.22 pistol recommendations based on disassembly/cleaning?

First topic message reminder :

I've greatly appreciated all of the recommendations to date in this forum on .22 pistols along the lines of accuracy, price, ammo considerations, etc., but one aspect I haven't seen addressed as much is ease of disassembly/cleaning. I know that's a common complaint among BE newbies like myself for the Ruger MK II/III, and it's something I don't love about my Buckmark. It's a fantastic price point for it's accuracy--I went from Marksman to Expert scores two weeks ago after incorporating a red dot, and it's still shooting better than I can--but I'm not a fan of having to remove the rear sight/red dot every time I clean it (every 1,000 rounds or so). How do the other .22 pistols compare in this regard?

Since you made expert level, get a conversion on a good lower.  I like Nelson. 
And cleaning Rugers is not rocket science.  Any dummy can do it including me.

Mac2 wrote:Starting with the conclusions that indeed one should clean a 22 Bullseye pistol, and that one is going to buy a newly manufactured pistol that can receive a red-dot sight without fuss with a cost under $1500: 
The candidates are:  (1) a better Buckmark   (2) S&W 41 from custom shop  (3) S&W SW22  (4) a better Rugger  (5) "Marvel" type conversion from AA (or other) on a 1911 frame  (6) Beretta 87 (Target)  (7) better Beretta NEOS ( High Standard if it is still being made  
Low cost, high value, and easy to clean is the SW22 and NEOS.  So: what is missing from list?  What are your rankings based on whatever?

I'm certainly no expert, and of those listed, I've only shot the Buckmark, Ruger, and 41.  But if you look at what good bullseye shooters are using, the 41 and 1911 conversions are popular choices, so those stand out in your list.  People talk very highly of the High Standards, too.  My personal just-one-data-point experience with the NEOS is that one of the guys in my league had one and couldn't get it to shoot well.  He switched to a Buckmark, and likes it much, much better.  I really like my Buckmark, and it will shoot expert scores every time, and probably master scores if I were better (my personal best with it is 568/600 (94.6%) in our league), but there's no denying that few, if any, of the good bullseye shooters use them. If you have $1500 to spend on a .22 for bullseye, why wouldn't you get the 41 or a 1911 conversion (people seem pretty happy with the Nelsons)?

Once you get to shooting expert and start talking top guns, the trigger and how it fits your hand become very very important.  Much more important than cleaning takedown.

Just FYI, the AW93 is ridiculously simple. Just push a button and it comes apart.

Joel

bdas wrote:My personal just-one-data-point experience with the NEOS is that one of the guys in my league had one and couldn't get it to shoot well.

I tried a Neos for a while a couple years ago - I was (and still am) a High Master indoors shooter, so I figured I'd be able to get it to shoot well but I was wrong; I couldn't really make it work. Something about the sear, the spongy trigger, the small grip size + high grip angle, the striker-fired action, and the long lock-time while the relatively heavy striker is in motion before it hits the rim of the cartridge...I'm sure the platform is accurate enough, but there were too many things working against the shooter with the Neos that I don't think I could recommend it. It was, however, easy enough to disassemble and clean while keeping the sights in place.

The S&W 22A I tried around the same time was a little better in terms of shootability (better trigger, faster lock time), and Master-level scores were easy enough to obtain with the one I was using (even shooting left-handed, just for fun) and was pretty easy to disassemble and clean - red dot sight stays attached to the barrel. However, the limitation was the availability -- or lack thereof -- of aftermarket grips. The plastic/rubber grips were fine for me, if a little blocky, but I could see where other shooters might have issue with them. The one I had was a Talo edition with the special wood grips, and those felt humongous. Apparently there aren't many other options for grips for this gun, and that makes it difficult for me to recommend as well. And the gun has been discontinued by S&W for the new SW22 "Victory". A number of people have tried the SW22 Victory and reported on it, both here and on the Bullseye-L mailing list.

Between the Buckmark and the Ruger Mk. series of guns, I'd recommend the Ruger over the Buckmark since disassembly usually doesn't require the red dot sight to be removed if the sight is mounted to the rail that comes with Mk.III guns, or the Mk.II guns that had the rail mounting screw holes between forward of the rear sight; older Rugers and ones that are not drilled and tapped for a scope and thus use the "no gunsmith"-type mounts still require the sight to come off for disassembly - not optimal. I don't find the Ruger disassembly process to be particularly difficult (even with the Mk.IIIs with their magazine disconnect). The wider availability of aftermarket parts and grips for the Ruger over the Buckmark also helps me make that recommendation.

---

JoeW and I borrowed each other's guns for practice last night; he shot my Model 41 (and my Model 617 for grins), and I shot his Buckmark. I was able to overcome the Buckmark's roughness and post a Master-level score (575/600; mostly of the 'roughness' was in the trigger which had too much overtravel for my liking, though the balance made the sights seem to wiggle a lot - I dropped 23 points in slowfire), and I think shooting the 41 was a spoiling experience for Joe. He was also impressed with how easily the 41 field-stripped for cleaning. I suppose I could show him how to completely disassemble it (the sear on mine tends to gunk up after a few thousand rounds, and requires a good break-down to get it truly clean).

Next week I should have him try out my Marvel conversion.

rvlvrlvr wrote:Next week I should have him try out my Marvel conversion.

+1!!!!

rvlvrlvr wrote:

...I shot his Buckmark. I was able to overcome the Buckmark's roughness and post a Master-level score (575/600; mostly of the 'roughness' was in the trigger which had too much overtravel for my liking, though the balance made the sights seem to wiggle a lot - I dropped 23 points in slowfire)

FYI... to address the overtravel, you can order a Buckmark trigger with an overtravel adjustment screw from Browning for $10.

As for the roughness... I haven't tried one myself, but I've read good things about the Volquartsen hammer cleaning up the pull on Buckmarks, especially once they get worn in (or lightly polished in the right spot).  If I thought my Buckmark trigger was too rough, for $35, I'd at least try it.

As for the balance... you can get longer, shorter, heavier, or lighter barrels that bolt right on.  This step is not so cheap, but if you like everything else about the gun, at least you have the option to adjust the balance.