Henry Rifle Forums

Hey Guys,
So with a tight budget and other interests, I only buy a gun about every 5 years, and it's usually a pretty modest one, so I'm just waiting for a few more pieces (financially) to fall in place before I buy a .22 auto loader, and I would love it be a 1911 knock off if possible.

Ok, with "heart felt" honorary mention to the Rugers and S&Ws, I have narrowed it down to these (personal taste, looks, and oh, performance

GSG 1911 .22 / Colt 1911 .22

I can get into the GSG for $250 locally at Academy. We all know the GSG/Sig connection, and this gun has some very loyal followers and more than a few detractors. The biggest detraction for me is the huge safetys on both sides; seems dangerous, and all the zinc alloy.

Then the Colt. This was the one i wanted to go with. Zinc alloy replaced with aluminum, and I've had great support from Umarex in the past, love the looks; pretty much everything about it, except one thing.
The Barrel.
I didn't see this anywhere in the 20 Youtubes I had watched until one video broke it down a little further.

What I (and I think about everybody else) thought was the barrel is actually just a sleeve around the barrel, which is quite thin. I don't think I like this, especially for a gun that is auto loading and may get hot.

What do you all think?

Is this OK? Am I making too much out of this, cause right now it's kind of a deal buster.

Since I have one chance at this I feel I still have to go with the Browning Buckmark.
This the UFX version and has the new slide, again locally at Academy for $349. Even with great guns like the MK's and Victory out there, I still am partial to the buckmark, much as I would love to have a 1911 .22.

So that's it until something changes, waiting for the funds............

Had a GSG 88 and gave it to Grandsons girlfriend. I ended up changing sights on it and one other thing to make it shoot better but still wasnt ever impressed with the accuracy. Have no info on the Colt. But I do have a Ruger 22/45 ultra lite and I like it alot. Its the Mark IV with the easy takedown. The takedown on the II and the III isnt an issue for me but for some it is. But it fits you're hand like a 45 and its accurate. Ive owned some Brownings and theres nothing wrong at all with the Brownings they are a great gun.

Nice to see you found are considering the Buckmark. I have had one for over 20 years, it is the field model.
Shot count is approaching 100,000rds, the only breakage has been the base coming off a mag.
I used it for shooting ISSF for years, son used it to shoot his way onto a state team for 3 years, accuracy isn't a issue, recoil recovery and handling are surprisingly good.
The field and target do have a few nice features over the base models with things like adjustable triggers etc.

Lots of really nice choices out there right now - the Browning Buckmark, the Ruger MkIV, and the S&W Victory just to mention a few. We have a Ruger Mk IV and a Browning Buckmark rifle that are both nice. If I were to pick one, it would probably be the Browning - it feels like a slightly higher quality than the others when you hold it...

I love 1911s too, but every 1911 rimfire version I've tried has been spotty about functioning, fussy about ammo and, as above, not all that accurate. By the way, this includes a Kimber 1911 Rimfire, too, and those are not cheap. All of these 1911 rimfires are made with aluminum for the sake of function with 22 LR. If you want can accurate and trouble free 22 semi auto, I'd suggest staying with durable competition proven designs, such as the Browning, Ruger or S&W, even if they are not 1911 look-alikes.

The most accurate semi auto 22s I've had over the years have been the vintage Hamden, Ct., made High Standard Trophy and Victors. These were superb guns, but I'd be very careful about buying one, now, as there are serious parts and service issues with these vintage guns, no to mention they all sell, high.

Have had the most experience with Ruger Marks. These get my vote for durability. All they usually need is a trigger job to be competition worthy.

Have also shot the superb S&W 41, but these are very pricey guns. The S&W Victory, though, is very affordable and, believe it or not, just as accurate as the 41. I laughed at this when I heard others say it, but now that I own a Victory, I'm no longer laughing. Our Victory, out of the box, has the distinction of shooting the smallest 5 shot group at 25 yards from a rest than any semi auto 22 I've tested.

Hey Guys, thanks for the replies and keep them coming.

BigAl, I hear what you say about accuracy and the Ruger 22/45. The price on it and the Victory are only about $30 more than the Colt (Walther) and Buckmark, but for some reason I've never really been into Rugers. The Victory is an obvious choice, especially with NGC's post, but I don't care for the looks (silly) or the grip. I know in 22plinkster's review it was his only negative also. I don't even really care for the Altamonte grips as they have the same basic shape, I think.

220, 100K rounds has to be some kind of a record . BTW, all the new Buckmark's come with adjustable sights. The higher end models may have rails, better finishes, and they remove the steel from the side of the barrel to reduce weight, etc.

Tractortad, you've got the big three. To hear that you place the Buckmark so highly on the list says a lot. That Buckmark rifle looks interesting.

