Ruger MKII or MKIII Which One?

[paperboy]

I am considering on getting a ruger auto. I have heard pros and cons about the MKIII. One being feeding reliability. Some people say look for a good used MKII. Would this be because of the "Added features" of a MKIII? Are the MKII's more reliable than the MKIII? Just looking for some input....

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Most folks who adore the Mk II don't like the Mk III due to the added features, yes.

Many folks feel that the LCI hinders feeding and extraction reliability, too.

I've not owned nor shot a Mk III...so I have no personal experience.

But there have been more than a few folks on here who love their Mk IIIs. And you can get into a Mk III 22/45 for not a lot of money.

-J-

 

[MIGHTYSWORD]

I am considering on getting a ruger auto. I have heard pros and cons about the MKIII. One being feeding reliability. Some people say look for a good used MKII. Would this be because of the "Added features" of a MKIII? Are the MKII's more reliable than the MKIII? Just looking for some input....

You can't go wrong with either one, both are very reliable pistols. I bought my MKII in 1992 and still shots like the first day I took it out of the box, no problems what so ever. Few months ago I finally decided to buy the MK-III Hunter 6-7/8" SS and in my personal opinion this is every bit the gun I thought it would be. Shoots like a dream, very comfortable, good balance and feels great in my hand. Not a single problem with this pistol since I bought it six months ago and 800 rounds thru the barrel. I always like to wait after a new model or just any product comes out on the market for the first time. In this case I waited and gave Ruger a chance to fix all of the "people complains" regarding malfunctions that always happens with the new released models, specially the 22/45. By now I think they finally got it right!
Feeding issues with the Hunter or other MKIII with steel frames don't seem to be a issue like the 22/45 polymer frame.
Also and, in my opinion, this is the most versatile and most valuable .22 LR pistol on the market today regardless of what people say or complain when it come to new "added features": the LCI, Mag disconnect and Internal lock. I don't understand why people remove these parts? or at least two of them...If they don't like the new parts or the way they perform, why buy this model in the first place?...might as well buy the MKII instead. I know they don't make the MKII anymore but there are many second hand MKII's out there. Sometimes I think we look for things about which to complain just to complain................... but anyhow, that's another subject.
I'm not removing or planning on removing none of the new added parts, they work fine for me and might as well keep the gun in its original condition. The 6-7/8" SS target-crowned fluted barrel together with the checkered Cocobolo grips makes the MK-III Hunter a nice appearing pistol and Ruger does a great job in the packaging. The gun comes is a hard plastic green case along with a nice and BIG hilarious barn padlock...I guess to keep the cows from getting out?..... Two magazines, trigger lock keys, a scope mount (in case I decide to get one) plus the HiViz front sight with six interchangeable Lite Pipes included.... Money well $pended.

My MKIII with a new set of Altamont Rosewood grips:

 

[m_deaner]

...regardless of what people say or complain when it come to new "added features": the LCI, Mag disconnect and Internal lock.

These are features that no competent gun owner needs. They clutter what is otherwise a functionally beautiful design.

That being said - I love the relocated mag release on the Mark III, and that's enough to make me prefer it to the Mark II. You can disable the mag disconnect in less than 5 minutes at no cost if you know what you're doing, and the other two safety "features" don't make the gun less reliable (in my opinion). I still hate that LCI.

 

[ChalupaCabras]

The LCI barely touches the shells, and exerts little if any real pressure on the cartridge.

Reliability issues with the MKIII are nearly always extractor problems. The Ruger factory extractor is WEAK. Spend $10 and install a VQ custom extractor out of the box and your MKIII will run like a sewing machine.

These are features that no competent gun owner needs. They clutter what is otherwise a functionally beautiful design.

That being said - I love the relocated mag release on the Mark III, and that's enough to make me prefer it to the Mark II. You can disable the mag disconnect in less than 5 minutes at no cost if you know what you're doing, and the other two safety "features" don't make the gun less reliable (in my opinion). I still hate that LCI.

I don't know about you, but sometimes I forget if I have a round in the chamber. I follow all safety rules and I am perfectly capable of performing a chamber check, but the way the MK series charges makes that a problem sometimes, especially with gloves on. The LCI comes in handy when your in the field, even if it is unnecessary on a square range.

 

[HMMurdock]

I had a MkIII for a few months and I had no problems with it, but if I had to do it over again I'd get a MkII because it seems easier to find parts for (at least as of a year or two ago). The American style mag release on the MkIII was nice, but since it's not a tactical pistol the MkII's European-style release works juuuust fine!

