In my prior post, I laid out the reasons why, from everything I could determine, the Ruger Mark III and the Browning Buck Mark stood head and shoulders above the rest of the pack in the $300-$600 semi-auto rimfire pistol market. As I laid out previously, each of these two product lines enjoys a rock solid reputation for reliability and accuracy.
Both of these models are worthy contenders, but there can be only one. In this post, I'll lay out the reasons why, in my opinion, one of these two excellent product lines has the edge.
Less
THE RUGER MARK III PRODUCT LINE
As set out in my prior write-up, the current Ruger Mark III can trace its lineage all the way back to the original Ruger Standard pistol. The Mark III is available in a wide variety of models built on the same mechanism, with variations in materials, barrel length, sights and grips.
The Ruger Mark III line includes the 22/45 Bull Barrel ($314.00-422.00), the Standard ($342.00), the Target ($405.00), the Bull Barrel ($405.00-$512.00), the Competition ($589.00) and the Hunter ($602.00). Rather than doing a write-up on each and every one of these models, I decided to do a write-up on the entry-level Standard and the top-of-the-line Hunter Stainless, in order to give an idea of the range of options available on the Ruger Mark III.
At the entry level end of the Ruger model line, you'll find the Ruger Mark III Standard, which is clearly styled on the original Ruger Standard pistol:
From the specs, you can see that "Standard" is an accurate misnomer for this one. No frills, no muss, no fuss. Just a solid pistol. Of particular note is the price (MSRP $342), the blued finish, the tapered barrel, the fixed rear sight and the fixed front blade sight.
At the top of the line, you'll find the Ruger Mark III Hunter Stainless:
There are a lot of goodies on this baby. Of particular note is the price (MSRP $602), the stainless finish, the bull barrel, the adjustable rear sight and the fixed front fiber optic sight. It also bears noting that the Mark III Hunter is drilled and tapped for a Weaver-tyle scope mount, which is included.
In sum, a new Ruger Mark III is available for somewhere between $300 and $600, depending on options.
THE BROWNING BUCK MARK PRODUCT LINE
Much like the Ruger line, the Browning Buck Mark line includes variety of individual models, including the Camper ($315.00), the Standard ($380.00), the Challenge ($381.00), the Hunter ($408.00), the Contour ($442.00), the Target ($547.00) and the Bullseye Stainless ($689.00)
As above, rather than profiling every model, I've decided to feature the Buck Mark Camper and the Buck Mark Bullseye Stainless.
At the entry-level end of the Buck Mark line, we have the Buck Mark Camper:
Notable data points on the Camper include the price ($315.00), the adjustable rear sight, the fixed blade front sight, the bull barrel and the matte finish. With an MSRP of $315, this pistol comes in around $30 under the Mark III Standard, which probably won't make a big difference to most buyers. In terms of function, the Buck Mark Camper employs adjustable sights, whereas the Mark III Standard employs fixed sights, which probably would make a difference to many potential buyers. The Camper's bull barrel and "Parkerized"-style matte finish will make a difference to some buyers, but not to others. Personally, I like both features. I also like the fact that the Buck Mark Camper has a form-fitting grip whereas the Mark III Standard employs the traditional Ruger checked slab.
In terms of basic features, I have to give the edge to the Buck Mark Camper over the Ruger Mark III Standard. Browning has packed more "goodies" into the Camper at a lower price. That's not to say the entry-level Browning is a "better" gun overall, just that it comes with more bells and whistles. That said, some might consider Ruger's 5 1/2" 22/45 Bull Barrel ($316.00) to be more direct competition for the Camper. Its feature set is almost identical to the Camper's feature set for the same price. The relatively young, polymer frame 22/45 design is, however, a significant departure from the traditional steel frame Ruger design, and it hasn't yet had time to build up the same sterling reputation. If I were buying a Ruger Mark III based on the solid reputation of the traditional Ruger Mark line, I'd be buying a traditional steel-frame Mark III. Comparing the steel-frame Mark III and the polymer frame Mark III 22/45 may be comparing apples and oranges--or it may not. Time will tell.
In any event, at the top end of the Buck Mark line, you'll find the Buck Mark Bullseye Target Stainless:
The feature set on the Bullseye is very similar to the feature set on the Ruger Hunter Stainless. Notable differences include the price (the Browning is almost $90.00 more than the Ruger) and the Ruger's fiber optic front sight. Other than these differences, the Buck Mark Bullseye Stainless and the Ruger Mark III Hunter Stainless are very comparable.
