Ruger Original Standard .22 Pistol Versus MKIII Standard?


PDA






nero45acp
July 23, 2009, 08:59 AM
I'm going to buy my first Ruger Standard .22 pistol and I'm trying to decide between an excellent condition original Standard for $225, or a NIB MKIII Standard for about $300. I'd appreciate any info/opinions on if one is generally considered to be better than the other. Thanks.



nero

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger Original Standard .22 Pistol Versus MKIII Standard?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Shear_stress
July 23, 2009, 09:53 AM
More or less the same gun, depending on the features. The MKIII has a lot of fussy safety features I don't really care for, but that's up to you.

Six
July 23, 2009, 10:22 AM
I had an MKIII for plinking, it was amazingly accurate but the safety features get annoying. There's something wrong with a design that requires you to insert a magazine and then pull the trigger for take down/reassembly.

Now I shoot a Buck Mark, and while I wouldn't hesitate buying a Ruger .22 again, it would not be the MKIII generation.

xHypex
July 28, 2009, 07:39 PM
Shooting wise the Rugers are all similar unless you car about the magazine disconnect and loaded chamber indicator on the Mark III. The main things to consider when shopping for a Ruger Standard .22/Mark I versus a Mark II/Mark III are:
1) The Mark II/III have a catch that holds the bolt open after the last round.
2) the Mark II/III has a bevel that allows you to more easily grab the bolt to cock the gun. Mark I on the left; Mark III on the right
http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/images/Ruger-Mk-I-web.jpghttp://www.lipseys.com/eImages/News-MKIII512.jpg
3) The Mark I comes in two different frame versions. This won't matter much unless you want to change grips (I did; if you care get the A-100 frame)
4) The Mark I has a 9 round magazine; Mark II/III have a 10 round magazine
5) The Mark I has the magazine release in the heel of the butt; II/III have a magazine release button.

Most of these differences may not seem like a big deal, but if you shoot a lot having (1) and (2) plus an Ultimate Clip Loader sure helps keep your hand from getting worn out loading the gun. If you want more details read this (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=393241)
-hype

tlen
July 28, 2009, 08:26 PM
.............

tlen
July 28, 2009, 08:29 PM
What's an "original Standard " ?
Get the MKIII and if you don't like the LCI and Mag disconnect you can remove them. I'd recommend getting the adjustable sight model that is drilled & tapped and comes with a scope mount. A red dot on a Ruger is a slick setup. I have the MKIII678.
http://www.guntalk-online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=934
http://www.guntalk-online.com/service.html

premiumplus
November 6, 2009, 01:46 PM
I'm loving my old standard. It feeds everything I give it and shoots where I point it. It's just a joy to own and satisfying as all heck to shoot!

ArmedBear
November 6, 2009, 01:49 PM
Note that a Volquartsen hammer will remove the magazine disconnect on the Mark III.

I prefer the Mark II, but you don't have to live with that annoyance if you have a Mark III. And Mark II's aren't going for cheap from what I've seen.

I use a Mark II for match shooting, so the 9-round magazine of the Mark I would be a real PITA.:)

gb6491
November 6, 2009, 02:57 PM
5) The Mark I has the magazine release in the heel of the butt; II/III have a magazine release button.
The all metal Mark II pistols have the heel magazine latch; only the 22/45 had the magazine release button near the trigger guard (as all Mark III versions do).
Regards,
Greg

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger Original Standard .22 Pistol Versus MKIII Standard?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!