Please give me your opinion on this .22

Greetings,

If you have time, please give me your opinion about this pistol. Would it be risky to buy this, expecting it to be good enough for bullseye? Is it too old? Potentially worn out? Would the barrel be any good? Thank you in advance for any advice you could provide.

https://simpsonltd.com/high-standard-model-107-military-citation-c45598/

Another one I'm considering:

https://simpsonltd.com/smith-wesson-41-1/

HS 107's have been known to be shooters.
parts are available and knowledgeable smiths are around.

Both are excellent pistols but in my opinion, high standard have a nice adjustable trigger, they are super accurate and have the same 1911 grip style. I have a supermatic trophy Military(No numbers like 106 or 107 marked) and i like a lot the pistol. The only issue i found is the aftermarket mags need to be tuned, but you will run the pistol with 1 mag without problem.
The 41 series A is the best in my opinion of 41 series. The 41 worked by a Gunsmith and a relined barrel, you will have a Formidable bullseye pistol. Other .22 pistols like Hammerli 208(s)-215(s), Unique Des 69 are nice options.

Either would be a good pistol.  The HS is a bit fussier with more problematic magazines, but to compensate their triggers are legendary and accuracy is superb.  The 41 has decent accuracy and is normally very reliable.

I shot a Hi Standard Citation for years. The accuracy was ok (it would hold the 10 ring at 50 yards). I would usually get an alibi during the .22 phase. I later moved to a Hi Standard Victor and got about the same results. Support for Hi Standards have been up and down. I think mostly down, since the 80's, when the original company went out of business. Magazines have been an issue forever. If you want to scope the pistol, I found that the LSP barrel with scope mount to be an excellent option and enhanced the accuracy. As a master shooter, you might want to consider something more "top of the line". Switching to the Hammerli 208s greatly improved my scores and it was 100% reliable when I was actively competing. As I type this, there is a framed 50 yard target that I shot many years ago at the Frank J. Bickar Memorial Regional, Canton McKinley R&P Club. It was my first ten shots of the match and it is "clean". Shot with the Hammerli.

Although I never competed with a S&W model 41, I was shoulder-to-shoulder with many folks who did. My observations were that they performed just about the same as my Hi Standards in the reliability and accuracy department. If you will at some point mount a scope, one of the newer models with pre-drilled holes for a scope mount, might be a better option. A lot of folks like to have the barrels of their model 41's re-lined to vastly improve accuracy. Some smiths say that they can improve reliability too.

I'll argue the counter point. I would not start shooting bullseye today with a High Standard. Yes, there are a lot of gunsmiths around who know the gun, but they are getting older. Parts are available, but I have no trust in the Texas High Standard company management.

A Smith 41 is an outstanding bullseye gun. Lots of gunsmiths know it and Smith supports it.

Both guns have 1911 style grips and great triggers. Both guns will outshoot a high master unless the barrel has been abused.

That said, my recommendation to someone starting bullseye today would be a 1911 with a 22 conversion. Nelson and Marvel are good, I think there are a couple of other good one out there. If you have a lot of money one of the Euro target guns will shoot great, but may make the transition to 45 caliber harder. If the shooter needs a low cost gun, a used Ruger Mk 2 is the way to go, with the Mk 3 as a second choice.

I like Steve's suggestion. I started out with a High Standard, one of the older ones from Hamden. It shot great and I loved shooting it. The issues was tuning the mags so as not to have feed issues. I switched to a Marvel conversion and have never regretted it. If I were starting out today looking for a conversion, I would probably go Nelson instead but either one works well. I did have a dedicated lower built so as not to switch back and forth with my 45 but I do know folks who do that.

Can you please give me your opinion on this pistol also? This is a Browning Buckmark Hunter with a 7.25” barrel. I would change the front sight and it has a screw to do that...


https://postimg.cc/rKXRvbbG

Spec sheet here:
https://www.browning.com/products/firearms/pistols/buck-mark/current/buck-mark-hunter.html

I have a Nelson conversion that I've shot for four years. It works quite well, although the rear sight had to be fixed recently. I'm looking for a backup pistol in case something like that breaks again. I don't want to be out for a whole season if something happens to it.

If you want a back-up get another Nelson! Why change guns?? You will have extra magazines and a gun that your accustomed to shooting. A different back-up is better than none or to spend a lot of money on a back-up high-end gun like a Pardini unless money is not an issue. As time goes by you can get another frame so as to have a complete back-up.

Browning Buckmarks are great Bullseye guns. The only reason I didn't mention them along with the Ruger is that they are less common. I can't see the link here at work. 7.25" might be a little long and nose heavy depending on the barrel profile, but I shot a 7" full bull barrel Ruger Government for the first few years when I started out and got to Expert with it. It still is the most accurate 22 pistol I own.

Froneck wrote:If you want a back-up get another Nelson! Why change guns?? You will have extra magazines and a gun that your accustomed to shooting. A different back-up is better than none or to spend a lot of money on a back-up high-end gun like a Pardini unless money is not an issue. As time goes by you can get another frame so as to have a complete back-up.

What ^^^^^ said.

I've had both. The High standard is a little fussier than the 41. Like someone said the mags have to be tuned and I found that I had to very slightly relieve the bottom of the chamber lip with a dremel for it to reliably feed right. Another thing to watch for is frame cracks. If the gun is extensively shot the peening of the slide will cause the frame to crack. The 41 I had I got off a local gunsmith who shot bullseye and he worked magic on mine so it would eat anything. I liked the trigger on the 41 as much as the high standard but that's a personal preference. Personally I would go with the 41!

Thanks for the advice. It's good advice to advise me to get another Nelson. But I got another Nelson in the mail a few days ago and it's a dog. I took it out the other day and I couldn't even consistently score in the 70s with it at 50 yards. My highest was 75 and the lowest was about 65. Never even hit the 10 ring once. And I usually shoot in the high 80s and low 90s. I took my old Nelson to the range today, after fixing the broken sight, and shot right around 88, 89, 92 again. I don't know what is going on with the new unit but my old Nelson, circa 2017, is a tack driver.

I put a snap cap in the Browning pistol today at the gun store, and fired it. The trigger is very gritty, and not good. I wouldn't even buy that pistol for a plinker. I don't see how they can sell a .22 pistol with a trigger that bad. It felt like it was hanging up in two places when I fired it. The guy working the counter dry fired the pistol right before he put it away, which defeated the purpose of me bringing my snap cap. I noticed that the breech had been hit a few times before, also.

I am not adverse to souping up a pistol for bullseye, but I don't get why they don't come stock with a decent sear and a trigger with an overtravel set screw. I'd rather pay another $50 than have to take it all apart and fix things. There's a lot of work needing to be done to that pistol and I don't even know how accurate the barrel is yet. Although from my research, it would seem the Buckmark pistols are accurate enough for bullseye, after a trigger job is done on them.

Suggestion - call Larry Nelson, and ask his advice.  Maybe something is damaged, and you can track down the problem and correct it.

Are you sure it is mounted properly on the frame?

Are you sure the rod that sticks out in the front is REALLY tight?

Is something loose?

Have you taken it apart, to make sure all the parts are where they belong and working as they should?

What kind of sight are you using - iron, or optics?  Is something loose up there?

Maybe you should post a new item in the "Equipment" forum,  and someone here can figure out what is wrong.

Call Larry he'll get it fixed... one way or another...

CO1Mtn wrote:... There's a lot of work needing to be done to that pistol and I don't even know how accurate the barrel is yet. Although from my research, it would seem the Buckmark pistols are accurate enough for bullseye, after a trigger job is done on them.

Buckmarks are most definitely bullseye-capable, the barrels are generally very good, and the design is simple and reliable. It shoots practically any ammo. Mine is a reliable backup.

Can't say why the one in the shop felt so bad, depending on how long it was kicking around the counter there's no telling what abuse it has taken. You're correct that the trigger benefits from attention. The sear spring is fairly firm, and the surfaces benefit from polishing.

You mention the lack of an overtravel adjustment, you may not really miss that in this gun. There isn't a ton of overtravel, and IMO tweaking it won't lead to better scores from the pistol. But there are some aftermarket triggers with it out there, and they're quite easy to install.

CO1Mtn wrote:Thanks for the advice. It's good advice to advise me to get another Nelson. But I got another Nelson in the mail a few days ago and it's a dog. I took it out the other day and I couldn't even consistently score in the 70s with it at 50 yards. My highest was 75 and the lowest was about 65. Never even hit the 10 ring once. And I usually shoot in the high 80s and low 90s. I took my old Nelson to the range today, after fixing the broken sight, and shot right around 88, 89, 92 again. I don't know what is going on with the new unit but my old Nelson, circa 2017, is a tack driver......

