S&W "Victory" .22LR pistol. Ruger clone?

[hminsky]

I used to have the Buckmark Camper. I liked it, although it had an issue where when it was cold out it became sluggish to operate. It also seemed to blow burnt powder back more than it ought to. I ended up selling it and have been happy with the Ruger MKII.

 

[weehooker]

As much as I'm a S&W fan, I just don't see this as anything I want until /unless it is proven to be more than their next generation a plonker class 22 pistol. Fact is, if you go to any serious bullseye /gallery competition, you'll see that the Ruger MK II/III / 22-45 series are the top dogs for accuracy in the under $500 range. It has been that way for 30 years and will be hard pressed to change .

I don't buy into the Volquartzen upgrade discussion either. If you add a $300 barrel to a $400 gun, you'll find you have a $450 gun at the inevitable resale time. If you have the $700, then go right to the S&W 41.

 

[turbo38gn]

Here's another link to the Volquartzen barrels.. I like the looks of this, being a S&W fanboy.. I'll be watching how this gun pans out. I have owned 3-4 MkIII's... nice 22's, but can't say that any of them have been flawless... far from it.. MY S&W22a has been flawless though... so far..

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/01/13/volquartsen-barrels-for-sw22-pistol/

 

[92G]

assuming it's as reliable as a MK series, no mag disconnect or stupid LCI, along with easier takedown will give it some solid advantages over the ruger MK III. i still love my 22/45 and won't be rushing out to get the SW22 but hey it looks nifty.

 

[Crotchrocket]

As much as I'm a S&W fan, I just don't see this as anything I want until /unless it is proven to be more than their next generation a plonker class 22 pistol. Fact is, if you go to any serious bullseye /gallery competition, you'll see that the Ruger MK II/III / 22-45 series are the top dogs for accuracy in the under $500 range. It has been that way for 30 years and will be hard pressed to change .

I don't buy into the Volquartzen upgrade discussion either. If you add a $300 barrel to a $400 gun, you'll find you have a $450 gun at the inevitable resale time. If you have the $700, then go right to the S&W 41.

Where could I get a 41 for $700? I'm seeing $1000+ most places I look.

 

[lowbuckbob]

The front of the grip and the back strap look like they belong on different guns

 

[Sweeney]

I think it took all its design features from a Borchardt.

Look at it. It's got a grip, barrel, frame...even a trigger.

 

[turbo38gn]

I got to fondle one recently... definitely on my list, great looking, and feel in the hand.. unless I hear of any really bad and verifiable bad reviews... find most complaints are just whiney azzz bitches...

 

[Gammon]

With maybe a little browning buckmark mixed in.

The Buckmark is a take off of the Colt Woodsman/High Standard design.

 

[Gammon]

I did a little research on this pistol. One of its advantages is that the barrel is removable so it can easily be replaced unlike the Ruger where the barrel is part of the receiver and is considered to be the firearm for transfer purposes. The barrel is also easier to replace than a Buckmark because it is a precision fit that always (according to S&W) returns to zero. I have a High Standard Supermatic Trophy Model with a similar design that will always retain its zero after barrel removal/replacement. Unfortunately, my Buckmark, with a similar design, must always be sighted in after barrel removal. I have given up on removing the barrel and now clean the Buckmark with a boresnake.

If this zero retention is true, the S&W is a step up from the Browning and Ruger pistols design wise. Accuracy and reliability are still to be determined. Ugly is in the eye of the beholder and I do believe this S&W is ugly. I would gladly put up with ugly if S&W could do something with the grip. Put a 1911 type grip on this pistol and I would be interested.