Ever seen a worn-out Ruger MkII?


PDA






MatthewVanitas
September 26, 2006, 02:27 AM
Out of curiousity, what does it take to render a Ruger MkII unusable through typical use?

Not counting abuse (like the MkII submerged for several years, featured in their catalog), but just lots and lots of shooting.

Presumably, you need to replace some springs, extractor, etc. from time to time, but has anyone seen a MkII with a shot-our bore, rattly bolt, etc?

I'm thinking of spending a little cash to upgrade my MkII, and am just curious as to whether it's a 75-year gun, a 150-year gun, or what.

-MV

If you enjoyed reading about "Ever seen a worn-out Ruger MkII?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jlh26oo
September 26, 2006, 03:05 AM
Wow, so if it's a 150 year gun it's a go- but if it's going to fall apart in a mere 75 years, what's the point?


I'm sure they'll last man. Anything that gives you can replace. Either that or your grandkids can just buy a new MkVI when it happens lol. But no, don't guess I've seen any with loose bolts, I guess you could eventually shoot out the barrel.

MatthewVanitas
September 26, 2006, 03:07 AM
Wow, so if it's a 150 year gun it's a go- but if it's going to fall apart in a mere 75 years, what's the point?


Just need to make sure I get my money's worth out of it (grin)...

jlh26oo
September 26, 2006, 03:19 AM
lol understood. Upgrade away!

denfoote
September 26, 2006, 05:35 AM
No, but I'm working on it!!

Onmilo
September 26, 2006, 10:17 AM
I don't believe you can wear out the bore on a rimfire by shooting.
You can bulge them and overclean them but they don't go bad from shooting.

This applies to regular shooting guns, not a Match grade specific target rifle, gads those guys claim a bore of any caliber is worthless after 5000 shots.

Ruger pistols are actually overbuilt for the caliber.
Except for springs, one extractor, couple sets of broken grips, and a broken magazine catch I don't generally see them come in for repair.

I have seen my fair share of the Ruger auto pistols come in to have me reassemble them after the owner field stripped them or completely diassembled them and couldn't get them back together.

RandomMan
September 26, 2006, 02:30 PM
Matthew, I've never seen one worn out before, but I'm interested now. Perhaps you'd like some help wearing it out? Then you can rebuild it...internal suppressor perhaps? :what:

-Rob

TimboKhan
September 26, 2006, 03:09 PM
Frankly, I don't care if any of my guns are "150 year guns". My future relatives can pound sand. They apparently couldn't be bothered to keep me alive with their fancy technology and nano-parts, so I could care less if they enjoy my fine array of .22's. I am only concerned about me, so I want all of my guns to become unreliable at the literal second of my death. I also plan on having incendiary charges rigged to any other valuables, so as to deprive them of having any of my cool stuff. That will teach them.

Seriously though, a MkII should be a lifetime gun. Thinking it through, I just can't see how it could be anything but, especially considering good care. I have a .22 rifle that is probably 95 years old at this point that hasn't recieved a particularly large amount of TLC from it's previous, and it still functions and fires just fine, and I have a .38 thats probably close to 75 years old that works like brand new. If you are firing 100,000 rounds a year or something through it, it might be a different story, but given that that is fairly unlikely, the gun will outlast you by a large margin.

Vern Humphrey
September 26, 2006, 04:00 PM
With normal use, I think it would be impossible to wear out a Ruger MKII in several lifetimes. As I recall, Charles Askins had a Colt Woodsman that he had put something like a quarter of a million rounds through, and he sent it to Colt to be checked out -- and they sent it back, saying no noticeable wear.

ndh87
September 26, 2006, 04:12 PM
i mangaed to wear out the action on my marlin model 60, took about 8 or 10 years and probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 250,000 to 500,000 rounds(thats just a guess, i always used to shoot at least a 500 ct. brick every time i shot) the action wont feed a new round and jams, but if you load one at a time it is still dead accurate.

MatthewVanitas
September 26, 2006, 05:32 PM
@ vern:

As I recall, Charles Askins had a Colt Woodsman that he had put something like a quarter of a million rounds through, and he sent it to Colt to be checked out -- and they sent it back, saying no noticeable wear.

