AMT copy of Ruger MKII

[Win1892]

Stainless receiver is a sloppy fit on steel frame. There is a dogleg at the upper front of the frame that on all my Rugers is a snug fit into receiver usually requiring a light tap with a small mallet to seat. This AMT however slides right in and will allow the receiver to twist substantially. The dogleg appears to be a permanent part of the frame and the receiver is machined so I see no replaceable part. Any suggestions?

 

[rcmodel]

Par for the course.
They weren't that great to start with.
That's one of the reasons AMT went out of business.

The pistol was an unlicensed & cheap copy of the Ruger Mark II pistol and, along with the AMT Lightning 10/22 rifle, prompted a successful trademark infringement lawsuit from Ruger that helped bankrupt the company.

Your best bet is a gun buy-back program, or a sale or trade at the next gun show.

rc

 

[gb6491]

I think that the Lightning pistols might have been one of AMT's best products.
The ones I've handled and shot were well made with fit and finish at least as good as the Ruger. Most parts will interchange between the two.



There are, at least, two schools of thought on how to tighten the frame to receiver fit on the Ruger and Lightning.
One involves a shim between the frame and receiver. This is most often done as a debris shield near the lug in the front of the frame:
http://rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215624
The other method is to put the frame in a padded vise and and bend the frame lips enough to tighten the fit:
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=71381&sid=2c893d71bffaa0a8767d3f0261560d23
As an alternative to this, using padded pliers (ideally vise grips) bend the very front of the lips just enough to tighten the fit.
Regards,
Greg

 

[Win1892]

Made a brass shim from a 30-30 case I cut up with a Dremel. Slid it into the curved portion of the receiver that the frame dogleg slides into. Added a little bevel to get the two pieces started together and it is perfect. As tight as all my Rugers. I assume that with rough handling or extensive use it will work itself loose again because the brass is so soft, but the gun was unusable before and it was a fun little hour long project.

 

[Win1892]

My pistol does not have a flat sided receiver and your trigger looks considerably better than my chrome plated cast piece. Your trigger guard is shaped differently also.

 

[gb6491]

My pistol does not have a flat sided receiver and your trigger looks considerably better than my chrome plated cast piece. Your trigger guard is shaped differently also.

Any chance you could post a photo of it? Also, are there any numbers on the frame?

As far as I know all the AMT Lightnings came with the flat side receiver, Clark trigger and hooked trigger guard. The exception would be the "Baby Auto Mag" (though it still had a Clark trigger). AMT did offer top ends at the same time the pistols were available. In sales brochures, they have flat sides. However, I have read that prior to the Lightning being introduced AMT sold barreled receivers for use on Ruger frames. I have no idea if these early units were round or flat side, perhaps you have one of these and a Ruger lower (your description of the trigger reads like a Ruger part).

The Lightning manual and some other info is available on "Ian's AMT Information site"

Regards,
Greg

 

[Win1892]

I think this is a Ruger frame. I had a case head separation years ago and the factory grips blew to pieces, these are Ruger.







and I'm curious....why did your pictures appear full size and mine are thumbnails?

 

[Win1892]

There is a reprint from a 1984 Guns & Ammo article on the above mentioned Ians website that tells about the "uppers" being available stand alone.

 

[gb6491]

Great photos; that's the first round receiver AMT upper I've seen. It must be one of the pre-Lightning versions.

I think this is a Ruger frame.

Yep, that's a MARK I frame. Here's the instruction/parts manual: http://www.ruger-firearms.com/products/_manuals/markI.pdf

and I'm curious....why did your pictures appear full size and mine are thumbnails?

Mine are hosted off site (tinypic.com) vice attachments here and linked with the

tags.
Regards,
Greg