Are there any specific advantages of a purpose built bullseye .22 vs. something like my existing Browning Buckmark 5.5 target?
The reason I ask is, that I'd like to upgrade at least my grips at this point. The mouse pointer is hovering over the Karl Nill site. I tried a "real" bullseye .22 and it seemed like the ergonomic grip really helped with getting a consistent grip and holding the gun steady. So I can upgrade my grips for ~$250 (grip cost + shipping) but if there are other specific advantages to a purpose built gun I might be more inclined to upgrade.
Specific advantages of purpose built pistols?
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
The biggest advantages of the high-end target pistols are the sights and triggers.
Most modern top-end guns have sights that are not only adjustable for windage and elevation, but for rear notch width and front blade width as well. And they are usually great big things that your eye can't miss. Well worth trying.
As to triggers, the top-end guns have great triggers...and you can get the two-stage triggers that are desirable.
My advice? If your budget can stand it, buy the best. You will be enjoying the quality long after you forget the cost.
Most modern top-end guns have sights that are not only adjustable for windage and elevation, but for rear notch width and front blade width as well. And they are usually great big things that your eye can't miss. Well worth trying.
As to triggers, the top-end guns have great triggers...and you can get the two-stage triggers that are desirable.
My advice? If your budget can stand it, buy the best. You will be enjoying the quality long after you forget the cost.
That's interesting to know. The purpose-built gun I tried felt like it had a striker fired system. The trigger felt like I was pulling against a rubber band -very odd, but maybe not typical? I actually like the trigger on the Browning. If the sights are an improvement, it seems odd that most of the guys (where I shoot) who have the purpose-built guns use optics. Actually, I think most of them use some kind of optic with magnification. It's an informal league. I've been using a red-dot with no magnification.
I got a little impatient and just went for it with the Nill grips. I figured it's cheaper for now and I can always upgrade to a full-on bullseye pistol later.
I got a little impatient and just went for it with the Nill grips. I figured it's cheaper for now and I can always upgrade to a full-on bullseye pistol later.
Buckmark
Actually I've found the Buckmark to be pretty good.
The advantages you get are:-
Better sights
Better, more adjustable trigger.
Lower barrel line compared with the hand.
More grip options, and not having the magazine go through the grip allows better ergonomics.
Better overall quality, in theory.
The advantages you get are:-
Better sights
Better, more adjustable trigger.
Lower barrel line compared with the hand.
More grip options, and not having the magazine go through the grip allows better ergonomics.
Better overall quality, in theory.
For myself, it's all about ergonomics. Once you understand the fundamentals, it's easier to execute them when the gun can be fitted to the user rather than vice versa. Many entry level guns offer near match grade mechanical accuracy but may be disappointing in how they interface with the user to extract that potential.
-
Guest
Re: Buckmark
???JamesH wrote:Actually I've found the Buckmark to be pretty good.
The advantages you get are:-
Better sights
Better, more adjustable trigger.
Lower barrel line compared with the hand.
More grip options, and not having the magazine go through the grip allows better ergonomics.
Better overall quality, in theory.