Pistol Smith Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was in the market for a 22/45 recently and stopped by a local store. To my surprise, I felt the Browning Buckmark's grip was actually closer to that of a 1911--excepting only the contoured stocks, which can be easily altered or changed. The sights, though more than a bit meager, were not terrible either. The thumb-safety was abysmal. The slide is a pain, but I think it could be learned. Does it lock back on an empty magazine?

I was wondering what the general view is on Buckmarks. I like Browning, but .22lr semi-automatics of any make I distrust by instinct unless otherwise demonstrated.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: telackey on 2001-07-04 21:28 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I don't know what the general view of the Buckmark is, but my personal view is that it sucks. I bought one NIB a few years ago and had problems with mine from day one.

First problem: the top strap with the rear sight on it is attached to the frame with two hex screws. Every time you take the pistol apart, you have to rezero (or at least I did). I also had a problem with the screws coming loose while I was shooting--I had to tighten them every couple of magazines.

Problem two: the tiny recoil spring is held onto the tiny spring guide by a microscopic piece of rubber or plastic. If that microscopic part breaks, you can't get the gun back together. Mine did break and it took my dealer 3-4 months to get a new captive recoil spring system. (Brownell's didn't have any and Browning was between production runs.)

The last time I shot my Buckmark, I had several misfires and the trigger return seemed to be weak. I stopped on the way home from the range and traded it for a S&W 617 (this was before the Great Betrayal).

I would also be very careful about modifying the grips of a Buckmark because they hold many small parts in place.

I have shot (but not owned) both the Ruger 22/45 and Mark II and I think both of them are better pistols than the Buckmark.

.22lr semi-automatics of any make I distrust by instinct unless otherwise demonstrated.
Ditto! The only .22 pistol I ever had that was completely reliable was, of all things, a little Spanish Llama that looked like a mini 1911. I sure wish I had that one back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Mine is a varmint model and is great 12k-15k rounds very accurate and the best trigger I've ever had on any gun. I have optics on mine which are attached to the rail which comes off with the barrel so zero is maintained should you need to take it apart although I haven't found a good reason to take it apart. Scrape out the crud with one of them cuticle scrapin' sticks spray out with brake clean and your good to go for another 2k. However in my estimation anyway it doesn't have much in common with a 1911.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I`ve had both a Ruger Mk2 and 2 Buckmarks. I much prefer the Brownings. The grip angle and controls are the same as a 1911,even the 22/45 which has the 1911 angle fails to come close to duplicating the feel, still has hard to work button type controls and has those bug clunky plastic baseplates on the mags. I`ve put untold thousands of rounds through my Brownings (and the Ruger) with no problems or breakage of any kind. Fieldstripping the Buckmark is blown way out of proportion, I find it more pleasant than stripping the Rugers in fact. The Screws in the topstrap of the Browning have lockwashers that prevent them from coming loose (which many folks forget to put back it) and there is no re zeroing necessary (unless something is dreadfully wrong somehow). I strip and clean mine after every range trip and it`s still prefectly zeroed. Another perc is that Buckmark triggers are almost universally much better than Rugers. The pull on mine is as good as they get. Go for the Browning, you won`t be sorry. Marcus
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I like both the Ruger Mk.II and the Buckmark. I have a Standard Buckmark and it never fails. THe Ruger is the same way. I recomend hi-vel. ammo. The gun functions better. You won't go wrong with either gun.
Good luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
I owned one of the early Buckmarks and used it when I started out in bullseye competition. It shot well, but I wound up selling it because the trigger needed work (and no one was willing to tune it) and there weren't any good replacements available for the flat, plastic grip panels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
As far as the grips go, check this out.

http://www.gunaccessories.com/Excalibur ... owning.asp

I haven't bought their grips but they sure look good. Someone recommended them in the past and I bookmarked the site.

My Buckmark probably has 1K rounds through it with no problems re-zeroing sights after disassembly or with feed and cycling. And the trigger is pretty nice. I consider it a very good value for about $239. You can get all sorts of configurations, but I got the one with the 5 (5-1/2?) barrel and flat ground sides.

Whatever you do, avoid the Remington ammo. It causes trouble in all my .22's

So the Buckmark still isn't as close to my S&W mod 41, but for the price, its a winner in my book.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top