Ruger MKIII Target - a couple questions.

[rockquarry]

Just a follow-up comment. Whatever else you do, be sure to upgrade to the Ruger grips shown in posts 12 and 19. You can feel the difference.

I've never found the standard stocks to be lacking in any way on a Mark I that I've been shooting for almost fifty years, or on a Mark II that I bought more than thirty years ago. But it's good that we have choices.

 

[Krogen]

We're enablers, not some gunaholic support group!

Ah hahahaha....

That could be a banner on the home page!

 

[Rammer Jammer]

The OP got a great gun at an even better price. The LCI on my MKIII has gotten gummed up with residue but never caused functional issues.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

If you are looking to spend some money-why don't you send it off and get it threaded for a silencer. Simple operation of setting the sight back, having it threaded and get a protector put on. One of the few things one can do to these that will actually enhance resale value.

 

[sipowicz]

I’ve got my eye on this MKIII at the LGS comes with box and 4 mags. No factory grips has these aluminum ones. I can get it for $350. Anyone care to talk me down from the ledge … ?

Me. If you saw how easy a Mark 1V is to field strip you’d kick in an extra C note.

 

[Imissedagain]

Took the LCI off the new Sig P238 HD after a few mags fired as it's a carry gun.
Forgot that the MKIV SS Target even had one.
At some point will get some extended range time with it and the old 17-4.
Drilled and tapped it and will do the same with the 63-3
Optics and irons at 50-100yds.

The 17-4 stays in South Florida and
the MKIV and 63-3 for the kids in the Rockies in a few years.

 

[PALADIN85020]

I have 'em all - the early standards in several variations, a couple of Mark I targets, several Mark IIs including the Government Target, one Mark III I hate, and one Mark IV blued target.

I loved the Mark IIs. Everything you need and nothing you don't.

The Mark IIIs were the answer to nothing - they just fouled up the disassembly/assembly routine unbelievably, had a magazine safety that prevented you from using it as a single loader if you had to, and the stupid loaded chamber indicator that was just one thing more that had the potential to foul up and go wrong. I think the gun was designed by lawyers.

In order of my preference:

Mark II.
Mark IV.
Ruger standard and Mark I target models.
The horrible Mark III.

Here are just a few of my Ruger .22s -

John

Ruger Standard (Red eagle 1st full year of production)


Ruger Mark I (bull barrel target model) - I shot this one in competition for years.


Ruger Mark II (Government Target)


THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK (Mark III - BIG mistake)

Ruger Mark IV (Target model) - great takedown procedure.

 

[OLDSTER]

The MKII Govt. Target Models are special. And the Standards are indeed. This Standard I bought some years ago "new-old-stock unfired.

 

[rockquarry]

Can anyone see any accuracy difference between the Gov't. Model and the standard bull barrel guns? I've shot both for many years unmolested straight-out-of-the-box bullseye style at 25 yards; the shorter barreled gun (MK I) will stay with the Gov't Model (MK II) as for accuracy. I occasionally shoot these at 50 yards but not recently and can't recall any possible differences at that distance.

 

[target tech]

This is a close up of a lci delete. I had it disabled for years before someone came out with a steel blank to fill the slot. This pic isn't quite up to date, this gun has a Leopould delta point on it now. There isn't much left that I can do to this thing, full Volquartsen internals and rear sight, Majestic arms speed take down kit, grips, extended saftey and sling shot mod. The sling shot mod allows you to pull the bolt back and release it after you put a fresh mag in. For some reason you can't do that with stock 22/45s. These things are as bad as 10/22s for aftermarket.

 

[Empe]

$350 ??---BUY IT !!

My thoughts exactly .

 

[OLDSTER]

Can anyone see any accuracy difference between the Gov't. Model and the standard bull barrel guns? I've shot both for many years unmolested straight-out-of-the-box bullseye style at 25 yards; the shorter barreled gun (MK I) will stay with the Gov't Model (MK II) as for accuracy. I occasionally shoot these at 50 yards but not recently and can't recall any possible differences at that distance.

No difference. It's called "marketing".

