Ok ok... which one should I be looking at? Please discuss your favorite variants.
The Ruger MK III is obviously inferior to earlier models because of excessive lawyer input, but that's what they are selling new... so lets leave the MK Is and IIs out of the discussion. I'm only interested in a new one.
I personally like the way the Buckmark feels in my hand better, but I'm not too excited about some of the plastic parts. I feel like maybe the Ruger is a better heirloom, but the Buckmark is more of a pleasure to shoot. But I haven't had much range time with the MK III.
If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger MK III vs Buckmark" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
October 25, 2007, 06:20 PM
Dubious, I have a Mark II and a Buckmark and I prefer the MarkII. I have never shot a Mark III. The Mark II I have is more accurate, more reliable and feels better in my hand then my Buck mark. Ruger Mark ** takedown and reassembly have gotten alot o bad press, but it's pretty easy once you've done 25-30 times. Buckmarks can be a pain to put back together as well.
Just my opinion, not any recognizable science behind it whatsoever.
October 25, 2007, 06:32 PM
leave the MK Is and IIs out of the discussion. I'm only interested in a new one.
I've bought 5 NIB MKII's in the past 10 months. They are all over Gunbroker.com, GunsAmerica.com, and AuctionArms.com, and you can find them NIB at most every gun show as well.
You just missed out on this gem at a great price. I have two like it, in both blue and stainless: