I need a new 22 for Bullseye shooting. The Buckmark I have simply does not fit my hand well and is starting to misfire. It is one of the older ones bought in the mid 1990's, it was a truck gun forced into bullseye duty, now needing retiring.
Are the new Smith 41's OK?
How about a used FW-93?
The Marvel conversions are nice, are they accurate?
Pardini?
the NEW High Standards????
Words of wisdom sought on new or used......
Please help me decide on a 22 bullseye gun.
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, Isabel1130
I can't help you on the Pardini or the new High Standard. The old High Standards are great. I have one of each of the other three. I think you mean the FWB AW-93. I have one and love it. There aren't a lot of used ones for sale. Reasonably priced they go quickly. I have a new Smith 41 as well. The new ones, mine at least, are accurate and reliable. I don't like the grip that comes with it because it slips in my hand because the back of the grip is so smooth.
The Marvel Unit #1 is very accurate. I use mine as a 1911 trainer rather than a match gun. If I get a dedicated lower I might use it in matches.
The Marvel Unit #1 is very accurate. I use mine as a 1911 trainer rather than a match gun. If I get a dedicated lower I might use it in matches.
-
NDbullseye
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:14 pm
a 22 that you might want to look at is the new ruger MKIII Target Competition model. I just bought one and absolutely love it. They do NOT need an aftermarket trigger and are very accurate. They also have very nice thumb rest grips. The accuracy on mine is 0.98" with eley tenex at 50yds off of bags. It will also group blazers or cci std velocity right about 1.1" at 50yds off of bags.
-
fast shooter
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:42 pm
- Location: Warren, Rhode Island
I think all you mentioned are fine and are as good as they cost. The only one I would question is the new High Standard. There are other good guns also. There are basically two different grip angles and you will probably prefer one which will negate half of the guns available. There are those that mimic the 1911 angle and those that are angled a lot. -- Bill --
Smith, old High Standards, Marvel, no problem, Benelli yes problem, I don't know about the Pardini. The old High Standards could have a thing called a BB block installed so cocking the gun is real simple and easy and the hammer doesn't fall. I have no idea where you could get one now though. If a new firing pin was installed in an old High Standard incorrectly it would peen the back of the chamber and mess it up.
-
Isabel1130
- Posts: 1364
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:19 pm
- Location: Wyoming
The AW-93 is a wonderful gun for dry firing. No plug is required so you can do it at will even during the match. The only thing I don't like about it is so far, I have not been able to get the trigger as heavy as I prefer it. However, that said, my AW-93 will be relegated to International shooting as soon as my gunsmith delivers my dedicated Marvel Unit. I prefer the 45 platform and grip angle.bpost wrote:Dry firing is a MUST does that REQUIREMENT leave any guns out of the running?
I used a S&W 41 from the 1960's which I still have. It was relaible and accurate with a wide variety of ammunition.
I later used a Walher GSP which had a somewhat better single stage trigger and was relaible with every brand of ammo I fed it. I must have put 50,000 rounds through that gun without any repairs.
Finally I opted for less weight up front and purchsed a Pardini SP ca. 8 years ago. It has a strong preference for Wolf MT, SKJagd PM or RWS Target ammo.
I have never been a fan of dry firing although I did purchase the dry firing trigger for the Walther GSP - nice toy but sold it after a year or so.
I later used a Walher GSP which had a somewhat better single stage trigger and was relaible with every brand of ammo I fed it. I must have put 50,000 rounds through that gun without any repairs.
Finally I opted for less weight up front and purchsed a Pardini SP ca. 8 years ago. It has a strong preference for Wolf MT, SKJagd PM or RWS Target ammo.
I have never been a fan of dry firing although I did purchase the dry firing trigger for the Walther GSP - nice toy but sold it after a year or so.
One correction to make - dry firing a Hi Standard of any vintage WILL dent the breech face and potentially deform the chamber mouth if done enough times. There is an old trick to dry firing Hi Standards and Model 41s. Your homework assignment is to ask senior bullseye shooters you know. I'll bet they know it.Smith, old High Standards, Marvel, no problem, Benelli yes problem, I don't know about the Pardini. The old High Standards could have a thing called a BB block installed so cocking the gun is real simple and easy and the hammer doesn't fall. I have no idea where you could get one now though. If a new firing pin was installed in an old High Standard incorrectly it would peen the back of the chamber and mess it up.
The Pardini dry fire adaptor is easy to use and absolutely foolproof.
