Ruger MK III Experiences?

[otisrush]

I like having a .22 semi pistol in the stable because, not only is it fun, I think it's a great training tool to help identify and eliminate flinching.

I have a Browning Buckmark and, although it pains me to say it because I have a deep love and loyalty to Browning (and S&W ) - I really dislike the Buckmark. Mine is incredibly picky with ammo.

With the Ruger MK IV being released MK IIIs can be had *really* inexpensively. A LGS has one for something like $240 right now.

Can anyone comment on the MK III takedown issue? People talk about it being a real pain. And what is peoples' experiences with how the MK IIIs do with different ammo?

Thx.

OR

 

[Marshwheeling]

At best, it can be fiddly to take down. It would go easier if I had to do it often enough to remember the drill, but as it is, I won't attempt it without the manual in front of me.

Nevertheless, I love the gun. It is easy to shoot well, and I shoot it better than anything else I own.

The takedown has not troubled me enough to make any of the mods to make it easier.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I've been shooting Mark III pistols for several years and have no interest in a IV. There are a ton of vids on the Net about field stripping that will walk you right through it. Don't fret over it. The good ole boy in the below vid is as good as any and he ain't no expert.

This one is my favorite rimfire pistol.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7nDefvB1Io[/ame]

 

[arjay]

I had one for a number of years and it wasn't picky about ammo,though it shot it's tightest groups with cci sv.I replaced the mag disconnect with an after market hammer bushing which simplified reassembly.The trigger wasn't the greatest so that and the sear were replaced with VQ parts.The only flaw the gun really had was the factory grip not being tight enough against the hammer pin which would let it back out just enough to bind the hammer and tie up the gun.I still have a couple of mark Is and I think those triggers are better than a mark III trigger.At that price I'd grab one and start shooting.All the mods I did (if you do them) including after market grips only cost about $100
All the mods I did I blame on rimfire central
Lots of good info on 22s there

 

[CajunBass]

I've owned a couple of Mk III's, and never understood all the hoopla over the takedown "problem." Just read and follow the directions. It also doesn't hurt to practice it.

But on the other hand, another reason I never had any problem with it is that I just never really did it all that often. A can of Gunscrubber, a couple of Q-tips, and a few drops of oil here and there were about all I ever used for routine cleaning.

 

[DWalt]

After you have performed the Ruger takedown a time or two (doing it the right way, according to instructions), there's not much to it. The main thing to remember is that the hammer must be down during disassembly and reassembly. However, unless you shoot a great deal, it's not really necessary to disassemble it very often. I have an earlier Standard Model from ca. 1955, and it is my favorite .22 pistol. And it still looks (almost) like new. There's something about the earlier SMs that just isn't there with the later Marks. They look and feel much the same, but there is an intangible but definite difference. There are many off-the-shelf improvements you can add, but I have never felt the need for any.

 

[cmansguns]

I bought a Mark III brand new in 2012 to replace my 1986 slab-side Buckmark that was very finiky about ammo plus extra magazines were impossible to find and the aftermarket replacements would load and fire OK but would NOT lock open on last round.

The Mark III immediately became the family favorite with sons, daughters and wife alike for training, plinking and all around plain fun.

When it was brand new the take-down was really troublesome for me, even with the Manual. Just the step to pull out the back strap lever was tough, and the rest was equally troublesome in that I felt I had to have precision micrometers and special tools and skills to get it back together. With many rounds downrange and my solution of not taking it apart for routine cleaning (from the muzzle) little lube jobs on exposed points, I found after a year or so that the whole takedown was much easier because of wearing in I suppose, but it was simply no longer the aggravating issues when new.

Sold the Buckmark and never looked back.

 

[DWalt]

I nearly bought a Browning Buckmark at a pretty good price ($200) a few months back, but remembered reading so many unflattering things about them, I decided to pass. But I really wish I had one of my old Colt Woodsmans back. I once had two of them, which I foolishly sold.

 

[catadjuster]

I have the Buckmark, the Mark III and the Standard model Ruger. The Buckmark we have is not picky at all with ammo and it is the go to gun when teaching a new shooter. I got a good deal on the Mark III as I bundled it with a High Standard that I really wanted.

The trigger on our Buckmark is quite superior to the stock Mark III trigger and it really bugged me. So I got the VQ parts and get rid of the magazine disconnect and replaced the sear parts which has improved the trigger quite a bit. Still not up to the Buckmark trigger though.

However, the standard model Ruger has an outstanding trigger. I have heard that some people don't like the two stage trigger, but it was my first handgun when I was 14 or so and I had nothing to compare it to at the time. So yeah .. I got spoiled right out of the box.

 

[DWalt]

My SM trigger is not that great, but I've gotten used to it. It's not bad enough for me to want to change it in any way.

