• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

What gun to buy?

dizzle2

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
189
Location
Lacey
hello, I am looking for a gun obviously and im am leaning towards either a Ruger Mk111, a Walther P22, or an S&W Sigma? any insight on these? Thanks
 

dizzle2

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
189
Location
Lacey
What's gonna be the primary purpose?

well, mainly to practice with and improve my accuracy. 520 rds of .22 rimfire is only 11 bucks so i figured its the way to go. haha. also i have a marlin .22lr and I must say, i have a sweet spot for it. It is very accurate. I just wanna make a switch to handguns now
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
The perk of a Sigma, as I have owned one, the trigger is so heavy, when you move up, you have a strong trigger-finger. After about 5k rounds the trigger get a little jittery...I field-stripped it and discovered that there was a metal piece rubbing against the polymer frame, it's the way the handgun was designed. Accuracy wise, I never had any issues...a draw and pull the trigger sidearm. Grip felt very comfortable to me. The down side, and it is a HUGE one if you are prone to limp wristing...stovepipes galore. I never had issues with it, but my partner, she would have one every mag.

I ended up selling my Sigma...I used it as a primary carry, I liked it, it was reliable for me, easy to field-strip and clean, but I prefer to carry a Beretta 92FS...9mm is all a person needs IMO.... .45 is not required, 9mm is cheaper to shoot and just as effective:shocker:

This is just my opinion, but I think a carry gun should have looser tolerances...you are going to be carrying it out in the world where there is sand, dirt, mud, snow, rain, etc...the last thing you want is the sucker jamming on you when you need it most. I think there are some real nice 1911's out there but would likely never carry one. If i was in a shootout in sandy or muddy conditions, I would take a Beretta 9mm over a 1911' .45 any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

As for the others, I can't offer up anything, as I have not carried or owned them.
 
Last edited:

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
A good .22lr pistol should be in any shooter's collection. Perfect to get lots of trigger time on, and to teach new shooters the ropes. My vote would be for the Ruger.

-G20
 

dizzle2

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
189
Location
Lacey
The perk of a Sigma, as I have owned one, the trigger is so heavy, when you move up, you have a strong trigger-finger. After about 5k rounds the trigger get a little jittery...I field-stripped it and discovered that there was a metal piece rubbing against the polymer frame, it's the way the handgun was designed. Accuracy wise, I never had any issues...a draw and pull the trigger sidearm. Grip felt very comfortable to me. The down side, and it is a HUGE one if you are prone to limp wristing...stovepipes galore. I never had issues with it, but my partner, she would have one every mag.

I ended up selling my Sigma...I used it as a primary carry, I liked it, it was reliable for me, easy to field-strip and clean, but I prefer to carry a Beretta 92FS...9mm is all a person needs IMO.... .45 is not required, 9mm is cheaper to shoot and just as effective:shocker:

This is just my opinion, but I think a carry gun should have looser tolerances...you are going to be carrying it out in the world where there is sand, dirt, mud, snow, rain, etc...the last thing you want is the sucker jamming on you when you need it most. I think there are some real nice 1911's out there but would likely never carry one. If i was in a shootout in sandy or muddy conditions, I would take a Beretta 9mm over a 1911' .45 any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

As for the others, I can't offer up anything, as I have not carried or owned them.

Thank you for your input. I will take it in consideration
 

dizzle2

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
189
Location
Lacey
A good .22lr pistol should be in any shooter's collection. Perfect to get lots of trigger time on, and to teach new shooters the ropes. My vote would be for the Ruger.

-G20

Thanks. but why would you pick the ruger?
 

OlGutshotWilly

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
443
Location
Snohomish, WA, ,
This is just my opinion, but I think a carry gun should have looser tolerances...you are going to be carrying it out in the world where there is sand, dirt, mud, snow, rain, etc...the last thing you want is the sucker jamming on you when you need it most. I think there are some real nice 1911's out there but would likely never carry one. If i was in a shootout in sandy or muddy conditions, I would take a Beretta 9mm over a 1911' .45 any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

As for the others, I can't offer up anything, as I have not carried or owned them.

The whole premise and design of a 1911, was to carry in war. A reliable gun with stopping power to be used in battle conditions such as mud, sand, dirt, water, jungle, snow, freezing conditions, desert etc.
The gun was used in multiple wars and "police actions" all over the world, and gained a reputation for reliability and stopping power. The whole point of having to "accurize" a 1911 .45 is because of the loose tolerances they come with out of the box to fulfill their primary mission.

