Mark IV 22/45 or Buckmark

abraves

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
490
Location
Wilmington
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
I am in the market for a 22 pistol. I have narrowed down to a 22/45 or Buckmark. I owned a Buckmark years ago and should not have sold it. Which one of these will be fairly reliable with bulk ammo? I have a Walther P22 that is very reliable but only with Mini Mags. My browning would shoot anything. It was the slab side. I am going to get a pistol and a 10/22. Had one of those too and sold it.
 
IMHO - it comes down to if you want it to work right out of the box, or if you want to upgrade it. The browning is definitely better right out of the box (another option is the SW Victory - great value for the money out of the box).

If you plan to upgrade - then I think the ruger is the better gun. Way more things can be done to this gun, and the support both from Ruger and the public is going to be better. They can be a little rough around the edges right out of the box, but in the long run I prefer the Rugers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
Reminds me of comparing the Marlin model 60 or the Ruger 10/22. Out of the box, my experience is that the Marlin is the way to go. But when it comes to modifications, the Ruger leads the way.

I went with the Ruger personally, mainly for aesthetic purposes, but it has been a very solid choice.
 
All the 22/45's I've owned would shoot anything, cheap bulk was no problem, without upgrades.

I've shot a Buckmark but never owned one. Although I would like to have one.
 
Hard to go wrong with either.

I am not a fan of the deep hook trigger on the BM. But some prefer it.

I like the aftermarket support for the Ruger as I enjoy tweeking .22’s. So I have had several of those and still own 2.

If you have a fat wallet, the Volquartsens are sublime, imo.
 
Buckmark with a Tac-Sol barrel and picatinny sight base with the built in adjustable rear sight. It makes for a light and very accurate .22 pistol. Barrels are easily swapped on the Buckmark, not so on the Ruger.

<>< Fish

Not mine, too lazy to dig mine out.
BuckMark_Cover.jpg
 
I will look at the victory. I’m leaning towards the Ruger Mark IV. Only thing I would probably do would be a trigger and install fiber optic front sight.
 
I will look at the victory. I’m leaning towards the Ruger Mark IV. Only thing I would probably do would be a trigger and install fiber optic front sight.
My Victory came factory with FO front/tears as well as a threaded 5.5” barrel. Trigger is nice too.
Eats anything. It also came with a factory optics rail as well.
 
I have both. The Browning is a better gun . Easier to work on and especially easier to clean . Just as accurate and the better trigger is a 10 minute job with no parts. Barrels change without a 4473 .
 
My Buckmark is more accurate than the missus' MkII with a 4.5" PacLite upper & some trigger work, but I shot the Ruger better in rimfire steels matches.
 
I am in the market for a 22 pistol. I have narrowed down to a 22/45 or Buckmark. I owned a Buckmark years ago and should not have sold it. Which one of these will be fairly reliable with bulk ammo? I have a Walther P22 that is very reliable but only with Mini Mags. My browning would shoot anything. It was the slab side. I am going to get a pistol and a 10/22. Had one of those too and sold it.

Found this today. Used. Looks unfired and pristine. I could not get the wallet out fast enough.

FE62D33B-2F2F-4B2B-913C-5C072C4E6A3C.jpeg
 
I have several Mark 1's through Mark 4's and, Smiths, A Nomad, Buckmarks, Colt Woodsmans, a pile of Hi Standards , other Rugers and stuff I am forgetting.

Best bang for the buck? The Mark IV target with the threaded barrel. I remember laughing uncontrollably when I first pushed that button and the upper popped open. It is the pistol Bill Ruger should have built 70+ years ago. It is joy on earth.

1.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have both and there is nothing hard about changing the barrel on the ruger. I don't have a problem with takedown and reassembly of the old ruger you just have to be able to follow directions.The MK4 is super easy. I don't have a preference and my S&W 41 beats both !!!!!
 
Last edited:
Yeah, changing the barrel in the Ruger is hard. Not talking about changing a barreled receiver.
 
My old Buckmark is more accurate than an old Mk3 I owned. My TC Contender 22 bull bbl with match chamber is more accurate than the Browning.
 
Nah. The barrel screws into the receiver. It really does. It looks like one piece. It's not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
So many options for Rugers, don't know why you'd ever need to change the barrel? Pretty cheap guns.

If you want a sublime semi-auto and don't mind spending money, buy a Volquartsen.
 
I have both and there is nothing hard about changing the barrel on the ruger. I don't have a problem with takedown and reassembly of the old ruger you just have to be able to follow directions.The MK4 is super easy. I don't have a preference and my S&W 41 beats both !!!!!

on mine its just one piece the barrel is the upper receiver


Man, you sure got me confused here. Not sure what you are saying.

The barrel is easy to change on a Ruger, but you can't change the barrel on a tacsol upper?

I guess I agree, although the barrel on a Ruger can be quite hard to change, imo. Maybe easy for a gunsmith with the right tools?
 
Man, you sure got me confused here. Not sure what you are saying.

The barrel is easy to change on a Ruger, but you can't change the barrel on a tacsol upper?

I guess I agree, although the barrel on a Ruger can be quite hard to change, imo. Maybe easy for a gunsmith with the right tools?

I am saying that if you are upgrading you change both as that is the way most if not all the upgrades are done
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
Started shooting Bullseye 25 yrs ago with a slabside Ruger MKII. Today I own 3 model 41s and 3 Buckmarks.
Ruger is a good gun with tons of accessories, they fixed the takedown nightmare and you can't go wrong with either choice. Experience with buddies shooting Rugers in competition is that they are still a bit finicky as far as reliability goes but most of these are older guns. I own lots of Ruger revolvers and they are great guns for the money but all need some TLC in the polishing and debugging areas.

Buckmarks have some drawbacks with the sight rail removal takedown design - I started leaving the rail attached with front screw and removing the bbl. Also rail length on most models limits optics mount choices due to ring spacing. But - with an hour of your time you can have a 2.5-3 lb trigger with overtravel stop on a Buckmark, I have found them very reliable and aftermarket bbls open up lots of options. I must say I hate the grip panel design and the way parts are retained with the grips but I don't need to strip that often.

I saw lots of both brands at local pin shoots up north before we moved, find the one you feel best with and buy tons of ammo !!
 
If reliability is what your are looking for, nothing exposes these guns more than Rimfire steel challenge.
250-350 rounds of high performance shooting.
And in the Carolinas, and on this forum, we have world class Rimfire challenge shooters.
Many.
All these guns have strengths and weaknesses.
It’s a matter of knowing what they are and addressing them, as they have all been shown to perform well. And poorly as well!
 
Last edited:
I grew up shooting a MkII. It has sat in the safe since getting my Buckmark 5-6 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom