Is there any pistol worse to reassemble than a Ruger MKII


November 11, 2006, 09:16 PM
After much frustration, and a great deal of help from THR members in a previous thread, the question comes to there any worse pistol to reassemble than a Ruger MKII ?

If you enjoyed reading about "Is there any pistol worse to reassemble than a Ruger MKII" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
November 11, 2006, 09:20 PM
The Mk1? They sure didn't make it easy did they.

November 11, 2006, 09:30 PM
It's not difficult once you get the hang of it. :)

November 11, 2006, 09:30 PM
Yes, a Ruger Mark III. The magazine disconnect makes it just that much harder.

November 11, 2006, 09:32 PM
It absolutely made a fool out of me last night. Thanks again Kruzr.

November 11, 2006, 09:43 PM
All you have to do is follow the manual TO THE LETTER the first few times, after that it's pretty easy.

Separating the upper and lower is a little stiff the first few times; a rubber mallet is good for that. I'd avoid separating them too much though; extra hassle, and over decades will loosen the fit.

I think that MkII difficulty, like AR-15 unreliability, is much overrated.


History Prof
November 11, 2006, 09:57 PM
The Mk1? They sure didn't make it easy did they.Yup. I've never had a MkII, but having read your other thread, the problem is identical. The first time I played with my MkI about 25 years ago, I didn't have the internet to help me. Took me about 3 hours to figure out that STOOPID but SIMPLE problem. Yea, I probably could have read the manual, but I was only 14 and 14 year olds think they know everything....:neener:

November 11, 2006, 11:23 PM
It is not a gun that you can figure out as you go along. This is where reading directions comes in awfully handy, and I am not saying that sarcastically. I can field strip and reassemble a MkII pretty quick these days, but there is a certain learning curve involved, and if you don't follow the directions exactly while your learning, your never gonna learn.

November 11, 2006, 11:55 PM
Once someone showed me how to push the hammer ALL the forward by giving it a little push, and how there needs to be that little bit of resistance when putting the housing all the way down into the grip-frame just before swinging the latch closed (indicating the hammer strut is "in the pocket") life was good: it's a snap once you've got the hang of it. Those are the only two things that I've encountered that can make like with MKI/II/III difficult. But then again... That's enough until you do get the hang of it.

Seven For Sure
November 12, 2006, 12:29 AM
The Walther P22 is pretty bad also.

November 12, 2006, 12:40 AM
Depending upon when your Mk III was packed --- there could be SEVERAL errors in the enclosed manual. This includes everything from the disassembly procedure (some manuals do NOT instruct to REMOVE the magazine before removing the action from the frame) to the parts diagrams (which may NOT properly show some parts). If you are doing a hammer/trigger upgrade --- beware!!!:banghead:

(If there's any interest in particulars, I'll dig out my book and itemize this stuff.)

Ruger knows about this stuff, and will send replacement pages/manuals on request.

Since these are "creatively" :rolleyes: assembled pistols, a first acquaintance with one with an incorrect manual can be --- amusing. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Mine is about 7 months old.

November 12, 2006, 03:23 AM
You're right about the manual, 51cards. I field stripped and cleaned my Mark III, 22/45 twice now and it's still a challenge. I guess by the seventh or eigth time I'll get the hang of it.

November 12, 2006, 10:29 AM
Other than the need for a tool to pry up the take-down lever of the main spring housing and the reassembly of the gun when insterting the MSH back in, the Ruger MkI/II/III is really not as time consuming and doesn't require more attention as some others, IMO. The upper can be removed by rapping the back of the upper receiver on a lightly padded non-marring surface and can be re-installed by doing the same at the muzzle end.

Others like the Browning Buckmark require more tools and a re mor invovled to get to the same point ans the MkI/II/IIIs. A hex wrench to remove the bolts on the sight rib/top strap and a screw driver for the barrel set screw. The sight rib must be remove to remove the bolt. There is a plastic buffer in the recoil assembly that must be kept track of or it will get lost, the (at least) two sight rib bolts and thier conical spur washers and the barrel set screw must also all be kept track of.

The Beretta NEOS isa litle better as it used a finger friendly nut to tighten the barrel down instead of a screw.

The 5" P22 does have that barrel weight to remove but is otherwise, IMO, not too difficult. The problem after removing the barrel weight, though, is that since the front sight you'll very slightly shift your zero. (Not an issue with the 3".)

Higher end target .22s are an entirely different discussion. No easy take-downs their.

