Browning Buck Mark Field Target vs. Ruger Mk IV Target?

My wife is looking to sell her Ruger Mk IV Lite (because it's too light!! )

I'm researching other options for her and wonder if anyone has done a comparison of the Browning Buck Mark Field Target and Ruger Mk IV Target?

She's really a plinker, so we're looking for a reliable .22 that won't break the bank. She'll shoot with an Ultradout mounted on it.

Thanks!

Val

Have her try both and buy what she likes. I can’t imagine a wrong choice here.

Various discussions online - consensus is that the Mk IV has the advantage in takedown.  Most threads note Ruger has more gunsmiths and aftermarket accessories available.  Unfortunately, this includes scope mount bases (expect to spend $15-30).
Mk IVs are available with aluminum and stainless steel lower receivers.  If low weight is an issue, assume you are looking for a stainless one.  Buckmark lower receivers are all aluminum.

Triggers - Not sure if the Mk IV Target requires trigger work.  The Buckmark requires little trigger work.

Fit and feel - this is important.  Does your wife like the MK IV grip feel?  (Size, shape, and grip angle.)  Or does she prefer the Buckmark Field Target grip?

Bottom line: Sounds like a "Try before you buy" is in order.  Find a way to borrow/rent examples of both pistols, ideally for a side by side comparison.

Link to one online comparison:  https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/22lr-pistol-showdown-browning-buck-mark-vs-ruger-mark-series/

Asa

I have both. I like shooting the Buckmark more then the Mk4 for the simple reason that the Mk4 is too darn heavy up front. I had a quick trigger job done on both of them by Roddy Toyota so both triggers are great. All the Buckmark needed was labor. The Mk4 had a Mk2 trigger upgrade. When Roddy did the trigger job on the Ruger he offered to knock some of the barrel off. I should of taken him up on it. I'm not a little person but I find it fatiguing. The Mk2 (middle pistol) feels a lot better balanced. YMMV

Len

LenV, the Mk IV in the picture looks to be the Mark IV Competition which is listed at 45.8 oz. The Mark IV Target is a few ounces lighter at 42.8. Val, the Lite is only 25 oz.

Maybe the Target is a better option? Would likely need a Volquartsen trigger upgrade. Sorry, I don't know anything about Buckmark triggers.

Big fan of my Buckmark (medallion model). The trigger actually is fairly good stock, fairly easy to lower the pull weight a bit with the sear spring flip. Mark IV will be easier to take down and clean, especially with a scope rail. At the time I was able to buy my Buckmark for a bit less than a Ruger, but ballpark should be close. Probably hard to go wrong with either one.

I'm pretty happy with the two Buckmarks I have. Dave Sams tuned the triggers on both. I'm not a BE competitor like y'all...but from a casual rest it stacks cci SV pretty well...anything out is on me.

I've had two Ruger MKII Gov models...sold one years ago, and more recently had one that was a problem child..function issues and not particularly accurate.

One thing about the BM is the barrel swap. No need to send the gun off to do so.

The BuckMark is a great pistol and you could not go wrong with either. Only Browning I own now is a Challenger II, great pistol. I have had BuckMarks in the past and another one is on my short list. I have two Ruger Mark IV. This is the way I see them.

Ruger Mark IV
1. Easy Take down, no tools and can be taken down and back together in less than 30 seconds.
2. If Stainless Steel the complete pistol is all steel.
3. 3rd party upgrades every where, anything you want to do with them.
4. Heavier trigger out of the box, but not super heavy.
5. Most people figure on another $100 dollar to get a great trigger on up grades. 2lb. trigger
6. Ruger customer service is one of the best in the industry. Very customer oriented.
7. Will eat every thing that you can find in 22lr. ammo except maybe CB's (low power)
8. Don't remember ever having a misfire that was not bulk bad ammo (bad primer)

Browning BuckMark

1. Good trigger out of the box. No extra cost.
2. Aluminum Frame
3. Not as much 3rd party parts out there but there are parts available.
4. Will also eat everything that you put in the magazine that's 22lr.
5. Several models just like the Ruger's
6. Takes an Allen wrench to take apart. Possible of crossing threads or wearing them. But probably not to worry.

To me these are just a preference gun. Can not go wrong with either one. I put these two brands in a class above the others including the S&W Victory. Would not consider the others

I don't know how the MkIV fares.  I much prefer shooting my MkII to my Buckmark, though.  The trigger on the MkII is fantastic thanks to Volquartsen.

They're both inexpensive pistols, buy them both and sell the one that you like less.  Someone will buy it.

Buck Mark Field target is the one to get. They do not have much after market parts but they do not need much. Frame is a little thich so if you wife has small hand then tshe should get the 22 45. Cheap and it is a 1911 grip angle. No need to get the Competition, Ruger 5 inch barrels shoot plenty good.

I choose the Buckmark Hunter because of its frame. Almost all of the older Buckmark parts will fit. This older pair of Nills fit with about 3 minutes of work inside the right side grip. The grips didn't make it lighter but it won't be confused with hunting pistol.

