Rugar Mark re-assembly

[Ernie]

https://youtu.be/3hflZbPI-qc Saw this on You-Tube, I can relate

[markiver54]

https://youtu.be/3hflZbPI-qc Saw this on You-Tube, I can relate

Don't own one...but that's great Ernie!

[Mags]

.
Funny video.
Then this video shows how to do it. Doesn't look that hard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nD1z8lhjP04

https://youtu.be/3hflZbPI-qc Saw this on You-Tube, I can relate

[JEBar]

we gave a Mark II to both of our son's many, many years ago .... I took one apart, ended up sending it back to Ruger for reassembly .. .. one of our son's has learned to take his apart and reassemble it without much effort .... he does both because his brother and I won't attempt it

[BigAl52]

I have a 3 and a 4 and I just look at it this way it keeps me out of trouble.

[Mags]

.
Another video with a more concise demonstration.
"Don't let the internet terrors scare you away..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDDB9t2qa7Y

[Ernie]

It is a bit difficult but I can resemble without cursing too loudly, don't do it enough to attempt without the manual. The new versions with the one button takedown has great appeal.

[Mistered]

I am planning on a Mark II as soon as I find a good deal on one locally.
I have often heard of the difficulty of disassembly/reassembly but after having once owned a Kel-Tec gen 1 S2K, and having accomplished it once on it - I can't imagine the Mark II being too difficult.
The Kel-Tec was the worst gun to work on I have ever experienced.

[Ernie]

my worst was a Colt Woodsman. Got to the last piece to put together and it just would not go. Tried for 2 days and ended up having to take it to a gunsmith. He told me they could be a real problem and to not take it all the way down again.

[PT7]

When I bought my MkIV Ruger 22/45, simply decided to skip models I-III. The single-button release is a pleasure to "work" with. Sure do like simple.
PT7

[Shakey Jake]

EABrown sells kits to make them a lot easier to assemble. I installed one on mine and it's a breeze now.

[North Country Gal]

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.)

[Mistered]

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.

[North Country Gal]

The IIs have always been my favorite. Everything you need and nothing that you don't.

[North Country Gal]

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.

[Shakey Jake]

My Mark II. Recently changed the stock grips.

[Mags]

.
This sharing on these Rugers, got me wanting one.

[North Country Gal]

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.

[BigAl52]

I have a current Mark IV 22/45 Ultra lite with a Burris fast fire on it. I like it alot. But Local pawn shop has a Mark II slabside target model Ive been kind of eye balling.

[bandit1250]

NCG is right about the negative things Ruger did with the Mark III. As much as I prefer a MK. II I have a MK. III Hunter with a Redfield red dot on it that shoots better groups than my wife's slab side stainless target model and her MK. II is a very good shooter. The trigger and the dumb things Ruger did to the III make it not as desirable as the II. The MK. II is with out a doubt the cream of the crop when it comes to the MK series. They had it right then took a step back wards to fix things that worked better before the changes that were made. My MK III even with its factory trigger is better than the MK IV trigger and is much better to look at. I don't like looking at a pistol with a hinge in it. Just me. It is a matter of taste to the individual that is buying one. Makes the earlier MK's a bit cheaper to buy with folks wanting the MK. IV.