Which Mark III for Competiton?

[VTM]

I will trade my 617 for a MIII.

I want to shoot as accurately as possible, even when I plink in the woods. I may someday shoot in a competative league.

So I want the most accurate MIII.

Would that be the Target MIII? I would like some help on making the decision. Which is the most accurate and please tell my why it is.

Does the Target Model have some special features...trigger, rifling, etc.?

Stainless or blue?

Thanks for opinions on this one..I want to buy one and not have to trade, loose money, and buy again.

VTM

 

[wwb]

To each his own, but I'd recommend a Mark II rather than a Mark III. Gets rid of the foolishness. Used Mark II pistols in excellent condition are not hard to find

If you're looking for accuracy, get the 6-7/8 inch Target model... stainless or blue, your choice. Install a Volquartsen trigger, hammer, and sear (about $90), and you have a pistol with accuracy far beyond what 99% of the shooters are capable of using.

 

[gclefton]

If you're looking for accuracy, get the 6-7/8 inch Target model... stainless or blue, your choice. Install a Volquartsen trigger, hammer, and sear (about $90), and you have a pistol with accuracy far beyond what 99% of the shooters are capable of using.

+1

 

[Anonymous]

Competition, I'd stick with what Ruger considers their competition model:

http://www.ruger.com/products/markIIICompetition/models.html

A slab sided 6.88 inch bull barrel, stainless, adjustable sights. Gives you the same weight and balance as the 5.5 inch bull (which I have) but a longer sight radius. If you want optics, it's already drilled and tapped, a Mark II isn't. The Mark III's magazine release is much nicer too, for fast mag changes.

The Mark III "foolishness" isn't so hard to deal with. Replace the magazine safety arm and spring with a Volquartsen, or Clark, Mark II hammer bushing. Remove the metal tab from the loaded chamber indicator. Or, replace it with a purpose made plug like I did.

Throw in the Volquartsen trigger, hammer, and sear (use their Mark II parts in a Mark III with the mag safety removed) and you're set. I used the whole accurizing kit, and the titanium disconnector, but the trigger and sear alone gives 90% of the improvement.

Volquartsen tip: Their springs give about a 2.25 lb trigger. I left my springs stock and got about a 3 lb pull.

 

[mattsbox99]

I'm not sure what the 'foolishness' is either, I own both and prefer the MKIII.

I have several of their competition models, my favorite is the 5 1/2 Slabside stainless with thumbrest. This particular model is an Acusport special edition. I have a JPoint red dot reflex sight on it and I use it for steel challenge.

I don't think you can go wrong with any of the competition models.

 

[Fox Mike]

I have a MK III Target (6 7/8 bbl) that will shoot much better than the 'shooter' can. I have a Volquartsen trigger and extractor, and a thumbrest grip. It is better than my MK III 22/45 as far as accuracy goes.

 

[GR8_Outdoorsman]

If you're looking for accuracy, get the 6-7/8 inch Target model... stainless or blue, your choice. Install a Volquartsen trigger, hammer, and sear (about $90), and you have a pistol with accuracy far beyond what 99% of the shooters are capable of using.

I have the 6 7/8" Hunter model with an Aimpoint Micro H-1 red dot as can be seen in my profile pic. I swapped the hammer, sear, trigger and hogue grips as recommended and this thing is crazy accurate. I'm not sure if there is a difference in accuracy between the hunter model and the target model, but I really doubt it. It far exceeds my capabilities as a shooter.

Regarding the "foolishness" on the Mark III, I've yet to have a single failure of any kind due to it. I've read plenty of complaints about it on the internet forums and seen plenty of mods and doodads to replace it, but haven't seen where it has caused problems. I guess I'm weird, but I honestly like the loaded chamber indicators.

 

[wwb]

........ I guess I'm weird, but I honestly like the loaded chamber indicators.

Unless the bolt is locked back, the chamber is to be considered loaded.... and even then, you treat the pistol as though loaded. Simple firearms safety.

Bad habits are too easy to develop.... seen it too many times to count.

 

[Fox Mike]

I guess I'm weird, but I honestly like the loaded chamber indicators.

I don't like to depend on a mechanical device telling me what years of gun handling has beaten into me..if the action is closed the weapon is LOADED until I determine otherwise by physically opening it and looking/feeling to make sure it isn't.

