Ruger Mark III Hunter or Competition?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bear2000

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
397
Hi all,

I'm looking to buy a target .22 pistol and have settled on a Ruger Mark III, either a Hunter or Competition. But which one? I'm primarily interested in attaining the highest accuracy I can.

Do you think I'd do better with the fluted barrel (which just looks really cool andat 41 oz is 4 ounces lighter) on the Hunter or the bull barrel on the Competition? The Hunter also has a fiber-optic front sight, whereas the Competition has regular adjustable sights, but a thumbrest.

Hunter: http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=10118

Competition: http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=10112

Anyone shot either one of these? I've only shot a Mark III Standard, but want something a bit, well, prettier (in my opinion).

Thanks!
 
Hi,

You could also consider the cheaper "Target" model with the tapered barrel of the same length. Don't count it out.

All three of these models are theoretically just as accurate, so you should weight these other considerations:

1. If you are getting it to PRIMARILY shoot competitions with lots of SLOW FIRE within a short period of time, the heavy bull barrel will dissapate the heat better and also be less prone to temporary heat distortion of the barrel. Hence, better accuracy from later shots while the barrel continues to heat.

2. If you are getting it to PRIMARILY hunt with and lots of follow-up shots are thus not expected, go with the lightest weight rig, for the reduction in "toting" weight will make for a more enjoyable hunt!!!

Also, if you are hunting, consider the color of the gun. I personally prefer the way that blued guns generally don't reflect light as much as the glint on a stainless gun that might tip game to my location. Rugers ain't really "blued" anyway. They are more "blacked" and this finish is more stealth-like, IMHO.

3. The fluted bull barrel is a good compromise between a heavy barrel to dissapate and eliminate barrel heating issues during long sillouette matches and such, while also not being so danged heavy to tote during small game season. Many will gravitate to this model as a good compromise.


However, I love my MkII Target Model and have done well with it in Sillouette, pin matches AND hunting. It's cheaper too!!!;)

I prefer the blued Target model. Here's mine, complete with Volquartsen LH grips and a Bushnell Holosight. It is a real tackdriver.

2220655RugerTargetModel.jpg

2220885IMG2476.JPG



Good luck on your choice! You really can't go wrong with any of the three!

T.
 
Thanks....

...for the good advice. I plan on using it primarily at the range, actually. I'm new to shooting and think a Ruger .22 is a good handgun to start with. And while I know I can get a nice one like yours for a little less, I saw the new stainless Hunter yesterday at the range and thought it looked great.

So, I think I'll get the Hunter (and yes, partly because I think the barrel looks very cool). I can get it otd for $447.00, which seems pretty good for a gun that retails for $567.00.

Thanks again!
 
That's a very good choice indeed!

Welcome to the sport!!!

When I started doing the same thing about 10-15 years ago I bought my Target Model MkII because that's what my local dealer had in stock that would do the job!

If I'd seen that gorgeous Hunter version . . . well . . . I'd have probably gone for it too!!!

BEST WISHES . . . and I hope you enjoy the sport like me and many others have!

Now get a set of Volquartsen grips and you'll be sittin' pretty and shootin' even better!!! They've recently added the grips to fit the new MkIII versions . . .

Here's their website: https://www.volquartsen.com/vc/pages/public/home.jsp

T.
 
Either would work. . . I have a Hunter . . . liked the "looks" better & it's far more accurate than the operator is . . .
 
The "Express" sights on the Hunter -- V-notch with a center vertical white stripe at the rear and a round fiber-optic bead (I like the green) at the front -- are a little odd at first, but work okay after some getting used to. And if you never do, you can always replace them with a set of standard Ruger Mk.III sights. Or any number of optical doo-dads.
Regardless, the pistol itself is quite accurate.
 
Thanks for all of the feedback.

Unfortunately, the Internet can make choices like this all too difficult. I've been looking at the Buck Mark Bullseye Target, which is a fine looking gun and, from what people are saying, also easier for a novice like me to take down.

http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/popup.asp?cat_id=051&type_id=426

Any thoughts on the great Buck Mark vs. Ruger Mark III debate? Or is this Ford/Chevy territory?
 
Mark III Hunter

This is a very reliable and accurate gun. I enjoy shooting it very much. It is even better now that I have a set of Hogue grips on the gun. I bought it new, but the wooden grips had a scratch on them. I called Ruger and explained this to then, and they laughed at me, told me that the gun was over two years old, and that I should just deal with it. I have, by putting it up for sale. If their customer service is that pathetic, I am going back to a Buckmark.
 
