Help Me Decide Please

[thug23]

New guy here, first post. Love the site.
I have been torturing myself for weeks on what 22 rimfire pistol to purchase.
My wonderful state has a very short approved list so I have decide to buy a Ruger Mark III.
My question, which model would you suggest and why between the "TARGET" or "HUNTER" models?
I know I want the 5.5" bull barrel style just not sure which gun to chose...this gun will be used for target practice only to improve my skills and not a CCW.
Thanks for any advice you can provide.

 

[blume357]

Welcome thug23!

I think if you read your question you will see the answer...

the target model.

That's the one I would choose anyway, and did.

 

[thug23]

OK one more...what's the difference or benefit between the mark III or the 22/45 models?

 

[carsinc]

Go with the target model. See my earlier post where I also asked for advice on which model to choose. Also, my post lists the prices I recently found for various models, new and used.

 

[WrenNH]

I'm sure either Mk III will be a good gun for you. That said, I despise the loaded chamber indicator on my Mk III Hunter. It tends to get gummed up, and is difficult to clean thoroughly without field stripping the pistol.

If I had to buy .22 LR pistol again, I'd buy a used MK II.

Just my 2 cents,

Tom

edit: reread your post. You need the LCI.

 

[ranger1]

And my 2 cents worth:
Here's a MK III Hunter with a 5 1/2" barrel, this would be my choice.


http://www.galleryofguns.com/genie/Default.aspx?item=10125&mfg=Ruger&mdl=Mark+III&cat=1&type=Semi-Automatic+Pistol&cal=22LR&fin=All&sit=All&zipcode=55316

 

[contender]

The difference between the 22/45 & the MKIII models is the angle of the gripframe. Try each one in your hands to see which one you prefer.

 

[CraigC]

You owe it to yourself to get your paws on the 22/45RP model. The "RP" denoting replaceable grip panels. I never could get used to the grip angle onthe standard MK-series but the RP model is one of the most comfortable .22 handguns I've ever handled.

 

[hittman]

I'd buy a used MK II.

Me too. And I did. Totally happy with the decision.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

CraigC:

Drool!

 

[berettapistols]

MKII here too!!
I just can't bring myself to embrace the magazine disconector safety, loaded chamber indicator & the locking mainspring..
I do like the looks of the magazine release that the MKIIIs have though..
You can buy parts to disable the safeties but then why not just look for a used MKII, There still very plentifull..
I paid $300 OTD for my KMK678 Target January 1st This year..
I've now replaced the Eagle Wood Grips with Hogue rubber & got several magazines plus installed a Volquartzen Trigger Kit & Exact Edge Extractor..

1986 Ruger KMK678 Target

What it looks Like NOW!!

 

[Yosemite Sam]

Just to totally confuse things, my MkIII Hunter says "Hunter" on one side of the chamber, and "Target" on the other. BTW, I like the 6-3/8" barrel.

The MkIII mag disconnect can be replaced with an $8 part from Midway and 15 minutes of time. And it should be (removed, that is). Putting in a Volquartsen or Clark MkII bushing will not only remove the disconnect, but will improve the trigger about 200%.

The LCI is a complete non-issue for me.

-- Sam

 

[thug23]

Boy I knew this wouldn't be easy!!! So know after reading tons of articles etc. today I think most people would say that the Mark II is way better than the newer Mark III....maybe I should look for a used Mark II first?
What year did they stop making the Mark II? This sucks. :roll:

 

[Yosemite Sam]

BTW, welcome to the forum!

See the last two lines of my previous reply, under the pic.

Sure, you can get a MkII, but a MkIII is nowhere near as bad as the "purists" would have you believe. Personally I'd rather have an innocuous LCI than a "heel" mag release. I've pinched my hand in my Sig P232 more than once.

OTOH, you might save a hundred bucks buying used.

-- Sam

 

[ranger1]

What year did they stop making the Mark II? This sucks. :roll:

2004 last year of MK II.

I have a couple of MK II's and MK III's and like all equally, (except for the mag release on the MK II).

 

[berettapistols]

Don't you reach down to catch or take the magazine out anyway?? MKII Baby!! HaHa!!
Couldn't resist, I am a Purist MKII Owner..
Maybe one of these days I'll look into a MKIII..
I've waited six years now & still prefer the MKII..

 

[Richbaker]

OK one more...what's the difference or benefit between the mark III or the 22/45 models?

The 22/45 duplicates the grip angle of a 1911 and control placement(safety, mag release and slide release)...... everything else is the same as a Mk.

 

[chopprs]

Here are my two Mark IIIs. A Volquartsen Masters and an early 22/45 that I machined the grips off and installed the Pachmeyers mainly for comfort. Both of them shoot wonderful. I like the 22/45 because it is good and cheap practice for shooting my Gold Cup. The Masters is on another planet though. This gun is a phenominal example of pistolsmithing. The weighting is superb and firing it is a true delight!

 

[blume357]

thug, I'm back... if you will recall I was the first to answer...

what you'll find is lots of folks will complain and criticize all the added 'lawyer' features on the MKIII... I agree they are silly and useless.... but they have never once caused mine to not fire or for me to not enjoy shooting mine. With that said, the only real experience I've had with these is the MKIII target....

if the only difference between the target and the hunter is the hunter has the fiber optic sights.... I'd go with the hunter. I changed out the regular iron sights on my target model for high visibility fiber optics and really like them better.

when I decided to buy a ruger 22 semi-auto pistol I had the choice of either a 22/45 model or the MKIII target and I held both and studied long and hard on each.... I really liked the way the 'heavier' target model felt in my hand. Except for the first two times breaking the pistol down and cleaning it, I've never had a regret on this purchase..... but that's part of the 'paying your dues' for owning one of these and I feel it's well worth it.

 

[WrenNH]

OP, living in Massachusetts, you can legally only buy a pistol with a loaded chamber indicator, or a magazine disconnect. The Mk III has both.

I might be mistaken, but I don't think the Mk II has either. That's why I edited my post above.

The LCI is a nuisance I could do without, but that's all it is, a nuisance. The Mk III is a good gun.

I think it's just a nuisance because anyone who is a handling a firearm unsafely probably isn't going to change their behavior any because that little plastic strip is poking out.

Tom

edit: Relevant section of Massachusetts law


(3) It shall be an unfair or deceptive practice for a handgun-purveyor to transfer or offer to transfer to any customer located within the Commonwealth any handgun which does not contain a load indicator or magazine safety disconnect.



http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=cagoter...dguns Without Childproofing or Safety Devices

Cut and paste. I don't have the patience to make the URL tags work

 

[thug23]

Thanks again guys for all your advice.

 

[SocialD]

I have had a Mark II Target model for years and I still love it. Everyone that shoots it loves it too. I have held a Mark III, but I have yet to shoot one. I can't imagine a big difference between the Mark II and Mark III. Basically, I'm saying 5.5" bull barrel all the way! Oh yeah, go stainless too.

 

[carsinc]

Great looking grips on the 22/45. Can you give us some details on how you machined the wood panels.

thug, I'm back... if you will recall I was the first to answer...

what you'll find is lots of folks will complain and criticize all the added 'lawyer' features on the MKIII... I agree they are silly and useless.... but they have never once caused mine to not fire or for me to not enjoy shooting mine. With that said, the only real experience I've had with these is the MKIII target....

if the only difference between the target and the hunter is the hunter has the fiber optic sights.... I'd go with the hunter. I changed out the regular iron sights on my target model for high visibility fiber optics and really like them better.

when I decided to buy a ruger 22 semi-auto pistol I had the choice of either a 22/45 model or the MKIII target and I held both and studied long and hard on each.... I really liked the way the 'heavier' target model felt in my hand. Except for the first two times breaking the pistol down and cleaning it, I've never had a regret on this purchase..... but that's part of the 'paying your dues' for owning one of these and I feel it's well worth it.

 

[chopprs]

Carsinc. The grips come from Pachmeyer just like that. They are actually pretty cheap. I dissasembled the gun and put the frame in my vertical mill and simply milled the factory grip off to be flat and then did the other side. An easy job to locate, drill and tap the holes for the screw bushings and then installed the grips as on any 1911. They fit perfect as would any 1911 grips. Here is a link that I found that was helpful prior to the carving.....

http://www.wiztechs.com/knightsrealm/guns/22-45/grips/grips.htm

 

[thug23]

Can you also tell me why it appears the 22/45 is a lot cheaper priced than the target model Mark III?
This is what I have seen on many gun sale sites.
Both have the 5.5" bull barrel...?
Thank you.

 

[chopprs]

I questioned that myself and then spent the $250 for my gun. They both have good sites and I doubt there are any differences inside the gun. Mine is stupid accurate. I have shot bullseye with it many, many times.

 

[stubbfarmer]

I believe the Mark’s have a metal frame while the 22/45 frame is polymer. My 22/45 was muzzle heavy until I bought a Tactical Solutions barrel. Now the balance and weight are great.

 

[carsinc]

Thanks for the info. I plan to buy a 22/45 with the removable cocobol panels (any 1911 panel will fit). I think I will try the combo like you did.

Carsinc. The grips come from Pachmeyer just like that. They are actually pretty cheap. I dissasembled the gun and put the frame in my vertical mill and simply milled the factory grip off to be flat and then did the other side. An easy job to locate, drill and tap the holes for the screw bushings and then installed the grips as on any 1911. They fit perfect as would any 1911 grips. Here is a link that I found that was helpful prior to the carving.....

http://www.wiztechs.com/knightsrealm/guns/22-45/grips/grips.htm

 

[CajunBass]

I've got both a MK II and a MK III. Frankly I don't see a dimes worth of difference in them. If I was at a gun show and found a MKIII on one table and a MK II at the next one, same price, I wouldn't walk from one table to the next. I'd just buy whichever one was closer.

Personally I like the 22/45.

 

[thug23]

From all the reading I've done in the last weeks EVERYONE says the 22/45 has a grip or feel of a 1911 model....unlike the Mark III which grips/holds a little bit different or at a different angle in your hand.
Personally I don't know the difference between the two I would just pick up a gun and shoot the dam thing...can anyone else explain what the difference in FEEL is between the two (Mark III vs. 22/45) and why one might be more benefitial than the other?