Need a 22lr semi, .... Help?
- Thread starter SudburyShooter
- Start date
My limited experience with .22lr HG's….
The inexpensive recent offerings of semi-autos that mimics their full-sized siblings are made with materials that wear out way too fast. They look like the real deal but feel too light and remind me of my son's airsoft pistols.
I've sold them off (started questioning their longevity and safety) and went back to the Ruger MKIII with their proven track record…..YMMV
The inexpensive recent offerings of semi-autos that mimics their full-sized siblings are made with materials that wear out way too fast. They look like the real deal but feel too light and remind me of my son's airsoft pistols.
I've sold them off (started questioning their longevity and safety) and went back to the Ruger MKIII with their proven track record…..YMMV
That statement would seem about right!
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
My 22 stable currently is
Smith and wesson..M41, M617, M17
Hi Standard Military model and Olympic model (but that one is in 22 short), and a over under derringer (but that ones 22 mag)
Browning buckmark and challenger
CZ cadet conversion
GSG
Ruger MII stainless, 10"
North american arms mini revolver
Berretta 74, and a little tip up barrel model in 22 short ( i think a 950)
I don't think that's missing any....it's kinda hard to keep track sometimes.....
As a semi, for general shooting, plinking and learning, the gun i bring out for new shooters is the buckmark. Untill you can group 10 rounds at 10 yards under a quarter, (which it can do) you aren't ready for a more expensive pistol...The CZ cadet can get close to this, as can the beretta if you can hold it steady (it's really light and small in the hand of the average guy)
The gsg may do better then 2" at this range, but not regularly, and only with ammo it likes...and if you shoot it lots it will break parts.
Any of the smiths will do this, and the 41 better it...as will the hi standards. The only thing that keeps the revolvers from doing it is that they're 4" barrels and it's harder to hold them...the extra 2 inches of sight radius really helps!
Smith and wesson..M41, M617, M17
Hi Standard Military model and Olympic model (but that one is in 22 short), and a over under derringer (but that ones 22 mag)
Browning buckmark and challenger
CZ cadet conversion
GSG
Ruger MII stainless, 10"
North american arms mini revolver
Berretta 74, and a little tip up barrel model in 22 short ( i think a 950)
I don't think that's missing any....it's kinda hard to keep track sometimes.....
As a semi, for general shooting, plinking and learning, the gun i bring out for new shooters is the buckmark. Untill you can group 10 rounds at 10 yards under a quarter, (which it can do) you aren't ready for a more expensive pistol...The CZ cadet can get close to this, as can the beretta if you can hold it steady (it's really light and small in the hand of the average guy)
The gsg may do better then 2" at this range, but not regularly, and only with ammo it likes...and if you shoot it lots it will break parts.
Any of the smiths will do this, and the 41 better it...as will the hi standards. The only thing that keeps the revolvers from doing it is that they're 4" barrels and it's harder to hold them...the extra 2 inches of sight radius really helps!
I think Cocked&Locked wins this thread. Great posts.
Has anyone found the Buckmark to be picky with what ammo it'll feed or shoot? I assume none of these guns can be worn out, but it'd be nice to know that the infamous 22LR issues won't be appearing if I buy a buckmark. My dad has one and it has been great for him. Shoots much better than it looks.
Is the Model 41 *really* worth that much money? It almost seems silly to invest so heavily into a gun shooting such a small caliber but I know people love them.
Has anyone found the Buckmark to be picky with what ammo it'll feed or shoot? I assume none of these guns can be worn out, but it'd be nice to know that the infamous 22LR issues won't be appearing if I buy a buckmark. My dad has one and it has been great for him. Shoots much better than it looks.
Is the Model 41 *really* worth that much money? It almost seems silly to invest so heavily into a gun shooting such a small caliber but I know people love them.
Sounds like good advice
I have experience with the Ruger and the m&p pistols and that sounds about right. I'm more accurate than the m&p but nowhere near as accurate as the ruger. Fixed barrel and sights is the way to go for accuracy. The rugers and buck marks come with better sights too. I prefer the grips on the buckmark but I haven't had the chance to fire one. For your budget you should be able to pick up a really nice one.
Last edited:
I have an m41. I like the trigger and the easy take down. The bull barrel with all the weight at the end does really help to control the muzzle when shooting fast. When all is said and done I think I actually shoot better with the ruger mk series when shooting slowly and I prefer the grips on the buckmark over both. My 41 is an older model so I don't have the option of a rail either.
I've seen a few that are very ammo fussy (including mine) whereas the ruger seems much less so. It's an expensive design that commands a premium price. If you look at a 41 bull barrel and think of the machining time and size the original blank would have to be it makes sense that it's expensive. I bought one because I liked it and I had an opportunity to buy a used model from a club member at a fairly reasonable price. If I were buying new I'd probably choose a buckmark or ruger as a second. If you like to customize things buy the ruger. There is way more aftermarket stuff.
A couple guys at my club have Olympic pistols that you can change the calibre with different uppers. They make the .41 look cheap
. It all depends what your into and how much money you have.
