Ruger Mark III/Good first .22 pistol?


PDA






7.62mm.ak47
February 19, 2012, 05:58 PM
I've been thinking of buying a .22 so I can justify shooting more often and decided on getting a handgun over a rifle. I hear good things about the Mark III by Ruger and found a 6" standard version for $290 on BudsGunShop. Does anyone have suggestions for someone looking for a .22lr pistol on the cheap? Thanks guys.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger Mark III/Good first .22 pistol?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
almherdfan
February 19, 2012, 06:05 PM
Hell yes! It's a great pistol. There are other very good options, but probably none better for the $$.

7.62mm.ak47
February 19, 2012, 06:12 PM
Okay great. Does the target model really improve accuracy or is the heavier barrel the only addition to it over the standard model?

wgaynor
February 19, 2012, 06:51 PM
I have the Mrk III 22/45 Target model and have noted great accuracy. Of course, it will shoot far better than I am capable of, but that is with most firearms.

All firearms have great capabilities of extreme accuracy when properly maintained, it's the person behind the trigger that is usually the problem. I do think that the longer barrel will give you a bit more velocity (you won't notice it though). Plus the longer barrel increases the distance between the sights, thus giving you better accuracy.

The weight of the barrel might lend to a steadier aim, but that can be negated with any pistol if one practices enough.

rule303
February 19, 2012, 07:06 PM
The standard model is every bit as accurate as the target model, but lacks adjustable sights.

mahansm
February 19, 2012, 07:15 PM
I prefer the target model as it seems to balance better in my hand. The 6 7/8 heavy barrel feels better to me than any other.

AlexanderA
February 19, 2012, 07:18 PM
The Ruger .22 is a great pistol, especially for the money, but I would personally prefer a Mark II over a Mark III. I'm sure there are a lot of used Mark II's in excellent condition on the market.

I have a Mark III, because I collect the series, but the first thing I did when I got it was retrofit most of the Mark II features. About the only worthwhile "improvement" on the Mark III is the M1911-style magazine release. The magazine safety and the loaded-chamber indicator are particularly bad ideas, dictated more by liability lawyers than by users. Somebody makes an aftermarket filler piece so that you can remove the loaded-chamber indicator without leaving an unsightly gap.

HisSoldier
February 19, 2012, 07:24 PM
I have the all SS target model and have put a red dot scope on it, the accuracy is amazing. I removed the obnoxious and degenerate mag safety, removed the lock screw, lightened the mainspring (Hammer spring) and did a trigger job (Sear hone), in addition I screwed a pad on the trigger to spread the force of my finger tip out which effectively lightens the trigger even more.

The standard model is every bit as accurate as the target model, but lacks adjustable sights.

If that's true you could put a good scope on it and have the best of all, I'd still remove the mag safety and lock screw and do the sear honing. I like the looks of a tapered barrel, but that is a small matter, what really matters is hitting the tiny 1" diameter swinging target, which mine will do with monotonous regularity from 25'.

The magazine safety and the loaded-chamber indicator are particularly bad ideas

Oh yeah, I did that too. I left it open there and can still see a rim, though in concept it's way too easy to pull the bolt back to check so it's a stupid lawyer/insurance addition you get to pay for, &*%$#@!

nathan
February 19, 2012, 07:31 PM
My first .22 was the Ruger Mk 2 in 5.5 bullbarrel stainless in 1995. I ve shot around 23000 rds into it and still tight like new. That was my go to go gun together with the Russian SKS. I ve plinked plenty of tin cans and what not. Also killed quite a few birds and varmints. Great gun to have.

Now i got the Mk 3 Hunter ive not shot it that much but it balances well too. The mag disconnector is the one i dont like but its just getting used to.

greyling22
February 19, 2012, 07:33 PM
rugers are super. as far as pure accuracy, standard vs bull barrel doens't matter much beyond the sights. However, the heavy barrel helps stabilize the gun and compensate to a bad trigger pull jerking the gun off target. (I bought the biggest heaviest barrel they made :)

the browning buckmark is another good choice and may feel better in your hand.

Psa1m144
February 19, 2012, 07:36 PM
One of the best 22lr semi autos out there. You will be very happy with one. Check GunBroker. I picked up a NIB Ruger Mark III 22/45 Bull Barrel for only 200 + shipping from there.

alaskanativeson
February 19, 2012, 07:38 PM
The Ruger Mark III is a very good gun, similar to the Browning Buck Mark. It sounds like a very good deal from Buds. An awful lot of kids learned to shoot with a Ruger Mark I, II, or III. Fun gun.

Fishbed77
February 20, 2012, 12:05 AM
The standard model is every bit as accurate as the target model, but lacks adjustable sights.

Well, yes and no... Yes, the standard model is as accurate, but the bull barrel of the Target model will retain it's accuracy better as the barrel heats up after multiple shots.

paintballdude902
February 20, 2012, 12:06 AM
id get a 22/45

TurkeyOak
February 20, 2012, 12:55 AM
Its a great choice. I have a 22/45.
They are a pain to tear apart. They Dont have a slide like practically everything else.
Ive broken my down twice but now just clean the chamber and bore snake it.

7.62mm.ak47
February 20, 2012, 01:06 AM
Awesome stuff, I should probably check out the local stores to see how the 22/45 and standard fit in my hands. Thanks for all the input!

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger Mark III/Good first .22 pistol?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!