MK II. Target carbine

Help Support Ruger Forum:

jpdesign

Single-Sixer
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
255
So after about 4 years of picking up the project for a little and then setting it aside for a long while. Finally one step closer to finished.

Started with a Mk II. Target with. 6 7/8 heavy taper barrel. I did not modify any parts from the original gun, other that a bit of interior stoning and polishing. I got a second reciever and had a gunsmith do some work on it. I had to do a good bit of final fitting myself.

I made that stock attachment. (I plane on making another stock and a leather pouch for mags.)

I still need to attach a scope mount.

image.jpg1_zpsexfwdmrx.jpg
 

JFB

Hunter
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
2,091
interesting!
did you make the barrel/reciver or is it something that can be purchased?
 

SGW Gunsmith

Blackhawk
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
966
jpdesign said:
So after about 4 years of picking up the project for a little and then setting it aside for a long while. Finally one step closer to finished.

Started with a Mk II. Target with. 6 7/8 heavy taper barrel. I did not modify any parts from the original gun, other that a bit of interior stoning and polishing. I got a second reciever and had a gunsmith do some work on it. I had to do a good bit of final fitting myself.

I made that stock attachment. (I plane on making another stock and a leather pouch for mags.)

I still need to attach a scope mount.

image.jpg1_zpsexfwdmrx.jpg

Interesting project. Have you shot it yet?
 

jpdesign

Single-Sixer
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
255
Went and shot it today.

Little problem. I thought I might have a problem of the longer barrel making the bolt come back harder but that wasn't the case. It didn't even cycle enough to eject the cases.

Any ideas?
 

JFB

Hunter
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
2,091
were you shooting Quite, SV or HV?
is the chamber "match"?
Have you inspected an unfired chambered round?
 

jpdesign

Single-Sixer
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
255
First tried federal high velocity and auto match.
Tried some stinger and velociter today. Velociter operates it about half the time.

Cases don't look like there is much blow by/back what ever you want to call it.
 

jpdesign

Single-Sixer
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
255
Today I ordered a set if Wolff springs with a lighter weight hammer spring. We'll see if that helps. As is it is pretty stiff.
 

JFB

Hunter
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
2,091
is the chamber polished and "loose" enough? Too tight would cause your problem and have the outside of the fired cases "clean"
 

contender

Ruger Guru
Joined
Sep 18, 2002
Messages
20,836
I have to ask.
Isn't adding a rifle length barrel AND a stock to a handgun considered manufacturing a firearm? Aren't there special laws or a license required? NOT flaming,,, just asking.
 

Kanook

Buckeye
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
1,123
contender said:
I have to ask.
Isn't adding a rifle length barrel AND a stock to a handgun considered manufacturing a firearm? Aren't there special laws or a license required? NOT flaming,,, just asking.
Unless a felon, anyone can make/manufacture a firearm for personal use (follow state laws). The OP added a stock to a pistol that has a legal length 16" barrel. It is a rifle. (must be a certain overall length also)

If the OP decides to remove the stock, it is a long barreled pistol. (federal has no max pistol barrel size, states may vary)

If the OP decides to shorten the barrel to under 16", papers must be filed for SBR or just remove stock and it's back to a pistol.
 

jpdesign

Single-Sixer
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
255
According to Supreme Court and the case with Thompson Center as long as both the barrel (over 16") and stock are only used together, and kept together, it is legal.
 

jpdesign

Single-Sixer
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
255
Been thinking about it. But don't want to attach anything directly to the barrel. At least nut yet. Been looking at volguartsen piece that puts a lower rail on a 5 1/2 bull barrel as something that would float. But that thing it a bit high for right now, and don't think the look goes with the gun. Looking always to attach to the front of the frame and the trigger guard.
 

JFB

Hunter
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
2,091
I can see keeping your cleaner "wire" design. I wonder how comfertable would a wire extension from the front frame just under the barrel, then turning down on the end for a fore grip. sort of like a reverse of the stock.

now that I think about the above, the more I would like to make me a similiar carbine! did you make the barrel reciever or by someone that would sell it?
 

eveled

Hunter
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
3,674
I always thought Ruger missed an opportunity, by not making a carbine version of the MK series. Really cool little project.
 

mohavesam

Hawkeye
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
5,847
eveled said:
I always thought Ruger missed an opportunity, by not making a carbine version of the MK series. Really cool little project.

+1. Browning took the ball away and Ruger slept in. They are still sleeping on this one, as a matter of fact.
 

eveled

Hunter
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
3,674
My guess is they were worried about blowing somebody's eye out with the bolt. Also probably didn't want to compete with their 10/22. A pistol that took 10/22 magazines would have been another idea. They had a great idea with the Charger, but I'm thinking a smaller more normal pistol.
 

ADP3

Single-Sixer
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
481
I like where you are going with this. +1 on the suggestion that it could be your chamber dimensions. Possibly it's tight or a bit rough(?). Try some Aguila Super Maximum or maybe even their 60 grain Super Sniper ammo. Barrel length should not affect bolt operation. Good Luck.

Best Regards,
ADP3
 

Mobuck

Hawkeye
Joined
Dec 25, 2007
Messages
6,723
"I always thought Ruger missed an opportunity, by not making a carbine version of the MK series."

Consider the interface between the grip frame and the upper section. It's not strong enough to handle the weight and leverage forces of a longer barrel.
 

Latest posts

Top