And NCG, I think you post sealed the deal. The other two, even if made in Germany, are cheap imitations of something else. I will probably revisit them once my finances recover, but for now have to go with the real deal. As far as the Victory is concerned, I have this thing about S&W's. It does have something to do with my dad being a NYC cop and carrying them, but nothing bad. Just one of those things I don't like to talk about.

Nobody commented on the thin barrel on the Colt/Walther. I think the Henry survival rifle also has a thin steel sleeve as a barrel?

Thanks again and keep them coming............

I love 1911s too, but every 1911 rimfire version I've tried has been spotty about functioning, fussy about ammo and, as above, not all that accurate.

Ditto this and essentially the rest of NCGs post.
A friend has a Sig 1911 .22 and is having many problems with it - and his is not the first I have ever heard of with problems.
Stick with the known, proven and popular models for the best experience. Heck in my area I find nice Ruger Mk IIs & IIis In the Mid -$200s

Henry88 wrote:Hey Guys, thanks for the replies and keep them coming.
220, 100K rounds has to be some kind of a record . BTW, all the new Buckmark's come with adjustable sights. The higher end models may have rails, better finishes, and they remove the steel from the side of the barrel to reduce weight, etc.

There would be some out there that have a higher round count than mine. Easy to shoot 200rds a week if you are shooting comps regularly. Do it for long enough and it is surprising how many shots you fire over a few years.
A bit of browsing shows they still of the field model like mine. Looks to be the only bull barrel option currently listed, no info on if they still come with the adjustable trigger.

I have three absolute favorite firearms. My Henry Mare’s Leg, Uberti Stallion revolver, and my S&W Victory. If I had to give away all of my other .22 guns I could live with just those three.
That said, a 1911 in .22 would interest me if I could find one that was reliable. I know someone from another forum who had a GSG that he got a lot of good use from. He posted threads at 50,000...100,000....and 200,000 round counts. With repair and replacement details. If you keep up with cleaning and maintenance it is a good gun. I do recall that he replaced the recoil spring a couple of times and replaced the slide once.

But I think that a 1911 in 9mm would be a better choice for me.

220 wrote:

Henry88 wrote:Hey Guys, thanks for the replies and keep them coming.
220, 100K rounds has to be some kind of a record . BTW, all the new Buckmark's come with adjustable sights. The higher end models may have rails, better finishes, and they remove the steel from the side of the barrel to reduce weight, etc.

There would be some out there that have a higher round count than mine. Easy to shoot 200rds a week if you are shooting comps regularly. Do it for long enough and it is surprising how many shots you fire over a few years.
A bit of browsing shows they still of the field model like mine. Looks to be the only bull barrel option currently listed, no info on if they still come with the adjustable trigger.

220 I'm sorry I mistook adjustable trigger for adjustable sights on your original reply

RetiredSeabee wrote:I have three absolute favorite firearms. My Henry Mare’s Leg, Uberti Stallion revolver, and my S&W Victory. If I had to give away all of my other .22 guns I could live with just those three.
That said, a 1911 in .22 would interest me if I could find one that was reliable. I know someone from another forum who had a GSG that he got a lot of good use from. He posted threads at 50,000...100,000....and 200,000 round counts. With repair and replacement details. If you keep up with cleaning and maintenance it is a good gun. I do recall that he replaced the recoil spring a couple of times and replaced the slide once.

But I think that a 1911 in 9mm would be a better choice for me.

RS totally agree about the 9mm 1911. That would be where it's at.

Not something I can pursue, but I'm wondering if just building your own 1911-22, more or less by converting an existing 1911 to .22. I would be willing to bet NCG has tried it, or knows someone who has. There are a number of folks on RFC talking about it in the 1911 22 subforum.

I think they look awesome with this barrel........

Almost reminds me of my old P-38

Henry88 wrote:

220 wrote:

Henry88 wrote: Not something I can pursue, but I'm wondering if just building your own 1911-22, more or less by converting an existing 1911 to .22. I would be willing to bet NCG has tried it, or knows someone who has. There are a number of folks on RFC talking about it in the 1911 22 subforum.

Haven't tried it, myself, but have been tempted. The advantage with a kit is that you end up with the same grip and trigger as you're used to shooting. Still, a good kit like the Kimber isn't cheap and you still need the 1911, of course. That, and when I get a 1911 tuned and running the way I want, I don't want to convert it to anything else.

If you're a budget, I'd stay with the idea of the Browning or similar. That way you can take both a 1911 and a 22 pistol to the range. The kit route is something to consider, though, if you're more interested in shooting the 1911 platform than just shooting a 22 cal pistol. As for me, my 1911 shooting doesn't suffer in the least by shooting something like the Smith, Browning or Ruger semi-autos. Just not worth sacrificing one of my 1911s for kit use for the sake of staying with the 1911 platform. That's me, though.