Mark I, II, III & IV

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Joined
May 16, 2008
Messages
1,394
Location
NC
I already had these, I - III:

2DuWEpql.jpg


But a really good price at a gun show yesterday finally tempted me to add this 75th Anniversary IV:

L9sH4ldl.jpg


Some day I'll add an A-54 frame T-678.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
I suppose I'd buy a series IV at the right price but I really don't see the need for the features the IV provides.
I'm perfectly satisfied with a 22/45 series 2 with a 'custom stippled' grip from the previous owner's pooch(makes for a better grip with wet, muddy gloves :whistle:).
 
My very first handgun was a Mark I ( BTW- Didn't they just call the first a "Marksman" when it came out? Can't remember.) I loved the feel, loved the accuracy. Unfortunately I found it to be the worst jammer I have ever owned. I ended up selling it back to the dealer at a loss ( I did use it for awhile). At the time I blamed the gun, but it was long ago, and looking back it may well have been the ammo of the time....?
 
My very first handgun was a Mark I ( BTW- Didn't they just call the first a "Marksman" when it came out? Can't remember.) I loved the feel, loved the accuracy. Unfortunately I found it to be the worst jammer I have ever owned. I ended up selling it back to the dealer at a loss ( I did use it for awhile). At the time I blamed the gun, but it was long ago, and looking back it may well have been the ammo of the time....?
My recollection isn't nearly as sharp as it used to be, but I do seem to remember that the original pistol was called Standard that came in 4 3/4" or 6" barrel length. The Mark 1 was an adjustable sighted target version with a 6" barrel.
 
My very first handgun was a Mark I ( BTW- Didn't they just call the first a "Marksman" when it came out? Can't remember.) I loved the feel, loved the accuracy. Unfortunately I found it to be the worst jammer I have ever owned. I ended up selling it back to the dealer at a loss ( I did use it for awhile). At the time I blamed the gun, but it was long ago, and looking back it may well have been the ammo of the time....?
I don't recall them ever being called "Marksman". Maybe "Standard".
 
I suppose I'd buy a series IV at the right price but I really don't see the need for the features the IV provides.
I'm perfectly satisfied with a 22/45 series 2 with a 'custom stippled' grip from the previous owner's pooch(makes for a better grip with wet, muddy gloves :whistle:).
I guess that's why Ruger makes different stuff because people like different stuff. The "right price" is part of the reason I bought it.
 
Last edited:
My recollection isn't nearly as sharp as it used to be, but I do seem to remember that the original pistol was called Standard that came in 4 3/4" or 6" barrel length. The Mark 1 was an adjustable sighted target version with a 6" barrel.
The Mark I was either a T-514 (5 1/4" tapered target barrel), T-512 (5 1/2" target bull barrel) or a T-678 (6 7/8" tapered target barrel). Ruger did not make a Mark I with a 6" barrel.
 
As a senior getting back to the shooting range, I thought I'd share some observations through a link to a blog post.

 
I have Dad's old High Standard HDM which is extremely accurate. With the OEM sights, it was more accurate than I could shoot even back when I was young.
I used to aggravate the heck out of my Brother in Law. I'd use the HDM and let him use his rifle AND STILL OUTSHOOT HIM on targets at 50 yards.
 
When I first started recreational target shooting in my 30's I had a High Standard Victor, along with a Ruger Target. By my second wind in my 60's, I found the Victor too hard to rack. Ruger is still rackable, even in my late 70's.
 

Latest posts

Top