Underdog 1,593 Posted November 10, 2011 I am interested in getting an all-steel Ruger Mark III (not the .22/45). I would like to get the TALO version with the 5.5" fluted barrel, however, I like the sights on the Target model, better, except I would like a fiber optic front sight. I think the Target Model w/ the 5 1/2" barrel is about 5 ounces heavier than the fluted-barrel version. The fluted one with the V-notch sights and Cocobolo grips is also $70.00 more expensive. Does anybody have any thoughts or experience with these? Is there really any reason that I should consider a used Mark II instead? What would the accuracy and ballistics be for the 5.5" barrel as opposed ot the 4.5" barrel or the 6 plus version? If anybody has a strong reason why they would prefer the 22/45 version with the composite frame over the stainless version, please advise. Weight isn't that important to me, as I like the heft of a heavy gun. and the all-steel construction. Are there any other all-steel ones .22s that I should consider that are currently marketed and available. I like the CZ Kadet, but I could practically have two Mark IIs instead, and the Mark II is probably just as sweet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
this_is_nascar 162 Posted November 10, 2011 I chose this Mark III for the simple fact that I didn't see any others that looked, felt and functioned as well as this one. I ruled out the 22/45 quickly, because I didn't want a polymer bottom. The only other one that interested me was this Talo version, but I would have had to replace the grips, so I opted for the one above. I'm still pleased with my decision. Those who choose the Mark II nowadays are usually doing so to avoid some of the newer safety features. They don't bother me, so the Mark II came off my want-list as well. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hd2000fxdl 422 Posted November 10, 2011 For the most part you really can't go wrong with a MK II or MK III, they are a very dependable gun, they shoot well, are built well and another handgun that I think ever gun owner should own at least 1 of them. There is only one thing that people will always mention but it gets better after the first time or 2 but field stripping the gun is a pain in the butt. I have a Walther P22 and and a GSG 1911-22 and the OL has a MK III Hunter, while I like the GSG 1911 the best the MK III is a very close second if not a C hair off a tie for 1st. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonF 79 Posted November 10, 2011 One key difference is that Mark II's have a magazine heel release, MArk III's have a button at the top of the grips if thats of any importance to you. I thought the Mk III replaced the Mk II and so the only way to get one is in the used market? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bry@n 195 Posted November 10, 2011 the mk 3's have a mag disconnect also. So if you put the mag in backwards with a mk3, better hit the net before trying to remove it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soju 153 Posted November 10, 2011 If you start to put the magazine in backwards you really should know it before you put it all the way in. It doesn't feel right. It you do put it in all the way you really need to pay more attention to what you are doing. A lot more attention. Wow that sounded dirty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,894 Posted November 11, 2011 If you start to put the magazine in backwards you really should know it before you put it all the way in. It doesn't feel right. It you do put it in all the way you really need to pay more attention to what you are doing. A lot more attention. Wow that sounded dirty. Its impossible to get it in all the way backwards, both sides of the mag are angled to accommodate the grip angle. My advice, get what you want and ignore the sights it comes with, just replace them with what you want. Its harder to find the right pistol then it is to find a fiber optic front sight and they make a bunch of rear sights you can buy. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bry@n 195 Posted November 11, 2011 It is not impossible to get it in pretty close to all the way. Look on the web. You will find a thing called mag out and other peoples ideas. It is not easy but if somebody blindly puts it in and then slams the bottom, there will be an issue. I watched it happen right in from of me. A friend did it at TJ Sporting Arms when he picked up a mk3. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hd2000fxdl 422 Posted November 11, 2011 It is not impossible to get it in pretty close to all the way. Look on the web. You will find a thing called mag out and other peoples ideas. It is not easy but if somebody blindly puts it in and then slams the bottom, there will be an issue. I watched it happen right in from of me. A friend did it at TJ Sporting Arms when he picked up a mk3. Just kidding but the first thing that comes to mind when you said that was the scene from Tommyboy when they tell people how to operate a seatbelt. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sixtytwo327 14 Posted November 11, 2011 If anybody has a strong reason why they would prefer the 22/45 version with the composite frame over the stainless version, please advise. Weight isn't that important to me, as I like the heft of a heavy gun. and the all-steel construction. I don't have a strong reason, just an observation. I didn't want the polymer either, until I held both and the 22/45 fit my hand better. I think they're both excellent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FishNJ 2 Posted November 11, 2011 i just picked up an MK III stainless bull barrel with plain black grips, no 10103 i think. i was originally after the 5.5" hunter with fluted barrel, but decided that for the extra $120, i could probably dress it up the way i wanted, and have some money left over. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted November 11, 2011 Either the MK II or MK III are very nice, but if you get a MK III make sure it was one that had the recall on it covered. Besides changing the mag button location the MK III has a loaded chamber indicator which in earlier models was capable of firing the gun if the gun was dropped or hit hard on the left side. I think the fix was that they replaced the metal lever with a plastic one. Both are a pain to strip and my recommendation is don't bother. Spray them down with gun scrubber very few thousand rounds, add some oil, keep shooting it. I have a Mk II and my wife has a Mk III 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Greydaddy 2 Posted November 11, 2011 I chose this Mark III for the simple fact that I didn't see any others that looked, felt and functioned as well as this one. I ruled out the 22/45 quickly, because I didn't want a polymer bottom. +1 I have the Mark lll Hunter and I love it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Underdog 1,593 Posted December 5, 2011 Are the sights changeable on a Mark II? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Malsua 1,422 Posted December 5, 2011 Are the sights changeable on a Mark II? Yes. Here's mine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Babaganoosh 192 Posted December 5, 2011 I've got the mark 3 22/45, and while I would have preferred a metal lower, the grip angle is a lot nicer in my opinion. Fits me well. So dont discount it until you have held it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sivl32 27 Posted December 16, 2011 I'm just gonna throw it out there and say, I always wanted a beretta 22 neo.. and they have a cool carbine kit for it.. but never shot it and never knew anyone with one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Underdog 1,593 Posted December 16, 2011 The NEOS appears to be a popular gun and relatively cheap at the range I shoot at. However, I cannot get over the looks of it. It is just not my thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sivl32 27 Posted December 17, 2011 looks like a laser tag gun, lol which is fine with me cause shooting 22's i'm most likely saying pew pew as i shoot it anyways Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1down5up 7 Posted December 20, 2011 If you go with the MKIII know that you can remove the loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect easily and cheaply. Other than that, the primary difference between the two will be heel vs thumb mag release as mentioned already in here. Edit - I meant between the MK II vs MK III not 22/45 MK III vs normal MK III. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
this_is_nascar 162 Posted December 20, 2011 If you go with the MKIII know that you can remove the loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect easily and cheaply. Other than that, the primary difference between the two will be heel vs thumb mag release as mentioned already in here. I believe the entire lower is synthetic on the 10/22. On the Mark series it's all metal of some sort. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1911NUT 0 Posted December 20, 2011 I chose this Mark III for the simple fact that I didn't see any others that looked, felt and functioned as well as this one. I ruled out the 22/45 quickly, because I didn't want a polymer bottom. +1 I have the Mark lll Hunter and I love it! That is a good looking pistol...nice choice Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1down5up 7 Posted December 20, 2011 I believe the entire lower is synthetic on the 10/22. On the Mark series it's all metal of some sort. Yes, the frame on the 22/45 is polymer and the regular MKIII's is alloy steel. Different grip angles too. The 22/45 is made to mimic the grip angle of the 1911. Some models of the 22/45 accept standard 1911 grips. The ones that don't can be modified to accept them too but it requires some work. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites