Noob with a contrarian question

[Anonymous]

I am new to handgunning (hell firearms in general) and when I took the NRA 1st steps pistol class I shot, among others, a Ruger mark III (5.5" bull barrel) and have included that in my short list of possibles.

What I am looking for is not how great this firearm is (that's easy to get) but rather feedback on things you don't like and things you wished you knew before buying one.

TIA

moose

 

[rugerguy]

melmoose, welcome to the Forum....sounds like a good one, and as far as "likes/dislikes" very subjective...we like the older ones, MK I and MK II< but some nice features on the newer MK IIIs. but for the MOST part, they just "lawyered" them up with all kinds of "safety this, mechanical that", user "safe" but NOT "friendly".....for a newer shooter, fine and dandy,GOOD gun..but harder than the hinges to hell to do normal "take down" maintainance on ( yes, you can use them and clean them , and NEVER have to take one apart, but come the day, you may want to.........) :shock: .as I said the older ones we are used, just do NOT care for these newer ones.....MY opinion, and the milage may vary......

 

[CraigC]

I've owned two MK-series guns and both were excellent. One an original MKI, the other a MKIIGC model. Both were very accurate and reliable. The grip angle just doesn't agree with me so I went back to my Buckmarks. The only MK-series that I can live with is the new 22/45RP model with replaceable 1911 grip panels. I just live with all the "safety" garbage but managed to remove some. With a Volquartsen "kit", removing the magazine disconnect and the detent and spring on the bolt release (the "slingshot mod") it is a very good and usable pistol.

 

[blume357]

As rugerguy said.. and absolute pain in the butt to break down clean and then especially put back together.... there is a secret to it, but I think most folks need to spend and hour or two messing with it first.

I love mine by the way, even though you did not want to hear that.

best solution to the cleaning problem..... break down about every 5-10,000 rounds.

 

[Snake45]

Very interesting and intelligent question!

I don't own and have never shot a MKIII but I have owned a MKII for about 25 years. From reading on this an another forum, I gather that those who have never owned an earlier MK like the IIIs; those who have owned both IIs and IIIs generally seem to prefer the older guns over the newer, "lawyered up" IIIs.

Can't think of anything in particular I don't like about my MKII. I WISH it were an old High Standard Supermatic Military, of course, but then that's not what I paid for when I bought it. It's reliable and accurate and rugged and easy to shoot--what's not to like? As others have mentioned, the Ruger .22 autos--all of them--can be a bee-yotch to tear down and reassemble until you learn how it's done, then it's really not a big deal. Try to get someone to show you "the trick" and you'll be okay. I suspect there are YouTubes on the technique.

I'd recommend looking around for a nice used MKII before buying a III, but if you can't find one or feel better about buying new, then buy a III and be happy. It's a good gun, I'm sure; it just has some extra junk on it that most of us old pharts don't care for, don't need, and resent having to pay for. :wink:

 

[blume357]

I've never used the lock on mine... well I think I did the first day I brought it home to see if it works... and I hope the key is still stored in the box....

I can't remember the last time I flipped the safety on either.... and I never even notice the loaded chamber indicator... when the bolt locks back I know the chamber is empty.

I put a scope on mine for a while but to be honest decided it wasn't as much fun or a challenge at 50ft (which is my pistol range's distance) So, I took the scope off and put some williams high vis. fiber optic sights on and really like them... much like the ones on the hunter model.

If you get one, I would suggest the one you mentioned, I like the grip on the standard a lot better than the all polly grip on the 22/45. The first item(s) to invest in are extra mags... 5 or 6 is the minimum you need for this gun to have fun.

Next, I put Hogue target grips on mine. I think I will put standard Hogue grips on it at sometime in the future.

Oh, one of the things I like about the MKIII over the II is the mag. release behind the trigger guard not on the bottom of the grip.

 

[rooger]

Positives:
Ruger needed to do some further machining on my brand new MKIII and their service was fast and effective.
Now shoots several thousand consecutive rounds without any problem.
Now is quick and easy to break down, clean and reassemble.

Negatives:
Ruger needed to do further machining and test-firing to solve 95% of FTEs.
To completely solve my FTE problem, I removed LCI and added Volquartzen extractor.
To master takedown and reassembly, I had to read info here, watch videos on Youtube and actually do the procedures a few times.