And the Woodsman is a far more intricate and fragile piece of gear than the MkII, right? The tubular steel receiver seems pretty failsafe compared to the open designs.


mangaed to wear out the action on my marlin model 60, took about 8 or 10 years and probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 250,000 to 500,000 rounds

Wow, I just asked that same question on the rifle board. What specifically conked out on it? Did you just wear down some internal parts, or did you actually erode the receiver to unusability? Gut reaction, I'd imagine that something on your bolt is worn or burred, or perhaps your lifting lever if it's mainly a feeding problem. That's why I make sure to buy Marlins with the wire ejector, rather than the earlier ones where the ejector is carved into the feed throat. I've heard that the feed-throat solid ones eventually wear down.

-MV

El Tejon
September 26, 2006, 05:42 PM
When I was rangemaster of the Indiana University indoor range, the rifle & pistol team had two MKIs that we sent off to be refit. They were purchased circa 1978 and I sent them off in '91. Do not know the number of rounds.

However, they were 2 of 10. Pistols came back like new.:)

Carl N. Brown
September 26, 2006, 05:53 PM
wear out the action on my marlin model 60

ndh87 probably just wore out the aluminum feed throat.

I have owned Marlin M99 -- M60 auto rifles since 1965 and
have had to replace feed throats on one that I wore
out and one I bought used at a pawn shop. It takes
thousands of rounds to wear one out, but once the
hard chrome is worn through to the aluminum, the
aluminum goes quickly. Also, on the early models the
ejector was part of the feed throat and they get worn
eventually. The newer production the ejector is a leg
of the cartridge lifter spring (hard steel) and does not
wear out.

Marlin Service Division and Numrich Arms Gun Parts Corp.
have the feed throats in stock. It's like getting a new gun
for about ten bucks.

Vern Humphrey
September 26, 2006, 05:53 PM
And the Woodsman is a far more intricate and fragile piece of gear than the MkII, right? The tubular steel receiver seems pretty failsafe compared to the open designs.

When I handle the Holy Grail, my 1938 Woodsman, and then pick up my Ruger MK II, the Ruger feels heavy as lead. It's much more robust than the Colt.

I expect that if someone gave me all the ammo I could shoot, and I tried to wear that Ruger out, my finger would fall off before the gun gave out.

Carl N. Brown
September 26, 2006, 05:55 PM
Oh, I have only been shooting my MkII since the mid 1980s
and after twenty thousand rounds there appears to be some
polishing of the parts going own. If it breaks after 75 years
I'll really be upset.

Desertscout
September 26, 2006, 08:32 PM
Well, I actually did wear one one out...mostly. But not from "normal" wear and use.
When I was stationed in CA, my wife and I used to go out and shoot 1-2,000 rounds nearly every weekend. NEVER less than a thousand. Let's just say we shot a minimum of 1k a week for nearly 9 years. Sometimes we shot more but rarely less. That would be around 468,000 rounds and that's probably not far from being accurate. The gun still shot fine but the trigger was getting a little iffy and the bolt wouldn't stay locked back. I sent it back to Ruger and they went though it and replaced pretty much everything in it. I also had it re-blued and had them install a target trigger in it. The total for everything was around $45 + shipping IIRC.
I still have it and it still shoots like a champ.

History Prof
September 26, 2006, 08:36 PM
Can't speak for the MkII, but I have a MkI that my dad bought new in the mid 1970s. First my mom and dad used it for target practice, then it made the rounds between two of my older brothers and one of my older sisters, then to me (as the "spoiled" youngest, I got to keep it :D ). It has since been through my daughter's hands, but she now prefers the 9MM my dad left her when he passed. It has a few scratches from careless handling, but otherwise looks brand new.

45shooter
September 26, 2006, 09:01 PM
You can't wear out a Ruger 22.
When I was younger I did wear out a 22lr pistol.
It was a chrome finished Jenning 22 with wood grip.
It was the only gun I owned at the time and I used to fire a brick of ammo or more every month. I guess I fired over 25,000 round in about 5 years. The pistol was very reliable and was pretty accurate in the beginning but the accuracy got worse as time went by. It started to have problem feeding during the last few thousand rounds and suddenly it wouldn't feed more than three or four rounds in a row. While cleaning it I found a crack on the slide just below the ejection port on the inside. It was about 1/2" long and it ran from the rail to the ejection port.

