Which of These Two Ruger Mark IIIs Would You Choose?


KP Texan
October 21, 2010, 11:06 PM
I've narrowed my .22 handgun choice down to a Ruger Mark III and there are two that I'm interested in for my price range:

The 6-7/8" tapered barrel with adjustable sights: http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/369/products_id/13149

The 5-1/2" bull barrel with adjustable sights: http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/369/products_id/12754

Unfortunately, I can't fire both of these in order to tell the difference. What are the advantages/disadvantages of the longer tapered barrel or shorter bull barrel?

Thanks so much,


If you enjoyed reading about "Which of These Two Ruger Mark IIIs Would You Choose?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
October 22, 2010, 07:32 AM
i just took my mkIII 5.5 fluted bull barrel to the range last night. only went there to align the sights, but it shot great. Much less recoil than my friends moskito.

I dont know what one is better. I got the stainless fluted bull one, because I think the tapered barrel is ugly.

October 22, 2010, 07:42 AM
if the length doesn't bother you, the longer brrl is gonna have more velocity. 22LR needs all the help it can get :D Also the low pressure from 22LR removes any advantage expected from a bull brrl.

KP Texan
October 22, 2010, 09:39 AM
Thanks for the replies. Yeah, I'm with thedub on the look of the tapered barrel: just looks a bit lugerish. On the other hand, sansone makes some good points. I'm guessing the longer barrel will also offer a bit longer sight radius which is somewhat of an advantage. This is just going to be a plinking/practice pistol so I'm sure either will serve me well.

Thanks so much,


October 22, 2010, 10:06 AM
The first model with the tapered barrel is the Target model and my personal favorite. The second is the one you normally see scoped, and have an appeal for those who need glasses.

October 22, 2010, 10:16 AM
I prefer the looks of the bull barrel, so that's the way that I'd go. Having said that, I have basic model MKIII with a tapered 4" barrel with non-adjustable sights, and it's a great little gun. It shoots reliably, the stock trigger is smooth and crisp, the recoil is (not surprisingly) minimal.

Either of your choices will serve you well.


October 22, 2010, 10:19 AM
The first one is the classic look of a Ruger .22, and out of the two would be my preference.

October 22, 2010, 10:31 AM
You probably will not discern an accuracy difference between the two. Handle them both, and pick the one that feels better to you.

I have a MKIII Hunter and a standard... I find myself shooting the standard much more often.

October 22, 2010, 10:41 AM
FWIW and YMMV: I have a Ruger MKI with the 6-7/8" barrel. I may be comparing apples to oranges but when I'm shooting it the barrel and balance are more "whippy" (for lack of a better term) compared to my 4" K-frame and the old Hi Standard 5-1/2" Victor I have. It just doesn't seem to settle down in my hands. It is an accurate shooter though.

You may also find the 5-1/2" barrel easier to carry for casual shooting. And should you get the urge to "improve" it Volquartsen makes drop-in kits.

Red Cent
October 22, 2010, 11:24 AM
I had been looking for a good buy on a 6 7/8" fullbull or fluted. Then I tried a friend's 5 1/2" fullbull Target model. From my saddle I think the 5 1/2" balances in the hand allowing quick movements with enough heft to inhibit jerky movement. 'Course I hope to shoot Ruger Rimfire (pistol and rifle) 1st Saturday in November.

PS: I bought the5 1/2" fullbull.

KP Texan
October 22, 2010, 03:05 PM
So does your 5-1/2" full bull have the rail on top? I'm trying to figure out if that is standard or optional; either way, I don't really want it on there since I don't ever plan on mounting a scope. I was at Bass Pro last weekend and their version didn't have the rail on there.



October 22, 2010, 06:52 PM
The rail comes from the factory as an ad-on for later, I have the Ruger 22/45 bull barrel 5.5" great guns, didn't care for the luger grip myself

October 22, 2010, 07:19 PM
The rail comes as an accessory with the target model pistols, it is not factory mounted.
I have the 5.5" bull and love it-highly modified and scoped-it's a tack driver at 25 yds.
I also have a '62 Standard which I restored from a rust bucket-great for golf and tennis ball bouncing at the same range. A couple of pics...
I do have a love of the look of the long tapered barrel and will eventually own one of the 6.88" tapered Target models.

October 22, 2010, 08:04 PM
:) I would choose the 5 1/2" barrel. I had a MKI in that barrel length and it was my favorite gun to carry fishing. It just had a good feel and balance. I have also killed a lot of squirrels with it. The MKIII should be a better gun Don

KP Texan
October 23, 2010, 02:33 PM
Thanks for all the help guys! Looks like the 5-1/2" bull barrel is for me!


October 23, 2010, 05:17 PM
I actually have both of those guns, the longer one was my first gun a few years back, and I eventually got tired of fighting with MrsBFD over who was going to shoot the Ruger (she got a Walther P22 for her first gun at the same time I got the long Ruger)

In the end, I got the 5.5" bull barrel as a second Ruger, and ended up liking it better. She gets some placebo-effect accuracy from the longer model, and it became "hers".

Both have some VQ fire-control parts and a magazine-interlock removing gadget installed, they're not race-guns but they're pretty damn accurate, I spent half the summer ringing 18 and 12 inch gongs at 100 yards with mine, that really torques up the rifle shooters for some reason.

October 23, 2010, 11:01 PM
I have the 5.5" bull barrel and I love it. It balances very well in my hands, and it's a tack driver. That being said I have never handled the 6 7/8" barrel model. You wont be disappointed with either.

October 24, 2010, 02:43 PM
I much prefer the looks of the tapered barrel. But that's just me.

For single shot at a time bullseye shooting either will work fine. But if you participate in any club matches where speed combined with accuracy are the name of the game then the bull barrel will reduce recoil and get you back onto the next target or in place for a fast followup shot faster.

October 24, 2010, 03:39 PM
I prefer the balance of the 67/8 model.It works for me.Both guns weigh the same.Go figure.

October 24, 2010, 05:35 PM
Any way you can try them out?

October 24, 2010, 05:37 PM
I'd choose the one that says "Browning Buckmark" stamped on the frame.

October 24, 2010, 06:17 PM
I'd go with the Bull BBL 5.5"er. I had one in the MK II mdl. and it was a great shooter. I find I can hold the heavier BBL. a tad steadier. the longer BBL. = longer sight radius but to me 5.5" is long enough. Also I think the Bull BBL. looks nicer.

Average Joe
October 24, 2010, 07:58 PM
bull 5.5 that's what I have and love it.

October 24, 2010, 09:19 PM
Well, I have a Mark II blue with the 5-1/2 bull barrel and I love it. It shoots very well with little recoil and is very accurate. I bought it back in 83 or so when I was in high school and have put many thousands of rounds through it. Recently, I had to replace the extractor and gave it a trigger upgrade at the same time. I love the gun and feel you can't go wrong with the bull barrel. I'm sure the longer barrel would be nice too however. Go with what you want.

October 25, 2010, 08:49 PM
The 5.5 closely resembles the 1911 in size if that makes a difference. I like the longer barrel.

October 25, 2010, 11:34 PM
I have the 5.5" bull and the 4' tapered barrel in the 22/45. I used both in steel challenge matches with the same red dot on both. I found the taprerd barrel just a liiiitle bit quicker from target to target due to the lighter weight. Recoil was not a factor.

If you enjoyed reading about "Which of These Two Ruger Mark IIIs Would You Choose?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!