Henry Rifle Forums

BigAl’s post prompted me to shoot my 22/45. I haven’t shot it much since moving to Wisconsin. I shot SV and was having problems with it cycling. Part of the reason is it’s -15F and the other problem is it’s very dirty. I hate cleaning it. Actually I hate putting it back together after cleaning it. In the past this has been one of my most accurate pistols.

I have one also, mine has the shorter 4.5" barrel. I may run a few through it later just for the heck of it also.

RP

Gene, on Ruger Marks, the biggest reason for cycling issues is a dirty chamber and bolt face and you do not have to do a complete takedown to clean that. All you need to do is run a brush down from the muzzle end for a good chamber cleaning. Yes, I know about the advice from cleaning from the breech end when possible, but you're fine cleaning from the muzzle if you are reasonably careful. Then clean the bolt face and extractor and breech area.

As for cleaning the rest of the action, the internal parts can go a very long time without cleaning.

The next issue is ammo choice. If you haven't shot your 22/45 a lot, it may just need more of a break in. I always ran a minimum of 500 rounds of a HV load, such as Mini mags on a new Mark before running SV. If that didn't do the trick with a good SV load, I ran another 500 with the Mini Mags. The good news is that Ruger Marks do very well with HV ammo like Mini mags for accuracy.

Best of luck.

I feel that Rugers are very intelligent firearms and your 22/45 is telling you, “what are we doing out here in this cold”.

Mine is a MK IV but otherwise similar to yours and it likes HV just fine. But in fairness I didn’t run a lot of different ammo types in it but just what I had on hand. Here’s my results.

The Otis cleaning kit will do a great job if you are hesitant to clean from the muzzle.

Sir Henry wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 31, 2023 9:31 am

... I hate cleaning it. Actually I hate putting it back together after cleaning it.

ditto that, especially my semi-autos.

All my .22s have accuracy issues with SV. I now only buy and shoot HV/HP. My favorite CCI Mini Mags.

I shoot only Mini Mag HPs in mine, it is boringly accurate IF I do my part. Putting 50 shots inside a 3 inch bull at 25 yards offhand is unusual but not surprising for me. I do have a red dot. And a Tac-Sol upper. And Volquartson trigger. These are great guns. I am not much of a shooter, so those really help.

Mine is a Mk 1 and I milled the frame so I could add 1911 grips.

John Davies
Spokane WA

North Country Gal wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 31, 2023 10:08 am

Gene, on Ruger Marks, the biggest reason for cycling issues is a dirty chamber and bolt face and you do not have to do a complete takedown to clean that. All you need to do is run a brush down from the muzzle end for a good chamber cleaning. Yes, I know about the advice from cleaning from the breech end when possible, but you're fine cleaning from the muzzle if you are reasonably careful. Then clean the bolt face and extractor and breech area.

As for cleaning the rest of the action, the internal parts can go a very long time without cleaning.

The next issue is ammo choice. If you haven't shot your 22/45 a lot, it may just need more of a break in. I always ran a minimum of 500 rounds of a HV load, such as Mini mags on a new Mark before running SV. If that didn't do the trick with a good SV load, I ran another 500 with the Mini Mags. The good news is that Ruger Marks do very well with HV ammo like Mini mags for accuracy.

Best of luck.

I suspect the SV wasn’t powerful enough to cycle the bolt all the way back and it wasn’t locking fully into battery. I bet it might have with HV. Still it needs to be taken apart and cleaned.

Isn’t the Mark IV claim to fame supposed to be that it is easier to break down and reassemble than the earlier Marks?
I went with the S&W Victory it breaks down easy. I still haven’t ruled out picking up a Ruger Mark but lean more toward the earlier models. Maybe it is the challenge of learning to master that breakdown and reassembly.

I got my first Mark in the early 70s and learned how to do the take down by reading the manual. No internet in those days, of course. After learning a few tricks along the way, it never was a big deal for me. I will say, though, that as Ruger QC dipped in the MK III era, some, but not all, MK IIIs were so tight coming from the factory that I had to use a hammer for take down. Those were awful and just made the rep of Ruger Marks being hard to take down even worse. (By the way, the added safety features on the MKIIIs are not arbitrary lawyer proofing on the part of Ruger. Ruger added them to comply with restrictions some states had in order to be able to sell in those states.)

Over the years I did many trigger jobs a la VQ kits for various friend's Rugers. Those can be tricky, but for those of you wanting to try, there are plenty of vids online to help.

As far as Marks being competitive in bullseye shooting, a fully customized Ruger was considered competitive in the lower classes, but I don't recall any of the top shooters using one. In those days, the Smith 41 and the High Standard Trophy were the top guns. Vintage specimens are bring top dollar, now.

Yes, I had a couple S&W Victory autoloaders and they were very accurate, right up there with some Smith 41s I've owned. No match trigger, but very accurate. Great buy for the money. Nothing beats a Ruger Mark for durability, though.

RetiredSeabee wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 01, 2023 9:16 am

Isn’t the Mark IV claim to fame supposed to be that it is easier to break down and reassemble than the earlier Marks?
I went with the S&W Victory it breaks down easy. I still haven’t ruled out picking up a Ruger Mark but lean more toward the earlier models. Maybe it is the challenge of learning to master that breakdown and reassembly.

Correct. My 22/45 is a MK IV and it’s very simple to break down. I had a Victory a few years ago (shoulda kept it) and the Mark IV breaks down just as easily as the Victory. I have never owned any other Ruger Marks but I have read that the Mark II was the most difficult to take down and re-assemble. NCG’s experience with the III sounds awful.

The MK I and MK II were the same as far as take down. The only significant differences between the two versions is that Ruger added a bolt hold open for the MK II and the 10 round mag as standard. The MK II is widely regarded as the most desirable of Marks as far as features - not too many, not too few, just right. When you find a II, prices generally run higher than a used I or III.

The III had the same basic takedown as the I and II with an extra step to deal with the disconnect mag safety. The one thing I really liked about the III is that it featured a 1911 style mag release, which was easier to use than the I and II with the mag release at the bottom of the grip. That was nice.

I guess I never had an issue with any of them. I figured it just gave your brain some more exercising

North Country Gal wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 01, 2023 12:04 pm

The MK I and MK II were the same as far as take down. The only significant differences between the two versions is that Ruger added a bolt hold open for the MK II and the 10 round mag as standard. The MK II is widely regarded as the most desirable of Marks as far as features - not too many, not too few, just right. When you find a II, prices generally run higher than a used I or III.

The III had the same basic takedown as the I and II with an extra step to deal with the disconnect mag safety. The one thing I really liked about the III is that it featured a 1911 style mag release, which was easier to use than the I and II with the mag release at the bottom of the grip. That was nice.

Mine is a MK II and I bought it new in 2003.

Not that Ruger Marks are especially collectible, but that's one to keep in the Ruger Mark hierarchy.

I like my 22/45 as well, probably just a little bummed up in the cold temp so a shot of remlube oughta fix it. I have the mark IV version it disassembles and assembles with the push of a button

North Country Gal wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:16 am

Not that Ruger Marks are especially collectible, but that's one to keep in the Ruger Mark hierarchy.

My original 22/45 made me very mad when the Mk 3 came out, I really lusted after the replaceable grips, so I milled the sides of my grip flat and installed grip bushings….. I suppose I could have tried to buy a newer frame, but I wanted to use real 1911 grips, and those would not have worked anyway. I guess I destroyed the value of my pistol, but the original receiver is long gone plus the internals are different, so that is moot.

BTW complete grip frames are not cheap these days. I don’t know if Ruger will sell you one a stripped one.
John Davies
Spokane WA