 

[GR8_Outdoorsman]

........ I guess I'm weird, but I honestly like the loaded chamber indicators.

Unless the bolt is locked back, the chamber is to be considered loaded.... and even then, you treat the pistol as though loaded. Simple firearms safety.

Bad habits are too easy to develop.... seen it too many times to count.

NO,,,,, You don't say!!!!! :shock:

Kind of like the bad habit of stating the obvious?


There's also the other side of the coin in that good habits take time to develop. Nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes.

Internet bloggers constantly make the biggest deal about the loaded chamber indicator being ugly and another point of failure. If it's that big of a deal, don't buy a Ruger. There's plenty of higher priced and lower quality weapons floating around out there without the LCI....

 

[GR8_Outdoorsman]

I guess I'm weird, but I honestly like the loaded chamber indicators.

I don't like to depend on a mechanical device telling me what years of gun handling has beaten into me..if the action is closed the weapon is LOADED until I determine otherwise by physically opening it and looking/feeling to make sure it isn't.

Sure, and I certainly agree. I don't believe that the intention is to depend on the LCI to tell if there is a round in the chamber. It's just another point of information.

Everyone on this forum is likely familiar enough with guns to know the basic rules of handling a gun. Unfortunately, there are a large number of people that purchase guns without any form of training. They buy the gun, maybe shoot it once or twice and throw it in drawer. I feel that the LCI could prevent an accident for many of this type of gun owner. I can't count how many accidental shootings I've read about where the shooter didn't realize the gun was loaded. Ruger makes a high quality gun at a very reasonable price and Ruger's are very often someone's first gun.

Sorry for the rants, I just don't agree with the strong resistance to the LCI. It doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me and couldn't imagine not buying a gun because it had or didn't have one.

 

[Montelores]

Can someone please explain what the differences are between the Mk I and Mk II and Mk III?

Thanks to all -

Monty

 

[wwb]

The first generation pistols, the RST4 and RST6, as well as the Mark I, had no "hold open" feature. The bolt would close after the last shot, leading to a dry-fire if you weren't counting shots. The safety also functioned to hold the bolt open (or shut).... when the safety was engaged in either position, the bolt was locked. The Mark I was the target version of the first generation pistol.... bull barrel or 6-7/8 inch heavy tapered target barrel, and fully adjustable rear sight. Also, rollmarked "MARK I" on the left side of the receiver.

The Mark II, in all its forms (standard, target, hunter, 22/45....) differed from the first generation in that the safety was no longer tied to the bolt, and a separate bolt release was added. In addition, the bolt locked back after the last shot.

The Mark III added a magazine disconnect and a loaded chamber indicator. The mag release was also relocated to the same location as found on a 1911.

 

[Montelores]

Thanks, wwb.

Monty

 

[RedlegM109A1]

If you're looking for accuracy, get the 6-7/8 inch Target model... stainless or blue, your choice. Install a Volquartsen trigger, hammer, and sear (about $90), and you have a pistol with accuracy far beyond what 99% of the shooters are capable of using.

....
Regarding the "foolishness" on the Mark III, I've yet to have a single failure of any kind due to it. I've read plenty of complaints about it on the internet forums and seen plenty of mods and doodads to replace it, but haven't seen where it has caused problems. I guess I'm weird, but I honestly like the loaded chamber indicators.

I just took delivery today (after the 10 day waiting period) on a Mark III, and just put 200 rounds through it. Obviously that is not enough experience to determine if the LCI will be a maintenance problem. However, all things being equal I like having an LCI. Back before California began requiring them, one of my expensive Berettas came standard with an LCI and everyone thought that was really great. I wonder if part of the dislike of LCI is simply derived from the fact that it came about from a Government requirement.

I agree that an LCI is not "necessary." It is the shooter's job to know if a gun is loaded, and to treat the gun as loaded regardless, etc. Basic safety rules are the same regardless. Doesn't make an LCI a bad thing though.

I've never seen any point in a magazine safety (another Calilfornia requirement for new pistols) but I don't care much either way. The magazine safety does add a small amount of complexity to the assembly-disassembly process since you must insert a magazine to put the hammer down prior to removing the mainspring; then on reassembly you must do the same in order to get the hammer all the way up prior to closing the mainspring. No big deal.

 

[gatorhugger]

The LCI is just a pain to clean. it's the only thing I dislike about it, it holds crud. But I do like glancing at the gun and seeing if it's loaded.
Not a bad feature in my book.
Other than the cleaning, I prefer the Mark III, I love the thumbrest, the magazine release, no complaints here.

 

[Rumrunner]

You are out in the woods hunting, and there it is, a Boone and Crockett squirrel. You ease your MKII up and start to squeeze off the shot - and nothing. Oh no, when you got out of your truck and slapped a magazine into your gun you forgot to jack one in the chamber. And in a moments time your B & C squirrel is off through the trees, never to be seen again.

Same senerio with a MKIII - you pull up your gun and you glance over and see your chamber is empty. No problem, you jack a round in and - the noise scares the squirrel away anyway.

 

[WAYNO]

I wondered how the sales of MkIII's could continue to be successful, as dinosaurs like me wont buy them. Fortunately for Ruger, there's folks that like extra doo-dads!

Back to the original posters intent. A T678 variant in the MKI, II, or III is an excellent choice. These guns can be very pleasingly accurate.

This old MkI is great.

WAYNO.

 

[guitarpicva]

You are out in the woods hunting, and there it is, a Boone and Crockett squirrel. You ease your MKII up and start to squeeze off the shot - and nothing. Oh no, when you got out of your truck and slapped a magazine into your gun you forgot to jack one in the chamber. And in a moments time your B & C squirrel is off through the trees, never to be seen again.

Same senerio with a MKIII - you pull up your gun and you glance over and see your chamber is empty. No problem, you jack a round in and - the noise scares the squirrel away anyway.

So what DID that squirrel measure out to anyway?

 

[Anonymous]

I wondered how the sales of MkIII's could continue to be successful, as dinosaurs like me wont buy them. Fortunately for Ruger, there's folks that like extra doo-dads!

And there's folks that have figured out how to get rid of the doo-dads!

Myself, and most everyone else, wish the Mark III had simply been a Mark II with the nice mag release. With a little work, that's what my Mark III is now.

 

[wwb]

I wondered how the sales of MkIII's could continue to be successful, as dinosaurs like me wont buy them. Fortunately for Ruger, there's folks that like extra doo-dads!.......

They don't necessarily LIKE the extra doo-dads; the poor souls just don't know any better.

Respectfully,
A fellow dinosaur

 

[Blue Ridge Reef]

I just bought a MK3, and took it out in the woods Sunday for a box of 500. Was mostly happy with the pistol, but the first thing I will be doing is ordering a "filler" to replace the LCI, as well as a Clark bushing to fix that mag safety. If I'd never shot and liked the MK2, I might be perfectly happy with the MK3 the way it is. But I have shot a MK2 and I'm not happy with it the way it is! I'm happy to drop an extra hundred bucks to make it the gun I'll plink and shoot competition with for (hopefully) the next couple of decades. I just think Ruger would be well-served to make those features options.

 

[SGW Gunsmith]

Competition, I'd stick with what Ruger considers their competition model:

http://www.ruger.com/products/markIIICompetition/models.html

A slab sided 6.88 inch bull barrel, stainless, adjustable sights. Gives you the same weight and balance as the 5.5 inch bull (which I have) but a longer sight radius. If you want optics, it's already drilled and tapped, a Mark II isn't. The Mark III's magazine release is much nicer too, for fast mag changes.

The Mark III "foolishness" isn't so hard to deal with. Replace the magazine safety arm and spring with a Volquartsen, or Clark, Mark II hammer bushing. Remove the metal tab from the loaded chamber indicator. Or, replace it with a purpose made plug like I did.

Throw in the Volquartsen trigger, hammer, and sear (use their Mark II parts in a Mark III with the mag safety removed) and you're set. I used the whole accurizing kit, and the titanium disconnector, but the trigger and sear alone gives 90% of the improvement.

Volquartsen tip: Their springs give about a 2.25 lb trigger. I left my springs stock and got about a 3 lb pull.

Hmmmmmm............Well, here's a pic of my Mark II Competition Target and it SURE is factory drilled and tapped. :shock: