The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 19, 2016, 02:52 PM   #1
Blindstitch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 2,161
Ruger Mark 3 or 4

If you were in the market for a 22 would you buy a bare bones Mark 3 for $300 new or spend the extra and go for the easier take down Mark 4?

I'm sure both guns are great but i'm curious if cleaning ease is worth the extra dollars. I haven't seen a bare bones Mark 4 so I don't know the asking price on them.



Here's my reference place.
http://www.fleetfarm.com/detail/ruge.../0000000218992

I did see a Mark 3 competition at Cabelas for $500 and really like it.


The goal is target shooting and maybe small game.
Blindstitch is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 03:07 PM   #2
Remington74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2012
Posts: 132
MK III all the way. The MK IV is a step change from all he previous MKs and will only make all the previous MKs rise in value. If the only reason for the MKIV is easier take down, that's not enough for me.
Remington74 is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 03:11 PM   #3
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 7,375
Ruger Mark 3 or 4

Quote:
MK III all the way. The MK IV is a step change from all he previous MKs and will only make all the previous MKs rise in value.


How is the Mk IV any more of a step change than say the Mk III? Around me Mk IIs are somewhat sought after, but I can't see this release raising the values of Mk IIIs.

Last edited by TunnelRat; December 19, 2016 at 03:16 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 03:16 PM   #4
Remington74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2012
Posts: 132
Quote:
How is the Mk IV any more of a step change than say the Mk II
A push button down take down is what would consider a step change, YMMV.
Remington74 is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 03:35 PM   #5
MandolinMan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2013
Posts: 180
Honestly, I would rather have a used Mark II. They pop up from time to time at my local gun stores and don't have all of Ruger's new 'safety' crap on them.
MandolinMan is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 03:47 PM   #6
CDR_Glock
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 30, 2010
Posts: 325
I have the Mark II Competition. It's not hard to field strip and clean once you learn how. Get a Volquartsen trigger and you're good to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CDR_Glock is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 04:28 PM   #7
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 6,909
All have trade-offs

Blindstitch
There are a lot of IF's flying around and you are showing a 22/45 which is a poor comparison to a Competition model. Understand that I am a Ruger MK-family fan and as I have often stated, there are trade-offs between all of them. I still have what some call the MK-I and it gives me great performance. ....

OKAY;
If money was not an issue, I would certainly get the MK-IV Hunter. As far as ease of cleaning, there is an advantage but does not have to be an issue. About three months ago, I held my first Hunter and Standard, in the IV's and personally, I liked them. However, I doubt that I will ever get one as I'm quite happy with my MK-II. .......

If, money was as issue, I'd look for a good used MK-II Target. I don't care for "any" generation of 22/45's.

Good Luck and;
Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 04:41 PM   #8
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 7,375
Quote:
A push button down take down is what would consider a step change, YMMV.
What I'm asking is what did the Mk III really add to the already existing Mk II? The only real benefit I see is the difference in magazine release location. That's not exactly revolutionary. And you also got a LCI and a magazine disconnect that many folks aren't particularly fond of (they removed the LCI for the Mk IV). To me both the Mk III and Mk IV were step changes.
__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness
TunnelRat is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 04:56 PM   #9
ammo.crafter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2006
Location: The Keystone State
Posts: 1,192
Which MK to get

The chamber load indicator in the MK III has historically caused feeding problems resulting in many owners having this item removed.

As Mark owners know, take down is a PITA and a model (IV) that avoids this issue would be a plus.

Personally, I shoot an MK I in competition with a Volquartsen barrel and have never experienced a FTF or FTE.

For warned is for armed!
__________________
"The Constitution is not an instrument for government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry, American Patriot
ammo.crafter is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 06:01 PM   #10
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 10,878
Makes for fantastic forum discussion but I truly believe that while all four Mk's are quality guns, the Mark II is the pinnacle of the design and this is not a close race.

I would pay more money for a used MkII in decent shape than any box-fresh, brand new, never touched MkIII or MkIV or even a museum quality NOS MkI or pre-MkI. I stand firmly by that statement all day long.

And that is the only way I can possibly answer the question.

New MkIII or new MkIV? The answer is used MkII, every single time.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 06:03 PM   #11
Blindstitch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 2,161
Pahoo,
Quote:
There are a lot of IF's flying around
Thought I only used two if's.

Here's what's happening. My wife has a Ruger Sr22 and loves it but the sights are horrible and she's thinking a more target based gun is in order.

I shoot that gun just fine and like it.

In order to help her get better and myself get more guns I took her around and she likes the Ruger line. She held a variety of Mark 3/4 and lite.
Well she hates the lite. Like the bare bones 22/45, Liked the Mark 3 with the luger style barrel ($300 used), didn't like the sights on the hunter but liked everything else, the competition was fine but she's a lefty so the target grip would have to go.

So I'm not sure if she's just liking the price tag or the gun. She did comment she likes how thin the 22/45 is but personally the checkering cuts my palm. She does like to clean her own guns so she liked the Mark 4 for that.

But if she goes cheap I might just want to buy the hunter or competition model for myself. And by she I mean I'll probably end up having to buy it for her.
Blindstitch is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 06:07 PM   #12
TheDevilThatYouKnow
Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2015
Posts: 58
MkIV if you can afford it, if not find a MkII. As a last resort, get a MkIII.

