mark 3,single 6 or buckmark?

K

ktmbigfan

New member
I'm buying a 22 pistol soon and wanted some input on which one. I'm leaning
Buckmark because of bang for the buck and my gun club only allowes handguns. The reason I ask is the ruger single six with two cylinders looks
very appealing. Ive shot them and talk about bang for the buck. 22lr and
22 mag. The only thing is I"m a revolver guy who needs some seriouse
auto practice. Sage Rats fear me but any of these fine arms will do fine
and most of the rounds will be at the range. So who has what and why
is it so great?

P.S. I recently bought a glock 19 and can't shoot it worth a damn. Give
me six gun and I'm deadly. I know it's no the gun so i'm thinking I'm needing
more auto practice.
 
D

deadin

Moderator
I guess the question would be what is your final goal with a .22? Plinking?
Practice with an auto? (The Ruger Single Six wouldn't make much sense here.:) ) If your ultimate goal is Bullseye or one of the similar disciplines, I would recommend the Mk III. There are any number of upgrades that can be had for it as you improve. (triggers,stocks, etc.) The Buckmark would be my second choice, but only for the reason I see less of them being used in competition than the Rugers.

Dean
 
2

22-rimfire

New member
My suggestion would be to look closely at a Ruger Mark II or III with a 5.5" bull barrel. You'll like the extra weight for plinking and range shooting. I carry a Mark II holstered in the woods too to keep me company sometimes as well. Used to be standard woods carry gear, but I have been leaning toward either a 357 or 41 mag of late for that purpose. The Ruger Hunter model is pretty darn nice, but I have not shot one yet. It is on my wish list.
 
B

Baba Louie

New member
Dryfire your Glock.
A lot.
The trigger on glocks is a little different than a wheelgun... or other semi's for that matter, and takes some getting used to.

Having said that, a single six isn't going to help you at all... scratch. (tho they are fun) I've got MkII's (several) and a couple of Buckmarks and like them both but their triggers are not the same as the Glocks (thank goodness).

'Twere it me, I'd probably get another Buckmark since I'm MkII heavy in that regard. (Actually, I'd get a S&W 617 -10 rd).

YMMV
 
2

22-rimfire

New member
I missed the point of shooting an auto... to help with the Glock. Just practice with the Glock. They really aren't that hard to shoot pretty well especially if you shoot a DA revolver. Not the same, but I think of them more like a hamerless revolver like the 642. Trigger is different though.
 
S

skeeter1

New member
Yes, this might be the revolver forum, but I'm going to suggest that you consider a Ruger MIII Standard. Good quality, lots of fun to shoot (cheaply) and the fixed sights work just fine. I have a Smith 35, but if I were a noob, that's the first one I would look for, followed closely by the Browning Buckmark. I'm not a fan of SA .22s. Whichever one you could get a better deal on. In either case, I don't think you can go wrong.
 
S

SAWBONES

New member
I own all three of your choices.

The Ruger Single Six revolver will have an entirely different grip shape and feel than either of the semiautos you mention, and that should really be your first determining factor in making a choice.
The ability to shoot .22 rimfire magnum (provided by the extra cylinder supplied with the Single Six) is really only significant if you hunt or shoot silhouette, and .22 magnum ammo is also fairly expensive compared to .22LR, so that may or may not be important for you.

It's a toss-up between the Browning BuckMark and the Ruger Mark III, AFAIC.

ANY of the above can serve as an inexpensive trainer type of pistol and will have carryover for sight alignment and trigger control skills to your centerfire handgun shooting, whether revolver or semiautomatic. (Chic Gaylord was advocating use of the Ruger Mark I pistol as training for revolver shooters back in the '60s.)
 
7

'75Scout

New member
I have a Ruger MKII I bought off my uncle for $200 with god know how many rounds through it. I've put probably about 2-3 thousand rounds through it in the 6 months I've owned it. Mine is the 5.5" bull barreled stainless model. It's by far my most accurate handgun.

I love it and recommend the Ruger MKII-MKIIIs to anybody looking for a good .22 plinker. Field stripping is a pain and I have only done it once. I'll probably never do it again unless something breaks. I only stripped it because I figured the internals that I couldn't get otherwise would be all mucked up. Turns out just cleaning what I can with the bolt locked back is more than enough and the internals were pretty darn clean.
 
G

gfen

New member
One of these things is not like the other, not like the other...lalala.

It shouldn't be too hard to either decide or narrow your options to two.

As for the Ruger III vs. the BM, heft 'em both and think it over. WHich ever one appeals to you based on weight, grip, and looks is the one you buy. Don't choose what someone on the Internet tells you to buy, you choose the one that you find the most satisfactory.
 
M

MatthewVanitas

New member
If the goal is getting into a semi-auto groove, then I vote for an Advantage Arms conversion kit for your Glock to allow you to practice in .22LR. A buddy of mine has the AACK, and likes is, and it gets a lot of good word-of-mouth.

-MV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top