I fail to understand your reasoning.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
You might consider purchasing a pistol that can be easily converted to .22lr with a field kit (pop the old slide off, and the new one on in less than a minute). That will give you the capability to train with your actual carry gun using cheap .22 ammo. You'll become more proficient with it's safeties, trigger, action, etc. A few examples are, any Glock, Browning Hi-Power, any standard size 1911, etc. The downside, is that you would be looking at spending quite a bit more (the price of the carry gun, plus the kit).

I have a Glock 20SF that I use with an Advantage Arms .22lr kit that a friend gave me. It works well. I also have a Ruger MKIII Hunter that I enjoy shooting. I decided to purchase the Ruger based on reviews I read about it's accuracy, and long term reliability, though I would preferred an earlier version without all of the "features".
 
Last edited:

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
The whole premise and design of a 1911, was to carry in war. A reliable gun with stopping power to be used in battle conditions such as mud, sand, dirt, water, jungle, snow, freezing conditions, desert etc.
The gun was used in multiple wars and "police actions" all over the world, and gained a reputation for reliability and stopping power. The whole point of having to "accurize" a 1911 .45 is because of the loose tolerances they come with out of the box to fulfill their primary mission.

I fail to understand your reasoning.

+1
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
The whole premise and design of a 1911, was to carry in war. A reliable gun with stopping power to be used in battle conditions such as mud, sand, dirt, water, jungle, snow, freezing conditions, desert etc.
The gun was used in multiple wars and "police actions" all over the world, and gained a reputation for reliability and stopping power. The whole point of having to "accurize" a 1911 .45 is because of the loose tolerances they come with out of the box to fulfill their primary mission.

I fail to understand your reasoning.

It is a give and take. You accurize your sidearm by making the tolerances tighter, the sidearm becomes less reliable in less that ideal circumstance. I should have been more specific...1911's are reliable in all of those above scenerios if you do not modify it or purchase a 1911 already designed to have tighter tolerances.

I am not a hardcore Beretta fan, I would just take it over a 1911...well, I might think about a duty type of 1911.
 

dizzle2

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2010
Messages
189
Location
Lacey
It is a give and take. You accurize your sidearm by making the tolerances tighter, the sidearm becomes less reliable in less that ideal circumstance. I should have been more specific...1911's are reliable in all of those above scenerios if you do not modify it or purchase a 1911 already designed to have tighter tolerances.

I am not a hardcore Beretta fan, I would just take it over a 1911...well, I might think about a duty type of 1911.

the key is it being cheap. i know cheaper isnt always better but it pretty much is with a 22
 

Bookman

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
1,424
Location
Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
A good .22lr pistol should be in any shooter's collection. Perfect to get lots of trigger time on, and to teach new shooters the ropes. My vote would be for the Ruger.

-G20

I've owned both the MkII and the MkIII and loved both of them. The only thing I really didn't like about them was that they were both a PITA to break down and clean.

On the other hand, that could be a plus. Once you've learned how to deal with something like that the rest of the firearms world is a cakewalk. :dude:
 

k.rollin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Messages
133
Location
Bellingham, Washington, USA
Get the Ruger. The Mk. III is really not that difficult to disassemble or reassemble, but there are a few little tricks to keep in mind. Those issues are typically overblown though. I'm sure that if you get one, you will not be disappointed.

This was my Mk. II; I traded it off almost a year ago, and I miss it like hell.
DSC_0065.jpg
 

cbpeck

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
405
Location
Pasco, Washington, USA
I fully support the idea of training with a .22, especially if you're new to handgun shooting. You'll have the advantage of shooting many more rounds per dollar with a low recoil gun that won't ingrain flinches or bad habits. In fact, every time I go to the range I put a magazine or two through a .22 before shooting my larger caliber guns. I view it as a warm up, just like you'd jog to warm up before you ran a 50 yd dash.

The Ruger is a nice option.

I'm not a fan of the P22, but they do resemble larger polymer guns, so I guess that's a plus for some.

I don't know much about the Sigma.

I really like the Browning Buck Mark pistols, but they may be a little pricey in comparison. The Beretta Neos is a fine gun at a great price. I would look into both of these if you haven't done so already. I'd be more likely to buy either of them than any of the three guns you mentioned.
 
Top