On balance, looking exclusively at price and included features, the Buck Mark Camper offers more than the Mark III Standard, while the Mark III Hunter Stainless is a better value than the Buck Mark Bullseye Stainless. If you're looking for a rimfire pistol in the $300 range, it seems that Browning offers more "bang for the buck," while the Ruger offers more goodies at the $600 range.
RELIABILITY
Reliability is a strong selling point for both models. The reliability of the Ruger Mark III or the Browning Buck Mark is not in question. The Ruger definitely has a reputation for "rock-solid" construction. The Ruger lower is steel, while the Browning lower is aluminum. The Ruger is held together with a complex and beefy mechanism, while the Browning is held together with a set of Allen head screws. It seems to be generally accepted that the Ruger Mark III is likely to handle heavy abuse better than the Browning Buck Mark:
ACCURACY
As with reliability, the accuracy of the Ruger Mark III and the Browning Buck Mark are not in question. Although either of these two guns is more than sufficiently accurate for the vast majority of shooters, a number of shooters who weighed in gave the edge on accuracy to the Browning:
ERGONOMICS - GRIPS AND BALANCE
Across the board, the Browning Buck Mark pistols I've handled have felt considerably more comfortable in my hand than comparable Rugers. This is particularly true of the Contour and Standard models, which feature molded elastomer grips. Again, just my own subjective opinion, but there seems to be a fair amount of consensus that the Buck Marks have the edge on ergonomics when it comes to grip comfort and balance:
ERGONOMICS - CONTROLS
In addition to the high marks for the grip comfort and balance, there seems to be fairly broad consensus that the Buck Marks have much nicer controls, particularly when it comes to the trigger:
APPEARANCE
Appearance is subjective, but in general, I think the Browning Buck Mark line is a better looking group of guns than the Ruger Mark III line. The Buck Mark Contour is one of the best-looking rimfire pistols I've seen.
DISASSEMBLY AND CLEANING
The Ruger Mark III is either very easy to reassemble or excruciatingly difficult to reassemble, depending on who you ask. It can either be done without any tools or it can't be done without the aid of special tools, again depending on who you ask.
It seems to be fairly well-accepted that the Buck Mark is fairly easy to disassemble and reassemble, though it requires an allen wrench.
I'm not quite sure which model has the leg up on this issue, so I'll call it a draw.
AFTERMARKET PARTS
The Ruger Mark III definitely has the edge in aftermarket parts, if that matters to you. A big aftermarket doesn't matter much to me. I intend to buy an inexpensive, reliable pistol that's ready to go shoot right out of the box, and then go shoot it. But that's just me. If you're wanting to buy something you can really customize, the Ruger definitely has the upper hand there.
SUMMARY
Although it's certainly a subjective issue, I consider the Buck Marks to be better looking than the Rugers. On balance, it seems to be widely held that the Browning Buck Mark has the edge over the Ruger Mark III when it comes to grip comfort, balance, trigger feel and overall control ergonomics. The Ruger line may have the advantage when it comes to durability, while the Browning line may have the advantage when it comes to accuracy, but both product lines enjoy rock solid reputations in both areas.
At the end of the day, in the choice between two very solid products, it comes down to what you like and what matters to you. On balance, the big differences come down to looks and ergonomics, and in my book, the Browning Buck Mark line wins on both counts hands down.
As set out in my prior write-up, the current Ruger Mark III can trace its lineage all the way back to the original Ruger Standard pistol. The Mark III is available in a wide variety of models built on the same mechanism, with variations in materials, barrel length, sights and grips.
The Ruger Mark III line includes the 22/45 Bull Barrel ($314.00-422.00), the Standard ($342.00), the Target ($405.00), the Bull Barrel ($405.00-$512.00), the Competition ($589.00) and the Hunter ($602.00). Rather than doing a write-up on each and every one of these models, I decided to do a write-up on the entry-level Standard and the top-of-the-line Hunter Stainless, in order to give an idea of the range of options available on the Ruger Mark III.
At the entry level end of the Ruger model line, you'll find the Ruger Mark III Standard, which is clearly styled on the original Ruger Standard pistol:
From the specs, you can see that "Standard" is an accurate misnomer for this one. No frills, no muss, no fuss. Just a solid pistol. Of particular note is the price (MSRP $342), the blued finish, the tapered barrel, the fixed rear sight and the fixed front blade sight.
At the top of the line, you'll find the Ruger Mark III Hunter Stainless:
There are a lot of goodies on this baby. Of particular note is the price (MSRP $602), the stainless finish, the bull barrel, the adjustable rear sight and the fixed front fiber optic sight. It also bears noting that the Mark III Hunter is drilled and tapped for a Weaver-tyle scope mount, which is included.
