PDA

View Full Version : Life of Ruger Mk II barrel?



Darth AkSarBen
04-23-2009, 10:49 PM
Just bought a used Ruger Mark II 6" standard pistol the other day. Was actually a trade. I had went to On Target in Kalamazoo and while filling out the paperwork on a Taurus Millennium PRO I had on lay-a-way, I looked at this new Ruger Mark III 22/45 in a 5.5" bbl, blue and bought it for $279.00

I came home and shot it, and found out that the magazine must be in the pistol for the fire, and also it has a loaded chamber indicator. It had jammed a couple of time, and the look was that there was too much extra feldercarb in there, such as the loaded chamber indicator guts and the magazine disconnect safety. I did like the target sights. It shot pretty decent groups and it had a magazine release button near where normal magazine releases buttons are on most of the auto loading pistols. Still, I just didn't feel "at home" with this pistol and it's magazine and other safeties. I called them back in 5 days after purchasing it, and they had a used Mark II Standard in 6" and would trade straight across for my now "used" pistol.

Sometimes I think I need to just drop in there and give them 20 or 30 dollars and save the paperwork!!:sex: The price tag on the used Ruger was $249.00 and it was 30.00 cheaper than the new one I got, about 5 years older and was a standard rather than a target model.

Still.... I traded. It was a great looking pistol, with very little show that it had ever been handled or shot much at all. It was about 99% of new in my guess.

I took it apart and cleaned it after shooting. It shot pretty good groups and no jams or ftf or any malfunctions. The hammer strut still has a lot of bluing on it, and does not look like one that has been shot a lot or the tip gets sort of polished. The bolt has the typical polish around the open space you see looking at the pistol, but the remainder is pretty much all 99.9% blue like you see them. Looking in the barrel it is bright and shinny, but I cannot discern how much of the rifling is in there. It just looks like it has rifling, as you can see the twist, but very smooth and polished looking.

Long last the question. HOW do you tell how much a pistol like this has been shot? How would you tell if the barrel has had so many round though it that the barrel would be shot out, (worn) so that it would affect accuracy?

tenthumbs
04-24-2009, 07:18 AM
Your method sounds reasonable. The best anyone could do is estimate Rd. count by apparent wear.

If you have accuracy issues try various ammo.

MKII's can show big differences in ammo preference...like most firearms.

Jim Simmons
04-24-2009, 10:21 AM
My 29 year old Mk II, with over 25,000 rd through it, shoots Remington bricks -- some of which are over 10 years old -- all day and and all night long. When I really want to hit what I'm shooting at, it eats CCI and is still more accurate than I am.

art
04-24-2009, 07:56 PM
I have never actually heard of anyone shooting the barrel of a .22 out.
I have seen them rusted or badly leaded- but not worn out.

Darth AkSarBen
04-24-2009, 09:54 PM
Tried some CCI tonight and shot pretty tight groups. I'll have to post pictures of it sometime... the Ruger Mark II.

Darth AkSarBen
04-25-2009, 07:01 PM
Ok.. got around to taking a few pictures today... before the rains came...AGAIN!!>:(

http://vernsdidj.com/pictures/guns/ruger_left.jpg

http://vernsdidj.com/pictures/guns/ruger_right.jpg

And, the underneath.

http://vernsdidj.com/pictures/guns/ruger_under.jpg

There is shiny spots from the flash and lighting. The gun has NO real visible marks or bluing wear on it. A view from the outside and the inside, it looked to be in "like new" condition. BTW compared to the Mark III it takes down and re-assembles like a dream! Not even a need for a soft blow hammer.

CCI seem to shoot a very tight group with this. Couldn't tell if there is leading or nor. but it has never failed to feed or jamb in all the times I have now shot it. A 100% improvement in that department over the Ruger Mark III 22/45. I think they had too much garbage in the Mark III, like the loaded chamber indicator. That looks just ripe to cause problems.

bear300us
04-26-2009, 03:31 PM
I think the MKII,s are classics I have a MKIII . I dont like the 22/45 plastic frame.JMHO.wise choice with that trade.it looks great

Darth AkSarBen
04-26-2009, 04:28 PM
I took it more apart this morning and I would say there was very little wear on the hammer strut, that piece that connects the hammer to the hammer spring. This is kind of like a ball and socket affair, and judging from the amount of wear on it, and the resulting sear (yes looked at it too) I may have been the one to shoot the most bullets out of this gun. If that is the case that fact simply amazes me.

