Opinions please!

[Independence Arms]

I am in the market for a cheaper (in price, not quality) .22lr target pistol.
could i please have some feedback between a Ruger- mark I, II, or III and a S&W 22A if anyone owns, or has owned both?
suggestions are appreciated, thanks!

 

[Palladin]

22A...sold one, looking to replace it

 

[Mike-Mike]

All of the ruger MKII and MKIII's are great and you won't be disappointed in the 22A either. There are tons of options. Just get the one that you want.

 

[william_munny]

I'm pretty happy with my 22A, and I've shot a MkIII before. Both were very nice, but I happen to like the look and feel of the 22A a little better. Either way, you can't go wrong.

 

[BossHarley]

I shoot in a bullseye league and there are quite a few Rugers - not a single 22A. I had a 22A and was not impressed with it (very early model), and currently have 2 MK III's. The best shooter in our entire bullseye league shoots MKIII - his average is something like 293 out of 300. Many others shoots Pardini's (what I shoot and probably greatest in numbers), also see Benelli's, SW 41's, Hammerli (sp?) and a few High Standards. Non of these fit your description of inexpensive except maybe the High Standards - you can find those used.

I recommend a Ruger, with a Volquartsen trigger/sear. You won't be disappointed.

 

[SMagee]

I've owned a Ruger MkIII 22/45 for almost a year now. I prefer the feel of the 22/45 over the other Rugers, seems more natural.

The first time you break it down is a nightmare, by time 2 or 3 you do it while your watching TV and not even think about it.

The first 2 months we owned it had about 8% FTE. Bought the VQ extractor and trigger/sear combo. The next approx. 3,000+ rounds not one. And I feed it everything from CC to Federal bulk packs from Wallyworld.

We were just talking about picking up another .22 pistol for when we take new shooters to the range, and it will definitely be another Ruger (with the upgrades mentioned).

 

[Scrivener]

Ruger.

Next question.

If you doubt the answer, spend a few minutes looking over the line at a rimfire pistol match. LOTS of Rugers, but damn few 22A's will be found.

Also check the aftermarket for accessories. Same result.

 

[Gammon]

A used High Standard Supermatic is a superior pistol, but I am not sure what they are going for. I have had one for over 30 years and love it.

 

[bazfoo]

If you do go with a new ruger mk III, be sure to put 1k of cci minimags through it before you consider the thing broken in.

I have one a love it.

 

[Neptune Cat]

I shoot low 280's with my MK III with a $50 red dot on it.

 

[Keystone]

I have a Mark III. It's a great little gun, eats whatever I feed it, more accurate than I am, and didn't break the bank. I shoot everything from CCI Minimags to blazer and federal bulk packs. There are a ton of reasonably priced accessories for it, though, as the upper is the serialized receiver, aftermarket uppers aren't really an option here in MA. I have the 5.5" hunter in blue. It has some serious weight to it (42oz, per Ruger), and just soaks up the little recoil a .22lr can provide. Great for beginners.

My only complaint is stripping the gun - it is a bear. Timber was not joking, I purchased a rubber mallet in order to get the receiver off and on the gun. It gets easier once you learn the dance.

I've shot a mark II, it was very similar, though the position of the mag release is more to my liking on the Mark III. Some people rip out all of the lawyer features on the Mark III on principle, if those things bother you the mark II might be a better option. If I start replacing the innards on mine, I may get the parts to remove the mag disconnect, if only to make stripping easier.

I personally like the look of the gun, especially when compared to the 22A.

You may also want to look at the Ruger 22/45. Basically the same gun as the mark ii/iii, but with a plastic/polymer/whatever lower and grip angles and controls meant to mimic the 1911. I've heard it can be a bit heavy on the barrel, but they are less expensive than the mark iii is.

 

[FPrice]

I've had several Rugers, the Standard Auto version (the early model) and MkIIs. I would strongly recommend them over the S&W. All of them were fun to shoot and pretty darn accurate.

 

[JGreen]

We prefer the Ruger MKIII models for our NRA Basic Pistol courses.

You have all the advice you need now. Enjoy your mallet and new Ruger.

 

[RichM]

One new note... the biggest complaint about the Mk III 22/45s was that the grips were not replaceable, as they were part of the frame...

The new Ruger 22/45 RP pistol features a classic 1911 grip angle and feel and is enhanced by replaceable 1911-style grip panels.

 

[wahsben]

I shoot in a bullseye league and there are quite a few Rugers - not a single 22A. I had a 22A and was not impressed with it (very early model), and currently have 2 MK III's. The best shooter in our entire bullseye league shoots MKIII - his average is something like 293 out of 300. Many others shoots Pardini's (what I shoot and probably greatest in numbers), also see Benelli's, SW 41's, Hammerli (sp?) and a few High Standards. Non of these fit your description of inexpensive except maybe the High Standards - you can find those used.

The last time I saw some High Standards they were more expensive than 22 A's or the Rugers. These were the victor and citation models.

 

[BossHarley]

I shoot in a bullseye league and there are quite a few Rugers - not a single 22A. I had a 22A and was not impressed with it (very early model), and currently have 2 MK III's. The best shooter in our entire bullseye league shoots MKIII - his average is something like 293 out of 300. Many others shoots Pardini's (what I shoot and probably greatest in numbers), also see Benelli's, SW 41's, Hammerli (sp?) and a few High Standards. Non of these fit your description of inexpensive except maybe the High Standards - you can find those used.

The last time I saw some High Standards they were more expensive than 22 A's or the Rugers. These were the victor and citation models.

Agreed, was just commenting on the fact they are match grade guns and cheaper than some of the other options (Pardini, Benelli, Ham.....). I don't konw the going price, but OP didn't really say what he was looking to spend.

 

[jaypap]

I had a 22A target model it shot very good, but I parted with it. I don't miss it.

I have a Ruger Slabside MK II it is a keeper, very accurate.

 

[EcHo]

I bought a new 5.5" bull barreled Ruger mk III 22/45 this past August and I love it. The only other .22's I've shot were the S&W Model 41 (too expensive for me to get at this point, although it felt nice to shoot) and a Ruger mk II. The mk II was alright, but the mk III felt better in my hands. The 22/45 grip is personal preference; I just like how it feels.

Never buy the cheapo Remington bulk packs; they suck and experience FTF/FTE every 6th or 7th shot. I went though all 500 of them and every single mag (10 rounder) had at least 1 issue with it. Some had failures half the time.

 

[Mike1911]

22a

 

[O/U]

I've had a Ruger Mark III 22/45 with a 5.5" bull barrel for a few years. I had a few failures to feed in the very beginning, but after taking it apart and cleaning it (which wasn't easy) it has ran absolutely flawlessly since.

It's been an accurate and fun gun.