wow. Very impressive. Here's a man who doesn't joke around.
wow. Very impressive. Here's a man who doesn't joke around.
Factory adjustable rear, and I put a standard Dawson fiber front on mine.Originally Posted by Zincwarrior
Excellent. Dawson makes great sights. I will have to look at the Glock in the future.
I'm not a Taurus fan, and don't own anything they make, but based on the reports I have heard from several TX22 owners, they are happy with their purchase. Taurus may have done this one right.
-Seconds Count. Misses Don't-
I had a Buckmark that was a complete jam-o-matic. Everyone else praises their reliability, but mine was a lemon. I think I sent it back to the factory for service (not sure), and maybe to a gunsmith to diagnose it (again, not sure), but I finally sold it out of frustration. Too bad, because I otherwise liked it.
The Buckmark had replaced a Ruger Mark something. That gun was absolutely reliable, but I didn't like taking it apart to clean it, so I sold it. After I sold the Buckmark, I bought another Ruger Mark something, and that also has been very reliable.
My wife likes her Buck Mark, but I am not a huge fan. The best things about the Buck Mark are the easily swappable (both mechanically and not the serialized firearm) barrels, easy takedown, and the aftermarket support. But the Buck Marks are essentially lower-cost versions of (in development order) the Colt Woodsman, Browning Challenger, Browning Challenger II, and Browning Challenger III. After shooting the Belgian Brownings, the Buck Mark is a tough pill to swallow.
The Ruger design, conversely, was always designed to need less skilled labor from its inception in the late 1940s and has a huge aftermarket. The changes Ruger has made to it have been primarily ergonomic, safety-driven, and assembly as it was reliable and durable from the beginning. I admit to a bias as a Standard was the pistol my father used to teach me shooting, but the aftermarket is so big for the Ruger for a reason. The Mark III moved the magazine release to the typical Browning location (but added the PITA loaded chamber indicator and magazine safety that so complicated field stripping and assembly), and the Mark IV essentially eliminated the big Buck Mark advantage of easy takedown and assembly as the Ruger is so simple. Make sure the hammer is cocked by cycling the bolt, engage the safety, push the button, and pivot the upper off of the lower. That is even simpler than the Buck Mark.
The reality is there are a lot of good rimfire pistols on the market. I would have no issues with many of them, including many out of production pistols like the Colt Woodsman variants Belgian Brownings, and the S&W 2206. But magazines for those out of production pistols are hard to find and pricey when found. I am modifying Beretta Neos magazines for usage in the Belgian Browning and Colt Woodmans variants. Optic mounting on the older guns is either difficult, unwieldy, or not a good idea. The Ruger magazines can be found in any gun store worthy of the name and a Mark IV magazine can be used in even the earliest Standard pistol. And optic mounting is a snap.
The big negative of the Mark III and Mark IV is the trigger and the magazine safety. Both can be addressed with a Volquartsen parts kit. The funny thing is my old Standard with the OEM parts has a great trigger, comparable to a tuned Volquartsen in the Mark IV.
If the takedown and assembly is not an issue, the older pistols can be found, at least before the latest panic, for under $300. I expect that will happen again once the current demand surge subsides. If anyone needs help taking one apart or putting it back together, please send me a PM. Once the tricks are known, it is fairly easy and takes no time.
Last edited by farscott; 05-14-2021 at 12:58 PM.
My Walther P22 5" once went over 2400 consecutive rounds of Mini-Mag #0030 without any stoppage, and is at least as reliable as my G44 and Ruger MkIV with other ammo. I hate shooting it though and secretly wish it would just die.
My S&W Plastic M&P .22 Compact is 100% with MiniMags and after a few hundred rounds of break-in has shot nearly everything else reliably. But its dinky size, light weight, and tough trigger are against it.
If you want a real target pistol, a Ruger or Buckmark will be your best bet. Reports vary, you just have to hope you get a good one.
My M41 is reliable with good ammo; I am shooting my remaining Aquila SV in it, then it will be CCI SV. I have notes on other brands but that would not necessarily apply to a different gun.
My Nelson Conversion on my least used 1911 frame is likewise accurate and reliable with good ammo, CCI SV preferably but it is shooting Aquila HV well right now, while it lasts. BUT it has a peculiarity. It will feed, fire, and function but if you want to unload, the extractor may not pull the last round out of the genuine match tight throat chamber. I have had to "unload through the muzzle" a good bit.
Code Name: JET STREAM
They're expensive, but a nice out of the box solution for a reliable, accurate .22 pistol are the Pardini and Walther GSP/SSP sport pistols designed for ISSF competition.
I went pizzagun, and got the Beretta 87 last year.
The only problems I've had was due to a box of ancient Winchester with bad primers.
"You win 100% of the fights you avoid. If you're not there when it happens, you don't lose." - William Aprill
"I've owned a guitar for 31 years and that sure hasn't made me a musician, let alone an expert. It's made me a guy who owns a guitar."- BBI
Reply With Quote