Has anyone had any experience with the German Colt clones or similar

Safe to say, they get mixed reviews, depending on who the importer is, some importers will demand a higher standard of finish on their offerings. That said, read up over on rimfirecentral, they have a forum for them over there.

A friend bought one of the models that SIG markets and it had a lot of feeding problems... Went back to the factory and now runs 100% with just about everything it is fed...

They look pretty nice, I will do some research

They "feel" cheap to me.

Bumping this back up
Any suggestions for a good 22 training pistol

g44.

G44 for the win!

Beretta mod9 22

anyone that watches that MAC video of the G44 vs the Taurus TX22 would never buy the G44.

..training with/for...?...1911?...Glock...?

I used to shoot a lot of PPC with a revolver but haven’t done much pistol shooting for years now
Want to get a 22 auto to get a decent amount of cheap practice

S&W Victory models are good

Loving my TX 22. Got it back in Sept when Taurus had a $50 rebate, right @ 2 bills.

Been using it to train the daughter. It's similar enough to her P365 to be very useful.

I've been pleased with my Taurus TX22. I posted a review of it somewhere in the handgun forum. Daughter and I ran a couple hundred more rounds through it last evening.

Shooting rimfire is very useful for handgun practice--up to a point. IMHO, the biggest contributors to missing the target with a handgun are the issues associated with recoil. People don't like the recoil impulse, the noise, the flash of light, or they just get the yips about the suddenness of everything happening at once. Shooting rimfire is a great way to "calm down" and focus on trigger pull, grip, stance, etc., but once you go back to shooting centerfire, you're back to facing the thing that's been causing you problems--recoil.

The Glock 44 is not a good choice for a .22lr semi auto. Sure, you get a Glock that's the size of a G19, but that's it. The weight and balance of the two guns are completely different. Shooting the G44 won't make you any better with your G19 than shooting a "real" .22lr pistol would, but at least a real .22lr pistol will be useful in a Bullseye Match.

I have four .22lr handguns. I love shooting them, and they do have a purpose in helping me shoot better. I try to fire at least a magazine of .22 every time I go to the range. But, if you are looking for a "cheap substitute" to get centerfire bullets on target, you're heading in the wrong direction.

Just a different point of view.

I think my G44 is a good trainer for my G19 because:
The trigger is the same, unlike my M&P 22 Compact which is different than my real M&P's.
Mag changes are the same.
Fits the same IWB holster so draws are the same.
The sight picture is the same.

I agree no 22 is going to help you deal with recoil. But shooting my MK IV in steel challenge matches is fun but pointless, the G44 shot from the draw makes more sense to me.
There are a lot of good guns out there and all have their own purposes. Some like the Taurus and the TX22 would be a great choice for those. If I were MAC, I'd send that gun back to Glock just like everyone else does with any other problem pistol, instead of complaining about it. I've found my Buckmark, Ruger's, and S&W to be more problematic than my G44. It'll ride in my HPG kit bag for targets of opportunity when I'm out calling, my G19 will reside in it's normal place.

I appreciate the civil discourse. Here's my view:

The trigger being the same is of minimal value if the rest of the gun is different.

Mag changes are not the same, because the loaded .22 mag is significantly lighter and is being inserted into a pistol that is significantly lighter. The physical dimensions are the same, but the weight changes the game. I think a mag full of dummy 9mm and a G19 is more useful for practicing.

Draws are also different due to the weight reduction. Practice draws at home with a G19 and your loaded mag of dummy ammo. Practice draws at the range with a G19 and real ammo.

Sight picture is the same. True. But...how great is the benefit to that if the weight and balance are different?

Shooting steel challenge--you're right. The G44 trumps using a target pistol.

The one G44 I shot functioned fine, but it's enough of a different gun than the G19 that the "same physical dimensions" weren't enough of a benefit to justify buying one.

Just my two cents--I usually get change back...

"Shooting rimfire is very useful for handgun practice--up to a point. IMHO, the biggest contributors to missing the target with a handgun are the issues associated with recoil."

Waders,

I respectfully disagree. The biggest contributor to missing the target with a pistol in my opinion is a failure to apply the fundamentals. You can see that in any new handgun shooter, with even a .22 Pistol.

After saying that and having a couple of trainers (a Nelson 1911 Conversion, a Taurus TX22, and formerly an Advantage Arms G19 Conversion), And having a couple of other "Serious" 22LR Pistols; If your centerfire is a 9mm, (normally, these times not being 'normal') you can buy about 2,000 rounds to several thousand rounds of 9mm to train with for the cost of a 'conversion' or other 22LR Trainer.

But considering the times, since most ammo shelves are empty of 9mm... perhaps a .22LR pistol is a good option, as long as 22LR ammo remains on the shelf.

Jerry

If I wanted a handgun for the sole purpose of fundamentals I'd get a GP100 in 22LR.

If you insist on an auto I'd go Browning Buckmark and not look back.

To each their own but I love my G44. I've been shooting USPSA and Steel Challenge with my G34 and it's nice to be able to swap mags and pistol while using the same belt rig.

Nothing is going to match 100% to what you're actually shooting but the G44 comes close enough to most any other Glock that I feel you're still making gains when using it.

It's also an outstanding trainer for kids or females. Have them shoot Steel Challenge with it and as they progress swap out the G44 for a 9mm. And you're not having to buy another $200 belt rig.