 

[Empe]

Can anyone see any accuracy difference between the Gov't. Model and the standard bull barrel guns? I've shot both for many years unmolested straight-out-of-the-box bullseye style at 25 yards; the shorter barreled gun (MK I) will stay with the Gov't Model (MK II) as for accuracy. I occasionally shoot these at 50 yards but not recently and can't recall any possible differences at that distance.

The extra 1.5" of barrel length between the two guns will make no difference in accuracy . The longer sighting radius of the longer barrel may help if shooting iron sights.
I have a MK II Competition Target with a 6 7/8" barrel as well as a MK III with the 5.5" barrel and there's no difference accuracy wise between these particular two.

 

[Empe]

Me. If you saw how easy a Mark 1V is to field strip you’d kick in an extra C note.

I own a MK IV and yes it's certainly much easier to take apart and reassemble than the MK II or III models however some of us don't find the disassembly/ reassembly process of the older models all that difficult.
I do like my MK IV but if I had to choose without question the choice would either one of my MK II's .

 

[rockquarry]

The extra 1.5" of barrel length between the two guns will make no difference in accuracy . The longer sighting radius of the longer barrel may help if shooting iron sights.
I have a MK II Competition Target with a 6 7/8" barrel as well as a MK III with the 5.5" barrel and there's no difference accuracy wise between these particular two.

I should have mentioned I use only the factory open sights. Can't see any point in putting any sort of optical sight on a handgun unless eye problems dictate such a need.

 

[DWalt]

Some years ago I got a great buy on an early 1950s standard model which appeared nearly unfired. I quickly found out why the first time I used it. The sights were very far off, at least a foot low and a foot right at 25 yards. I filed down the front sight and moved the rear sight to the left. That was a very difficult job as it took some serious pounding with a hammer to move it. I didn’t think it was going to budge, like it was welded into the dovetail. It now shoots to POA. My main dislike is the butt magazine release. Too small. I bought a pair of Mec-Gar magazines for it, they work fine. It had only one old-style magazine that came with it

 

[oink]

I don't get the issue with the LCI. I don't notice it. It doesn't bother me. I love the way the IV field strips. No, the earlier models aren't really that difficult. But the IV is just so darn easy.

At one time, (I guess when there was some patent issues), Volquartsen was buying the Rugers for the grip frames and then selling off the target barrels (the numbered part of the gun) dirt cheap. I bought one and now I have one barrel set up for irons and the other set up for red dot. Just push a button to switch. My gun is stainless but the second barrel is blue, so sometimes I have a pinto. I think I have a pic somewhere, hmmm, well maybe not.

 

[Screwball]

My dad gave me his stainless MK3 Target, which I love. Just a good pistol. But I saw that movie Assassins, and wanted to toss my .22 can on it.

Got a second upper…

Was told it was stainless from the GunBroker seller, but when I picked it up at the FFL, found out it was blued and someone took a wire wheel to it. After it was shortened, I sent it to CCR to get it plated…

I pulled the LCI on both uppers. Personally, I find them obnoxious… but more of an issue when cleaning. It creates sharp edges that do not need to be there.

I also redid the grip with Volquartsen parts. Trigger is a dream to shoot, and the magazine disconnect was removed doing so. Not having to yank/insert the magazine makes disassembly extremely simple.

 

[Mike0251]

My Mark II slab side competition with scope. It's a tack driver!

 

[BB57]

I have a MK 1 678 Target, a MK II 512 Target, and a MK II Government.

I’ve never been a fan of the Mk III:

- The loaded chamber indicator has caused some reliability issues for some shooters and ammo types; and

- The magazine safety largely defeats the purpose of the 1911 style magazine release as it prevent the magazine from dropping out of the magazine well. Unless you remove it, reloads are no faster than with an extended heel magazine release.

But if the LCI isn’t a problem, don’t bother removing it. If it is a problem it’s not expensive to replace it with a filler block.

Similarly, if the magazine safety is annoying for you, it’s a 20 minute job to remove it.

—-

I like the 6 7/8” tapered barrel on my Mark I best in terms of balance and handling, and the lack of a last round bolt hold open device isn’t a big deal.

However, I like the overall performance of the Government model. It comes close to shooting with my S&W 41s and my High Standard Victors.