MKIII Bull or 22/45

Status
Not open for further replies.

caver

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
13
Folks,

I am considering either of the above in a 5 1/2 barrel. I would like to get your opinions on each of these from the owners. I'm aware that you can not change the grips on the 22/45, so that might be a drawback in th future. Thanks
 
Get the MKIII bull, I love mine, you can change the grips out to target rubber grips that have the .45 angle. Plus its all metal not a plastic pistol, my gun smith has 20,000 rounds through his MK II bull. Only changed the extractor twice.
 
If you can find a MK II in either buy it the MK III is an absolute nightmare to take apart and re assemble and this is from people that own them and Gun Tests mag
 
Unless you're totally enamored of the 1911 grip angle that comes on the 22/45 I'd say go with the steel-framed bull barrel version. And while I'm not condoning anything illegal, I will tell you the MKIII can be <cough>converted<cough> into an MKII for all intents and purposes safely and easily. Removing the Loaded Chamber indicator is a cakewalk and removing the Magazine Disconnect is about one tiny step up on the ladder of difficulty. You can do one, either, both or neither, as you wish. Just thought I'd mention it can be done if you're so inclined. Feel free to PM me for details if you wish.

Reassembly is not as hard as some make it out to be once you understand one tiny detail about the hammer-strut that the Ruger manual does not make sufficiently clear. Once you've got that minor detail figured out (hammer-strut below the cross-pin), you're golden. It's no more difficult to reassemble than, say, a 1911 once you know this detail.


EDIT:
Wow... sorry for the triple post!! Reported it...
 
Well, you already know about the inability to swap grips on the 22/45, and the different grip angle. If you want to be able to mod the pistol for Bullseye shooting, I think a MK III or used MK II is a no-brainer.

I got the 22/45 MK III myself, in a 4" heavy barrel with adjustable sights. I didn't want it for a target pistol and like the 1911-style grip angle. The polymer frame IS thinner to hold on to, which is a bonus for me as my hands are on the small side.

Accuracy is great. Once the weather turns nice this spring, I'll give it a workout with something better than Federal Bulk Pack, but even with $9/550 ammo, it will shoot great, at least to 50 feet.

And don't sweat the assembly process. It's not rocket science. Once you learn the little trick of where the strut goes, it pops right together, first time, every time. The only disassembly difference between a MK II and a MK III is that you need a mag to squeeze the trigger to dry-fire it.
 
Since we seem to be beating around the bush a bit and I had to reassemble my Mark III again a few nights ago after a few months of non-use, I'll just say that it helps A LOT during reassembly to remember that it's very helpful to tilt the gun back a bit (or possibly a lot) when reinserting the mainspring.

Field stripping leaves you with a barrel, bolt, mainspring, and grip/trigger assembly. The barrel and grip are easy to put back together (though you might need a rubber mallet to help get it all the way in), the bolt slides right in if the hammer's not sticking in the way, but the mainspring can be the big pain since you can accidentally put it back in without it being, well, springy.
 
Love the MkIII.

Reassembly: just make sure the hammer strut is on top of the crosspin when the mainspring housing pin is pushed in. (Muzzle downward.) Then tilt back, pull trigger with mag in (emptyemptyempty!), make sure the strut drops into the mainspring "pocket," and you're in.

I used to whack/mallet/grunt the action off the frame every time. Haven't done that in months (it annoys my red dot). Doesn't matter. Until it's really filthed-up, you can clean what needs to be clean without a mallet. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top