 

[WhitleyStu]

I have always bought Smith & Wesson, Colt, or Kimber handguns, but decided to finally try a Ruger KMKIII678GC. I am very pleased with its accuracy and function. I might try the extractor upgrade, but only after it is broke in. I've never been a fan of the stamped lower, but it mates so tight to the barrel/receiver that it is of no concern. It's been a while since I had a .22 pistol and forgot how much fun they can be.

 

[m_deaner]

I had a MkIII for a few months and I had no problems with it, but if I had to do it over again I'd get a MkII because it seems easier to find parts for (at least as of a year or two ago).

The only parts that won't interchange are the bolt assembly, the mags, the grip panels, and the mag catch. All the other parts from the Mark II fit the Mark III, even the hammer if you toss out the mag disconnect. You can even get Mark II grip panels to fit a Mark III by carving on one of them a few minutes with your pocketknife.

One of my Mark IIIs has a Mark II accurizing kit from Volquartsen in it and a Mark II hammer bushing. Runs great...

 

[m_deaner]

I don't know about you, but sometimes I forget if I have a round in the chamber. I follow all safety rules and I am perfectly capable of performing a chamber check, but the way the MK series charges makes that a problem sometimes, especially with gloves on. The LCI comes in handy when your in the field, even if it is unnecessary on a square range.

I always know when my guns are loaded. And even when they're not, I assume they are. The LCI and mag disconnect were added by Ruger to make Mark XX pistols legal for sale in California. They weren't features gun owners were clamoring for.

I mean, really, how many guns have these "features"?

Fewer mechanical parts mean better reliability. And your brain is the best "safety" there is.

The ultimate Ruger would be a Mark II with the Mark III's mag release.

 

[MIGHTYSWORD]

I agree with ChalupaCabras,.... "always assume your guns are loaded" and he's also right about the CA safety law of adding a LCI to the MKIII.
We also know there are many opinions and suggestions about the MKIII and we have to make our own decisions based on our wants and needs. If your MKIII is not prone to jamming or stovepipes, then why remove the LCI or change the extractor. It's old advice but still true with the MKIII, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Some owners have issues or trouble with the LCI on the new MKIII and some don't.
I own few Glocks, all with LCI's, I'm use to it and one more pistol with LCI doesn't bother me at all.

 

[theweakerbrother]

MKII for all the above stated reasons. Use your brain as a safety, not features on a tool.

 

[bwframe]

I always know when my guns are loaded. And even when they're not, I assume they are. The LCI and mag disconnect were added by Ruger to make Mark XX pistols legal for sale in California. They weren't features gun owners were clamoring for.

I mean, really, how many guns have these "features"?

Fewer mechanical parts mean better reliability. And your brain is the best "safety" there is.

The ultimate Ruger would be a Mark II with the Mark III's mag release.

Deaner headed me in the right direction with my new, yet crippled up MKIII 22/45. His quick teardown and direction to some Internet study yielded a gun that runs like a scalded dog that is way, way more accurate than I am. The Internet study showed that the metal part of the LCI is a problem that is easily solved.

 

[IndyGunworks]

the only reason i would reccomend the mkII over the III is because of the mag release.

 

[luvall]

So what is going price for a never shot Mark II with custom rosewood grips? I have a friend who is willing to sell but wants me to come up with a price. This is in 100% condition. I don't want to cheat him.

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

Deaner headed me in the right direction with my new, yet crippled up MKIII 22/45. His quick teardown and direction to some Internet study yielded a gun that runs like a scalded dog that is way, way more accurate than I am. The Internet study showed that the metal part of the LCI is a problem that is easily solved.

Do you happen to have that internet study material handy? I could use some information to fix my MKIII up.

 

[G McBride]

My favorite is the MK II 512. This is a 5 1/2" Bull barrel target model with adjustable rear sight.

 

[JByer323]

the only reason i would reccomend the mkII over the III is because of the mag release.

Right, but with a little work, and a little money, you can turn the guts of a MKIII into pretty much a MKII. I still need to find someone who can machine me a dummy filler for the LCI, but it's not a terribly high priority right now.

 

[bwframe]

Do you happen to have that internet study material handy? I could use some information to fix my MKIII up.

Here you go, my friend;
GunTalk-Online.com :: View Forum - Technical Forum
Also, don't forget RFC Home

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

I sure do appreciate it.

 

[bwframe]

Right, but with a little work, and a little money, you can turn the guts of a MKIII into pretty much a MKII. I still need to find someone who can machine me a dummy filler for the LCI, but it's not a terribly high priority right now.

VQ sear and trigger (not the higher $ accurizing kit) along with the Clark hammer bushing solved every performance issue for me. At the same time, it drew the trigger down to 2# with an over travel set screw.

I removed the metal part of the LCI, leaving the synthetic part (seamingly flopping around.) It runs flawlessly.