I’m responding to this post, just to share my personal experience/opinion.
I owned a 5 ½” bull-barelled, blued MKII a few years ago. I had bought new gun new, and despite regular cleaning, trying different types of ammo, different factory magazines, and keeping the gun lightly oiled, it gave me reliability problems at nearly every outing.
Let me say that I am NOT anti-Ruger, however. I have owned (and do) a handful of Ruger products over the years and they have all been great, but that one. I’m not sure if I just received a “lemon”, or what.
I am in the market for a .22 pistol again, and I really like what I am hearing about the Browning Buckmarks. My philosophy is that I’d rather have to do some minor preventive maintenance at home, in order to know I have a gun that is going to be both accurate and, more importantly, will always function at the range. So, I guess changing buffers, allen screws, and monitoring the extractor area for wear doesn’t bother me so much (since they are all replaceable parts)—as long at the gun WORKS.
I check back on this forum periodically, and the reports of some Ruger MkII’s jamming (particularly some stainless models), just brings back bad memories for me.
I do really like the concept of the 22/45, though, and I do feel Ruger generally offers a great product, especially for the price. So I’m still uncertain right now, what I will end up purchasing.
Has anyone out there had a BAD Buckmark experience from a NEW & maintained gun, (with regard to reliability