Bottom line: The MKIII is my first and only .22 semi-auto pistol. I'm still very happy with it and I respect Ruger as a company. This forum has given me much valuable information one just can't find anywhere else.

 

[BuckJM53]

What I am looking for is not how great this firearm is (that's easy to get) but rather feedback on things you don't like and things you wished you knew before buying one

melmoose ... First of all welcome to the forum. Secondly, in answer to your question, I wish I'd known the following prior to purchasing my MKIII512 bull barrel:
1. That it would eat through nearly $1,500 in ammo over the past few years and still be hungry :shock:.
2. That it would frequently tire out my trigger finger and eyes at the range :o.
3. That it has so many accessories and upgrades to choose from :? (I like simple).
4. That I would end up with so many 8.5 x 11 targets with only this small hole near the center (seems awfully wasteful to me)
5. That it's so accurate and consistent that it sometimes verges on boring :roll:

Now ... would you also like to hear my list of things that I like about it? :lol: Seriously though .... While some folks don't like the safety features (LCI & magazine disconnect primarily) or the field strip procedure (which is really quite simple after you practice it a few times), I personally would not consider trading my MKIII for a MKI or MKII

 

[tomiswho]

I've owned a "standard" since buying it new in 1968. And I got a new MkIII last September. I did a few of the things to it (the MkIII) recommended over on rimfirecentral (Volquartsen sear, trigger, extractor, and a new hammer bushing to eliminate the mag safety) and I think this new MkIII is the cat's meow. I spent maybe $50 and an afternoon looking a videos to add those parts.

By far my favorite .22 (well maybe that S&W #34 kit gun....) anyway, I love it!

 

[Rick Courtright]

What I am looking for is not how great this firearm is (that's easy to get) but rather feedback on things you don't like and things you wished you knew before buying one.

Hi, and welcome!

I have the Mk II version of the gun you shot. I don't need a replacement at this time, but if I did, I'd probably look around for another Mk II before jumping into the Mk III.

I like the new mag release, but other than that, I see no "operational" differences worth noting between the two models.

I don't like the new LCI. Seems I remember reading here of some problems w/ the first one, and of a change to cure those problems (something about the original metal one causing unintended discharges on return to battery so a plastic part was substituted? You'll want to do some research to make sure I'm not giving you bad info.) I guess the "problem" is cured, but I don't think the LCI design is a good one to start with, and 'specially don't like seeing a "bandage" on a bad design. I'd think keeping a couple of spare LCIs in the box might not be a bad idea.

Internally, I'm not really familiar w/ the Mk III yet. My brother in law just picked one up, and we took it to the range a couple of days ago. It functioned perfectly thru its first 200 rds, using CCI Blazers (which BTW, MY Mk II isn't fond of, so remember you'll need to find the ammo YOUR gun likes! Common w/ most .22s, not a big worrisome item.)

But he hadn't field stripped it yet, so I don't know how much more of an adventure it is than the Mk II he had years ago. Biggest "problem" w/ the Mk II stripping drill is you HAVE to do it EXACTLY as the book specifies, else you'll think you're never gonna get things back together and working. I assume that's the case w/ the Mk III, too.

FWIW, the magazine for the Mk III is "unique" because of its new mag release slot. It does seem to be "backwards compatible" w/ the Mk II (my BIL's snaps right into my gun, but we didn't function fire it), but the Mk II mags aren't "forward compatible." Probably not a big deal. If my theory's correct, I wouldn't be surprised to see only a single magazine on the shelves soon, sold as a "Fits Mk II and Mk III" part.

Seems to me the "lawyering up" of the Mk III adds no real value, so I'll suggest the change in mag release position is the only "improvement" on the Mk II for most actual shooters.

Opinions will vary, of course!

Rick C

 

[Fox Mike]

Having owned both the MK I and a MK III I can say that other than the 'added features' of the MK III they shoot equally well. The 'loaded chamber indicator' is a gimmick as far as I am concerned as I generally know when I have a round in the chamber. I do like the magazine release on the MK III over the MK I. I also like the bolt staying open after the last shot but the MK II also has that feature. They can be a bear to disassemble, as I found early on, but after a few times it becomes routine.

 

[martyj]

Welcome
I guess adding the loaded chamber indicator is a dislike of mine. Never need more moving parts on anything that do not improve its performance
Once you figure out how to disassemble and reassemble them you will never forget. Its not that hard its just a failure to read the manual or look it up on internet.