Browning or Ruger?

[DEC]

I am going to get a .22 automatic pistol. The two I am looking at are the Browning Buckmark and the Ruger 22/45. I am looking for advice as too which one is the better choice. Thanks in advance.

 

[JJR]

I have one of each and I think they're both great guns. I prefer the grip angle of the Browning and the big weaver rail that lets you put optics anywhere you want (On the target model). The Ruger, on the other hand, can go about 50,000 rounds before you even need to clean it (which is a good thing as it's not that fun to break down). I would, however, recommend cleaning it regularly . Ruger mags are cheaper and easier to find as well.

I don't think you can go wrong with either. Just a matter of what feels better. Enjoy!

Oops.
I just noticed that you're asking about the 22/45. That's a whole different monster and I haven’t heard many flattering revues on them.


[This message has been edited by JJR (edited August 16, 1999).]

 

[Ala Dan]

Greetings; On the Ruger front, I currently
own a Mark II KMK-512. Great shooting gun
with adjustable rear sight. Only thing is;
you must keep'em clean. And yes, they are
not easy to put back together; but after
a few times, you will get the hang of it.

 

[Ed Brunner]

I have a 22/45 and I love it, especially because of the placement of the controls which is like the 1911. It is relatively foolproof. I have not had a problem with it.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed

 

[Grayfox]

I'll put my vote in for the Browning Buckmark. I've had one for about five years and really love it. It feels good in my hand and is alot more accurate than I am. Mounting a scope on it is just too easy.
The Ruger is a fine gun and I can't knock it, but I'm glad I went with the Browning.

 

[Arizona Eric]

A vote here for the Ruger. Cheaper mags, a bit more reliable. Browning's got a nicer trigger. The biggest thing I don't like about it is you have to unscrew hex screws to disassemble it. Then they loosen up during shooting. Boo.

Oh yeah, I have the .22/45, and I like it a lot.

 

[JoeHatley]

I had the same decision to make a few years ago. I liked the Browning but bought the Ruger.

1) Initial price. 22/45 was less expensive.

2) Extra magazines were also less expensive.

3) Money (saved?) in reasons 1 and 2 was spend on a bunch of after market parts from Volquartsen. I like ta tinker with my pistols.

Really can't go wrong with either one. Both are fine pistols.

Joe




------------------
Go NRA

 

[jimmy]

I have a lot of respect for anything with the Browning name on it, but in this case I'd go with the Ruger. To me, it's the more proven pistol.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

A recent Gun Tests magazine (last month's I think) tested the S&W Model 21a, the Browning Buckmark, and the Ruger MKII.

They loved the Ruger, liked the S&W, and hated the Buckmark. (One criticism of the Buckmark was that if you removed the grips, parts and springs flew everywhere. They thought this was particularly poor design.)

In the shooting tests, the MKII edged the S&W slightly, and both beat the Buckmark. They felt that with a scope, the S&W might be the better gun.

I have a Ruger MKII Target Competition. I love it. (I loved it more after I got rid of the fancy walnut grips and added Hogue wraparounds...)



[This message has been edited by Walt Sherrill (edited August 17, 1999).]