Ruger MK III Hunter

[bandit1250]

I recently bought a Ruger MK III Hunter model 22 handgun. I bought it to shoot with my wife who has the MK II slab side stainless model. Her Ruger is a very good shooter and has a sweet 1 1/2 lb. trigger. I would like mine to be better and get rid of the creep. It shoots almost as well as hers and would maybe be a little better than it is now with some trigger work. Plan on changing out a few parts to make it more like the MK II. Need to get rid of having to have the magazine to fire and the cartridge in chamber indicator. Some claim that getting rid of the magazine feature helps with the trigger weight. I will shoot it as is for now and see if it gets better with use. I do like the grips that the Hunter model has with the full size grips and the finger grooves. The fluted stainless barrel is nice looking to. I bought it at my LGS where it was traded after the gentleman that bought it was going to shoot pistol matches then decided he would rather shoot rifle matches. Had a holograph sight with it and a set of Hogue rubber left hand thumb rest grips and the fiber optic sights were in the box with the spare mag. I sold the holograph sight that was NIB as I really don't care for them as well as a standard red dot. I got a decent deal at $329+tax. My wife and I put two boxes of Federal auto match through the Rugers twice since I got it. Had a lot of fun shooting and spending time with my wife. She loves to shoot.

[North Country Gal]

Good to hear your wife loves to shoot. My guy loves to shoot, too. Really is a great way to spend time with each other.

I have done well over a dozen trigger jobs on Ruger Marks, over the years, and that includes plenty of the MK IIIs. Changing out to a Volquartsen sear and trigger and switching over to a Mark II hammer bushing is all you need to get a very nice trigger. Just holler if you need help, but lots of videos online to show how it's done.

[PT7]

Bandit,

I was a little surprised that you didn't opt for the latest Mark IV model. The biggest change from the earlier models is the one-button, easy take down system on the Mark IV. I've shot my son's-in-law Mark III, which is a great shooter. But when it comes time to clean the pistol, the take downs are nowhere comparable. The Mark IV takes less that 10 - 15 seconds either to take down or re-assemble. Just noticed that about your acquisition.

Yes, they are a great-shooting, accurate .22LR gun. I also agree that those fluted barrels look sharp on this pistol.

Still, the best part is that your shooting partner is your wife!! Way to go, and you guys continue to enjoy your outings and spending that good time together.
PT7

[BigAl52]

I have a Hunter Mark III and I have a 22/45 in a Mark IV. But Bandit saved over 200.00 buying the Mark III. I agree PT the Mark IV is a snap to take apart. But if I could save 200 on the 3 I might have gone the same way. Once a guy gets use to that other system its not to bad. Besides I look at it as a jigsaw puzzle maybe or an exercise in patience management perhaps. Wish I was out shooting mine right now with bandit. But Im tired just got back from a 50 mile bike ride need to rest

[North Country Gal]

That's a good, ride, BigAl. Hope to be back to biking, soon, myself.

I spent most of my shooting life with Ruger Marks, beginning in the early 70s. Learned how to the disassembly on that very first one and went on tp have a couple dozen Marks, over the years, up to and including the MK IIIs. The take down was never an issue for me. Just something you did with a Ruger Mark. No big deal. Most of all, they were all Ruger Marks, basically the same action, plus or minus some features. The new MK IVs, though, are not the same gun. The action is different and see no point in paying extra to solve a problem that I didn't think was a problem. Just me, though.

These days, it's mostly revolvers, anyway. My 10 shot S&W 617 doesn't take much longer to reload than filling the mag on a Ruger Mark. We have two 617s, now, since Bill won't share his.

[PT7]

Makes good sense on the $$ savings, BigAL. The cost difference with Bandit's pre-owned Mark III, my Mark IV was literally only $10. That's why I brought it up. So I looked at the two guns specs & costs more closely on the Ruger site.

Bandit got the Hunter with the grooved target grips in stainless steel. I looked over the current 8 models offered by Ruger, and his model looks like it is currently the top-of-the-line Mark IV pistol -- definitely is based on it having the highest MSRP. Mine on the other hand is the shorter barrel length Standard model. There is a considerable difference in MSRPs, mine being much lower. In fact, mine is the second least expensive of all the models.

