Ruger MK II

The MK II's are commanding a premium over the MK III's due to the newer gun's addition of a magazine disconnect, internal lock, and loaded chamber indicator which have in the past caused some reliability issues. There are also reported quality issues with some of the MK III's, although Ruger may have dealt with that.

The mag disconnect, and LCI can be removed with some aftermarket parts, but you are left with an unsightly blank replacing the LCI. Many just get a used MK II to avoid the hassles, but many are hanging onto their MK II's as they are not making anymore, and haven't since 2004 IIRC.

FWIW, I have four MK II's, and no MK III's.

The Mk III also provides us with the magazine release as a button up by the trigger guard instead of the funky pivoting block down by the butt of the frame. And there's lots of options for removing the magazine disconnect easily enough. We can either use the home grown two modified washers or buy an aftermarket Mk II style hammer bushing to replace the Mk III bushing and mag disconnect parts.

On a blued Mk III the missing LCI isn't that noticable. And it may even be a good thing as it gives some of the fouling somewhere to vent from the gun instead of sitting in the lower action. Otherwise slot fillers to replace the LCI piece are available in both blued and stainless versions.

So all in all it's pretty much a wash. Some that don't like the additions stick with the supply of Mk II's. Others that want the more common magazine release button instead of the heel release like the Mk III and either live with the MD and LCI or do what is needed to remove them.

Your guns, being fixed sight versions, may not be quite as desireable as an adjustable sight Mk II. So keep that in mind when checking the prices in auctions.

In any event it's not like you suddenly found yourself sitting on a windfall unless you simply don't shoot much with them. If you enjoy them and they are doing the job for you then stick with them.

I also prefer the heel mag release on the MK II. It is sturdy, and secure. I see no need for a button style mag on a .22LR plinking/target pistol. While many can make the MK III work for them, it is certainly a step backwards from the MK II, and the continuing demand for MK II's shows that.

If I was you, I wouldn't sell either of them unless you absolutely have to. First of all, the Ruger Mk.II is a great pistol. An all time classic. Second, if you don't like the variations you currently have, you can buy new top ends for them with various barrel lengths, adjustable sights, or a rail for optic mounting. Third, I am pretty much against selling guns for a number of reasons. They are probably the best investment you can make. You may never be able to aquire another one if you decided to in the future..........................

I own a number of Ruger MkIIs. I got my first one when I was 9 years old and have owned at least one ever since then. I really like the newer ones, especially the super lightweight version with the threaded barrel that was in The American Rifleman last month. But, when I started looking into it, I realized there were a number of issues, most of which have already been mentioned. But a big one for me is the magazine release on the Mk.IIIs. As has been mentioned, it is now located near your firing side thumb, in the same location as most service type pistols. This IMO is a good thing. Muscle memory and all that. However, because they changed the location of the magazine release, they also had to change the magazines themselves in order to lock into the new gun. The new magazines have a cut-out that engages the magazine release. And.............. and so, all the magazines that I have aquired over the last 40 years won't work in the new guns. So I have a pile of magazines that work in my MK.IIs and now have to buy a different pile of magazines for the MK.III.

One of the main reasons I was looking at the particular MK.III is that it had rails on it. I am now in my 50s and my eyesight is slowly getting worse. Like many people, I had fantastic vision, then I turned 40 and got glasses. Now at 50, I have to wear them all the time and I notice that when I shoot, my vision isn't what it once was, so I wanted to try an optical sight. My MK.IIs were not drilled and tapped for an optic and I thought I could justify a new gun. But the magazine thing caused me to have two of my MK.IIs drilled and tapped and I added my own rail to them: one now has a C-More optic, the other one has a Leupold scope on it. And I still have a couple with iron sights.

And when I do, they are quite expensive. Are these better then the new MK III?

Click to expand...

I bought a MKI in 1961. It was in a fire in 1995.
I immediately bought a MKII and still have it.

I bought a MKIII a couple years ago. Big mistake. Ruger allowed the lawyers to ruin a good gun. I'd sell the gun in a minute if I found a buyer.

I recently found a like new, still in the box bull barrel MKI. I loaned the gun to a lady friend who is shooting 250/250 at local matches.

Unless you absoutely have to, don't get rid of your MKII.

M2 Carbine said:

I bought a MKI in 1961. It was in a fire in 1995.
I immediately bought a MKII and still have it.

I bought a MKIII a couple years ago. Big mistake. Ruger allowed the lawyers to ruin a good gun. I'd sell the gun in a minute if I found a buyer.

I recently found a like new, still in the box bull barrel MKI. I loaned the gun to a lady friend who is shooting 250/250 at local matches.

Unless you absoutely have to, don't get rid of your MKII.

Click to expand...

I second this.


I have two MK IIs, a stainless Gov't Target Model 6 7/8" and a stainless 10 1/2" bull barrel, and plan on getting another MK II once I find one that is acceptable (in NIB condition or nearly so).

