Buckmark Camper vs. Ruger Mk III

308BLR · 05-07-2007, 12:49 PM

I've been looking at inexpensive .22 pistols for a couple of weeks now. Need something cheaper than my .40 to plink with. Both of these pistols are in the $250 range (new), and both feel pretty good. Any marked difference between the two when it comes to reliability and accuracy? I looked at the Buckmark Micro as well, and loved the feel of the grip, but that didn't justify the extra cost to me.

308BLR · 05-07-2007, 01:20 PM

The Ruger I looked at was a 22/45, I believe.

mauser06 · 05-07-2007, 01:36 PM

i have a buckmark standard. think they run about 300 new..im not sure. its a fine fine pistol. more accurate than i am. functions great. not sure whats different about the camper. i know the barrel is round...i dont know if theres much else.

dad has a ruger mark II..its as good as my browning...but i can break my browning down 5x and clean it and assemble it before hes done once. not that they NEED to be completely broke down...thats just how i clean my weapons. and thats how dad normally does too...sure theres a trick to it or something...

stalkingbear · 05-09-2007, 08:15 AM

Speaking as a gunsmith with eye toward design AND lots of practical experience with both puts me squarely in ruger's corner. Here's why-browning buckmark has a flimsy ejector,without practice or looking,youmay be pulling on sight instead of slide. ruger design is inherently more potentionally accurate(this has proven out in actual use),the ruger takes about 8 seconds to fully field strip vs browning where you have to remove rear sight,ruger is much easier to acchieve excellent trigger pull-wether slickingup factory parts or drop in aftermarket,etc. This isMY personal preference ONLY,formed over years of use,ownership,and smithing.

JeffS · 05-09-2007, 11:05 AM

I have to agree with the Ruger being the best. I have a couple of Mark II's , and a 45/22. My buddy has the Browning Buckmark and he says he wishes he would of bought the Ruger. The only complaint I have about the 45/22 is it doesn't have adjustable sights. We fired it off a bench rest and it is just as accurate as my Mark II's though they are easier to shoot offhanded because the added weight.

308BLR · 05-09-2007, 11:26 AM

Thanks for the input. I went with the bull barrel 22/45 with the adj. rear sight. Only put 20 rounds through it so far, but I like it a lot. I looked at a buckmark micro that really caught my eye, though. The ruger feels great in my hand, has a really nice trigger and just impressed me. Look out, armadillos!

MontanaVet · 05-10-2007, 09:37 PM

I owned both of these pistols and I could not get rid of the Ruger fast enough. What a jamming, hard to reassemble piece of junk. The Buckmark Camper is the way to go in that price range. MV out!

JeffS · 05-11-2007, 08:01 AM

Quote:

I owned both of these pistols and I could not get rid of the Ruger fast enough. What a jamming, hard to reassemble piece of junk. The Buckmark Camper is the way to go in that price range. MV out!

I've fried several thousand rounds through mine and have never had it jam. It is not unusual to shoot two or three bricks through them on a weekend. You must of got a bad one because everybody I know that has had one has never had any problems at all with them.