In sum, a new Ruger Mark III is available for somewhere between $300 and $600, depending on options.
THE BROWNING BUCK MARK PRODUCT LINE
Much like the Ruger line, the Browning Buck Mark line includes variety of individual models, including the Camper ($315.00), the Standard ($380.00), the Challenge ($381.00), the Hunter ($408.00), the Contour ($442.00), the Target ($547.00) and the Bullseye Stainless ($689.00)
As above, rather than profiling every model, I've decided to feature the Buck Mark Camper and the Buck Mark Bullseye Stainless.
At the entry-level end of the Buck Mark line, we have the Buck Mark Camper:
Notable data points on the Camper include the price ($315.00), the adjustable rear sight, the fixed blade front sight, the bull barrel and the matte finish. With an MSRP of $315, this pistol comes in around $30 under the Mark III Standard, which probably won't make a big difference to most buyers. In terms of function, the Buck Mark Camper employs adjustable sights, whereas the Mark III Standard employs fixed sights, which probably would make a difference to many potential buyers. The Camper's bull barrel and "Parkerized"-style matte finish will make a difference to some buyers, but not to others. Personally, I like both features. I also like the fact that the Buck Mark Camper has a form-fitting grip whereas the Mark III Standard employs the traditional Ruger checked slab.
In terms of basic features, I have to give the edge to the Buck Mark Camper over the Ruger Mark III Standard. Browning has packed more "goodies" into the Camper at a lower price. That's not to say the entry-level Browning is a "better" gun overall, just that it comes with more bells and whistles. That said, some might consider Ruger's 5 1/2" 22/45 Bull Barrel ($316.00) to be more direct competition for the Camper. Its feature set is almost identical to the Camper's feature set for the same price. The relatively young, polymer frame 22/45 design is, however, a significant departure from the traditional steel frame Ruger design, and it hasn't yet had time to build up the same sterling reputation. If I were buying a Ruger Mark III based on the solid reputation of the traditional Ruger Mark line, I'd be buying a traditional steel-frame Mark III. Comparing the steel-frame Mark III and the polymer frame Mark III 22/45 may be comparing apples and oranges--or it may not. Time will tell.
In any event, at the top end of the Buck Mark line, you'll find the Buck Mark Bullseye Target Stainless:
The feature set on the Bullseye is very similar to the feature set on the Ruger Hunter Stainless. Notable differences include the price (the Browning is almost $90.00 more than the Ruger) and the Ruger's fiber optic front sight. Other than these differences, the Buck Mark Bullseye Stainless and the Ruger Mark III Hunter Stainless are very comparable.
On balance, looking exclusively at price and included features, the Buck Mark Camper offers more than the Mark III Standard, while the Mark III Hunter Stainless is a better value than the Buck Mark Bullseye Stainless. If you're looking for a rimfire pistol in the $300 range, it seems that Browning offers more "bang for the buck," while the Ruger offers more goodies at the $600 range.
RELIABILITY
Reliability is a strong selling point for both models. The reliability of the Ruger Mark III or the Browning Buck Mark is not in question. The Ruger definitely has a reputation for "rock-solid" construction. The Ruger lower is steel, while the Browning lower is aluminum. The Ruger is held together with a complex and beefy mechanism, while the Browning is held together with a set of Allen head screws. It seems to be generally accepted that the Ruger Mark III is likely to handle heavy abuse better than the Browning Buck Mark:
"The ruger will almost certainly be more rugged. It is made of big pieces of solid steel rigidly joined together."Reliability is definitely important, but the reliability of the Browning isn't really in question. It's certainly possible that the Ruger is more durable and reliable than the Browning, but it's a question of "very reliable" vs. "extremely reliable." Either model will be more than reliable enough for 99% of shooters--including me.
"The Ruger is built like a tank and has after-market parts galore."
"The [Ruger] 22/45 is tough as nails with great reliability."
ACCURACY
As with reliability, the accuracy of the Ruger Mark III and the Browning Buck Mark are not in question. Although either of these two guns is more than sufficiently accurate for the vast majority of shooters, a number of shooters who weighed in gave the edge on accuracy to the Browning:
"I was quite suprised how well "out of the box" the Buck Mark shot."Take that for what its worth. As with reliability, I'm sure either of these guns is more than accurate enough for most shooters--including yours truly.
"I own a Ruger Mark II and my buddy owns a Buckmark. I've probably put about 3000 rounds through my Ruger...I've shot the Buckmark also. Nice gun, more accurate than my Ruger."
