Mark 1,2,3 or 4. Whats the best of the bunch?

Whats the best of the bunch of the Mark .22's. It's time for me to round one up to have one.
Thanks

IMHO, the Mark II was the epitome of the series. Here is some recent chatter about this topic:

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=250043

I also prefer the MKII.

As noted,,, many of us prefer the MKII as the best one made. Disassembly & re-assembly is NOT hard if you follow the manual. Sadly,, too many people fail to understand just what & where the hammer strut should go & do.
The MKIV is a good upgrade of how to field strip a gun,, making it easier. I have some of each variations,,, and in general,, prefer the MKII.

The Mk 1. Didn't try to pretend it was a combat gun by adding thumb accessible (for righthanded folks) May releases. Useless cut outs for fumble fingered bolt operators. And needless "easy reassembly" for those that can't read and follow very simple instructions.

>>It's time for me to round one up to have one<<

What, only one?

Actually my preference is a Mark 2.5; a MKII upper and bolt and a MKIII lower.

I've a MKII and have shot the others. Frankly the MKIV is a minor upgrade but not worth it.

I'm kind of partial to the Mk I's too, especially the 6 7/8 targets. Mark IIs are good too, but my favorite may the the one that straddles the line- the 1 of 5000 Signature Series that is the first stainless series. I once asked a guy this same question, and he said AMT. Goofball.

Standard Auto, MkI, MkII.

He MKIVis probably a slightly better design, but the MKII has so many cool variants it is the easy winner in my book. For those on a budget the MKIII is hard to beat.

The tapered barrel target models are my favorites, and the trigger on the early MK I units are very good, so my preference. My absolute favorite are the 5 1/4" MK I pistols.

The original ad for the standard model states that disassembly could be performed 'in five seconds flat'.

NH Rugerman said:

The tapered barrel target models are my favorites, and the trigger on the early MK I units are very good, so my preference. My absolute favorite are the 5 1/4" MK I pistols.

The original ad for the standard model states that disassembly could be performed 'in five seconds flat'.

Click to expand...

Probably true. Seems folks can take them apart but forget to read the very simple reassembly instructions. I figure if you can't get a MK I back together you have no business around tools. You're likely to hurt yourself and others.

I have two MKIIs and one RST-4 Standard, one KMK512 and one KMK678GC and while
I harbor some real fondness for my RST-4, I have to go with the two MKIIs, the MKIII
is in my opinion at least a lawyer spawned abomination. I am withholding judgment on
the MKIV as I am suspicious of the again in my opinion unnecessary alteration to the
magazine release location and changes related to that. I can't find anything at all
wrong with the original heel release so if it isn't broken, why tinker with success?

Aside: I have had the RST-4 since the year it was made, 1968, got it at a local
Wally World like store for the princely sum of $37.50(yep, the same price it
went for until later that same year to $41.50). I remain amazed that Bill Ruger
managed to hold that price stable for 19 years, that has to be some sort of
record in the firearms industry.

Partial to the MKIII 22/45's but would not turn my nose up at a MKIV. The MKI and MKII's were fine but I don't care for the standard grip angle.

I always view all technology based on how user-friendly - AKA simple to use - it is. The best is almost always the easiest.

Based on that one factor alone I would (and in fact will someday soon) buy a MK IV, and perhaps even offer to trade-in my current MK III for one. Field stripping the previous versions of the Mark has ALWAYS been fiddly far beyond logic or need, and for some/many simply a P.I.A.

Opting for a Mk IV thus also follows my personal exercise mantra - "No pain? No pain, What don't you understand?" lol

For me, without a doubt, the MKII. Had a MK1 but did not like the lack of bolt hold open device on last round.

I'm also very used to and prefer the heel based mag release. Don't need the easy take down feature of the MKIV as I'm so used to the take down and assembly of the MKII.

vba said:

For me, without a doubt, the MKII. Had a MK1 but did not like the lack of bolt hold open device on last round.

I'm also very used to and prefer the heel based mag release. Don't need the easy take down feature of the MKIV as I'm so used to the take down and assembly of the MKII.

Click to expand...

Yup, I agree with pretty much everything. I have four Mark ll's and have no issues with take-down or assembly, but I did recently added a Mark lV 22/45 "just because." :wink:

Busterswoodshop said:

I also prefer the MKII.

Click to expand...

So do I!

vba said:

For me, without a doubt, the MKII. Had a MK1 but did not like the lack of bolt hold open device on last round.

I'm also very used to and prefer the heel based mag release. Don't need the easy take down feature of the MKIV as I'm so used to the take down and assembly of the MKII.

Click to expand...

Geesh, unless you've had an industrial accident you have enough digits on your hands to keep count. :roll: