Mark III vs Mark II

Discussion in 'Ruger Rimfire Forums' started by dogkinkead, Jul 31, 2015.

  1. dogkinkead

    dogkinkead New Member

    14
    0
    0
    Am I the only one who wishes Ruger would get rid of the loaded chamber indicator and the magazine disconnect? I've been shooting Mark IIs for longer than I care to remember, shot them in IHMSA competition, the only thing I had to do was touch up the hammer/sear and put on a decent (repeatable) rear sight. Used to shoot in a bullseye league using a Mark II, competed against a lot of fancy guns, did ok. One of my shooting buddies picked up a new Mark III 22/45; he ended up spending almost as much as he paid for the gun to get it ready for shooting falling plates. Just my 2 cents worth, Ruger had a great gun but the lawyers got in the way.
     
  2. phideaux

    phideaux Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporter

    12,933
    100
    63
    I love the MarkII,

    That's why I don't own a MarkIII





    Jim
     

  3. Tommycourt

    Tommycourt Tommycourt

    2,139
    17
    38
    Years ago I had a Mark II and I think, at the time, it was one of the best little .22 pistols you could buy. The only one I ever had that would surpass it was a High Standard Trophymatic (I think that's the right name, lotta yrs ago) and that WAS a nail driver. I never had problems with the Ruger and it took a lot of abuse. We used to go down to an old quarry pond and shoot frogs all day long and then throw it in the car and left it until we went shooting again. I sure wish I had it back, but .22 ammo out here is the thing of the past.........sigh!
    Tommy
     
  4. OldTexan

    OldTexan New Member

    147
    0
    0
    We live in a sue happy society. Folks do stupid things and then look to blame others for their mistakes.:rolleyes:
     
  5. Win94ae

    Win94ae New Member

    70
    0
    0
    This household has a Mark I, II, and III; you are right, the Mark 3 is ridiculous.
    When reassembling the Mark 3, you need to have the mag in at specific points, then removed in others. It was hard enough the original way, that many owners would never take theirs apart; then they complicated it.
     
  6. CLF

    CLF Hunter, CAS/SASS

    12
    0
    0
    I agree with the feelings of a MK II compared to a MK III. Sold my II and was sorry so bought a MK III. After complaining to a friend I went to Brownell's and bought two parts for under $20 and swapped some parts around and ended up with a trigger like a MK II and no mag safety. I will be adding the quick takedown parts in the future. That will be under $100 and fix two items most of us complain about, the last one on all the different models of a fine pistol.

    Lead Foot
     
  7. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear New Member

    61
    4
    0
    It's extremely easy, fast, and inexpensive to get rid of the mag disconnect safety. I wouldn't worry about the loaded chamber indicator though, it don't really affect operation. All you do is order a mk2 hammer, bushing, sear spring & install them in place of the mk3 parts.
     
  8. vic479h

    vic479h New Member

    8
    0
    0
    Stalkingbear is right

    It's an easy fix with all the you-tube videos out there. I added a LCI filler from Tandemcross. Tandemcross has a video showing how to install each of their products.
     
  9. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear New Member

    61
    4
    0
    The LCI never did bother me much, and is actually a good idea when letting students shoot it. Having said that, it's just a feel good measure and NOBODY should rely on it!!! It does cut down on dry fires however but never could tell any difference in reliability.
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2015
  10. dionnee

    dionnee New Member

    2
    0
    0
    There is some good to the MKIII if you lose the upper and add the MKII I like it for plinking around ,,,,,for shooting paper I still fall back on the MKII refined.
     
  11. buster40c

    buster40c Well-Known Member

    8,549
    267
    83
    The MKIII is harder to take down than an MKII ? WOW! I have an MKII and I have yet to hear any reason to trade it for an MKIII. I"ll keep what I have and it looks almost new also.
    A friend sold me the gun back in the early 90's before I had internet so I didn't have the manual to know how to take it down. About 10+ years later I saw a you tube video on how to do a total take down for cleaning. I don't know how many rounds were shot through it all those years but it never missed a lick without being totally cleaned.
     
  12. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear New Member

    61
    4
    0
    Yeah in MY experience, the MK3 is more of a pain because you have to put mag in & take it vack out due to the mag disconnect safety.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 26, 2015
  13. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear New Member

    61
    4
    0
    There's not enough money to tempt me to trade my beloved scoped MK2 competition target slabside! When I do my part (getting more difficult every year) it'll group 5 shots of quality ammo under 1/2" at 50 yards from solid rested position! That's better than a lot of .22 rifles I've seen! One time, my best year EVER, I got 117 squirrels with it! Not about to admit how many I missed!
     
  14. gwpercle

    gwpercle Member

    120
    15
    18
    Advice from my Dad " Don't ever git rid of a gun you like. "
    The old man knew what he was talking about
     
  15. MemphisJim1

    MemphisJim1 New Member

    33
    0
    0
    My first Mark was a 22/45 MkII I found at a pawn shop 7 years ago. It's the heavy barrel Target model and I shot the socks off of it at Steel Challenge and other matches. Added the QuikStrip kit and made some other mods to it as well as added a red dot; I really love that pistol. Three years ago I decided to add a MkIII to the battery and bought a fluted barrel Hunter rather than a slabsided Target 'cause I like the aesthetics better. In general terms I'm OK with the Loaded Chamber Indicator but hate the magazine dance with the MkIII when it comes time to clean and maintain. It's at least as accurate as my 22/45 so it sees a lot of Steel Challenge and other competitive action, too.
     
  16. buster40c

    buster40c Well-Known Member

    8,549
    267
    83
    I have the MKII and it is one very good gun. The only thing I don't like about it is the PITA complete take down. I have yet to hear anyone say they liked the MKIII better. If I was looking for a Ruger MK 22lr pistol I would rather buy a good used MKII than a new MKIII.
    I just ordered the S&W Victory and it says remove one screw and the take down is completed.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2016
  17. AndyRexia

    AndyRexia Member

    57
    1
    8
    I gotta say, I had a MkIII and it was an absolute nightmare to take apart. So much so that I sold it. However, I bought a 22/45 two days ago and complete take down was a breeze. It was like a totally different gun. I'm not sure why it was so much easier but I'm not complaining either.
     
  18. stalkingbear

    stalkingbear New Member

    61
    4
    0
    To those of yall that HATE the stupid mag disconnect safety-I HATE it too! It's extremely easy to get rid of however. A few parts and about 10 minutes and it is functionally identical to the MK2 with exception of the LCI, and it's easily removable if desired.
     
  19. OldTexan

    OldTexan New Member

    147
    0
    0
    Please explain the difference between a MKIII and 22/45. I have several and all have both MKIII and 22/45 on them??????
     
  20. AndyRexia

    AndyRexia Member

    57
    1
    8

    Mark III looks like this:
    ImageUploadedByRuger Forum1457663052.651523.jpg

    22/45 is this:
    ImageUploadedByRuger Forum1457663110.654099.jpg

    Mark III is made of all steel (I believe). 22/45 has a polymer grip frame so it's lighter. 22/45 also has a grip frame similar to a 1911. If I'm forgetting anything someone please chime in.