RNorris

I have owned an MKII in the past, and will be recieving another (10 inch) on Tuesday. I have been reading about them.....but why the aparrant unanimous preference for the MKII over the MKIII? What changed?

Iowegan

RNorris, Ruger did some "band-aid engineering" to convert the MK II to a MK III. These modifications were required for safety compliance in a few states. Ruger added a Loaded Chamber Indicator (LCI), a Key Lock, and a Magazine Disconnect. They did make one improvement .... the magazine release is now just behind the trigger guard, much like a 1911. Any time a safety feature is added, people get all wired so I guess that's why there's a unanimous preference for the MK II.

Actually, if Ruger would have done a better job designing the changes, it would have received a much better reception. Example: The LCI works great but is a cosmetic disaster. The Magazine disconnect also works OK but it interferes with the magazine release and won't let empty magazines drop free. The Key lock is barely visible and seems to work OK but it interferes with field stripping.

Some of us have converted our MK IIIs to a MK II.5 by replacing the hammer & hammer bushing and mainspring housing & safety latch with MK II parts to eliminate two of the problems.

RNorris

Thanks!

Roger

TomC

As someone who has modified a couple of MK IIIs to the MK II.5 configuration, I have to say I like it that way. The only additional change I make is to add a 1911 mag release extension, because even with my big hands, I can't reach the mag release button without changing my grip. The mag release extension fixes that.

VinS

I can tell you why I would not get another MKIII in 22/45. I have had nothing but feed issues with all ammo with the exception of CCI Mini Mags. From what I can see Ruger made some changes to the magazine from MKII to MKIII and I believe that is where the problem is.

Also, I am not the only one that has had these issues, several of my fellow club members had the same issues and sold their MKIIIs. Unfortunately, I am not in a position to do that right now and thus have to use the CCI MINI MAGS in the bullseye leage I shoot in. The MKII shooters never have a second thought about reliability with any ammo they chose to shoot.

To give credit where credit is due I will say that with the mini mags it shoots a 1" group at 50ft from a bench rest. Much better than I can shoot for sure.

ktmcneese

VinS - Minimags work best for my 22/45 too but Remington thunderbolts work well for me too. I found 350 round boxes at Walmart for $7.

Iowegan

VinS, You're blaming the wrong part. Get a Power Custom or Volquartsen extractor and it will fix your problems. They cost about $12 but are well worth it and turn your gun into a garbage eater. Extractors have been a hit and miss issue with the MK Series pistols since day 1 (1949).

rickyc

Where do you guys get the hammers? Someone butchered myMK I trigger pull and now it is so light I am unable to shoot it. I tried to find replacement parts to drop in and get a factory pull but they are restricted.

I'm not real sure which parts I need, but I think it is the trigger and hammer.

TomC

Brownell's is one good source. There are others.

Bullseye

You likely just need a hammer and sear. Not a trigger. You can also install a VQ Mark II hammer and sear in your Mark I. The only difference you will notice in your pistol is the ability to set the thumb safety to "on" with the hammer uncocked. Kind of like killing two birds with one stone, you can fix the hammer problem and get a decent trigger pull with the same effort.

R,
Bullseye

WvDave

I installed the VQ trigger accurizing kits in my MKIII Target and my MKIII 22/45. Very nice and crisp target triggers but be aware that they are both right at a 2lb pull, so they are definitely target triggers. Very easy to have premature discharge until you get used to them. I wonder what your trigger pull is now?

dangrd

The magazine disconnect on the Mark III makes the disassembly procedure even more complicated.

A friend is just getting into guns and she liked shooting my Mark II. Knowing that these pistols are already "particular" about how they are disassembled and reassembled I didn't feel it appropriate to put her in a new Mark III when the Mark II will do what she needs it to do, so I found a Mark II for her on an auction site and now she's waiting for her paperwork to clear here.

texas tiger

Just purchased a MKII form Cabela's gun libary. Looks like it was never fired.
I do not like the MKIII because of the loaded chamber indicator, which compromised the solidness of the receiver, for dirt and moisture entry. Yes I know it was a requirement. Too bad manufacturers have to reengineer for stupid.
Own two MKII's: government model and bull barrel

Texas Tiger