50 yardgroups. I only shot two groups.

Its a 1995 Buckmark with stock barrel and Valquartsen hammer and sear spring upgrade..

David

I had a buck mark std. bull barrel version from the early 90's I purchased at a gun show for $125.  It took me from Marksman to Expert, and I shot my first Master score with it.  All I did was add some skateboard tape to the front strap and down the road I had to replace a tiny spring (can't remember what it did, but it wore out.  It was a great 22, but after I found a HS Victor, I traded it straight up for a TC Contender 44 Mag, a deal I couldn't resist.  I'm finally getting around to getting a backup for the Victor, a Nelson conversion for the 1911.  Hoping the Nelson becomes my fav, as I love the 1911 feel and balance.  You can't go wrong with either, but I would probably go with the Ruger Mark IV, ease of takedown, lots of aftermarket support.  I thought the SS target model was too heavy, I liked the blued target model and the grip angle of the 22/45.  I didn't care for the 22/45 polymer frame, wish there was an option for steel.

Mark IV need a lot of work to make them excellent. Browning if they feel right for you are GTG out the box, The Field Target Model is the best one.

Ask and you will see many different opinions.  Ruger used to be the go to 22 for entry into bullseye shooting.  We had a master shooting one at our club until he switched to Hammerli.  You can't go wrong with either one.  I like the looks and feel of the Buckmark but the Ruger Mark IV is a nice alternative.  It basically comes down to how they both feel in your hand.  If you know of an indoor range that rents them, try before you buy.

I had to dig thru some targets I had here to find some Kimber targets I was looking for. I found this target while looking. It was my sight in target when I put the Sightron on it. It didn't need much.

The only complaint I have about the Browning, that hasn't been mentioned, is that when they change a style, they change magazine designs and abandon the production of the previous magazines.

Mike, I believe there have only been 3 versions of Browning magazines from the 1958 Challenger to today's Buckmark.   That is excluding the browning 1911 style pistols and other models that are not direct descendants of the Challenger.  

I call the three versions;
Heel cut
Narrow foot
Wide foot

Aprilian wrote:Mike, I believe there have only been 3 versions of Browning magazines from the 1958 Challenger to today's Buckmark.   That is excluding the browning 1911 style pistols and other models that are not direct descendants of the Challenger.  

I call the three versions;
Heel cut
Narrow foot
Wide foot

If that means that there are plenty of magazines available for the Browning Buckmarks then I withdraw my small complaint.

I retired 2 years back with one of my goals being, to learn to shoot a pistol accurately.  My first investment was a Buck Mark and really enjoyed it.  I started having the trigger problem where it will not re-engage when it cycled.  (It re-engaged a 100% of the time is I hand cycled the slide.) I gave it to my family (son) gunsmith in AZ to find the errant part or a better cleaning technique. I found a sale on another Buck Mark and picked it up.  I am now having the same problem with it.  My gunsmith has said for some time that I should sell the BM and buy a Rugar Mark IV.  When he learned that I have consumed 40,000 rounds between the two Buck Marks his comments included that I have gotten my money out of the Buck Mark plinker? When they function I love my Buck Marks but am clsoe to using them as boat anchors. Calls to Browning get me NO help. Send it in and we will look at it is no answer.  Asking if they have a recommended consumable parts list gets a no answer. One very informative internet feed listed near a dozen minor problems that could cause this problem.  One question is, if I put 20,000 to 40,000 rounds through a Rugar Mark IV will I find a different but similar frustrating problem?  The deeper I dig into it the more I am impressed with the fact that 22rf pistols are fabricated at a lower quality level than most quality centerfire arms? As the frustration increases I found info on the Nelson 22 conversion.  It appears that the Nelson Conversion is used and appreciated by the Bullseye community. I have done more practice than Bullseye Matches but am improving and do enjoy the Bullseye people and matches.  

I have a Springfield Armory - Range officer - 1911 that has a fantastic trigger that is still out shooting me.

I love my Buck Marks when they function but am at a point of making a change.  The main question I am dealing with is do I give into my gunsmith's urgings and get a Rugar Mark IV or do I get a Nelson conversion and leave the 22rf pistols behind?  

I would love to hear your thoughts.

My Buckmark exhibited the same thing a couple times
1) take out trigger bar and polish its back side and the track it lives in 
2) replace the trigger bar spring
3) if neither solves it, slightly enlarge the notch in the trigger bar where it engages the sear arm.  You should be able to see where it is lacking in clearance - most likely the rear side

The great thing about this malfunction is that it works like a ball and dummy drill.  When the gun doesn’t fire, you can see if you are anticipating or changing grip.

I'm shooting a Buckmark Micro Bull 4" in indoor gallery (50 ft) matches.  I like the balance of the 4" barrel with a relatively light red dot.  Reliability (with CCI Std Velocity) has been flawless.  Trigger not as good as my Ruger Mark I Target but unfair to compare until more rounds through the Buckmark.