Here is the hammer strut before I worked on it this AM.
http://vernsdidj.com/pictures/guns/hammer_strut_before.jpg

You well see it clamped in a plastic griper I have, and see the edges of the metal and how not much has been worn down at the tip?

This is after I did some polishing on it. The end goes into the "cup" that pushes down on the hammer spring and the better the polish, the less the wear and the less drag, although I must admit it is probably very little, every little bit helps.
http://vernsdidj.com/pictures/guns/hammer_strut_after.jpg

If you notice by looking closely, you can see the field and the tree horizon in the mirror reflection of the end. It should now work back and forth like a well tuned machine.

I think the Mark II Rugers are far and away a better pistol than the brand new pistols. Only thing I wish was at the trade in, I had gotten an extra magazine for the trade. It came with only one. But even it works so much smoother than the 2 I received in the new Ruger. Are they geting in a hurry at the factory?

ergoman
05-12-2009, 09:22 PM
I really like to shoot my mark II, its more accurate than I am and gives no problems. Didnt care for the feel/balance of the new 22/45, do like the slide release location though.

esq_stu
05-12-2009, 09:32 PM
I have two MKIIs - a tapered target model and a standard model. To me, the MKIII is not an improvement over the MKII - it is a reaction to regulations.

The MKII is a classic (as is the Colt 1911 Series '70). The makers should bring 'em back.

Rugergirl
05-12-2009, 09:37 PM
I had a MK II bull barrel, several years ago, and compared to my MKIII bull barrel the difference in take down is like night and day.
Both of them are very accurate, and you basically can't wear one out.
My MK II had somewhere between 30,000 to 40,000 rounds through it and it still looked and fired as well as it did new.
The MK II seemed to handle anything I fed it the MK III is picky and prone to not fully ejecting a spent round and jamming as the next round feeds. Never had a problem with the MK II doing anything like that.

kc8opc
05-12-2009, 09:52 PM
I was lucky enough to acquire a Mark II recently.

I had previously experienced only the Mark III, and I'll admit, I was worried the the II would balk like the III.
But no, the II is a total dream, already several hundred rounds through, more planned, not giving this one up!

MichiganShootist
05-20-2009, 02:54 PM
I have a bull barrel Mark II that must be at least 30 years old. I have put an estimated 50,000 rounds through the gun and have never even taken it apart. I blow it out with brake cleaner.... drive the lead build up out of the barrel ... add a little oil and it's good to go. And I don't even do that until it won't chamber a round.... then I know it's dirty:pistols:

I realize not doing a tear down isn't the greatest idea... but it's just a plinking and squirrel killer.... and ...hey...... I paid about $70 for this gun 30 years ago... I think I got my moneys worth ... if it croaks tommorrow.


BTW--- I have yet to find any 22 ammo that it won't feed and fire.

white1200c
05-21-2009, 04:16 AM
The only reason I like my MK III better than the MK II I used to own is the mag. release button on the MK III. I always hated working that stupid catch thing'y on the MK II. That said I intend to get rid of the magazine disconect "safety" and remove the loaded chaber indicator. It bugs me that it sticks out the side like that. Someday I will get to it. Oh, and to the OP great guns and I don't think you can wear one out. Heck even if you could send it back to ruger and I would bet they would send you a new one. (or fix it).
And to those that have had trouble with the MK III. I had the same type issues with mine.
I took it apart polished the bolt and have not had a problem since. It will shoot and feed any 22LR.

frank206
02-11-2010, 01:13 PM
I have the mk III and i like it very much but i don't like the 22/45 at all.

Clipper
02-18-2010, 08:58 AM
I have the mk III and i like it very much but i don't like the 22/45 at all.


...Funny. I have a stainless 10" bull MKII, and though it is very accurate (I have Williams hooded firesight front and peep rear sights on it, and made a self-storing, folding, quick-removable bipod), I've never cared for it's balance when I don't use the bipod or a rest. I tried a 22/45 with the 5" bull and fell in love. My wife tells me she's stealin' the 10"er if I get a MKII (I agree I don't like the MKIIIs) 22/45. She likes the barrel-heaviness of it, while I tend towards lighter, and more rearward balance...

Billetproof
02-18-2010, 10:59 AM
I have a 25 year old AMT Lightning, which is a copy of the Ruger. It is a great gun and fun to shoot, nice and accurate. Looking for a used MKII, so I can add a 6 inch Pac-lite barrel & reddot on it from Tactical Solutions.
http://www.tacticalsol.com/store/pc/viewCategories.asp?idCategory=38