Ruger Mk

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AlfonsDeWolf

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
312
Location
The Gorge, OR
In many Ruger Mk discussions many suggest the Mkll over the Mklll. My question is this....why not the Mkl? I know the Mkl has a couple differences to the Mkll, but is the Mkl somehow a lesser gun? (I have an unfired Bill Ruger commemorative) Thanks
 
MkI's are nice in their own rights, several features are lacking on the first gen but found on others though.
No bolt hold open, you can use the safety but I prefer a dedicated lever.
Heel magazine release, I prefer the standard release on later models.
Receiver cutouts at the rear for gripping the bolt...never had an issue, but the MkI doesn't have them...at least, mine doesn't.
I believe the MkIII is drilled and tapped from the factory, don't know if the MkII is or not, and my MkI isn't.
Some Mk1's use a different mag than later guns....hard to find.
 
Not really lesser, just lacking the refinements--and possibly even standardization, like magazines--that the newer ones have.

The MkIII is indeed drilled and tapped out of the box, or at least my 22/45 Target is. I think the MkII depended on model, but I can't promise.

The MkII was also adopted more commonly and thus has more aftermarket support, where the dimensions for parts for the MkI may be slightly different, and the MkIII can use MkII parts with the addition of a spacer in place of of the mag safety.

Also, in some cases, the MkIII may be a hand up for new shooters. It seems easier to train them to always drop the mag (thus engaging a mechanical safety) and check the loaded chamber indicator before turning away than to train out the muscle memory of their grip on it, but it's also an extra reminder to teach them to check their trigger discipline.
 
Earlier MK I's need the MK II mag button moved to the other side. Later MK I's will take a MK II mag as is. The later guns have A100 marked under the grips.

I have a 1965 5.5" heavy barrel Target that still runs like a Swiss watch.
 
Ruger MK1

I have a Liberty MK1,bought new in 1976, 6 7/8 inch heavy tapered bull barrel.Very accurate and runs any brand of ammo like a champ.A couple issues I don't like about it is the funky mag release and the bolt doesn't stay back on last shot.I put the thumb rest walnut Ruger grips on it. hdbiker
 
MkII mags will work in a MkI. The "button" needs to be moved to the opposite side of the mag but the packaging contains (or at least used to) directions on how to do this. I purchased 3-4 mags for my fathers MkI 2-3 years ago and had to do the "button" swap. Very easy to do if I remember correctly.
 
Here's the deal. The later MK's which added the "features" are simply folks screwing up a good design in the name of improvement.
 
I remember shooting my uncle's "MK1" (back before all these other "marks" were invented and it was just called a "standard") and I fell in love with it. I even saved the $90 to buy one at montgomery ward's but dad said no. Years later I ran across one and I still have it. As far as features, I say, who cares? It works just as good as the day it was new, and besides, its a 22 can plinker. As long as it fires, I'm ok with it not having a hold-open and whatever else it lacks. I ordered spare mags for it from Brownells.
 
I've had a MKI for so long the blueing is gone. Mine is the heavy barrel target model. I've shot the MKII's and have no complaints but the 45/22 don't impress me at all. Triggers suck and the accuracy suffers. Don't know if there were changes in design but I'm sure there has been in the manufacturing.
 
I have a Mk I and a Mk III. I prefer the Mk I. Even after installing aftermarket parts to remove the magazine safety, the trigger on my Mk III is not nearly as refined as the trigger on my Mk I.

Of course, the trigger on my Woodsman MT is better than that of my Mk I.
 
dbmjr1 said:
I have a Mk I and a Mk III. I prefer the Mk I. Even after installing aftermarket parts to remove the magazine safety, the trigger on my Mk III is not nearly as refined as the trigger on my Mk I.

Of course, the trigger on my Woodsman MT is better than that of my Mk I.
Click to expand...
And my S&W 41 has a better trigger than the Colt. But both of those are way more expensive than the Ruger.

My Smith is pretty much just a range gun. The Ruger ends up out in the desert killing jacks quite frequently. And, it is more than enough for coyote at reasonable distances.
 
I've tried several 41's and just don't like them. I also don't think that their triggers were any better than my Colt MT.

However, a buddy has a VQ Target that is based on the MK design. It has an excellent trigger.
 
Mine a MKII Don't need a new unimproved one . Best thing Ruger could do is leave their good designs alone . Like the 10/22 and the MK series. But nope got to mess. . My 10/22 dates to 1982 and still going fine .
 
Good job, Stoky. Until the adjustable sighted target models were introduced there were no "MK" anythings. I don't know how many guys have brought in a MKI to sell to find they had a "standard model" auto.
 
There's nothing wrong with a Standard/MK1, but it's an older model, and you are going to probably have to go out of your way to get one instead of a MKII or MKIII. Chances are, it will also have more wear than a newer model.

Also, it wasn't available in as many configurations, and it will be difficult to get one in stainless.

They have also completely held their value. Unless you are looking at a real dog of a pistol, you won't really save any money over a new MKIII.
 
I like my MK II better than my MK I mainly because the MK I doesn't have a bolt hold open. You have to count rounds fired so you don't slam the firing pin against the empty chamber which can't be good. But that's happened a lot since I bought it in 1976 and it still fires. I got the MK II because it has a 5.5" bull barrel, my MK I has the 6-7/8" tapered barrel. (Both barrels were available in the I and II.)
 
It is fine to dry fire them. You could disassemble the gun if you didn't dry fire it....Ruger let's you know dry firing I'd ok on their FAQ page or at least they did.

Sure someone is gonna say you can damage your gun if the firing pin hole is elongated. Possible, but that is a part failure problem, not a design flaw.. I am sure very MKI got dry fired every range trip.
 
Dry fire can eventually damage the face or the breech requiring the small Nick to be removed.
I know this from buying one very reasonable and discovering that it misfired most of the time. The Smith had a facing tool that cured the problem in minutes.
I don't count rounds fired but I also don't dryfire the Ruger pistols like I would a S&W revolver.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top