It covers a lot of ground adequately IMO.

Good reason to not watch that channel.

But not a good reason to avoid the G44.

deflave,

1. Good to see you around!

2. I think saving money on not having to buy redundant equipment is great. Having a gun that is a good choice for a competition is also great. My point remains that using a G44 is not sufficiently the same as a G19 to make it worth it as a "cheap substitute" for practicing with the G19. (Using the G44 as an introductory gun, is a new point, and I have no arguments against it.)

Hi Jerry,

I agree that newer shooters fail to apply fundamentals, but divide those new shooters into two groups: those that have had some basic instruction and those that haven't. Those that haven't had any need some. Turning to those that have had some basic instruction, why don't they use it? From what I've seen, recoil issues are number one. They do well during dryfire and rimfire but when it comes to centerfire (where recoil is the new variable), it's a whole 'nuther animal. They grip wrong, mash the trigger, etc. etc.

I sold my 1911 conversion, because using the exact same grips, frame and trigger didn't significantly help me train through other issues. The balance was SO off, I felt like I was shooting a new/different gun completely. I tried to like it. I really did, and it helped me in some respects. But, in the end, the benefits of it were insufficient to justify it.

However, I completely agree that the difference in the cost of ammo is the big attraction (and benefit). There is no argument there. Given the upcoming election (along with the possible horrific outcome) we could be seeing a shortage of 9mm ammo, and a $22+ per box price tag when it is available.

Thanks.

I agree with that mostly. But the trigger and mechanics of the gun remaining the same make it a more better option than others IMO. If you're a Glock guy.

Thanks for all the input
I am leaning towards a Walther PPQ after a bit more looking
Has anyone used one, if so what do you think?

I bought a 22 conversion kit for my CZ 75. Turns out it’s the best 22 auto I’ve ever owned but I’ve got a Cajun Gun Works SAO parts kit in the frame so the trigger pull is incredible. Took about 50 rounds to get settled in and then ran perfectly. I’m probably gonna get rid of my MK II now.

If the gun you are training for has a .22 conversion kit, I would suggest that first. Everything the same except recoil. Just don't mix up your mags/barrels.

After that, I'd say that whatever differences there between running two similar but different guns may come back to haunt you. "You do as you practice"...

I'm just guessing here, but it may be that having two guns that feel very different in the hand may help your subconscious avoid getting them confused.
I'm not an experienced trainer, and I'm not claiming to have any special insight or experience.

Thats a decision that only you can make.

I've heard this more than a couple of times...

Don't need another 'Trainer' but would really like to try one.



Felt the same way after getting my Nelson 1911 Conversion.


Jerry

There is a lot of really good information here, thanks to all that have contributed

ruger is synonymous with 22lr, and v.v. a ruger sr22 should be high on the consideration list.

Jeez mate you know how to cost a bloke some money
I just bought a CZ Sp-01 and 22 conversion kit 👍
Thanks also to the others that recommended a conversion

No votes for Browning Buckmark?

I've been shooting mine for more than a couple decades with no issues.

Some years back my hunting buddy and I were shooting .22s on a neighbor's ranch. There was a steel "T" fence post on a hillside about 35 yards away. The ground around the fence post was bare and angling up and away like a target berm. We decided to try and hit the post, aiming about a foot above the ground. We could hear out hits and the bare dirt behind the post allowed us to see our misses. Two or three times I was able to hit the with post 8 of 10 shots. Liked the pistol before that and have liked it even better since.

My buddy has a Ruger .22 pistol. Even though it is an older model, it is an excellent pistol and the new ones are even better.

Take me off ignore.

MK II Ruger with a few custom touches. Been shooting this daily for a couple of months now.
Bob





Kensight rear; a copy of the old BoMar


Front and rear strap stippled, trigger is a steel Clark set for 2.2 lbs

I bet it shoots pretty well. Grin...

When I was getting my Blackhawk - the guy at the store was super high on the Ruger MK IV 22/45 with a suppressor. Said the giggle factor was off the charts.

and he wasn't wrong.....

Yeah - said that they do a TON of business with them and the Ruger suppressor.

They even have a legal dude there to help with trusts.

You're not on ignore, but I didn't see your post.

Had a Browning Challenger before the Buckmark. Sent it to Browning for repair and they sent me the Buckmark in return. Circa 1995. Thank you, Browning.

Yeah I love mine.

I keep a suppressor on it 100% of the time.

No better tool for teaching the fundamentals than a suppressed 22LR.

Someone asked about the PPQ - read that the 22 PPQ - has some fouling issues, getting dirty quick.........I don't know, but I'd do some research on Google.

That said, again it's hard to go wrong with a Ruger MK II (2nd version) - and the Buckmark. The BM can have a great trigger easily by doing a simple spring flip, you can find that on youtube. Both very comparable IME with accuracy. MANY Good options.......

I like my PPQ accurate and reliable.

My Kadet 2 unit arrived yesterday. It's a snug fit on my Omega Convertible, but no filing was required. Them Czech fellers must know what they're doing. Cracked off a mag full into a trap in my basement, no burps at all. Nice piece. Costs about the same as a decent .22 pistol, but of course it uses the same controls, fits the holsters, and has very nice adjustable sights. I can see my Victory getting very lonely.