That hands-on, real-world genuine experience you just added supports my assertion 100% that as built, shipped, and delivered from Ruger: Mark II is a better gun than Mark III. And that Mark III was a step down.
Isolated incident? Rare experience?
But with a quick, easy internet search & fix for a common
With a known, suggested fix?
Plenty of ways to skin a cat. And I'm not saying that discussion threads don't have a life of their own (they do, no problem with that) HOWEVER, If we look at the original post of the thread, posted by the OP:
I want to look around at the used stuff and get a general consensus of which of the "mark" series might be the one to look for between the standard automatic (a.k.a. mark I), Mark II, mark III, and any certain variations.
I'll say Mark II was the high water "mark."