November 12, 2006, 10:55 AM
Just a matter of getting the hang of it! But, it does take time to get the hang of it!

November 12, 2006, 11:07 AM
I had a brand new MkII that I simply could not get back together - DESPITE following the directions. I took it back to the dealer who looked at me like I was an idiot. Then he tried it and couldn't do it either. He placed it gently in the box, laid it behind the counter and said, "We'll let Bill Ruger figure it out." He exchanged it for another gun and I never had any problems with that one.

November 12, 2006, 11:16 AM
The MkIII are worse than the MkII because in addition to the usual shaking and truning every which way, you also have to insert and remove the magazine to get the hammer to release at the appropriate times.

But IMHO the Browning Buckmark is the worst. You need two different sized hex wrenches to takedown and reassemble, and if you remove the grips several small critical pieces will easily fall out.


November 12, 2006, 11:21 AM
The Astra 600. Still suffering trauma. Much worse...Illini

November 12, 2006, 02:56 PM
I keep a paper clip in my Altoids-Box-O-Brushes-Etc. One end has a nice little hook bent into it. Great for picking the strut up and over that nasty little pin in there.

Most times I can reassemble as if I were doing a video on it. Then --- magically:what: --- the thing decides to turn alien. Usually, it's paper clip time.

On the plus side, you can deliberately store it "weirded-out." Like to see a BG grab that and make it work quickly ...:evil:

November 12, 2006, 03:19 PM
I dunno!!
I have 4 of the little buggers and I've never had any problems taking apart or putting them back together!! :evil:
The instructions in the manual are a little bit confusing, but once you do it a couple of times, it becomes easy as pie!!
The one thing you have to realize is that, unlike other guns, Ruger says that sometimes you do have to beat on them a little bit!! ;)

November 12, 2006, 05:23 PM
Here at MTU we have 10 MKIIs. I hate everyone of them. I now have no problems working on them, I just don't like them. A 1911 feels good coming apart and going back together, a MKII feels like a 30 car pile up.

November 12, 2006, 06:05 PM
Yes. A 1903 Colt .32 after a complete disassembly. Don't ask...:rolleyes:

November 12, 2006, 06:15 PM
AHHAHAHAh yeah there is a worse pistol its a RUGER MKIII ahaha just had to take it to my gun smith with the exploded view and he even had trouble with the damned thing.

highlander 5
November 12, 2006, 06:30 PM
If its any consilation my latest issue of Gun Tests thinks the MK III is the worst of the three "target" pistols to take apart the other 2 are a Buckmark and a S&W 41.
The MK II was easy for me to assemble/disassemble I always have my deluxe takedown tool with me,a large paper clip. Now I have the 22/45 and the procedure is pretty much the same.
If I buy another Ruger I'm sticking to the MK II model I'm not pleased with all the nonsense that Ruger put on th MK III:cuss: :banghead: :cuss: :banghead:

November 12, 2006, 07:56 PM
This link might help:

November 12, 2006, 08:04 PM
When I first got my Mk II, it was a PIA to clean. Then, I met a guy at a range that was shooting one and he taught me the secret handshake. Now, it's easy ;) Patience & practice....and the force in the force :D

November 12, 2006, 08:34 PM
I can now disassemble and assemble my MKIII in just a few minutes now, but the FIRST time... good Lord, I was about to beat it on the ground!

I dunno about the rugers being the "worst"... definitely the most bassackward. Ever try to disassemble a Lorcin .25? No wonder they suck. Pieces fall off everywhere and springs fly every which way. That has to be worst.

November 12, 2006, 11:48 PM
After saying that reading directions is key, let me tell you a story:

I sold a 22/45 to my old boss, and he wanted to know how to take it down. I got it apart just fine. Getting it back together??? Lets just say that I used the all-purpose word about 50 times before I finally broke out the instruction manual....

The thing is though, I LOVE MkII's. Love them. Have 2, want more.

November 13, 2006, 01:03 AM
yeah the mark III worst gun yet that I have ever had to clean If I knew disassembly required a hammer I would have bought something else. then again its my only complaint

November 13, 2006, 01:49 AM
Yes, a Ruger Mark III. The magazine disconnect makes it just that much harder
Tell me about it!:banghead: i have never messed with a mk2 but i know i haven't found a harder one to dissassemble than my 22/45!

If you enjoyed reading about "Is there any pistol worse to reassemble than a Ruger MKII" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!