I loved my Hunter SS. Also, perhaps lucky, my trigger was fantastic. No Volquartsen required.

Shot that all the time when I started plinking just shy of 3 years ago up until January. Shot a .22 personal best at a match yesterday with an 873/900.

Enjoy! Bullseye is a great sport.

cavman
 
You think Ruger shuld replace your grips after two years? Sorry I wouldn't of even made the call, if they were that bad why did you buy the gun?
Sorry back to the OP.
I have the Competition model with slab sided barrell and it is a blast to shoot. I put one of those cheap BSA Holo sights on it and I can soot a squirell out of a tree at 50 yards with little trouble. This little pistol is far more accurate than I am.
 
Buckmark vs. Mk III

#1-The Buckmark has a MUCH better trigger. You'll spend probably $75-$100 to get the Ruger trigger up to Buckmark standards.

#2-The finish on the Rugers is MUCH better than the Buckmark.

#3- You get TWO mags with the Ruger. The Buckmark will only get you one. (An extra Buckmark mag will cost you $25.)

#4- The Buckmark "Hunter" model is a pretty nice gun, and you should be able to get it for $50-$100 cheaper than the Ruger Hunter.

#5- Grip angle is personal preference. You'll have to make that call.
 
Well, the gun was brand new in box and it was won on Forthehunt.com. The scratch is very minor and cosmetic, but that is not the point. Some manufacturers stand behind their products for life, and some don't give a crap as soon as that first round is fired through the gun.

Case in point...my wife bought me a 629 cl dx 44 mag 7 years agothat a friend of mine had bought NIB 3 years earlier. The wood grips that came on the gun were cracked and The rear sight was also slightly damaged due to him being bucked off a horse. I called Smith and Wesson to order parts and they sent me both parts FREE OF CHARGE... I am glad it is pre-lock, and I am very happy that they stand behind their product, whether it is 2 months, two years, or 15 years.

Sorry...back to the post...The Ruger is a very fine weapon, but their customer service does not even compare to that of some other companies.
 
Mark I

I prefer the open sighted Mark I I can put all 9 in the space of half dollar. I truly like it better so I vote tapered.
 

Attachments

  • IM000853.JPG
    IM000853.JPG
    260.4 KB · Views: 22
Thank you all for the great information. I'm going to try both the Buck Mark Bullseye Target and Ruger Hunter, although I'm leaning toward the Ruger Hunter.

Of course, I first need to get three notarized letters attesting to my moral character, take them to the sheriff's office, and then wait 30 days for my permit here in North Carolina. What a pain.
 
Well, I just purchased a NIB Ruger Hunter - $420 otd (including FFL) on GunBroker, which I think was a real steal. It would have been $451 with Buds, who usually beats everyone else.

Anyway, thanks for all of your advice. Now, how do I tell my wife I just bought _another_ gun, my fourth in six weeks. I am, though, starting from scratch. Will she buy that?
 
#1-The Buckmark has a MUCH better trigger. You'll spend probably $75-$100 to get the Ruger trigger up to Buckmark standards.
Click to expand...

I have a Buck Mark Standard, Ruger KMKIII678H and PMKIII512. Out of the box, the BM has a crisper trigger than the Ruger. All the Buck Marks I tried have very nice triggers and they all seem to be about the same. I would disagree that they are MUCH better. All Rugers with the "Target" designation on the barrel (bull barrel Rugers) have triggers that can be adjusted. You can adjust the Rugers to a trigger that is pretty much equivalent to the Buck Mark. If you spend $100 you get a VQ trigger with pre- and post-travel adjustment (external), VQ sear that reduces the trigger pull to about 2lbs and (for the max price) a VQ hammer that drops the trigger pull a bit more. I've done the upgrades on the Rugers and the Buck Mark trigger is not nearly as good.

The Buck Mark and the Rugers are excellent pistols. I have no complaints about them. You can't go wrong buying either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Ruger MKIII Hunter or Comp Tgt - Which ONE?
Replies
7
Views
965
ColtPythonElite
C
O
  • Locked
Ruger Mark III Competition or Browning Buckmark?
Replies
18
Views
3K
searcher451
S
G
  • Locked
Ruger Mark III Hunter
Replies
10
Views
760
zeke707
Z
1
  • Locked
Ruger Mark III Questions - Any help appreciated
Replies
4
Views
766
12many
1
W
  • Locked
Ruger Mark III Hunter 5.5 vs 6 7/8
Replies
7
Views
4K
tlen
T
Back
Top