Thoughts on Ruger Mk III ? - Page 3
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Semi-Auto Handguns >

Thoughts on Ruger Mk III ?


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-07-2011, 01:29 AM   #21
The Balota's
FTF_ADMIN.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
winds-of-change's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Glenpool, Oklahoma
Posts: 27,306
Liked 10302 Times on 6154 Posts
Likes Given: 14949

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quentin View Post

Nothing wrong with buying a used Mark II if you find one.
I was lucky enough to find a used mark II. Thanks, JonM.
__________________
Honor Student: School of Hard Knocks
To the world you may be one person, but to one person you may be the world.
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritatus
winds-of-change is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2011, 10:01 PM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 29
Default

As a followup, I bought a MkIII target just today and headed straight to the range. It's accurate, cheap to shoot and I love the trigger. By the end I was running the target out to 70'. At 70', my eyes seem to be a bigger problem than the gun. Wish I shot my M&P9 as well as I do the MkIII -- though I sure do miss using the autoloader for the M&P magazine. Apparently I'm lazy.

Anyway, it was this model: Ruger® Mark III™ Target Rimfire Pistol Model 10103

200 rnds later, I'm really happy with the purchase (and so is my wife.)
BarryNiven is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 01:07 PM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 29
Default

As further followup: Left my sunglasses at the range. We had to go get them, so we shot both days this weekend. That's about 500 rounds through the MkIII over the two days without doing an initial cleaning. At the end of the second day we were getting failures to feed with exactly the same ammo we started with. So, I brought the MkIII home, disassembled it, cleaned it, and reassembled it for the very first time.

With the right tools, disassembly is easy. It's a clever design and the only thing tough was how tight the initial pin is to get out. A rubber mallet really helped.

Reassembly is definitely tricky. Getting the hammer positioned just right on the final step was not clear to me from the manufacturer video. In the end, this video was the one that really helped me with reassembly:


Fun gun. Not a serious business kind of thing, but I can say that alternating between this and other guns is making me a better shooter. When all the shots from the Ruger go into the center of the target, and the shots from the smith are going down and left; it's pretty clear that how I pull the trigger on the smith is moving the gun.
BarryNiven is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2011, 05:15 PM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jismail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 239
Liked 37 Times on 19 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

I have a 1978 "Standard" (same as Mark 1 but with fixed sights) and it is a really fun pistol to shoot, works flawlessly, is well made, and despite the fears stated for cleaing, it isn't hard. Most of the time you only need to clean the action and barrel, but if you feel the need to strip it down, it isn't anything to be afraid of, there is just a simple method you need to follow to ensure proper insertion of the mechinism - no big deal.

I think the style (which most people think is after a German WW2 Luger, but is in reality is styled after the WW2 Japanese Nambu pistol) is pleasing and fits most peoples hands nicely.

Nothing bad to say about the others out there but there is a reason that this pistol has been popular and basically unchanged since it was first introduced in 1949!
jismail is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2011, 08:59 PM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MrWray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,428
Liked 1040 Times on 621 Posts
Likes Given: 16

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jismail
I have a 1978 "Standard" (same as Mark 1 but with fixed sights) and it is a really fun pistol to shoot, works flawlessly, is well made, and despite the fears stated for cleaing, it isn't hard. Most of the time you only need to clean the action and barrel, but if you feel the need to strip it down, it isn't anything to be afraid of, there is just a simple method you need to follow to ensure proper insertion of the mechinism - no big deal.

I think the style (which most people think is after a German WW2 Luger, but is in reality is styled after the WW2 Japanese Nambu pistol) is pleasing and fits most peoples hands nicely.

Nothing bad to say about the others out there but there is a reason that this pistol has been popular and basically unchanged since it was first introduced in 1949!
Standard as in high standard? I use to have a high standard .22 pistol. It had "model GD" on the receiver,im not sure when it was made.. It shot good though. It had a button at the front tht detached the barrel.. Pretty simple little gun
__________________
Semper paratus.....virtute et armis
MrWray is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2011, 10:10 PM   #26
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Quentin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northwest
Posts: 7,379
Liked 1652 Times on 1086 Posts
Likes Given: 1653

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWray View Post
Standard as in high standard? I use to have a high standard .22 pistol. It had "model GD" on the receiver,im not sure when it was made.. It shot good though. It had a button at the front tht detached the barrel.. Pretty simple little gun
No, back when the Ruger Mark I was sold it was the target version and the non-target version was called the Standard. The Standard was the first Ruger released, around 1949. I think that term was dropped when the Mark II was released.
__________________
______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek
Quentin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2011, 01:36 AM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: sandusky,oh
Posts: 173
Default

I really like the mark 2s the best i have a regular blued one and a stainless target one with adj sights and a bull barrel both are absolutely great. I feel like i shoot better with them than the newer mark 3 my buddy has.
nccinstaller is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Any thoughts on CZ? Thadeuce General Handgun Discussion 12 07-28-2011 05:45 AM
What are your thoughts on the .357 SIG? Shihan Semi-Auto Handguns 22 03-30-2011 02:58 AM
Thoughts on Ruger LC9 wickedins4nity General Handgun Discussion 9 03-23-2011 02:45 AM
Thoughts on the Ruger P94? StanDJ77 General Handgun Discussion 7 08-19-2010 12:55 AM
Thoughts on CZ P07 mpd8488 Semi-Auto Handguns 11 06-08-2010 12:02 AM