I doubt that Ruger will ever make them again and I'd suggest (to the OP) that it is best to keep what he has since once they are gone replacing them will be very difficult at best.

Definitely hold on to your Mk.IIs. I wouldn't sell mine as it one of the most reliable and accurate .22 pistols I have owned.

Don't sell

I have my Grandfathers Mark I which he used in competition shooting, personally I wouldn't sell one unless you just don't want it any longer and can get a premium price for it! They just don't make them like they use to!!

I found a Mk II on sale for a good price in a local gun store. Phoned a buddy and told him to buy it over the phone or else....

It really is a fine gun in all the right ways. My only beef is that the stock heel block mag release is a little fumbly to use. But that is easily fixed by switching the pivoting catch over to one with a paddle to allow it to be released without our fat fingers getting in the way of the mag dropping clear easily.

Several years ago...

I had two MkIIs and ran across a MkIII Hunter NNIB for $350. No brainer--jumped on it.

The MkIII was beautiful stainless, fluted barrel, beautiful wood grips, nice FO front sight with replaceable color inserts.

When I took it to the range, the odd v-shaped rear sights did not promote accuracy (for me). I was annoyed by the mag disconnect, the internal lock, the LCI...

Bottom line--I sold it to a good friend for the same price I paid, and I went back to shooting my plain old SS MkII.

He is happy, I am happy.

i have a blued MKII, 6" pencil bbl, fixed sights.....its the best .22lr handgun i have.

I have a Government Model Stainless MKII in good shape. Anyone know what they are commanding now price wise? Just curious

jolly roger said:

I have a Government Model Stainless MKII in good shape. Anyone know what they are commanding now price wise? Just curious

Click to expand...

Pristine ones (basically NIB) command upwards of $750.

During a range session last January, I had a guy offer me $1000 for my stainless Gov't MK II (and the five magazines that were in the case with it), but I just couldn't part with it. I doubt seriously that I could replace it with one is as good condition, not that I'd care to try.

I wouldn't sell your MK II's, but by the same token, I don't think they're any better or worse than a MK III's. I've got both now, and have owned others, and I wouldn't give ten cents more for one than other.

I say keep both. I'd love to find one of yours to augment mine. I got the anniversary edition giving me a Mark II dressed as a pre-mark which is cool but I'd sure like a knock-around 6 inch Mark II to dedicate to a suppressor.

My son will inherit my MK II.

I've got a MKI that has well over 50,000 rounds thru it, never any failure to feed, fire, or eject regardless of the ammo. One of my sons will inherit that I'm sure. It is the 5" model with the tapered barrel and fixed sights. Probably isn't worth much but I still like it.

mrcylinder said:

I have my Grandfathers Mark I which he used in competition shooting, personally I wouldn't sell one unless you just don't want it any longer and can get a premium price for it! They just don't make them like they use to!!

Click to expand...

I bought my MK I in 1967 and still have the box with the $54.00 price tag.
My local FFL has a couple of used MK II's and MK III's on sale in the $350 price range and to be honest a purchase is tempting.
The Ruger .22 Autos are hard to beat.

Like most satisfied MK II owners, I see nothing out there to replace it.

I bought my MK II in 1987, back in the day when I had to drive out to the county sheriff's office and drop off an Application for Permission to Purchase a Handgun for a wants and warrants check. The approved form was mailed to the dealer the next day and I went out to pick up the gun. That's a side trip down memory lane. But it was a looooong time ago. At 26 years old, my Ruger Mark II is barely broken in. The least I have fired it was about 100 rounds a year, the most was over a thousand a year. Over 10,000 sounds easy, maybe 20,000 rounds, did not keep a log.

MK II had these improvements over the Standard and MK I:
o ten round mag (since most match courses of fire are 10 shots per bullseye target)
o bolt hold open on last shot (also useful for general cleaning)
o safety can be "on" to open bolt to clear chamber after magazine removed

The changes for the MK III are changes, not necessarily improvements.

My opinion: Magazine disconnect safeties make it too easy to forget about a round in the chamber. Plus, in the mountains if I lost my magazine, I could still use my MK II as a singleshot without the magazine safety. Loaded chamber indicator is extra parts to go wrong for little utility.

I got one too when they first came out back in 83,84. I have put about 5,000 through it Since. I have killed tons of rabbit's and squirrels with it along with lots of other critters. I would never sell it cause IMO It it best of the MK series.

I own a MkIII GC with the long barrel. Removed the LCI and mag disconnect. Those done, I think it is superior to the MkII version because of the mag release. Trigger, accuracy, sighs are the same as the MkII as target years ago. My MkII is long gone, but if I still had it, I would gladly traded for the GC.

Although I own one of the 22/45 variations, I'm not a big fan of the MkIII.

Keep them MK II' s are great.