One day I took the firing pin out and file it down to it wouldn't reach the cartridge and then threw it in the canal by the house. I should have kept it and turned it in during one of those gun buy back program... I could have gotten $50 for it which was what I paid:D

bakert
September 27, 2006, 12:00 AM
This Mark 11 Target made about 1988 I know for sure has had two and possibly three owners before me. I did have to replace the recoil spring unit and exractor but it's still going strong and more accurate than I can shoot.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f241/brumanj/Picture062.jpg

Sunray
September 27, 2006, 12:19 AM
"...couldn't be bothered to keep me alive with their fancy technology and nano-parts..." Geez, TimboKhan, if you're this bitter now, imagine what you'll be like in 150 years. Told my brother to build me a pyramid, put me on my couch and roll me and my stuff into it. Told him it'd save a lot of familial bickering. I haven't seen much building going on though. He always puts everything off to the very last second. I also told him that if he lets our idiot government get my firearms, he and the niece and nephew will be haunted forever. Silly twit isn't a shooter and has no idea how much money I have invested in firearms. He'd see my 1903A4 as just an old gun.

HSMITH
September 27, 2006, 12:28 AM
I haven't seen a Mark 1, 2 or 3 yet that runs good enough to worry about wearing it out. Sorry, but I just don't like them after the last 3 I bought, the ones my shooting buddies have confirm my thoughts also, to me at least. I put a LOT of money in a Govt Mk-II and it never would run more than a couple hundred rounds between jams, the others were worse. I REALLY wanted to make it work out too, had big plans for a 22-45..........

GREAT gun for a casual plinker or a bullseye type shooter, they just didn't work out for me and what I expect of a 22.

I have worn out a Marlin M60 too, a brick a week average for the first 8 years or so and probably 5000 since then, however many rounds that ends up being..... Mine still shoots under 1.5" at 100 yards with good ammo, but the bolt closes on the previously fired case every 2-5 rounds. Clean it up to Marine inspection clean and it will run 20-40 rounds without a hitch, but after that the jams start and within 200 rounds it is back to the 2-5 rounds between jams. You would think that $69 would buy a better gun........

My Buckmark has almost 100K rounds through it, it still shoots great and runs great. The trigger, non-adjustable version, is fantastic now LOL. That Buckmark has sold at least 15 more for Browning, I don't know of anyone that has shot it that didn't say they would like to have one. I add oil, easier than changing the oil, every time I shoot it whether it needs it or not. I have cleaned it a total of 5 times max, it doesn't seem to help anything. Cleaning the bore is a no-no, it takes a hundred rounds for it to settle in again. It shoots OK with a clean bore, but it shoots great dirty. I will do a lot of stupid things, but I won't argue with what is proven to work time and again.

TimboKhan
September 27, 2006, 12:28 AM
Lol... Well, I don't know how old you are, but if you die before me, I guarantee that your '03 will have a loving, caring, appreciative home in my hands. Hell, I will even build you a pyramid. A small, shoddily crafted pyramid, but it's better than what your bro has done thus far!

MatthewVanitas
September 27, 2006, 12:57 AM
@ HSmith: It really seems to be luck of the draw. I've heard the exact opposite on Buckmarks and Rugers as well. At the UT campus range, the Buckmark was finicky for bit, went down hard, and now still won't run right even with new springs and extractor.

The Ruger MkIIs run great, you just need to scoop the gunk out of the extractory bits with a dental pick every few hundred rounds.

To the best of my knowledge, nobody has cleaned the S&W 22a in about six months, and it's going strong despite being our most heavily used gun. The UT club is a great testing ground for gun gear: if it can be broken, an undergrad will break it.

They'd just about given up on gumming up the S&W 22a, until someone discovered that the mag floorplates break if you drop them. One last week, one this week, now we're ordering more from CDNN.


Okay, Rugers are as durable as anything has any business being, outstanding. Now I can also fire my Glenfield 75C (wire extractor) with solid brickfuls and not worry about it.

-MV

atblis
September 27, 2006, 01:42 AM
Don't think I ever will either.

aaronrkelly
September 27, 2006, 02:05 AM
I dont know about a Ruger Mark II.....


but heres a Ruger Mark I that I picked up recently, near as I can tell Im the third owner. First owner put a Clark trigger in the gun and did some trigger work to it. Second owner did nothing but shoot it. Its had LOTS, LOTS and LOTS of shooting. Fit and function are just the same as my new 22/45 - I cant see anything thats loose or excessively worn.

