SR22 vs MKIV Tactical

[mach]

[67Cuda]

I have a Ruger Mark III and that Mark IV looks pretty sweet.

Other than that, I don't know anything.

[AR22]

My Wife has a SR22. She Loves it. I have shot it on several Occasions. I like it too. Been a good Firearm, with no parts Breakage or such. Was a little Finicky on ammo till broke in. But it likes CCIs best and believe this or not, Remington Golden Turds. Remingtons are not so good for accuracy, but feed and function well.

Sorry have no experience with the Mk Ruger.

[newbie1234]

Sonething hit or something cute ?

First of all , you are lucky because you live in free State.
Here my two cents:
- SR-22 affective range 3-15 yrds, Mark IV affective range is 3-50 yrds.
- SR-22 is less accutared than Mark IV.
- SR-22 has fewer models to choose than Mark IV.
- SR-22 cheaper than Mark IV.
- SR-22 is easy to conceal than Mark IV.
And final thought: When you shoot, you want to hit target or you want to see something "cute" in your hand. Your choice

($130 is around 2.5K of .22LR ammo, 2.5K of ammo will last you 2 months (or less) but you can heir your Ruger the pistol).

[mach]

First of all , you are lucky because you live in free State.
Here my two cents:
- SR-22 affective range 3-15 yrds, Mark IV affective range is 3-50 yrds.
- SR-22 is less accutared than Mark IV.
- SR-22 has fewer models to choose than Mark IV.
- SR-22 cheaper than Mark IV.
- SR-22 is easy to conceal than Mark IV.
And final thought: When you shoot, you want to hit target or you want to see something "cute" in your hand. Your choice

($130 is around 2.5K of .22LR ammo, 2.5K of ammo will last you 2 months (or less) but you can heir your Ruger the pistol).

Makes sense to me. I think the MKIV Tac will be a better option for me.

[Wordupmybrotha]

I need to add a new .22 pistol to my arsenal now that I’m in a free state. I’m going with a Ruger product. Either an SR22 or an MKIV Tactial. Am I correct in assuming the SR22 is a good plinker while the MKIV is more of a target gun? Any other pros or cons? Cost different is about $130 between the two give or take with the MKIV being more expensive. Thanks for everyone’s thoughts.

More than a plinker, I would categorize the SR22 as an understudy. It's for training for larger caliber handgun in the same configuration using less expensive ammo.

MK IV is a target pistol.

[Lomita]

I have both a SR22 and a MKIII.
The SR22 is is lightweight, small enough to be a CCW and fun to shoot. The MKIII is WAY more accurate, a target pistol.
And without trying to muddy the water I also have a Buckmark Contour that, in my case, is more accurate than the MKIII.

Yes, you are correct the SR22 is a good plinker while the MKIV is more of a target gun?

[stormvet]

I have both a SR22 and a MKIII.
The SR22 is is lightweight, small enough to be a CCW and fun to shoot. The MKIII is WAY more accurate, a target pistol.
And without trying to muddy the water I also have a Buckmark Contour that, in my case, is more accurate than the MKIII.

Yes, you are correct the SR22 is a good plinker while the MKIV is more of a target gun?

[Tango_Down]

The fact that the Mark IV has eliminated the take down issue that the previous versions had, the only downside is the cost. With a round as accurate as the .22 its a shame to shoot it out of gun that doesn't take advantage of it. Go with the Mark IV.

[mach]

Over the last few months before I moved I was able to take my Savage mkII out to a 100 for the first time and boy that got me hooked on accurate 22s. As much fun as it would be to carry the SR22, just for the accuracy the MKIV is for me.