Third Time to the Range

Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
1,497
Likes
66
Location
Sandown, NH
Feedback: 8 / 0 / 0
Just got back from my third time on the range, took a trip home and basically figured what the hell I'll stop at AFS on my way back to school. Anyway, I rented a Ruger Mark II and put 150 rounds through it, I had a blast, and could see a noticeable improvement over the last time I went to the range.

I had about a 2 and a half inch group at 5 yards. How much more accurate can a Mark II get itself, it would be nice to know what I'm shooting for (pun intended). When I get my LTC, I plan on buying a P22, how does that firearm compare to the Mark II?
 
Just got back from my third time on the range, took a trip home and basically figured what the hell I'll stop at AFS on my way back to school. Anyway, I rented a Ruger Mark II and put 150 rounds through it, I had a blast, and could see a noticeable improvement over the last time I went to the range.

I had about a 2 and a half inch group at 5 yards. How much more accurate can a Mark II get itself, it would be nice to know what I'm shooting for (pun intended). When I get my LTC, I plan on buying a P22, how does that firearm compare to the Mark II?

The Ruger has a longer barrel and therefore a longer sight radius. A longer sight radius means that it is easier to aim accurately. The Ruger also has a heavier barrel and target sights.

The P22 is shorter and has 3-dot combat sights - quicker to acquire a target but not as precise. Also, the trigger on a MkII/MKIII is significantly better than that of a P22. The bottom line is that you'll get much better accuracy with the Ruger.

For your 3rd time at the range, a 2-1/2" group @15 feet is nothing to sneeze at. With practice,. you'll find that with the right ammo, the Ruger can be even more accurate than that. I mean one-ragged-hole at 15' kind of accurate.
 
If you want accuracy, the MKII or a Browning Buckmark (if you can find one) are your best bet.

If you just want a fun plinker that looks/feels like the bigger semi autos, you'll want the P22.

I have a P22. They are a blast to shoot and cheap.

Really depends on what you want.
 
Ruger can be even more accurate than that. I mean one-ragged-hole at 15' kind of accurate.

While I can't do it myself, I've seen shooters hold to a 10 shot group the size of a quarter or less shooting offhand at 50' under match pressure, granted with some improvements (trigger work, custom grips, etc.).

The Ruger is an excellent first pistol. It has way more accuracy than most shooters can squeeze out of it, meaning when the shot hits the paper, it went there because you made it go there. This feedback is crucial for getting better. If you're pistol can only hold 2" at 50' for instance, a very good 1" error means you'll have groups of 3". That's 6 ring instead of 10 or X ring. That means you could score have scored maybe a 70, but should have scored a 100.
 
Thanks for the replies. One of the reasons I want a P22 is because the sights and controls should be similar to most centerfire pistols (except the mag release from what I hear) so that my future purchases will take less time getting used to.
 
A Ruger MKIII will have the same controls. It uses a typical thumb mag release.

The P22 is kinda cool looking. I'm periodicly tempted by one just for fun...
 
What about things like cleaning assembly etc? All thinks I think a good first gun should facilitate the learning of...
 
One of the reasons I want a P22 is because the sights and controls should be similar to most centerfire pistols (except the mag release from what I hear) so that my future purchases will take less time getting used to.

In my opinion, this is over rated. It doesn't take long to learn a new gun. The P22 is much smaller than most center fire pistols, so not much of what you learn will transfer over.

If you're after a .22 that feels like a centerfire handgun, get a S&W Model 17 (or 617) revolver.

Neither the P22 nor the Ruger come apart/go together like other pistols - especially the Ruger; so getting used to cleaning them won't be a particularly valuable skill once you "move up".

Some will say that if you can take apart and reassemble a MKIII/MKIII, then any other firearm will be easy in comparison.
 
The P22 is kinda cool looking. I'm periodicly tempted by one just for fun...

I bought one because I needed another .22 for Basic Pistol classes, and the P22 was cheap. Plus, it was the only non-pocket pistol with a grip small enough to fit my 11 year-old daughter.

In my opinion, the P22 is a cheap toy compared to the Ruger, S&W Model 17, Buckmark, Colt Huntsman, etc.
 
Last edited:
Whats a good price for a MKII/III?

Also, when I was at the range today I had multiple Jams. When I cleared them a noticed the round looked dented, I think it was catching on the feed ramp, was this because I was doing something wrong loading the mag, or just a dirty/worn rental? The other two times I was there this was never an issue.
 
I used to own a p22 and I now own a mark 1. The p22 is total junk! The Ruger may be a pain to clean but it is a much better gun and a whole lot more fun. This is from someone still relatively new to shooting.
 
A Ruger MKIII will have the same controls. It uses a typical thumb mag release.
Oh, dear G-d, do NOT get a Mark III. While it's a nice shooting piece, it was designed by f@#king lawyers gone amuck. Loaded chamber indicator, magazine disconnect (mistakenly called a "safety"), a magazine that will NOT drop free due to the incredibly imbecilic design of the magazine, a mongolian cluster-f**k of a disassembly/reassembly procedure that finds you inserting the mag, taking it out, putting it in, pulling the trigger, and probably sacrificing a goat at moonrise when you get frustrated and make a mistake.