It was purchased sometime in 1975 - makes it 31 years old.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v67/aaronrkelly/All%20Guns/rugermark1.jpg

hexidismal
September 27, 2006, 02:16 AM
This thread kind of makes me wish I had just bought a used MKII instead of the U22 Neos I picked new recently. Not that there's anything wrong with the Neos so far, and I just ordered some optics for the built on top rail. I just wonder if it'll hold up as tough and solid as a ruger.

redneckdan
September 27, 2006, 12:37 PM
the MTU club has an MK that is starting to split cases. The chamber is not within spec. We go through about 3-4k rounds a semester/ per weapon, this weapon has been with the club since early 81. Roughly 200,000 rounds.

TimboKhan
September 27, 2006, 01:06 PM
This thread kind of makes me wish I had just bought a used MKII instead of the U22 Neos

Well, I for one am interested in owning as many .22 pistols as I can get my hands on, and while my favorite, by a large margin, is the MkII, I would love to own a NEOS. I would also like to get my paws on Olympic Arms version of the Whitney Wolverine.

Desertscout
September 27, 2006, 01:11 PM
If you had a Ruger that chronically malfunctioned, you should have kept it. It was a collector's item. Out of the 4 that I have owned and probably close to a million rounds that I have put through them, I have yet to experience my first malfunction.
The closest that I can remember is once when stationed in Barstow, CA, with the gun that I mentioned in my earlier post, when the extractor broke. We had been shooting all day and late in the day I noticed that the emptys weren't being thrown nearly as far away as they usually were although it still functioned normally. Upon inspection that night, I found that the extractor had broken.

MatthewVanitas
September 27, 2006, 02:26 PM
@ redneckdan: MTU gets a ton of traffic from what you say, so I imagine you're an even better proving ground than we. Do you think that somebody messed up the chamber through improper cleaning, or was it always out of spec but just became problematic recently?

IRT Neos: I was actually thinking about nominating a Neos as our next club pistol, as we already have Buckmark, SW22a, SW 63, Single Six, MkII, etc. However, seeing how hard we are on pistols, I'm thinking I'll nominate a MkIII 22/45. Folks like the Rugers, and it's just different enough to give us a little variety. I don't like the MkIII "improvements", but I don't think they make a difference in a club setting. I do like the new 22/45 grip more than the old soap-dish one, and it should be great for small-handed shooters.

-MV

Lone Star
September 27, 2006, 03:09 PM
In the Nov/Dec/, 1980 issue of, "American Handgunner," I published an article on the MKI, that being the form then made.

Curious to see how well one would endure, I asked Ruger and sources in Europe and in South Africa how long guns had lasted in their experience. At that time, South Africa was under a UN arms embargo, but guns did get through. However,some were shot more than usual, because some people had trouble getting new ones, and clubs owned guns that were used by members before buying their own. In Europe, club guns also got enormous amounts of shooting. Some had fired hundreds of thousands of rounds. One fellow quipped that they were "cleaned occasionally, if someone feels moved to do so." Yet, they worked.

Ruger's then-Export Director, the late Steve Vogel, told me that he knew of Ruger Standard and Mk. I autos that had fired astonishing amounts of ammunition, and were still in use. I believe he said that one gun in Europe had fired a full million rounds! (He didn't say if it had ever had small parts replaced.)

I don't shoot my own MK II nearly enough to worry about it.

Lone Star

TimboKhan
September 27, 2006, 03:10 PM
well, having never shot a NEOS, I can't add anything useful in terms of their function, reliability, etc.. But I have held a couple and I thought they were pretty comfy. MkII will likely always be my favorite .22 for both functional and sentimental reasons, but that NEOS is pretty cool. Plus, I like the fact that you can buy a carbine kit for the NEOS. It's not as if I need another .22 rifle, but it is just so darn cool. To be honest, I can't say that I have ever been displeased with a .22 pistol. In addition to my 2 MkII's (which I definitly favor over the MkIII's), I also own a Buckmark Hunter, and it is pleasant and enjoyable to shoot.

CWL
September 27, 2006, 05:41 PM
Wear out? I'll have to check for any signs of wear next time I clean my MKII, then again, I've never cleaned it more than a few sprays of brake cleaner and a boresnake since I bought mine 7 years ago...