I'm still looking for my senior since I am 67 and dryfired the High Standard that I was issued in 1965 every day that I was in the AMU at that time according to their instruction. If the firing pin is installed correctly (which they seemed able to do) it will not peen the chamber. At this time I have a High Standard Citation that I have had for about 20 years and has been dryfired thousands of times but not nearly what my army one was. If you will read my first post again, you will see that installing a BB block will keep the firing pin from moving. It isn't necessary to have one to dry fire but makes it easier because it is so effortless to cock. Hope that helps you Sonny.
Re: Please help me decide on a 22 bullseye gun.
I'd recommend a Marvel Model 1 with a dedicated frame. Any of the pistols you mention is going to be about equally accurate but the Marvel is the only one that's really going to have the same grip, trigger position, and trigger pull as a 1911.
I bought an aluminum model 1 based on the test target (.71 at 50 with CCI SV) thinking I'd use it as a .22 conversion for a .45 but now I'm thinking its the way to go for a match .22. I believe Marvel uses Shilen barrels.
The only complaints I have about it are that its very lightweight, and dumps a lot of grit into the magazine well, so you have to pay particular attention to cleaning the trigger mechanism which gets gritty pretty quickly.
I added a steel compensator trying to get the weight up, but it makes the recoil and balance sort of strange and it doesn't seem to attach very well. I think the way to go is to either get a heavier rail or add weight to the frame.
The version I have doesn't lock back (well it does lock back with Colt Ace magazines but they apparently put too much wear on the slide).. I think they've got some new versions that are all steel and are designed to lock back that might be better.
I've been shooting high standard victors but I think their heyday has come and gone. I've got a hamden, a screw barrel East Hartford that I'm currently using, and a new production standard (non 10x) Houston victor.
If you're going high standard I'd suggest any of the connecticut ones. The big button frames make it really easy to switch out a barrel, and there are a bunch of good third party barrel makers using quality barrels (douglas, shilen, krieger).
There are basically three target versions of the connecticut high standards (citation, trophy, and victor). The victor is very similarly balanced to a 1911, comes with a sight rail and is already drilled and tapped.
The early models 102-104 had a slant grip and I think are more comfortable to shoot, but with the 106 and 107 HS came out with a miltary grip very similar to a 1911.
Their claim to fame is that the trigger is very predictable. I find any HS preferable to a model 41 because of the trigger, although I like the 41 (except for the trigger).
On the military gripped HS's the grip is at the same angle as the 1911, but the trigger position is not the same and the trigger while very predictable doesn't emulate a good 1911 trigger.. Also the balance is not quite the same. I don't like having to adjust between the two.
High standards can be pretty finicky. You have to tune the magazine to the particular pistol with a special tool. On my hamden and east hartford's the magazines sort of flop around in the grip, and I don't have 100% confidence they'll run.
With the older ones you need to check the frame at the right rear of the magazine well for cracks. Apparently the steel they used in the frame is pretty soft and I think its a little corrosion prone as well.
The new ones use a cast stainless frame that should be more durable. I recently bought a new Victor direct from Houston. I had to send it back because as it showed up it wouldn't run and the trigger was breaking at around 6 pounds. They got it running but the trigger is still horrible. Basically its at best a pretty plinker.
I found dealing with them to be a royal pain, and when all is said and done I feel like the victor was $850 I flushed down the drain. For the most part its well CNC'd (with the exception of the trigger) but whoever put mine together originally either didn't know what they were doing or was using out of spec parts.
I bought an aluminum model 1 based on the test target (.71 at 50 with CCI SV) thinking I'd use it as a .22 conversion for a .45 but now I'm thinking its the way to go for a match .22. I believe Marvel uses Shilen barrels.
The only complaints I have about it are that its very lightweight, and dumps a lot of grit into the magazine well, so you have to pay particular attention to cleaning the trigger mechanism which gets gritty pretty quickly.
I added a steel compensator trying to get the weight up, but it makes the recoil and balance sort of strange and it doesn't seem to attach very well. I think the way to go is to either get a heavier rail or add weight to the frame.
The version I have doesn't lock back (well it does lock back with Colt Ace magazines but they apparently put too much wear on the slide).. I think they've got some new versions that are all steel and are designed to lock back that might be better.
I've been shooting high standard victors but I think their heyday has come and gone. I've got a hamden, a screw barrel East Hartford that I'm currently using, and a new production standard (non 10x) Houston victor.