Duh, should have looked more at the details of the guns, how equipped and the MSRP. And one other thing I goofed on. Over the years reading Bandit's post, and seeing the various guns and equipment he has secured, I should have known better. He often comes up with excellent deals!! Whatever was I thinking!
PT7

I have a Hunter Mark III and I have a 22/45 in a Mark IV. But Bandit saved over 200.00 buying the Mark III. I agree PT the Mark IV is a snap to take apart. But if I could save 200 on the 3 I might have gone the same way. Once a guy gets use to that other system its not to bad. Besides I look at it as a jigsaw puzzle maybe or an exercise in patience management perhaps. Wish I was out shooting mine right now with bandit. But Im tired just got back from a 50 mile bike ride need to rest

[bandit1250]

I not only saved quite a few dollars with buying the MK III it was a new unfired pistol that had to be sold as used because it had been sold and then traded in unfired by the owner. Then I also got back $60 of my money by selling the holograph sight I didn't like. So $269+ almost $20 in tax on the selling price of $329 I feel I really came out good. I could have sold the lefty Hogue grips to a friend for $25 but gave them to my left handed brother for a gift after seeing that they fit his MK II slab side fine. The Hunter also had the factory Ruger scope base in the box. I also don't like the look of the hinge for the barrel on the MK IV and have heard they have the worst trigger pull of the series. Maybe they are fine and I could still own down the road but right now not likely. I think the MK II was the very best of the entire MK series. I quess I am really a MK II guy when it comes to the Ruger MK series. I am watching for another MK II like my wife shoots and I will get it when I find a perfect one. Mark II's are a bargain right now with folks trading them for MK IV's to get rid of a problem that isn't a problem at all if you make sure the strut is in the main spring where it belongs before pushing the main spring latch at the rear of the grip frame closed. Folks are letting MK II's and III's go cheap to get a MK IV. If you get a steal of a price on a MK II or III grab it and learn the break down procedure on you-tube or just contact our forum lady (NCG) who definitely knows guns.

[North Country Gal]

I'm with you on the MK II series. I think the II had the nicest balance of features - every thing you needed and nothing that you didn't. Down the road I think it will be the most sought after Mark in the series. In fact, prices on the II series started to climb as soon as the IIIs came out and replaced it. Another thing I liked about the II is that for most of its production run Bill Ruger was still running the show at Ruger. The one feature I did like on the IIIs was the mag release. The magazine safety and LCI, I could do without.

The two most sought after IIs were the Slabside and the Government. If you have either one, better hang on to it.

[PT7]

Curious as I don't know, NCG or Bandit. What are "the nicest balance of features - every thing you needed and nothing that you didn't" for the Mark II? Sounds a little like the current high "value" placed on the Colt snake guns....some prices have reached very high thousands of dollars. Is it for collecting purposes? Or do searchers and purchasers of such guns want them to shoot because, for instance, your term of "nicest balance of features?" Why should someone "grab" one of the older models now?

Really interested in learning a more about the Ruger Mark series, especially now that I own one. Sounds like the Mark IV I have with the simpler take down is not that big of a deal compared to what the earlier versions carry.....

Final Q. What is "LCI?"

Thanks
PT7

Folks are letting MK II's and III's go cheap to get a MK IV. If you get a steal of a price on a MK II or III grab it.....

I'm with you on the MK II series. I think the II had the nicest balance of features - every thing you needed and nothing that you didn't. Down the road I think it will be the most sought after Mark in the series. In fact, prices on the II series started to climb as soon as the IIIs came out and replaced it. Another thing I liked about the II is that for most of its production run Bill Ruger was still running the show at Ruger. The one feature I did like on the IIIs was the mag release. The magazine safety and LCI, I could do without.

The two most sought after IIs were the Slabside and the Government. If you have either one, better hang on to it.

[Mags]

Final Q. What is "LCI?"

loaded chamber indicator

[North Country Gal]

The original Ruger Standard/Mark did not have a bolt that stayed open after the last shot. You could manually lock the bolt back using the safety if you wanted to clear a jam, but the bolt did not stay open after the last shot. Meanwhile, the competition did offer guns with this feature, so, in the early 70s, Ruger began some design changes to the original Mark in preparation for adding a bolt hold open feature. This feature was introduced in 1982 with the Mark II, which is otherwise a Mark I with the new feature. It basically made the Mark II a more competitive gun with the competition and the bolt remaining open after the last shot is a very useful feature on any semi-auto.

The Mark III added a 1911 style mag release, which many Ruger Mark fans liked, but also added a magazine safety and loaded chamber indicator which many fans did not like. Many saw these features as unnecessary lawyer-proofing, but Ruger actually added the features for the sake of being able to sell the MK III in states that required those features. The LCI and mag safety can be removed from a Mark III and many Mark III owners have done just that.