Dienekes
September 28, 2006, 12:26 AM
We have had about five of them in the family, all but one bought used. The one I use most was a seventies model bought in "poor" condition for $59. It looked awfully rough but fired a full box of ammo perfectly the first time I tried it. Pretty much pitted overall but the bore and and mechanical function were okay. Did some draw filing to take out the worst of the pits, had a gunsmith bead blast it and throw it in the bluing tank.

I replaced the banged up sights, all springs, and the extractor on principle. Did a trigger job which turned out nicely and added a Volquartsen steel trigger for a bonus (felt nicer than the stock aluminum one). The original hard rubber grips were okay so kept them.

It is my ugliest .22 pistol and also the one I shoot best. Lately I have noticed that the stamped "U" shaped ejector is a little loose on its rivet but like a timex it keeps right on ticking.

I have seen guide rod/recoil spring assemblies break off parts but it doesn't seem to stop them--they just keep working.

Even better, spare parts are dirt cheap--so no reason not to have a full set of "just in case" parts on hand.

panzermk2
September 28, 2006, 01:18 AM
My grandmas from the farm in Iowa bought when they first came out. It spent most of its life in the barn or on the fergy. I have never had it fail unless caused by ammo, meaning round didnot go bang when also loaded into bolt action 22 older then the MKII

TimboKhan
September 28, 2006, 01:42 AM
I come from a John Deere family, so I am required to respond to this:

It spent most of its life in the barn or on the fergy

I bet the Fergy broke down more than the gun.

Also, the MkII runs like a Deere.

Did you have to use the MkII to put down the Fergy?

I could go on and on and on.....:neener:

foghornl
September 28, 2006, 01:12 PM
Oldest brother has a Mk I that he bought in 1968 or so.

Says he can still sit on his front porch and write his initials on your doorknob with it.

Doesn't know how may rounds have gone through it. Say he has actually worn out a couple of magazines, though.

5Wire
September 28, 2006, 04:56 PM
Not a Mark II but I've been trying to wear out this Ruger Standard Pistol since 1964 ($37.50). Used, abused for tens of thousands of rounds and it still shoots reliably and accurately. Tigerwood grips are only a few years younger. Made roughly using Dremel round burr tool. I'm on my third magazine.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y286/5Wire/RugerStandard.jpg

MatthewVanitas
September 28, 2006, 05:19 PM
@5Wire: So... do you feel you're close to getting your money's worth out of it yet? $37.50 was a lot of money back then, or so I'm told.


I'm getting the other UTRPC members on board to vote to buy a MKIII 22/45 for the range's next gun. I don't like the mag-disconnect or the chamber indicator, but neither is a dealbreaker for a range gun. And I admit, the new 22/45 grip is far better than the previous 22/45.

This has been an awesome thread.

-MV

5Wire
September 28, 2006, 05:36 PM
@5Wire: So... do you feel you're close to getting your money's worth out of it yet? $37.50 was a lot of money back then, or so I'm told.I'm definitely closing in on it.:D Let's see, $37.50 over 42 years. About $0.90 a year. Now, $37.50 would be $245.86 in today's dollars (a bargain).

No complaints but I did start in on a Mark II a couple years ago.

panzermk2
September 29, 2006, 02:03 AM
I come from a John Deere family, so I am required to respond to this:
Quote:
It spent most of its life in the barn or on the fergy

I bet the Fergy broke down more than the gun.

Also, the MkII runs like a Deere.

Did you have to use the MkII to put down the Fergy?

Do you know why John Deereís are green? So their embarrassed owners can hide them in the field!

How can you tell a John Deere owner? Heís the one who keeps turning the ignition key on the fergy and canít figure out why it wonít start!

Why are IH farmalls red? So you canít see the rust!

I was born and raised in Chicago but spent my summers at the farm. Not many city boys know what a fergy is let alone start it. AND yes it had a homemade front loader on it.

So TimboKhan clue these other guys in about starting a fergy so they get the joke, and yes it's still sitting out there with an old coffee can over the stack and starts everytime IF you know the trick

panzermk2
September 29, 2006, 02:05 AM
Back on topic

Many a Squirrel ended up in the stew pot because of that MKII

If you enjoyed reading about "Ever seen a worn-out Ruger MkII?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!