1022allstar

i am considering a ruger pistil in .22 for target shooting ,etc. i have looked at the mark 3 and the 22/45..can anyone offer suggestions as to the pros cons on the diffrences of these firearms.for example magazine release,ergonomics,takeapart/breakdown,etc.thank you!!! )

gasbag

My son has a Mark III and it is an excellent shooter.
Very accurate and not picky about ammo. He likes it a lot.

Which ever one you do buy read the manual 18,437 times before
taking it down, cleaning it and reassembly. Some psychotherapy
afterwards may be needed.
They are stinkers, especially when new. My son can do it ok now but
it took a while for him to figure it out. Me? I won't touch it.

1022allstar

i have heard that they suck at tear down .im willin to deal with that as they shoot like no other.

weblance

I have 4 now... a Mark II Target from 1990, and 3 new 22/45s. Takedown and reassembly isnt all that hard. I dont know why everybody whines about it. Just pay attention at first to the directions and after a few tries, It comes naturally. If you get a Mark III series(22/45 included)it becomes really easy if you remove the magazine disconnect. The Mark I & II dont have the mag disconnect. I prefer the 22/45 grip angle over the Mark grip angle, but they are all really the same pistol. Consider the 22/45 LITE. Its the same gun, just half as heavy. My Mark II Target weighs 42 oz, my LITE weighs 22 oz. Thats a real difference if you are gonna carry it all day long camping, or bumming around in the woods looking for squirrels or bunnies. Whatever you buy, you will be happy, they are great guns and will last several lifetimes with any care.

Nick0410

I liked the Mark III better because all 3 buttons and levers were in the same exact place as ms SR9 so it was a natural fit. I heard you have to press down on the slide release on the 22/45 to release it even with no mag or on a full mag. Besides that, cant really go wrong with either.

Nick0410

First few times, once you get the hang of it, nothing special really, theres one key piece that hangs off the hammer in the back, that piece will get caught up if its not put together in a certain way. Thats about it when it comes to problems. That and you have to force it when disassembling with a rubber mallet, mine is really tight, even after a year

brigond

Yes, I didn't let the break down stop me from buying. My m3 Hunter and 22/45 lite are both tight. I need to use a rubber mallet to get the barrel off . Just be careful not to wack your sites. Also read the manual closely and pay attention to when you remove and insert the magazine during the process. The 22/45 and the hunter have a slightly different step to follow. Both use the same manual but at a certain step, they say to skip to step .......... if you have the 22/45.

Ascii

I have both a stainless MKIII and a black MKIII 22/45. The MKIII, with both the upper receiver/barrel and lower trigger/grip assembly being all metal, is going to be heavier than the 22/45, whose lower assembly is polymer. Both have the same 'blow back' style bolt action. The MKIIIs grip is bent a slightly greater angle than most people are used to. The 22/45s grip is modeled after the 1911 grip. I like them both for different reasons. The best thing to do is try them both out and figure out which one works best for you. Good luck, and happy shooting.

Electromotive

Either would be a good choice. It mostly comes down to a matter of personal preference as far as feel and looks of the gun. I really can't see Ruger making the metal frame Mark 3 series much longer. I'm guessing it costs less to manufacture the polymer 22/45, but around here the street price of the Mark 3 metal frame and 22/45 in the various configurations are pretty similar. They discontinued all of the metal frame P series center fire pistols as of a few years ago, and it seems to me that cataloging the 22/45 polymer frame and the metal frame Mark 3 at the same time only siphons orders away from each other. I quess the marketing people at Ruger know what they are doing, though

North country gal

From a strictly target shooting perspective, the MKIII is the better choice due to it's additional heft and weight in the grip. That added weight helps to absorb small mistakes and inconsistencies in how you grip the gun and that helps to shoot better scores. The metal grip also gives the MKIII a more traditional look and feel, which I very much prefer.

As to the grip angle on the 22/45 making the 22/45 feel like a 1911, in this gal's opinion, that is advertising baloney used by Ruger to sell 22/45s. To me, the added heft of the MKIII makes it balance more like a 1911 in the hand than the 22/45. The 22/45 feels nothing like any 1911 I've shot or held.

Not to say the 22/45 is a bad choice, just don't buy it with the expectation that it will make a better trainer for shooting a 1911 than an MKIII. Buy the 22/45 on it's own merits - lighter weight, easier to carry, a touch less expensive, some different add ons you don't get in an MKIII and so on. Unless you are very serious about getting that last little bit of target grade accuracy, the choice between an MKIII and the 22/45 is mostly just personal preference as far as I'm concerned.

stargeezer

I own both and there really is not much difference aside from the angle of the grip. I've been popping 1911 since the 60's, long, long before I bought my first MKI/II or III. I really like the angle of the 22/45 because it "feels" natural to me. No offense meant to you North Country Lady , it does matter if you are practicing on the cheap for combat competition. Or if you're a old bum, set in his ways.......

bhefley59

I have a 22/45 mark lll very good shooter my wife loves to shoot this gun. As for take down for cleaning, like any "new to you" gun the first couple times apart might be confusing but after a few good cleaning's it will be like second nature. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the Mark family !!

North country gal

No offense taken, stargazer. We like what we like and who's to tell us any different? Besides, 22/45 or Mark III, they're all still Marks, one way or another, going back to the original versions. Love 'em all.

tylerting

I just got a mkiii after having a 22/45 for a few months, here's my opinion.

I like the mark more. Im a novice shooter and thought I'd like the 1911 grip angle a whole lot more but I don't mind either. the 22/45's downsides are that it balances poorly being steel on top of plastic. get the lite if you get it for sure. The other thing that bugs me is the inability to slingshot the bolt closed without modification. The mkiii has this engineered into the lower. no matter what you get remove the magazine disconnect, it just adds problems.

personally I think the mkiii grip angle is dead sexy.

gmsoapy

Hi I just got a MKIII Hunter. It's my 3rd MKIII . This one breaks down with a paper clip to release to main spring and a light tap with a small hammer to break down. To put together no tools at all slide the reicever on and hit the lower end with my fist and the rest is history. Break down and back together 5 mins. Not thge typ MKIII. My othewr two are not like that. My sons is a lttle earier then my two but not as easy as the Hunter. Also on my the mags drop out like a 1911 push the mag release out the mag shoots. This right out of the factory. Got to love it. I wish they all were like this.