Colt Pythons are valued for their extensive hand-fitting of parts, exquisite polishing and finishing and workmanship, something no longer done with revolvers and, because, well, they are Colts. Any vintage Colt brings big bucks. Colt collectors are about as rabid about vintage Colts as Winchester collectors are about vintage Winchesters.

That was never Ruger's market. Rugers were never made with that degree of hand fitting and polish. Ruger's marketing was all about strong, serviceable guns at an affordable price. They never tried to compete with Colts. Some of the older Rugers bring a good price and are avidly collected, but vintage Colts are in an entirely different league of collectibility.

[PT7]

Thanks, NCG. However, I'm still missing the end of the story (I think).

It seems to me that the dots are not fully connected yet in the Mark series to the newest Mark IV. Is the simpler break down system the only change from the Mark III? Or are there other changes that have been done --- either taken away or added to the latest model? For example, I don't know what the difference(s) is that you mention in your earlier post:

The new MK IVs, though, are not the same gun. The action is different and see no point in paying extra to solve a problem that I didn't think was a problem.

Is the different action connected to the break down system? Or are there other "not the same gun" changes? Yeah, my curiosity is up now that I have a Mark IV. I'm wondering what I really have, if that makes any sense. Do I have a good pistol, or is it possibly a not-so-good pistol -- yet to be determined

Too many questions, I guess. You can let me know whenever I need to quit asking -- seriously!

Appreciate the education I'm getting on this pistol. So far, it has really been a very enjoyable pistol to shoot, and I like the close resemblance in looks to a war-model German Luger. Plus for me it seems to be extremely simple to operate for a semi-auto. Remember, I'm a wheelgun person, and this is only the second semi-auto I've ever had. The SA 9mm Service pistol I had was a good gun, but this Mark IV has bested that one for my current shooting fun.

PT7

[North Country Gal]

Yes, there were changes in the action that were necessitated by the easy take-down feature. I've never shot a Mark IV and doubt I ever will, since I see no need for that feature and don't want to pay to get it, so I'll leave it to others to make a comparison as to how well the new MK IV carries on the Mark tradition, not just in terms of accuracy, but also in terms of durability. (The Ruger Mark holds records for shots fired without needing any maintenance.) Hopefully some Mark IV owners will do some range reports for us.

It's no secret that the Ruger semi auto's resemblance to a Luger helped it become the most popular semi-auto 22 pistol, ever, but in terms of the action, the Ruger has more in common with the old Japanese Nambu 14, which gave Bill Ruger the idea for his pistol.

[PT7]

Thanks, NCG. Yes, it would be interesting if there were some range reports from Mark IV owners, especially anyone who has shot a Mark II or III to any extent. The comparison would be good to hear. I have only shot the IV out of the Mark series, and not that many rounds yet (just over 500 to-date).

As far as my firearms education, it keeps on growing thanks to your narratives.

~~~Cool to learn the Mark pistol "holds records for shots fired w/out needing maintenance." I'll take that! As far as accuracy, I've already seen that to be true with mine from the first NOOB shot.

~~~Just for fun, I looked at the web site I researched for photos of the German Luger, Arundel Militaria @ http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/ Found the Japanese Nambu 14 listed there. It sure does resemble the Mark IV in many ways. It was also interesting that you pointed to this Japanese pistol as the one that turned the lightbulb on for Bill Ruger. They had a sharp-looking photo of one of these deactivated pistols, and here it is:

NAMBU_2.jpg

Always appreciate your narratives, NCG, and your willingness to share with everyone. I'd bet you could put a book together including all the stuff you've posted on our Henry Forum, plus the many more you still have at ready. I'd buy a copy for my library!

Thanks again, and have a great day.
PT7

Yes, there were changes in the action that were necessitated by the easy take-down feature. I've never shot a Mark IV and doubt I ever will, since I see no need for that feature and don't want to pay to get it, so I'll leave it to others to make a comparison as to how well the new MK IV carries on the Mark tradition, not just in terms of accuracy, but also in terms of durability. (The Ruger Mark holds records for shots fired without needing any maintenance.) Hopefully some Mark IV owners will do some range reports for us.

It's no secret that the Ruger semi auto's resemblance to a Luger helped it become the most popular semi-auto 22 pistol, ever, but in terms of the action, the Ruger has more in common with the old Japanese Nambu 14, which gave Bill Ruger the idea for his pistol.

[North Country Gal]

Thanks, PT. Always glad to talk anyone's ear off on this stuff. Hard to shut me up, sometimes.

[albin25]

Try it, you'll like it.

https://www.eabco.com/Ruger_Mk_III_Speed_Strip.html