Ruger MKII vrs Ruger 22/45

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kitt

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
151
Location
N.C.
I have owned several Ruger MKII 22 pistols and they all shot well ..but I'm looking at the 22/45 as it has the same controls as my Colt pistols. Do the Ruger 22/45 pistols shoot as well and last as long as the MK II's ? Thanks in advance for any info...KITT
 
Kitt, my only experience is with the Mark11 but I would bet there's not a bit of difference in accuracy or longevity. Think some people like the grip angle of the 22/45 better. Hogue wrap around grip's make the Mark11 fit my own hand better.
 
I use my 22/45 for steel and pin shooting - and got it in preference to MkII because of control positions and grip angle. I prefer a ''conventional'' mag release position for one and never found the MkII grips very friendly.

Just me probably.


22-45_dot_s.jpg
 
Main difference is the grip angle and the fact you can't change the grips on the 22/45 (ignoring the Houge "rubber bands" you can put on about anything).

The MKIII has same controls as 22/45 & and the 22/45MKIII has a slimmer grip and frame although lots fo folks dismiss these out of hand because of the loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect that the MKII models lack. But if you want a traditional mag release location and the "Luger" grip angle definetly look at the MKIII.

the 22/45 and MK top ends are essentially the same -- some folks have swapped them but report slight differences in trhe lugs that engage the frame.

I'd go with what feels best in your hand and has the price and sight options you want. The 22/45 is supposed to "feel" like a 1911 but IMHO its only a vague similarity with the 22/45 MKIII seeming a bit closer in my hand. To me its the 1911's sliding trigger (and its unique crisp pull) that defines the "1911 feel". The pivoting trigger on either 22/45 is not even close, and the slide lock and safety "buttons" while in the right place, don't interact with your thumb in the same way either.

--wally.
 
Last edited:
I have both the MK II and 22/45. The MK II is a 5 in. bull barrel and is more of a target pistol, as its too heavy to carry in the field. I bought a 4 in. bull barrell 22.45 becuase its smaller an lighter. ITs plent accurate, although not as accurate as the MK II which has a Volquartsen triger, and obviously longer barrel, etc.

I prefer the grip angle of the MK II, it just points more naturally for me. I also prefer the heal mag release for this type of gun. That being said, for the field, my little 22/45 is fine and has operated reliably over the five or six years I've had it.
 
I've got a Mk III, 22/45. The loaded chamber indicator and the magazine disconnect don't bother me one way or the other. Actually the loaded chamber indicator is a nice feature I think. I like the grip angle, and the location of the controls.

As far as which shoots the best, I doubt it makes much difference. Any of them will shoot better than you can most likely.

Here's mine.

Cajunshoots041.gif
 
I chose my MKII 22/45 over the regular MKII because I prefer the mag release, and the grip angle is more comfortable for me. The lighter weight means my girlfriend enjoys shooting it more as well...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top