Mk L vs MkII....what are the main differences

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Bloodhound

Bearcat
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Messages
33
Location
Colorado High Country
I have had Ruger MK IIs since 1990...I have owned and traded several of them...but I have never owned a MK I....aside from the magazine differences, what are the major differences?

I notice that there are occasionally better deals on the MK I than on the MK II
 

Bloodhound

Bearcat
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Messages
33
Location
Colorado High Country
Cool..I think read a post that mentioned the modification to MK I was possible so that the MK II mags could be used...I couldn't find the post is that a doable project?
 

Ruger45

Blackhawk
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
778
Location
Central NH
I don't know how well it works but I watched a gunsmith grind the nub on the MKII mags down so it would fit in the MKI
 

wwb

Hunter
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
2,867
Location
wisconsin
Ruger45 said:
I don't know how well it works but I watched a gunsmith grind the nub on the MKII mags down so it would fit in the MKI

?????

All you have to do is switch the button on the follower to the other side.
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
9,023
Location
Ohio , U.S.A.
you do NOT grind down ANYTHING to make a MK II mag ,work in a MK I !!!! Please!!! :shock:

gosh, there are so many folks out there full of unadulterated BS......... 8)

they have nothing better to do than hear themselves talk and spread gossip, and untruths.......... :roll:

better you ask here and we will try and tell you the 'truth', best we can........ :wink:
 

SGW Gunsmith

Blackhawk
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
966
Location
Northwestern Wisconsin
^^^^^AGREE, wholeheartedly!!!! There is absolutely no need to grind on ANY magazine follower button. While the follower button diameter is certainly smaller on the early magazines (.250 diameter) than the follower button diameter on the Ruger Mark II magazines (.326 diameter), the larger follower button will indeed still work. What Ruger did do when the Ruger Mark II's came out, was increase the size of the radius in the grip frame for the follower button from 7/16-inch to 1/2-inch, but still, the larger size follower buttons do work in the older grip frames. I've tried them, do it yourself to see that they work.
When the Ruger Mark II was introduced in 1982, there were a couple of changes made to improve the Mark II, over the Mark I, or early Standard. One main improvement is the addition of the bolt stop assembly parts. Another change involved the "scallop-cuts", just in front of the bolt ears on the receiver. That was done to get a better purchase on the bolt ears for cocking the pistol. Those parts in the Mark II are activated by the magazine follower button. The A100 grip frames had the magazine follower button clearance radius, stamped into the grip frame, moved from the right side of the grip frame over to the left side, same as the Mark II grip frame. Previously, on the Ruger Mark I pistols, there was no hold-open mechanism in place to hold the bolt back after the ninth round was fired and the magazine emptied. The safety on the Ruger Mark I pistols was used as a 'manual' bolt hold open device, when the safety is pushed up and the front end of the safety is hooked into the left side notch in the bolt. Now, to get things even more convoluted :) , magazines for the (catalog numbered A54) early grip frames can only be used in the A54 grip frames because there is no slot for the magazine follower button on the left side of the magazine, only the right side. Magazines that were made to accommodate the A100 grip frames, and all Ruger Mark magazines thereafter, have magazine follower button slots on both sides of the magazine and will work, in even the early pistols, except for the 22/45 style base plate type, if the follower button is moved to the right side of the magazine body, even the Ruger Mark III bodies. I've tried 'em. Then, you can have a magazine that holds 10-rounds.



#1. Ruger Mark I & Standard for the A54 style grip frame.

#2. Ruger Mark I & Standard for the A100 style grip frame. Notice slots on both sides. These magazines will also work on the A54 style grip frames.

#3. New style Ruger Mark I & Standard "replacement" magazines for the above. Still hold 9-rounds

#4. Ruger Mark II style magazines. Introduced in 1982. Hold 10-rounds
 

Bloodhound

Bearcat
Joined
Feb 18, 2014
Messages
33
Location
Colorado High Country
D A and others thanks for the info. I am looking at purchasing a MK I target Bull barrel. I am even thinking of selling one of my High Standards to funs some Ruger purchases. Maybe some MK I s 8)
 

y2k-fxst

Single-Sixer
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
104
D A Wood said:
#1. Ruger Mark I & Standard for the A54 style grip frame.

#2. Ruger Mark I & Standard for the A100 style grip frame. Notice slots on both sides. These magazines will also work on the A54 style grip frames.

#3. New style Ruger Mark I & Standard "replacement" magazines for the above. Still hold 9-rounds

#4. Ruger Mark II style magazines. Introduced in 1982. Hold 10-rounds

The #3 replacement Mark I magazines can be modified to hold 10 rounds by shortening the pin inside of the magazine spring on the follower. I have 2 magazines I have done this with I use in my Mark I so I don't wear out my factory magazine.

PS. Do not try to do this on magazines #1 and #2 it won't work. The only difference between #3 and #4 is the silver vs. black base plate and the 9 vs. 10 round follower.
 

wwb

Hunter
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
2,867
Location
wisconsin
Jeepnik said:
Think of it this way. Ruger designed the Mk I. Decades later the lawyers got involved and the Mk II and Mk III were the result.

Not to mention a worse trigger

The above DOES NOT apply to the Mark II. The Mark III, yes.

The general consensus is that the Mark II was the pinnacle of Ruger .22 pistol development.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
7,347
Location
On the beach and in the hills
wwb said:
Jeepnik said:
Think of it this way. Ruger designed the Mk I. Decades later the lawyers got involved and the Mk II and Mk III were the result.

Not to mention a worse trigger

The above DOES NOT apply to the Mark II. The Mark III, yes.

The general consensus is that the Mark II was the pinnacle of Ruger .22 pistol development.

The general consensus was determined in what manner?
 

BRL

Single-Sixer
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Messages
283
Location
Tahuya Wa.
Not trying to hijack this thread but on a similar note, I was wondering if the barrel/receivers and frames interchange on these models?

Fell in serious like at a gun shop with a 4 3/4" Mk I the other day and owned a 6 7/8" Target Mk II at one time...(sold it :oops: )

But that got me to thinking of a non-scalloped Mk I receiver with the mag. release of the Mk III (hate that Mark III loaded chamber indicator :evil: ) or even a stainless Mk II frame if the trigger pull on the Mk III has gotten worse.

Just idle thought. :D

ETA: Got good information from Iowegan on .net concerning the compatibility possibilities.

http://rugerforum.net/ruger-rimfires/113959-mark-i-ii-iii-parts-compatibility.html

Thanks anyway.
 

Latest posts

Top