Last edited:
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
The buckmark will eat anything you throw at it, mix it in the mag it doesn't care. when your done, lock it open, take the mag out, hose it down with aerosol cleaner and brush it out with a tooth brush. Maybe run a patch down the barrel to get any crud that washes in. I know a guy who put 8-10 000 rounds thru one without cleaning...just slopping on g96 when it got slugish.....we finally made him clean it as it made anything within 10 feed of it black.
Ruger 22/45 or Browning Buckmark...GSG slides are crap and the metal wears out pretty quick..on the slide stop...Buckmarks and 22/45's are for the money the best out there...in my experience...BTW I'm in Sudbury too, where do you shoot?
If you want a rimfire semi that fits in with your other center fire guns so you reinforce your muscle memories while shooting both in a focused and positive way the only thing you need in the rimfire gun is to have a gun with a similar grip frame angle, a set of grips of roughly the same size and shape and a similar reach to the trigger. Similar sights will also encourage good continuity when transitioning from gun to gun. It's also not a bad thing if the gun is roughly the same weight and has a similar balance in the hand. The closer these things are to your HK the more effective your center fire to rimfire cross training will be.
What the rest of the gun looks like really doesn't matter because your hands won't feel the difference and you are only interested in what the sights look like so your sight picture practice works well for both guns. What it looks like from the side means pretty much nothing in terms of effective practice.
With all this in mind I'd suggest that a GSG, while I like them, would be a very poor match to the feel of your HK. You'd likely be better off looking for a gun which mimics your double stack HK for both "fatness" and shape as well as grip angle. Guns such as the M&P, CZ Kadet, Tanfoglio Force .22 come to mind as possible options. The Mosquito fits too but I've read too many bad reports of jamming and breaking to suggest them. This is despite knowing two owners that love them despite the fact that they need to buy only one or two types of ammo to keep them happy.
Another option would be something like a Browning Buckmark or S&W 22a with some fat grips that mimic a double stack mag frame and grips.
I don't like conversion kits for a number of reasons but if your HK is your only other handgun and you're narrowly focused on competing with it then if there were a conversion kit available this might be the time for such a thing to really shine.
But if, like many of us, you shoot a variety of handguns then the importance of all those matching factors begins to fade fast.
Of the two you mention I seen dozens of GSG's that run well and read constant reports of happy owners that well outpace GSG problems. With the Mosquito it's the other way around.
However I'd also suggest the Ruger or Browning as very good alternatives. But instead of the Lite model, which some of them are due to be cancelled from production, I'd go for a steel version so the gun mimics the weight of your HK more closely. And if you opt for the Ruger 22/45 model to get the more familiar grip angle pay for the one with the replaceable side scales. The other one piece frame is WAY too skinny for human hands to hold well. With the replaceable scales version at least you can switch scales or go for a wrap around style. There's LOTS more options.
The Browning already comes with grips that more closely mimic a double stack feel. And out of the box the Browning's trigger is nicer. Many owners find that they end up going for aftermarket trigger groups or parts to improve the Ruger trigger to match or go beyond where the Browning is right out of the box.
What the rest of the gun looks like really doesn't matter because your hands won't feel the difference and you are only interested in what the sights look like so your sight picture practice works well for both guns. What it looks like from the side means pretty much nothing in terms of effective practice.
With all this in mind I'd suggest that a GSG, while I like them, would be a very poor match to the feel of your HK. You'd likely be better off looking for a gun which mimics your double stack HK for both "fatness" and shape as well as grip angle. Guns such as the M&P, CZ Kadet, Tanfoglio Force .22 come to mind as possible options. The Mosquito fits too but I've read too many bad reports of jamming and breaking to suggest them. This is despite knowing two owners that love them despite the fact that they need to buy only one or two types of ammo to keep them happy.
Another option would be something like a Browning Buckmark or S&W 22a with some fat grips that mimic a double stack mag frame and grips.
I don't like conversion kits for a number of reasons but if your HK is your only other handgun and you're narrowly focused on competing with it then if there were a conversion kit available this might be the time for such a thing to really shine.
But if, like many of us, you shoot a variety of handguns then the importance of all those matching factors begins to fade fast.
Of the two you mention I seen dozens of GSG's that run well and read constant reports of happy owners that well outpace GSG problems. With the Mosquito it's the other way around.
However I'd also suggest the Ruger or Browning as very good alternatives. But instead of the Lite model, which some of them are due to be cancelled from production, I'd go for a steel version so the gun mimics the weight of your HK more closely. And if you opt for the Ruger 22/45 model to get the more familiar grip angle pay for the one with the replaceable side scales. The other one piece frame is WAY too skinny for human hands to hold well. With the replaceable scales version at least you can switch scales or go for a wrap around style. There's LOTS more options.
The Browning already comes with grips that more closely mimic a double stack feel. And out of the box the Browning's trigger is nicer. Many owners find that they end up going for aftermarket trigger groups or parts to improve the Ruger trigger to match or go beyond where the Browning is right out of the box.
