I just got my PAL license and am looking for my first handgun. I have done some research and am now debating between the above mentioned guns. I have never shot either gun so I would like to know what you guys think. Any pros and cons? Thanks
GSG 1911 .22LR or S&W M&P22
- Thread starter hikeetech
- Start date
kschneider
Regular
- Location
- southern ontario
What about the Ruger MKIII. Many a shooters first gun. Very reliable, and will last a long time. It was my first, and I love it.
- Location
- West Quebec
I'd go for the Ruger first the M&P a distant third after a Buckmark
Ghillie Man
CGN frequent flyer
Welcome to CGN!
Both are excellent guns! There is really no loser (surprised to hear the previous poster has jam issues). I suggest you try shooting both, or at least go to a gun store and see how either one fits in your hand. If they do not carry a M&P 22 they will most likely carry an M&P 9 (which will give you an idea of how the 22 feels/fits). Personally i love 1911's! There really is no cons that i can think with either pistol. And the good thing with both pistols is that they have bigger brothers (meaning if you want to start shooting center fire calibers and you are used to the fit and feel of your .22 it will be an easy transition). The main difference is barrel length and site picture, with the 1911 having a longer profile. This may result in better accuracy (but it really comes down to the shooter).
Another difference is the 1911 is a hammer fired pistol and the M&P 9 is a striker fired pistol. Also when it comes to field striping the M&P is easier to take down.
I have the SIG 1911 .22. It jams ammo like no gun I ever heard of before.
After a couple thousand rounds, multiple cleanings and some heavy oiling everything seems to be well worked in now and its working quite well. I find you have to watch what ammo you use because the feed ramp is so short and split.. the bullet has to have a smooth taper and not be one that flares out near where it goes into the case.
Now that it works good and reliably its a great gun and super accurate.
Is the GSG the same? I don't know.
Not the best info, but I hope that helps you out.
After a couple thousand rounds, multiple cleanings and some heavy oiling everything seems to be well worked in now and its working quite well. I find you have to watch what ammo you use because the feed ramp is so short and split.. the bullet has to have a smooth taper and not be one that flares out near where it goes into the case.
Now that it works good and reliably its a great gun and super accurate.
Is the GSG the same? I don't know.
Not the best info, but I hope that helps you out.
What he said.
But try to go for the Ruger 22/45 Mark III
The angle of the grip is like that of a 1911 (and it will take 99.999% of 1911 grips. I have about six different pairs and
I switch them often. Fellow members at the club, think I have about six 22/45s.)
I have the GSG Conversion Kit on my Remington frame. It's decent, but it wears quickly. The finish is so-so and it isn't the most accurate pistol. But mine works reliably and let's me practice with a 1911 patterned gun cheaply.
I have shot and handled the M&P enough to say it's finish is tougher and the various examples I have shot were reliable and a nice companion to their bigger caliber brethren. If I liked M&Ps a bit more, I'd have one in the stable.
I find that Rimfire copies of Centerfire pistols tend to trade-off either reliable feeding or accurate shooting to gain the ability to train with the same gun cheaply.A gun designed around the .22LR cartridge like a Ruger Mk III or a Browning Buckmark will serve you better.
A revolver eliminates the feeding aspect, which seems to be where most .22 semi autos get hung up. They are a world of fun in their own right. Don't disregard them.
I have shot and handled the M&P enough to say it's finish is tougher and the various examples I have shot were reliable and a nice companion to their bigger caliber brethren. If I liked M&Ps a bit more, I'd have one in the stable.
I find that Rimfire copies of Centerfire pistols tend to trade-off either reliable feeding or accurate shooting to gain the ability to train with the same gun cheaply.A gun designed around the .22LR cartridge like a Ruger Mk III or a Browning Buckmark will serve you better.
A revolver eliminates the feeding aspect, which seems to be where most .22 semi autos get hung up. They are a world of fun in their own right. Don't disregard them.
- Location
- Coquitlam BC
Ruger Mark 3 Hunter or nothing. I sold mine and miss it. I have an m&P22 it is great for when you take noobs to the range
What about the Ruger MKIII. Many a shooters first gun. Very reliable, and will last a long time. It was my first, and I love it.
I know the Ruger is overall a better training gun to start with. I read a lots of articles about this gun and people love the performance of this firearm. The only thing is this is my first handgun, and I think you guys probably all went through this, you want your first handgun to be ###y. Not that the Ruger MarkIII isn't a good looking gun, it is...it's just not what I had in mind.
I recently bought a Sig P226 22LR Classic which I am pretty satisfied with. I got it at Cabellas Canada (on-line) for about $620 and as it is a full size P226 frame it can later be converted to a 9mm, .357 sig or a .40 cal
The only issue is in the design whereas after the last shot the slide does not lock in the open position, but thanks to a$10 fix I have solved that problem.
The only issue is in the design whereas after the last shot the slide does not lock in the open position, but thanks to a$10 fix I have solved that problem.
- Location
- West Quebec
What was the fix?
I love the feel and the look of the P226 and the potential to convert it to a 9mm later. But I heard the Sig is VERY picky about the ammo. Is that true? Another problem is (same with the Glock and Beretta conversion kits), the conversion slider is always 'out of stock'.
- Location
- West Quebec
So not enough spring pressure?