"I have a Ruger MK III and a Buckmark... I personnelly prefer the Buckmark--no problems and very accurrate."
ERGONOMICS - GRIPS AND BALANCE
Across the board, the Browning Buck Mark pistols I've handled have felt considerably more comfortable in my hand than comparable Rugers. This is particularly true of the Contour and Standard models, which feature molded elastomer grips. Again, just my own subjective opinion, but there seems to be a fair amount of consensus that the Buck Marks have the edge on ergonomics when it comes to grip comfort and balance:
"I've never owned a Ruger because I don't like the grip for some reason."In other words, although it's a subjective judgement, a whole lot of shooters have apparently come to the same conclusion that I have--Browning has a distinct edge when it comes to grip comfort and balance.
"I like the buckmark better than the others, its mostly the preference for the grip and feel of the handgun."
"I was leaning towards the ruger Mark II until I felt the Browning buckmark. It fit me like a glove so I bought one."
"I have had a Mark II and the Buckmark...I liked both, but the Buckmark fits me better."
"Both guns weighed about the same, though the Browning balanced much better. The Ruger seemed muzzle-heavy, which resulted in the front sight wandering around."
"I have the [Ruger Mark III] 22/45 and the buckmark with rail. The buckmark is comfortable and actually feels like an extension of ones self."
"The grips on the Buck Mark have thumb grooves that mated perfectly with my hand. Balance is excellent. The 22/45's integrated slab grips didn't inspire the same confidence..."
"Neither is better or worse, just that the Ruger grip does not suit me as well as the Browning."
"I always liked the Ruger, but I LOVE the way the Buckmark fits my hand."
"The Buckmarks are fantastic pistols. The newer ones that have the URX grips are the most comfortable grips I have ever felt on a handgun."
ERGONOMICS - CONTROLS
In addition to the high marks for the grip comfort and balance, there seems to be fairly broad consensus that the Buck Marks have much nicer controls, particularly when it comes to the trigger:
"...the buckmarks tend to have very good triggers out of the box."As above, it certainly seems like the Buck Mark carries the day on the ergonomics of the controls--particularly with respect to the trigger.
"The Buck Mark's controls were much easier and more definite to operate."
"Buckmarks have better grips and triggers....but don't feel as sturdy."
"The biggest difference [between the Ruger and Browning] was in the trigger. The Ruger trigger was just OK. The Browning trigger was a delight."
"The Buckmark has better ergonomics (far better) and a better trigger."
"I've got a Buckmark and the trigger was crisp and smooth from the box."
APPEARANCE
Appearance is subjective, but in general, I think the Browning Buck Mark line is a better looking group of guns than the Ruger Mark III line. The Buck Mark Contour is one of the best-looking rimfire pistols I've seen.
DISASSEMBLY AND CLEANING
The Ruger Mark III is either very easy to reassemble or excruciatingly difficult to reassemble, depending on who you ask. It can either be done without any tools or it can't be done without the aid of special tools, again depending on who you ask.
It seems to be fairly well-accepted that the Buck Mark is fairly easy to disassemble and reassemble, though it requires an allen wrench.
I'm not quite sure which model has the leg up on this issue, so I'll call it a draw.
AFTERMARKET PARTS
The Ruger Mark III definitely has the edge in aftermarket parts, if that matters to you. A big aftermarket doesn't matter much to me. I intend to buy an inexpensive, reliable pistol that's ready to go shoot right out of the box, and then go shoot it. But that's just me. If you're wanting to buy something you can really customize, the Ruger definitely has the upper hand there.
SUMMARY
Although it's certainly a subjective issue, I consider the Buck Marks to be better looking than the Rugers. On balance, it seems to be widely held that the Browning Buck Mark has the edge over the Ruger Mark III when it comes to grip comfort, balance, trigger feel and overall control ergonomics. The Ruger line may have the advantage when it comes to durability, while the Browning line may have the advantage when it comes to accuracy, but both product lines enjoy rock solid reputations in both areas.
At the end of the day, in the choice between two very solid products, it comes down to what you like and what matters to you. On balance, the big differences come down to looks and ergonomics, and in my book, the Browning Buck Mark line wins on both counts hands down.
By 2008-06-04 19:25:13
Some folks do like the stock buckmark grips better, but there are plenty of custom aftermarket grips available for the Rugers. A ruger with custom grips can be as comfy as a buckmark--or even more so.
I considered a Buckmark at the same time I was looking at my 22/45 and finally decided on the Ruger. I have no regrets.
http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/search?q=gun cake
Just a sweet thing for gun nuts...;-)