Just to be sure....   Are you saying you have two Nelson kits, and you are shooting them on the same 1911 lower?  Making NO other changes, just switching from one to the other, one shoots around 90, and the other shoots around 70.   The lower is the same, and the trigger is the same.  Both have similar iron sights, the first one with a repaired sight?

You are presumably using the same magazine, and the same ammunition.  Ammo is standard velocity?  

For the Nelson you got in the mail a few days ago, have you disassembled it for cleaning, and all the bits and pieces look good, and are in the correct location?

When you dry fire each of them, does everything feel and sound exactly the same?

I assume you've looked down the bore of the new one, and it's clean and shiny?  And the end of the barrel looks perfect, no "dings" or anything?

A Nelson has a fixed barrel as do most .22s so there shouldn't be any problems. Be sure you check to see if the barrel moves. Thought sights are attached to the barrel it can move when hit by the hammer if barrel is loose and moves when hammer hits the firing pin it will move the point of aim. If all seems OK I would call Nelson, I have never had a problem contacting him! He was happy to send me some of his parts for the conversion I'm making.

mikemyers wrote:

CO1Mtn wrote:Thanks for the advice. It's good advice to advise me to get another Nelson. But I got another Nelson in the mail a few days ago and it's a dog. I took it out the other day and I couldn't even consistently score in the 70s with it at 50 yards. My highest was 75 and the lowest was about 65. Never even hit the 10 ring once. And I usually shoot in the high 80s and low 90s. I took my old Nelson to the range today, after fixing the broken sight, and shot right around 88, 89, 92 again. I don't know what is going on with the new unit but my old Nelson, circa 2017, is a tack driver......

Just to be sure....   Are you saying you have two Nelson kits, and you are shooting them on the same 1911 lower?  Making NO other changes, just switching from one to the other, one shoots around 90, and the other shoots around 70.   The lower is the same, and the trigger is the same.  Both have similar iron sights, the first one with a repaired sight?

You are presumably using the same magazine, and the same ammunition.  Ammo is standard velocity?  

For the Nelson you got in the mail a few days ago, have you disassembled it for cleaning, and all the bits and pieces look good, and are in the correct location?

When you dry fire each of them, does everything feel and sound exactly the same?

I assume you've looked down the bore of the new one, and it's clean and shiny?  And the end of the barrel looks perfect, no "dings" or anything?

Yes to all.

From my experience most .22 conversions for the 1911 shot very good. Accuracy was never a complaint. Most of the problems came from feeding. Have you checked to see if it's shaving lead when chambering a round? Is the slide completely closed after chambering the next round?

If you want to try a military Citation, meet me at the July Boyertown 1800.  I have the original mag and two red bottomed magazines from Texas.  I have not had one miss feed.  I also fired one Ransom group.  I still have that group.  It is either two inches or a bit under. I don’t recall. It only has irons as that’s all I shoot and the rear notch is opened up to about .156”. I will likely hang it up after the Boyertown league and put it up for sale.  If there was an interested shooter before then, I wouldn’t mind a bit if all I had to shoot were my 45 for the remainder of the season. If you think you might be more than casually interested, bring $600 in cash and I’ll throw in the ammo for you to shoot the 900.

Thanks sir!

If you have big hands and are on a budget. "Browing Buckmark Field Target" The Barrels coming out of Browning lately are excellent I think TAC SOL are making their liners now. 

They are utterly reliable, trigger are good out of the box, someone makes a replacement hammer and Tandem Crass has a lighter sear spring that should work as the Heggis flip does not work great on guns with the new slide.

inthebeech wrote:If you want to try a military Citation, meet me at the July Boyertown 1800.  I have the original mag and two red bottomed magazines from Texas.  I have not had one miss feed.  I also fired one Ransom group.  I still have that group.  It is either two inches or a bit under. I don’t recall. It only has irons as that’s all I shoot and the rear notch is opened up to about .156”. I will likely hang it up after the Boyertown league and put it up for sale.  If there was an interested shooter before then, I wouldn’t mind a bit if all I had to shoot were my 45 for the remainder of the season. If you think you might be more than casually interested, bring $600 in cash and I’ll throw in the ammo for you to shoot the 900.

Good deal if it runs good, also as with any HS check the frame for cracks around the grip panels. Not a deal killer as most can be micro wielded