Get a Mark II - I don't think that they allowed the lawyers in the room when that was designed.

Anyone want to buy a Mark III? I'm keeping my Mark I...
Also, when I was at the range today I had multiple Jams. When I cleared them a noticed the round looked dented, I think it was catching on the feed ramp, was this because I was doing something wrong loading the mag, or just a dirty/worn rental? The other two times I was there this was never an issue.
Were you using the same gun? Were you using the same ammo?

Rugers (and many other .22LR semi-automatics) can be sensitive to the type of ammo used; my Mark I used to like Remington bulk pack stuff from Walmart... until a couple of years ago when they changed the design of the bullet. I know they did because I still had some old stuff that I could compare - the new stuff was guaranteed to hang up on the feed ramp. I switched to the Federal bulk pack and have had no more problems.

When you get your new pistol, buy several different types of ammo and try them all to find out what your new baby likes to eat. Unless, of course, you get a S&W 317 or 617 .22LR revolver, in which case it'll shoot whatever you stick in it. [wink]
 
Please take the time to consider a S&W 22A...You will not regret it. I liked it better than the Mark II/III, and will never get rid of it. I also know for a fact that some members here have more than one of them, because they like them so much.
 
Thanks for the replies. One of the reasons I want a P22 is because the sights and controls should be similar to most centerfire pistols (except the mag release from what I hear) so that my future purchases will take less time getting used to.


You could also make that "future purchase" now, and get a .22 conversion kit for it. Provides for ALL the same controls. You can essentially practice with your carry gun at .22 prices.
 
Oh, dear G-d, do NOT get a Mark III. While it's a nice shooting piece, it was designed by f@#king lawyers gone amuck. Loaded chamber indicator, magazine disconnect (mistakenly called a "safety"), a magazine that will NOT drop free due to the incredibly imbecilic design of the magazine, a mongolian cluster-f**k of a disassembly/reassembly procedure that finds you inserting the mag, taking it out, putting it in, pulling the trigger, and probably sacrificing a goat at moonrise when you get frustrated and make a mistake.

So, I'm a little unclear? Are you saying you don't like the MkIII? [rofl][rofl][laugh2]

I actually have a MkII myself and I think it is a great pistol. Paid $195 for it, but it was a mess when I got it. I wasn't thrilled with the triggers on the MkIII's out of the box, but that can be fixed.

Regarding Price: A new MkIII will run you $300 and up depending on what you want. The shiny, fluted barrel, MKIII "Hunter" will be more than the basic blued model.

If you get one, whatever you to, get it with target sights, not fixed. The fixed sights have no advantage and will only hold you back.

I guess one point that everyone is making, but not saying is that a .22 is a skill building / target pistol. It has no real other use (SD, etc) except maybe hunting small game. Get a good one so it can do it's job for you. You will not "out grow" it. Ruger, Browning Buckmark (I have one and use it for competition), S&W are all good choices. Handle them and see how they fit you. Shoot them if you can (come to members shoot and you'll be able to shoot all of them if you request to ahead of time... and there is one coming up).
 
Were you using the same gun? Were you using the same ammo?

I believe it was the same model, but it might not have been the same gun, I think they have something 10-12 of the Ruger MKII/III's for when they offer the firearms safety course. I think the ammo was the same, Remington Yellow Jackets I think.
 
I believe it was the same model, but it might not have been the same gun, I think they have something 10-12 of the Ruger MKII/III's for when they offer the firearms safety course. I think the ammo was the same, Remington Yellow Jackets I think.

I don't like the current Remington rimfire ammo. Like Dwarven1, I use the Federal copper washed ammo that comes in bulk pack boxes (500, 525, or 550 rounds depending on where you get it).

You'll never get 100% reliability with a .22 rimfire. Most .22 LR autos will begin to malfunction when they get dirty - and .22 LR is dirty stuff. The combination of bullet lube and the grit in the priming compound make it (pound for pound) about the filthiest ammo you can use (short of black powder).

In addition, you will get occasional failures-to-fire with all .22 LR ammo. This has to do with the way the rounds are manufactured - specifically, the way they are primed.

Modern rimfire ammo is primed by dropping a bit of liquid priming compound into a spinning case. The centrifugal force will (theoretically) distribute the priming compound evenly in the rim. Unfortunately, this is not always the case.

(NOTE: Some mfgs don't spin the cases. They use a thinner liquid and hope for the best).

Many times when I've had .22 LR fail to fire, I'll put the "dud" round back in the chamber - turned so that the firing pin will strike a different place on the rim. More often than not, the round goes BANG! This indicates that there was a "dead spot" where a bubble (or something else) caused the priming compound to "miss" a portion of the rim. I've also pulled the bullet on rounds that wouldn't fire after multiple attempts and found that there was no priming compound present at all.

So, I guess the short answer is "Don't expect 100% reliability with a .22."
 
Nisho - cannot add anything to Jim's excellent advice and that of others - find yourself a Ruger MarkII - they are out there and cheap enough. I bought my first at 16 and still have it. Literally 10's of thousands of rounds through it.....The P22 is what it is and I don't like what it is.....
 
I understand I won't get 100% reliability, and as for ammo choices because it was a rental I of course needed to use their ammo (that and bringining in my own is a bit hard without a license [smile]).

I was just concerned I was doing something wrong, I didn't have any FTF or FTE but the gun "pinched" the round probably 4 or 5 times at least out of the 150 rounds I shot. I twisted them and reloaded and they shot fine, but it would be nice to know the cause so I can avoid it down the road, especially if I get my own Ruger!

The Ruger website doesn't list the MKII, does that mean I'm going to need to look for a used one?
 
I was just concerned I was doing something wrong, I didn't have any FTF or FTE but the gun "pinched" the round probably 4 or 5 times at least out of the 150 rounds I shot. I twisted them and reloaded and they shot fine, but it would be nice to know the cause so I can avoid it down the road, especially if I get my own Ruger!

The Ruger website doesn't list the MKII, does that mean I'm going to need to look for a used one?

You weren't doing anything wrong. It sounds like a weak mag spring or more likely, a dirty pistol. That doesn't surprise me. The Ruger autos, as Dwarven1 indicated, are a pain in the butt to take apart and reassemble; therefore they probably don't get cleaned as often (or as thoroughly) as they should. This is true for the MKIIs as well.

With that said, you shouldn't let that get in the way of you getting one of these fine pistols. If you follow the instructions in the manual, you can put it back together quite easily.

Ruger no longer makes the MKII; if you want one you'll have to get it used. It has been replaced by the MKIII series of pistols. I've had both and frankly, I like the MKIII better than the MKII. It's a personal thing - I don't like mag releases at the bottom of the grip. I don't mind the loaded chamber indicator, the magazine disconnect doesn't bother me (I'm not going to be using this pistol in combat), and I can't see how you can complain that the mag doesn't drop out when the previous model required both hands to even release the mag!

You'll find that the used handgun market is loaded with MKIIIs, MKIIs and Ruger Standard Models (this preceded the MKII).
 
The Ruger autos, as Dwarven1 indicated, are a pain in the butt to take apart and reassemble; therefore they probably don't get cleaned as often (or as thoroughly) as they should. This is true for the MKIIs as well.
Not true, Jim - the III is significantly more of a pain in the ass to take apart than my Mark I ever was. There's much more stupid little twitchings that you have to do with the III, like putting the mag in and taking it out, etc.

If you follow the instructions in the manual, you can put it back together quite easily.
Do NOT attempt cleaning that gun WITHOUT the manual... at least, not for the first 40 times. [rolleyes]
Ruger no longer makes the MKII; if you want one you'll have to get it used.
Easy enough to do; there are any number of suckers who "upgrade".

I've had both and frankly, I like the MKIII better than the MKII.
Wanna buy another?
It's a personal thing - I don't like mag releases at the bottom of the grip.
That's why I went for the Mk III instead of a used II.

I can't see how you can complain that the mag doesn't drop out when the previous model required both hands to even release the mag!
Well, I tried pin shooting (candle pins, that is) and you DO need to reload pretty quickly if you have dead wood still on the table, so it pisses me off that the magazines ARE designed to drop free - if you completely take your hand off the rear of the grip - but the "heel" of the mag is designed such that it wraps up the back of the grip for about a half inch, which means that your hand is contacting it when you're pressing the mag release... and there's NO f#@$ing REASON for it to be designed that way!!! It's just a truly stupid design, and the engineer who designed it should be FIRED with extreme prejudice so that he can do what he's clearly more suited to do - make fries at McDonald's. Anything else would be beyond this idiot's limited skillset.
 
Most .22 LR autos will begin to malfunction when they get dirty - and .22 LR is dirty stuff. The combination of bullet lube and the grit in the priming compound make it (pound for pound) about the filthiest ammo you can use (short of black powder).

This is interesting to me because I've noticed mine has fewer malfunctions when I haven't cleaned it in a while. Maybe I'm using the wrong amount of lube?

Also, just a slight correction on the previous post- the standard model preceded the Mark I, not the Mark II. The only difference between them (as far as I know) is the Mark I uses a 9-round magazine and the Mark II uses 10-round ones (wish I had known that when I made my choice!)
 
Mark I uses a 9-round magazine and the Mark II uses 10-round ones (wish I had known that when I made my choice!)
I've been thinking that, too... and I started to wonder, why does that bother me?

I mean, think about it now: for bullseye shooting, you usually load 5 shots at a time. I haven't done it in a long time, but when do you ever need 10 shots as opposed to 9?

That said, I still wish I'd stocked up on 10 round Mk1 mags when Ramline was still making them. [crying]
 
Looks like I'm pretty much sold. I didn't notice any issues with the mag release on the MKII I used, looked like it had a normal push button like every other picture of a pistol I've ever seen...

Thanks for all the question answering etc.
 
Back
Top Bottom