 

[gnystrom]

I have two MKIII's. One has all Volquartsen insides and the othr has a full VQ 22/45 alloy frame. Between the two they have hundreds of thousands or founds fired by me and my students. Takedown videos are available and helpful.
My thirteen year old grandson took almost ten minutes to learn the proper fieldstrip procedure.

 

[Florida Guy]

I prefer the MK II due to the fact there is no loaded chamber indicator (left side of barrel). Those have been known to cause problems such as failure to eject. A lot of folks just disable them, and it seems to help.
So, that said, I have a MK II competition target (slabside), one 22/45 Lite MK III, a Volquartsen Custom based on MK III frame, and a 22/45 Lite MK IV, and Hunter MK IV.
Breakdown on the MK IV is incredibly simple and fast. It has a much harder trigger pull than my MK II, and I've added the Volquartsen accurizing kit (over $100) which remedies a couple of nits with the gun, to both the MK III Lite, and MK IV Hunter.
You can find really good deals on older Rugers now, as many prefer the easier takedown. In reality, you rarely have to break it down. Just clean the barrel and anything you can reach without a breakdown. I've read of shooter's going years without a breakdown necessary. You'll know when you need it, as performance will deteriate after many thousands of rounds.
Watch the video and you'll eventually get it back together. The first time is the hardest and most frustrating. I've only done it once or twice, so not a big deal.
Pics:
Top left: 22/45 Lite MK III
Top right: 22/45 Lite MK IV
Bottom left: Volquartsen Custom MK III
Bottom right: Hunter MK IV
Far right: Competition Target MK II

 

[sodacan]

I had a MK III. Takedown was (and is) a pain. I disassembled it a couple of times. That was enough for me. I fired thousands of rounds through it and only cleaned the bore and whatever parts I could get to without taking it apart. Ran like a charm until the day I sold it. Great pistol. Don't clean it and you'll enjoy it a lot more.

 

[S&WIowegan]

Ruger cleaning

I've been shooting Ruger 22 autos since 1964 when I bought a used Ruger Standard made sometime in the 1950s. The gun is still my varmint gun and has never been disassembled. Get a Boresnake and a tooth brush and clean what you can reach. Disassembly is highly over-rated and a pain.

 

[Wee Hooker]

I like having a .22 semi pistol in the stable because, not only is it fun, I think it's a great training tool to help identify and eliminate flinching.

I have a Browning Buckmark and, although it pains me to say it because I have a deep love and loyalty to Browning (and S&W ) - I really dislike the Buckmark. Mine is incredibly picky with ammo.

With the Ruger MK IV being released MK IIIs can be had *really* inexpensively. A LGS has one for something like $240 right now.

Can anyone comment on the MK III takedown issue? People talk about it being a real pain. And what is peoples' experiences with how the MK IIIs do with different ammo?

Thx.

OR

I'll bite. I have 7 MK II/III/IV's so know a bit about this.
The takedown issue (IMHO) is way over blown. To take it down /put it together, you just need to understand where the hammer and strut are/need to be. There are plenty of Utube vids on how to figure that out.
The problem arises: a) when people try to clean the gun once a year without reference , b) don't have a clue where the hammer/strut is in the process, c) all of the above.

The other thing to note is that a Ruger MK II/III/IV should only need to be taken apart every 7500K rounds or so. Between that, just spray her down with some gun scrubber and finish a couple drops of lube to the bolt here and there. Taking the gun apart really doesn't get you to much more than can be cleaned via this method.

 

[C J]

I love my Buckmark. It shoots great and has no trouble with ammo it's designed to use (subsonic isn't a good idea). I taught my wife to shoot with that pistol.

But I would trade it in a heartbeat for the right MkII. There isn't a lot of difference between it and the MkIII when it comes to the way they shoot. A MkII with a 10" barrel and a competition trigger is the most accurate pistol I've ever shot. It's crazy accurate out to about 60 yards. It shoots better than a lot of .22 rifles I've seen.

 

[otisrush]

Wow - excellent perspectives. It's kind of why I asked: One of the things I've learned is that the internet emboldens some to amplify their voices and make them think they're experts.

"OMG - breaking down a MK III is absolutely *HORRIFIC*. I mean - defusing a nuclear bomb is much much MUCH easier than breaking down that bad MK III. You're an absolute fool to buy one!"



Thanks folks!

 

[Maple Trapper]

I have a MkII Slabside Target (looks like a twin to the bottom far right pic a few posts up). The first time I took it apart it took me an hour or so to get it back together. The second time took about 6-7 minutes. I never got faster than that because I only take it down every 3-4 years.

 

[OLDSTER]

MKIII

This MKIII is over 10 years old with many thousands of rounds of enjoyment, and a few little goodies added over the years. In more than 50 years of owning and enjoying Ruger MKI-MKIIIs, I've stripped ( field strip and detail strip) them so many times that is no issue at all. Get one and enjoy it.

 

[joeintexas]

Not to hijack this thread but any opinions on the MK1? Would the 3 or 4 be a better option? Thanks for any info on this.