customizing these is intriguing. :)
The 41 is the better and more expensive long term buy.
The 22A is cheap. Not many Buckmarks in Mass. :-(

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


I just picked up a S+W 22A yesterday. I hope to take it out today or tomorrow to see how well it shoots out of the box. Just upon handling it I can tell it should be a decent plinker. The grips were quite comfortable and the trigger felt good as well. And you can't beat the price. I picked it up over at Basspro for $199. I don't know if they have anymore for that price though because I believe I got the last one they had on sale in stock.

SW22A.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have about 10,000 round through my S&W 22A 7"
I cleaned up the trigger a little and can't say enough good things about it, shoots the cheap Federal wallyworld ammo all day and with the Federal gold it's a tack driver.
Best $200 I ever spent on a gun.
 

Similar threads

Identify this pistol?
Replies
2
Views
229
cfwii1979
cfwii1979
Ruger 22/45 lite grip size
Replies
2
Views
129
Lennypeters
Lennypeters
Glock 34 slide options
Replies
1
Views
280
paul73
paul73
HK MP5 .22
Replies
2
Views
265
Parksy
P
New Hammerli Force B1 straight Pull .22 Rimfire Rifle
Replies
4
Views
694
Parker Duofold
Parker Duofold
Back
Top Bottom