Ruger .22 Pistol

[Timradcliffe345]

Can anyone explain the differences between the Mark II and III Ruger .22 pistols. Which one is preferable for target shooting? What barrel length is the way to go? Fixed versus adjustable sights? Please share your personal experience with the Ruger Mark series pistols. Thank you.

 

[ArmedBear]

What do you mean by target shooting?

My personal experience has been with a 22/45 and a Mark II Target, both with 6 7/8" slabside bull barrels.

The 22/45 has the original target irons. The Mark II has a Leupold F8 2X pistol scope on it.

These are the most reliable semiautos of any caliber or brand that I have ever owned or shot, bar none. Thousands upon thousands of rounds and zero "jams" of any kind whatsoever, with match ammo or with the cheapest bulk crap you can buy.

If I strictly wanted a plinker, I'd go with a slightly shorter barrel than the ones I have, but it's not a big deal. These are fun. Everyone who tries one, loves it.

I use the scoped one for local club matches, where my score has been right there with people who have MUCH more expensive pistols. It could use a trigger job; I'm going to get one this week now that there's a break between matches for a few weeks.

Some of my favorite guns.

I do not own a Mark III. I bought a pre-owned Mark II both because it's a slightly simpler design and because I got a great deal on the unfired gun and scope. I say "pre-owned" because it wasn't actually used. Someone just mounted a Leupold, lost the box and magazines, and I got a new gun with a mounted Leupold for close to the price of the gun by itself.

 

[Brian Williams]

I had a mark II and it was great, I found a Colt woodsman as a plinker and like it better. I would love to have another ruger slabside like I had.

 

[XavierBreath]

The MKIII is similar to a MKII, but with a loaded chamber indicator, a magazine safety, and a mag release button placed behind the trigger guard.

The MKII is preferred by many shooters, including myself, due to it's simplicity and durability. The MKIII is having a decent track record though. It had a few teething pains, but most new designs do.

For precise target shooting, the Ruger MKII Government Model is/was the way to go. It had faster rifling, and was test fired at the factory for accuracy.

Among the MKIII line, the Competition Model has replaced the Government. The MKIII Hunter is also superbly accurate. Both are drilled and tapped for optics if you like.

Another option is a PacLite receiver/barrel set-up.

To be honest, most Ruger rimfire pistols are capable of out shooting the person who holds them. The pistols with the longer sight radius, adjustable rear sights with a fiber optic front sight or red dot definitely help the shooter harness that accuracy.

You can learn more about them, the MKII in particular, here.

 

[MCgunner]

I bought a pre-owned Mark II both because it's a slightly simpler design and because I got a great deal on the unfired gun and scope.

Mine wasn't unfired, and it SURE ain't now. But, it was a good deal...

 

[stalkingbear]

The mk3s are extremely easy to convert back to mk2 in regards to chucking that goofy magazine disconnect safety. All you have to do is install an mk2 hammer.

BY ALL MEANS get adjustable sites!!!!!!!!

 

[Bill B.]

For precise target shooting, the Ruger MKII Government Model is/was the way to go.

Excellent Advice! You might wish to add a pair of thumbrest grips but it is good to go right from the start!

 

[Oro]

After hungting for a while, and unsuccessfully, in 2007 for a MkII with adjustable sights, I bought a Mark III 22/45 with adjustable sights. No regrets. Superb gun. Get the adjustable sights and grip shape you want, then let the "MkII" or "MkIII" follow after that.

 

[punkndisorderly]

I owned a MKII in the past, and own a MKIII currently. While I like my MKIII, the upgrades actually hurt the design rather than help it.

The loaded chamber indicator is just one more thing to clean around in an already tight space.

The magazine disconnect adds more steps to the already longer than normal disassembly, assembly and mandates having the magazine by your side to accomplish it.

All in all though, I'm very happy and would only trade it in towards the same model in a MKII.

 

[IndianaBoy]

The loaded chamber indicator is just one more thing to clean around in an already tight space.

The magazine disconnect adds more steps to the already longer than normal disassembly, assembly and mandates having the magazine by your side to accomplish it.

I may be wrong. But as I understand it, you can remove both the loaded chamber indicator, and the mag disconnect. With no inhibition of the reliable or safe function of the gun.

As every responsible gun owner knows, adding a loaded chamber indicator and/or a mag disconnect doesn't do anything to truly make the firearm safer.

I can understand certain situation where a mag disconnect might be desirable. If I were a cop, I might want one.


As for the Ruger pistols. I love mine.

 

[Pilot]

I have three Ruger MK II's. A 5.5 in bull barrel Target model with Volquartsen tigger and sear and thumbrest grips. Its my "go to" range gun for informal target shooting. I also have a MK II 22/45 with the 4 inch bull barrel and I use this mostly for woods carry and plinking, but its almost as accurate as the 5.5. My thid is the Standard model MK450 50th Anniversary model which I have kept unfired NIB for ten years, but may shoot it for the first time today.

For all around target shooting and plinking I recommend the 5.5 inch bull barrel Target model in either MK II or MK III configuration, although that MK III Hunter with 4.5 inch fluted barrel looks good too. As others have said you can take out the MK III lawyer stuff if you can't find a MK II. Get adjustable sights.