Between the normal Mark IV



and the 22/45



which one do you prefer in terms of the grip?

I handled both in a store. The angle definitely felt more natural on the 22/45, but the actual grip felt nicer on the Mark IV Target model I handled. Ideally I'd be able to go out and shoot them both a bunch of times, but I don't think I'll have that chance.

I'd go with the 22/45.
Never liked Glocks due to the steeply raked grip; just not natural for me.

I have both pistols and really have no strong preference either way. It is whatever you get used to. When I first pick up a MKI-III series it feels a bit odd but as soon as I start handling and shooting it they are fine and I don't give it any thought. The 22/45 feels natural right off the bat but it isn't a big deal. If it is for hunting or plinking and such I wouldn't worry about it and would pick the pistol I liked best. Maybe if it is for a training gun secondary to your defensive pistol and they share the same grip angle a slight preference might go to the 22/45.

I have both. I like the 22/45 grip better. I do have the lite version though with a can on it so its hard not to grin when shooting it. I have a mki and mkii bull barrel, I shoot them way better than my tapered barreled mks.

Is there any advantage to the standard grip for a two handed shooter? I have read it was designed for one handed shooting.

I guess I'm pretty simple, I use two hands and don't notice any disadvantage. I think you might be over thinking it a little.

If the .22/45 still has a mag safety, that would do it for me. My last was a MKIII .22/45, and I prefer the standard.

Removing the mag safety is easy and cheap fix.

The 22/45 grip all the way. points better and fits my hand better. Glocks and the 1911 type grip angel grip angle is spot on for me for point shooting. Other guns like Sigs (226 series) shot high for me.

That's interesting because the 1911 and the Sig have the same grip angle, 18*. The Glock has a unique 22* grip angle and most people report the Glock points high for them versus when they are shooting a more traditional 18* grip that most semi autos have. Between the 1911 and the Sig, the Sig definitely has a higher bore axis. Maybe that is what feels different to you.

If the 22-45 had a metal frame it would be a no-brainer, I don’t care for the plastic frame on the 22-45. I have been shooting a pre-MkI for 50 years with no problems swapping back and forth to 1911’s.

I prefer the 22/45 grip angle. The others are too steep to be natural.

Indeed. Like the angle and dims in the 22/45 but not the feel. The all steel MKs by heft to me feel better.
Their grip angle doesnt feel bad either, just different.

To do the 22/45 in steel.would have been nice.

Too late now. Got a 1911 w .22 conversion. Its heavy and accurate. That my range toy.

Only Ruger .22 Im interested in now is one of those adj sight Bearcats. Just because its cute, and I trapped as a kid. If I ever ran a line again........

I bought the heavy barrel versions of both and thought I would like the 22/45 better when shooting. Once at the range with both versions I definitely preferred the standard. Felt more natural of a wrist angle to me vs more bent/upright with the 22/45. So I sold off the 22/45 and bought another standard with skinny barrel.

I prefer the 22/45. And prefer the Lite version of it too.

For me, standard all the way. I dislike the 22/45 grip angle .. it's a no-go for me.

Tom

I choose the 22/45 grip and never looked back. It jut points better for me, same story with the glock grip angle it just works and I have 30 years of trigger time with that platform.