If you're going high standard I'd suggest any of the connecticut ones. The big button frames make it really easy to switch out a barrel, and there are a bunch of good third party barrel makers using quality barrels (douglas, shilen, krieger).
There are basically three target versions of the connecticut high standards (citation, trophy, and victor). The victor is very similarly balanced to a 1911, comes with a sight rail and is already drilled and tapped.
The early models 102-104 had a slant grip and I think are more comfortable to shoot, but with the 106 and 107 HS came out with a miltary grip very similar to a 1911.
Their claim to fame is that the trigger is very predictable. I find any HS preferable to a model 41 because of the trigger, although I like the 41 (except for the trigger).
On the military gripped HS's the grip is at the same angle as the 1911, but the trigger position is not the same and the trigger while very predictable doesn't emulate a good 1911 trigger.. Also the balance is not quite the same. I don't like having to adjust between the two.
High standards can be pretty finicky. You have to tune the magazine to the particular pistol with a special tool. On my hamden and east hartford's the magazines sort of flop around in the grip, and I don't have 100% confidence they'll run.
With the older ones you need to check the frame at the right rear of the magazine well for cracks. Apparently the steel they used in the frame is pretty soft and I think its a little corrosion prone as well.
The new ones use a cast stainless frame that should be more durable. I recently bought a new Victor direct from Houston. I had to send it back because as it showed up it wouldn't run and the trigger was breaking at around 6 pounds. They got it running but the trigger is still horrible. Basically its at best a pretty plinker.
I found dealing with them to be a royal pain, and when all is said and done I feel like the victor was $850 I flushed down the drain. For the most part its well CNC'd (with the exception of the trigger) but whoever put mine together originally either didn't know what they were doing or was using out of spec parts.
-
marvelshooter
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 10:39 am
- Location: Eastern MA
I am going to cast another vote for a Marvel. I have an early unit 1 on a Caspian lower and I love it. It is a little light but I have a 30mm Ultradot in steel rings and that adds some wight. It is still lighter than a .45 with a dot though. I have no problem with the no lock back feature. It forces me to pay attention in timed and rapid instead of just pulling the trigger until the slide locks back. In slow fire I load the second magazine after the first four rounds have been fired and yes I know the practice is questionable but it works for me.
I shot a Citation years ago, loved it. However, good or bad, I want to stick with a known new(er) gun. The older high Standards were a work of art for their day amazingly accurate. They are priced into the sky by collectors far beyond the real value as a shooter to me.
It is shame the new High Standards are an issue for folks. Most reports about them are less than sterling, that is why I figure I might as well go first class or stay home........
Has any one used the Hammerli Xesse Standard?????
I really appreciate your input, one and all, it is VERY helpful.
It is shame the new High Standards are an issue for folks. Most reports about them are less than sterling, that is why I figure I might as well go first class or stay home........
Has any one used the Hammerli Xesse Standard?????
I really appreciate your input, one and all, it is VERY helpful.
I would only consider two choices at this point in time:
1) S&W model 41 - will shoot better than you can
2) Marvel conversion of a 1911 - easier to switch between 45 and rimfire
I shoot a model 41 and while i average a 285 score with it, I know it shoots better than I can. It is easily capable of shooting high master scores.
The grip and grip angle of the 1911 is unique and nothing else fits my hand like a 1911. I like the feel of it, and my grip is constant with the 1911. When I switch to the model 41 or model 52, it takes some "getting used to". This causes problems (perhaps just excuses) when shooting competition.
If all my guns felt the same in my hand, my grip would be more consistant which should equate to a higher score. Switching between the 41 and the 1911 is not too bad, however, the model 52 feels very different and takes some getting use to.
If I were starting right now with bullseye shooting, I would have a 1911 in 45 and a 1911 in 22.
Chris
1) S&W model 41 - will shoot better than you can
2) Marvel conversion of a 1911 - easier to switch between 45 and rimfire
I shoot a model 41 and while i average a 285 score with it, I know it shoots better than I can. It is easily capable of shooting high master scores.
The grip and grip angle of the 1911 is unique and nothing else fits my hand like a 1911. I like the feel of it, and my grip is constant with the 1911. When I switch to the model 41 or model 52, it takes some "getting used to". This causes problems (perhaps just excuses) when shooting competition.
If all my guns felt the same in my hand, my grip would be more consistant which should equate to a higher score. Switching between the 41 and the 1911 is not too bad, however, the model 52 feels very different and takes some getting use to.
If I were starting right now with bullseye shooting, I would have a 1911 in 45 and a 1911 in 22.
Chris