With a MkII you'll probably want to take it down once a year, .... maybe. I shot mine monthly for a decade before I ever did a takedown on it. Liquid solvents and a pull string work wonders.
TheDevilThatYouKnow is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 06:31 PM   #13
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by TunnelRat
Around me Mk IIs are somewhat sought after, but I can't see this release raising the values of Mk IIIs.
+1. IMHO the MkIII is likely to become the 7th-gen Civic or E46 3-series of the Ruger world – the unwanted in-betweens, inferior knockoffs of their predecessors with superfluous crap added, lacking the genuinely positive new features of the later generations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilThatYouKnow
With a MkII you'll probably want to take it down once a year, .... maybe. I shot mine monthly for a decade before I ever did a takedown on it.
~70% of what needs to be cleaned on a MkII can be reached with Q-tips or a Bore Snake with the bolt locked back.

Most of the remainder can be accessed by pulling the bolt only, which is simpler than separating the barreled receiver from the frame.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 06:45 PM   #14
TMD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 9, 2011
Posts: 1,293
Quote:
The MK IV is a step change from all he previous MKs and will only make all the previous MKs rise in value.
Funny.
And FWIW all the current MK III's will be replaced with MK IV's.
TMD is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 06:54 PM   #15
Targa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2014
Posts: 1,383
Bit of a tough question for me. I guess it comes down to rather or not the simplified take down is worth the extra dough to me. After dealing with my brothers MKII, I am thinking it might be. Regardless of what anyone says, the take down on the II's and III's is an exercise in patience.
Targa is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 09:14 PM   #16
berettaprofessor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2008
Posts: 773
I own both. But if they had been available I'd have bought a Mark IV and never purchased a Mark III. That cleaning ease definitely makes it worth it.
berettaprofessor is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 10:13 PM   #17
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 7,375
Ruger Mark 3 or 4

I think one fact worth noting is that a lot of the folks that have no issues disassembling a Mk III have done it a number of times. It's a learning process. However that doesn't really help people new to the pistol and there are no shortages of internet threads where people are asking for help with the process and I imagine Ruger got a fair number of calls as well. The disassembly process of the Mk IV is much friendlier to new owners and takes away what was often a major complaint people would hear about the pistol. To me it makes sense both from a customer service and marketing standpoint to make the changes in the Mk IV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old December 19, 2016, 11:32 PM   #18
michael t
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Location: Out back Ky
Posts: 4,044
I vote a MKII my self I'll never trade for either of the other 2.
__________________
Certified Armed Infidel Colt Defender ,Colt Mustang ,Dan Wesson CBOB, PPK/S, American Classic 1911,Bersa Thunder 380
http://bersachat.comHome of Bersa
http://www.metroarms1911forum.com
michael t is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 07:03 AM   #19
Texas45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2016
Posts: 223
I cant say how the later ones are but the originals work well.
This one has been around for over 50 yrs and shoot everything.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Texas45 is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 09:49 AM   #20
Rogervzv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 1,040
I have several Standards, Mark Is, a Mark II, and several Mark IIIs.

I have shot countless thousands of rounds out of my several Mark IIIs and the LCI has never been an issue. It is simply not true that the LCI causes feeding issues. Guys remove them because they are made that the Almighty Government in some states requires them. That's all.

Once you master the reassembly of a Mark pistol it is not a big deal. But for people new to the gun, it can be a bear (it was for me one famous night until I figured it out). So I applaud the Mark IV for simplifying the take-down. Alas, Ruger will not be offering it in California so I will never own one.

One of my Mark Is ...

__________________
The difference between a citizen and a civilian is that the citizen makes the safety of the body politic his personal responsibility, protecting it with his life. The civilian does not.
Rogervzv is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 10:25 AM   #21
pete2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,399
I've owned a Mark II since 1998, pain in the butt to take it apart. I don't plan on tearing it down again unless I need to make repairs. Clean it with a bore snake and q-tips and air. I replaced the recoil spring and firing pin a few years ago, this seems to have eliminated some misfires. Keep bolt face and rear bbl face clean and she works well with good ammo.
pete2 is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 12:12 PM   #22
Fishbed77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 3,678
Quote:
What I'm asking is what did the Mk III really add to the already existing Mk II? The only real benefit I see is the difference in magazine release location
The Mark III also added a slightly revised feed ramp that improved feeding of HP ammo.
Fishbed77 is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 01:20 PM   #23
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 10,450
I have a Mark II. I would only buy a Mark II if I wanted another Ruger .22 target pistol. IMHO, the Mark II's are best of breed - more configurations than the Mark I and doesn't have all the BS of the Mark III.
Skans is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 04:49 PM   #24
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 10,878
Quote:
It is simply not true that the LCI causes feeding issues.
I might assume that you mean it isn't true that the LCI always causes feeding issues? Because you are dead wrong if you suggest that it never does, this has been endlessly proven to be true, and I have witnessed it firsthand myself.

Glad that yours hasn't caused you grief, that's how all of them SHOULD BE and sadly, are not. Demonstrated fact and not a rare event.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old December 20, 2016, 05:14 PM   #25
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 6,909
It's worth the money !!! ...... IF??

Quote:
I guess it comes down to rather or not the simplified take down is worth the extra dough to me.
I was also under this impression as well but at the last GS the III's and new IV's were selling for the same price.
Quote:
Because you are dead wrong if you suggest that it never does, this has been endlessly proven to be true, and I have witnessed it firsthand myself.
Personally, I have never had a problem but that darn thing, is a dirt catcher and if not cleaned, it will start giving you, a problem. It's really not needed and another example of trying to make a fix on what isn't broke. .....

Might add that the IV's have a different frame construction that I also find to be a plus. ......

Again, if I didn't already own an MK-I and II, I'd buy this one, in a heart beat. ...

Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2016 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11245 seconds with 9 queries