Spring has sprung. Get out and shoot your Henry
Rugar Mark re-assembly
- Shakey Jake
- Drover
- Posts: 4285
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:10 am
- Location: Sugar Land, TX
- Contact:
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
EABrown sells kits to make them a lot easier to assemble. I installed one on mine and it's a breeze now.
0 x
- North Country Gal
- Firearms Advisor
- Posts: 6054
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:46 pm
- Location: northern Wisconsin
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
What a shame to pass on a Ruger MK I, II or III for fear of take-down, but, especially, the MK I and II. They may not be the works of art as the Model 41 Smith, the Colt Woodsman or the vintage High Standards, but no semi-auto 22 pistol ever made will match the durability of the Ruger Mark.
I got my first Ruger Mark/Standard in the early 70s and learned to take it apart and reassemble just using the instruction manual. Yup, this was back in the days before the internet and personal computers. (I am that old.) I didn't think it was that hard, then, and I've done this probably hundreds of times, now. In fact, I've done the full Volquartsen mods on Ruger Marks for friends and that is even tougher than a simple take-down.
I suspect part of the push for the Ruger Mark IV was the shoddy way Ruger produced so many of the MK IIIs. When Ruger brought out the MK III, it was at a time when they were pushing to keep production up and a lot of those MK IIIs I've taken apart were so tightly assembled as far as parts that I suspect they were assembled with the help of a hydraulic press. Absolutely no excuse for having to use a mallet and a brass rod to do a take-down on a Ruger Mark, but that's what it took. That was something I never had to do on Mark Is or Mark IIs. i actually had to do the tear down on new MK IIIs for some local friends. They were that bad.
Nothing against the Ruger MK IV, but I was sad to see it hit the market. It is not the same gun as the earlier Marks, but I do understand the reason for it. The action is different. At least the MK III was still the same old Ruger Mark, but with the addition of the mag safety, LCI and different mag release. (Ruger added the LCI and mag safety to be able to sell the Mark in states that required them.)
I got my first Ruger Mark/Standard in the early 70s and learned to take it apart and reassemble just using the instruction manual. Yup, this was back in the days before the internet and personal computers. (I am that old.) I didn't think it was that hard, then, and I've done this probably hundreds of times, now. In fact, I've done the full Volquartsen mods on Ruger Marks for friends and that is even tougher than a simple take-down.
I suspect part of the push for the Ruger Mark IV was the shoddy way Ruger produced so many of the MK IIIs. When Ruger brought out the MK III, it was at a time when they were pushing to keep production up and a lot of those MK IIIs I've taken apart were so tightly assembled as far as parts that I suspect they were assembled with the help of a hydraulic press. Absolutely no excuse for having to use a mallet and a brass rod to do a take-down on a Ruger Mark, but that's what it took. That was something I never had to do on Mark Is or Mark IIs. i actually had to do the tear down on new MK IIIs for some local friends. They were that bad.
Nothing against the Ruger MK IV, but I was sad to see it hit the market. It is not the same gun as the earlier Marks, but I do understand the reason for it. The action is different. At least the MK III was still the same old Ruger Mark, but with the addition of the mag safety, LCI and different mag release. (Ruger added the LCI and mag safety to be able to sell the Mark in states that required them.)
0 x
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
Always heard the III's were the worst with the II's probably being the best of the 'three'.
Again it's common to read the trigger on the II's is the best of all.
Therefore I will keep an eye out for a II. One showed up for sale in WA state recently for $200 in beautiful condition but too far to deal with.
Again it's common to read the trigger on the II's is the best of all.
Therefore I will keep an eye out for a II. One showed up for sale in WA state recently for $200 in beautiful condition but too far to deal with.
0 x
- North Country Gal
- Firearms Advisor
- Posts: 6054
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:46 pm
- Location: northern Wisconsin
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
The IIs have always been my favorite. Everything you need and nothing that you don't.
0 x
- North Country Gal
- Firearms Advisor
- Posts: 6054
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:46 pm
- Location: northern Wisconsin
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
I really shouldn't complain about all the internet discussion on the need for the easier to disassemble MK IV. It does leave all those vintage Marks out there at a great price, just waiting for me to snatch them up.
Here's a recently acquired Mark I made in 1965. Great trigger, all original, no mods and very lightly used. Couldn't pass it up for the price. The Mark I was Ruger's full blown target version and these got a better trigger job than the fixed sight Standard versions. Of course, if you wanted Ruger to upgrade your fixed sight Standard trigger to a Mark I trigger, you could send your Standard in and Ruger would do it for $10. Times have changed.
Here's a recently acquired Mark I made in 1965. Great trigger, all original, no mods and very lightly used. Couldn't pass it up for the price. The Mark I was Ruger's full blown target version and these got a better trigger job than the fixed sight Standard versions. Of course, if you wanted Ruger to upgrade your fixed sight Standard trigger to a Mark I trigger, you could send your Standard in and Ruger would do it for $10. Times have changed.
0 x
- Shakey Jake
- Drover
- Posts: 4285
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:10 am
- Location: Sugar Land, TX
- Contact:
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
My Mark II. Recently changed the stock grips.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
0 x
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
.
This sharing on these Rugers, got me wanting one.
This sharing on these Rugers, got me wanting one.
0 x
UPDATES: OR passes 114, "one of strictest gun control measures in U.S." https://henryrifleforums.com/viewtopic. ... 34#p213234
- North Country Gal
- Firearms Advisor
- Posts: 6054
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:46 pm
- Location: northern Wisconsin
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
Nice MK II, Jake.
This will be heresy to some, but I actually prefer a vintage MK I or II, to my S&W Victory or my crazy expensive S&W Model 41. Oh, the Smiths will shoot ever so slightly smaller groups from a rest and the 41 is a nicer finished gun, great balance and trigger, pride of ownership and all that. Just that a Ruger Mark is more user friendly for me, not to mention that I've been shooting Ruger Marks almost as long as I've been shooting.
This will be heresy to some, but I actually prefer a vintage MK I or II, to my S&W Victory or my crazy expensive S&W Model 41. Oh, the Smiths will shoot ever so slightly smaller groups from a rest and the 41 is a nicer finished gun, great balance and trigger, pride of ownership and all that. Just that a Ruger Mark is more user friendly for me, not to mention that I've been shooting Ruger Marks almost as long as I've been shooting.
1 x
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
The mention of High Standard match pistols gave me a flashback to my hometown auxillary police pistol team. They all used a "supermatic" model I think and they were extremely competitive in the league. Back in the 60's!
0 x
Re: Rugar Mark re-assembly
I was considering a .22 pistol and am a big Ruger fan as I own 4. Are the current Marks that bad? Is their a better choice?
0 x