[asmith77]

My father-in-law's birthday is coming up and I wanted to get him something special. He used to own a High-Standard .22 target pistol, sold it and has regretted it ever since.

I don't have the kind of money needed to get him another High-Standard but I think I've found three other contenders to fill the .22 void. Does anybody have any opinions/thoughts/comments on any of these?

Browning Challenger II
S&W Mod 41
Aimco/Stoeger Pro Series 95

which one is the closest to the old High-Standard in quality/performance/feel? Out of the 3 which would you rather have?

 

[16'er]

If you can get a S&W 41 for less than an original Hi Standard, than jump on it. The 41's usually demand 700+ in excellent shape. The challenger II is less expensive and is a fine plinker. i have a Buckmark, which is current production, and is nice for the price ~300. If you like Steel, don't over look the Ruger MarkII/III. Hard to get used to the take down, but almost impossible to wear out. Check th trigger prior to purchuse in the low end 22 market, seems to be alot of difference from one to the next..

best of luck

 

[huntswithdogs]

I've shot the Brownings and SW but still prefer my Ruger MarkII. It just feels better and it shoots better than I do. Check one out before spending too much. You'll not be disappointed. Mine is the Target Model with adjustable sights and midlength barrel.

HWD

 

[Paul F.]

Dollar for dollar... I'd go with the Ruger. You can get as accurate with these as any full production guns. Of course, if you want to mortgage your house, you could go with a Hammerli Electric Trigger model. :wink:

 

[uglydog]

No question the S&W 41 as it and the High Standards are what all others have been measured against. I have both a 41 and a Military gripped High Standard which are my favorite rimfire handguns. The Browning would be nice but I'll have nothing to do with Stoeger regardless of who currently owns them. Bad taste in mouth.
What grip shape did the High Standard have? There were two, one raked back like on the Ruger MK I, II, and III or the more vertical one (called the Military) that was to resemble the Colt 1911. If it is the former style, the Challenger (if I remember correctly) or Ruger would be hard to beat. The Colt Woodsman was a major rival of the High Standard especially in the field models and might also be a fine choice. A base Ruger can be found in the $200-$250 range NIB and is what I would start with. One can customize them to no end and do so fairly cheaply.
In the Military grip style, I would go with the 41 followed by the Buckmark. I also have a target model Buckmark but would probably go with a standard bull barrel model if I had to buy new. The rail and stocks are not worth the $100+ new price over the bull barrel models and the trigger is about the same on either. Ruger makes their .22 LR in a military grip called the 22/45 but I do not like it as much out of the box as the Browning. I don't care for the shape of the grips but it is a good gun none the less. It can be modified with many of the same add ons as the MK I-III and again is rather inexpensive.

 

[Asylum Keeper]

Ruger MK 2 or 3, with a heavy barrel and adjustable sights

 

[Paul F.]

 

[asmith77]

Thanks for all the great info guys!

I think I just pulled off something of a coup over at gunbroker.com. Found a hi-standard model B for $275, with 99% bluing and only a little pitting on the backstrap.

What info I was able to find on this particular model says it was produced for military training and has the same high quality associated with hi-standard.

Anybody have any other info? Anybody own one and want to praise it glories?

 

[16'er]

The Model B is nice vintage plinker, but is not the quality the Hi Standard target models are. I'd personally avoid the Model b unless you want a vintage plinker. There are current production guns which are as good or better quality for that price, like the Ruger.

 

[New_Geezer]

Nothing against the Ruger but two other worthies would be a BuckMark (but avoid the Camper model), and the Beretta Neos which is probably about the best bang for the buck IMO at this time. Caveats - The Neos has a distinct style and hand grip angle that you either really like or really don't. Regardless it is a well made, easy to disassemble pistol with a built in weaver rail for mounting a red dot scope. If your Dad's eyes aren't what they used to be, he might appreciate that. The BM Camper is the only BM that comes with a plastic sight base that has a real tendency to crack. An annoying shortcoming in anotherwise excellent pistol. To upgrade the Camper to the better alloy sightbase costs about $65. To buy a third party weaver rail and BSA red dot runs about $60. I own a Camper (problem discovered after purchase) and it is a great pistol after I upgraded the sightbase. Other BuckMarks don't use the plastic sight base

 

[16'er]

The only Neos I ever shot, I was about a year ago. I couldn't believe the trigger pull.. must have been over 10lbs. I actually stopped to check to see if the safety was on. I'm sure it could be lightened up, but I would check the trigger before considering one...

 

[Paul F.]

I'm sorry... whenever I see a NEOS on the line, I want to say, "Set your NEOS to stun!" :lol:

I'm just not ready for the look. :wink:

 

[dennishoddy]

I had my Ruger Stainless Mark II stolen last october, and just now replaced it with the Ruger Mark IV hunter. Stainless, with a 7 1/2" fluted barrel, Hi Vis sights, drilled and tapped for a scope with a base included, and cocabolo wood grips. Its a beautiful combo, and the best part, it is a tack driver deluxe :wink: