GunTalk-Online.com

I was looking at a Ruger 22/45-Just the plain Jane as that is about all we can get in Ca.-I have always been a Kimber fan and started looking at the Target 1911 22lr-It is pricey but I sure do like it. Just wondering if you all think it will shoot as well as the Ruger?
Thanks for any help.
Jack

For the money I doubt that you can come close to the 22/45. I recently got a "plain jane" 22/45 (4.5" blued) for $ 275 and it shoots as good as my 6" Mk.3. If you can find someone who has one and try it out. I think that will sell you on it.
Stew

Welcome to the forum, action.

Tough choice. I haven't seen a Kimber Target .22, but I do have the 1911 Target .22 conversion kit. My guess is they are pretty much the same.

If you have a 1911, the Kimber conversion kit is a fairly good buy because it has the same feel as your 1911. Accuracy is what you do, but the conversion kit .22 is pretty consistent and generally goes where you are pointing the gun.

I also have some Ruger .22's. Two of them are 22/45's. I shoot the Ruger's better than I do the Kimber .22 conversion. Perhaps because I have more practice with the Rugers. If I were choosing between a 22/45 and a Kimber .22 Target, my preference would be the 22/45.

I noticed that Kimber has a $845 list price for their Target .22. That's getting in the range of an S&W M41. If I had the bucks for the Kimber, I'd probably add a few bucks and get the M41.

Welcome to GunTalk-Online!

If your looking for a good 22 target pistol in the 1911 configuration then the Kimber is a good alternative. It is more costly than a 22/45 but if you cannot locate one the Kimber may be your best option. Groupings and functionality are on par between these two pistols with a slight edge going to the Kimber. You should also have a better feeling trigger out of the Kimber because it doesn't have the Ruger style disconnector/trigger bar operating the ignition parts. Plenty of smiths can tune a 1911 trigger but a Ruger takes some specialized tweaking to get just right. Sure there's aftermarket parts available to make a Ruger's trigger feel better and perform with a lighter pull but it is not the same as a nice crisp breaking trigger with little or no perceivable creep like you can get from many 1911 smiths.

If you're already shooting a 1911 in competition then having to virtually identical pistols, instead of one that just simulates the feel of a 1911 then go for the Kimber.

If you're interested on shooting within a budget, hold out and look for a Ruger that meets the importation rules of California's AG.

Good luck with your search. I feel for you folks in the occupied territory of CA.

R,
Bullseye

Not speaking against the Kimber, but the Ruger MK III family, which is Kalifornia Kingdom friendly, is a BLAST to tinker with and shoot!! You can drop in a VQ trigger, hammer and sear and (not sure what the Kingdom rules are) the LCI and magazine disconnect are easily removed!

Action, Welcome to GTO. The best group of members on the www.

The Rugers are hard to beat when it comes to cost vs value. They are accurate as they come with their bull barrels. Like Bullseys pointed out the big difference is in the trigger. The Rugers disconnector gives you a long reset, worst feel with the mag disconnector in place. With the VQ drop in parts you can get a nice trigger but it will not be tuneable when it comes to pull weight.

Hello Action. Welcome to GTO forum.
I would like to offer up an alternative .. a 22LR pistol that is pretty close in weight, function, features.. even field strip methods.. to a traditional 1911. I own one and have been very happy with it.

That is the (German Sports Gun) GSG1911. It is imported by ATI and I am fairly certain it meets CA restrictions. The price is competitive to what a Ruger 22/45 costs. I have one of those also.. a slab-side bull barrel version. And love it, too. Sig Sauer rebrands the same gun for about a $60 premium.

Here is a link for you to check out.
http://www.americantactical.us/76/detail.html

Good luck with your search and decision.

Thanks everyone,
I may just save a few $$$ and start with the Ruger as that was my first choice to begin with.
Thanks again
Jack

I haven't been on here forever, but let me throw my vote to the Ruger.....

I've shot indoor .22 bullseye for a couple of years now and I'm completely satisfied, both with the Ruger 22/45 and the cheap, bulk ammo I shoot. Fast approaching seventy, and I'll never be on a National pistol team, but...who cares! I think I spent $240 on the pistol, $90 or so for the Volquartzen accuracy kit, $30 for a used Millet red-dot, $20 or so on the grips -- and I'm a happy man! I shoot that Federal Champion 525 bulk stuff at what....$18 bucks or so for 500 plus rounds? Money well spent!

Time after time after time, I've stepped back from the line after my strings and watched the high dollar shooters with their SW 41s and Hi-Standards and even a Pardini struggle through their alibis! I can only remember one alibi I had to shoot, and that was with some sticky Aguila Super SE that I was experimenting with..... Bill Ruger built a good gun 3/4s of a century ago, and it's a good gun now.

(had to edit the ammo I shoot! Federal, not Remington!)

The .22/45 is a fine plinking and target pistol. The MK-III is a good competition pistol. IMHO.

Here's .22/45 with TruGlo Scope. Some VQ parts.


Here's the MK-III a Mueller sight and VQ parts.

Action wrote:Thanks everyone,
I may just save a few $$$ and start with the Ruger as that was my first choice to begin with.
Thanks again
Jack

I've learned over the years to get want you want knowing you will be happy with your choice in most cases. Substituting a different gun in the long run you may not be happy with it. But at times a better gun will come up while your waiting for the price your willing to pay.

In any case the Ruger MKIII is my only 22 and I'm very happy with it. Yes it has been tweeked a little but that's the nice thing about the Rugers. But all of my hand guns have been tweeked a little with the exception of my Kimber Ultra II TLE.

Great looking guns!

My MKIII is mostly used for small game hunting and this time of year is likely to have dirt, leaves or coon fur sticking to it. I do, however, keep it clean and lubed.

I may have to get another just to try to keep up with you "Jonses" and make it sharp like the ones in your photos. If I do, it will never even SEE the woods.

Cousin Jack, Baldy, those are some real fine pics of some real nice looking guns.
I have the Mlll Hunter 6 7/8" model, trigger job, Volq wood grips, fib/opt front sight,
adj rear sight, and I shoot it pretty well for old eyes. Even with the old eyes, I prefer
steel sights over optical sights. I think it is more of a challenge with irons and more traditional.
To each his own. This weekend I am going to test which hg out-shoots the other,
my S&W 617 6", or my Mlll Hunter. At 30 feet I get about 2" circles with each.
Head to head? we'll see this weekend.
Haka

Great looking guns.

Blue has great advice. Buy what you like. My trouble is I like about everything.

greener wrote:Great looking guns.

Blue has great advice. Buy what you like. My trouble is I like about everything.

Finally the truth comes ouy.