Ruger Mark Pistols: How Accurate Are They?

[SGW Gunsmith]

I've owned and worked on Ruger Mark pistols for 50+ plus years now. While there's not much that can be done to improve the accuracy of these FINE pistols, they certainly can be made to "perform" much better, and in many cases, will help the operator to shoot more accurately. It all lies within the barrel and how that's been machined, along with the chamber being reamed concentric to the bore's ø.

I've tested the accuracy on hundreds of Ruger Mark pistols from those with 4-inch to those with 10-inch barrels, and with various brands of .22 rimfire ammunition from Standard to High Velocity, but never using hyper-velocity as Ruger recommends that doing so should not be done. For example: Stingers, as they produce way too much "recoil impulse energy" that causes the bolt to slam into the bolt stop pin at the top of the mainspring housing assembly quite viscously. In fact I have a bolt stop pin that I removed from a young man's Ruger MK512 pistol where he admitted using Stingers most all of the time:

That bolt stop pin is visibly bent, and the bend is obvious, but what's not to obvious is the elongated hole in the rear of the receiver that this pin pokes out of. Bolt stop pins are cheap, receivers, not so much.

When testing any Ruger Mark pistol for the accuracy it's capable of with a specific brand and type of .22 rimfire ammunition, it's paramount as much, if not all, of "human influence" be removed from the testing as much as possible. Thus, my investment in this Ransom Rest:

I've had owners tell me that they can get the same results from resting their pistol for testing on a sandbag. Until we set up their pistol in the contraption above. That's when the amazement shows up on their faces, after them shooting their favorite.22 Long Rifle rounds off the sandbag and then seeing what happens in the Ransom Rest.
Of all the Ruger .22 Mark I,II,III,and IV pistols I own, these two are indeed thee most accurate:

Here again, the reason they are more accurate than the shorter barreled versions is because the bullet spends more time engaged in the rifling so that it becomes much more stable once it leaves the muzzle, and both of these two pistols like the very same .22 Long Rifle ammunition, yet dislike ammunition of the same brand just as well. So, by golly some alike barrels do indeed like the same fodder.

 

[snert]

Well let's see the groups by golly!

 

[rimfireshooter]

Yes ! lets see some groups from the Ransom Rest!
That looks like a fun device for some guns n ammo testing.

 

[rimfireninja]

I've owned and worked on Ruger Mark pistols for 50+ plus years now. While there's not much that can be done to improve the accuracy of these FINE pistols, they certainly can be made to "perform" much better, and in many cases, will help the operator to shoot more accurately. It all lies within the barrel and how that's been machined, along with the chamber being reamed concentric to the bore's ø.

I've tested the accuracy on hundreds of Ruger Mark pistols from those with 4-inch to those with 10-inch barrels, and with various brands of .22 rimfire ammunition from Standard to High Velocity, but never using hyper-velocity as Ruger recommends that doing so should not be done. For example: Stingers, as they produce way too much "recoil impulse energy" that causes the bolt to slam into the bolt stop pin at the top of the mainspring housing assembly quite viscously. In fact I have a bolt stop pin that I removed from a young man's Ruger MK512 pistol where he admitted using Stingers most all of the time:

That bolt stop pin is visibly bent, and the bend is obvious, but what's not to obvious is the elongated hole in the rear of the receiver that this pin pokes out of. Bolt stop pins are cheap, receivers, not so much.

When testing any Ruger Mark pistol for the accuracy it's capable of with a specific brand and type of .22 rimfire ammunition, it's paramount as much, if not all, of "human influence" be removed from the testing as much as possible. Thus, my investment in this Ransom Rest:

I've had owners tell me that they can get the same results from resting their pistol for testing on a sandbag. Until we set up their pistol in the contraption above. That's when the amazement shows up on their faces, after them shooting their favorite.22 Long Rifle rounds off the sandbag and then seeing what happens in the Ransom Rest.
Of all the Ruger .22 Mark I,II,III,and IV pistols I own, these two are indeed thee most accurate:

Here again, the reason they are more accurate than the shorter barreled versions is because the bullet spends more time engaged in the rifling so that it becomes much more stable once it leaves the muzzle, and both of these two pistols like the very same .22 Long Rifle ammunition, yet dislike ammunition of the same brand just as well. So, by golly some alike barrels do indeed like the same fodder.

nice pictures .. I own a 10" bull barrel blued steel MKII, bought NIB in mid 80's, very accurate .. Ruger stopped making the 10" barrel for a long time, glad to see they brought them back

 

[Tommy Leroy Johnson]

I've owned and worked on Ruger Mark pistols for 50+ plus years now. While there's not much that can be done to improve the accuracy of these FINE pistols, they certainly can be made to "perform" much better, and in many cases, will help the operator to shoot more accurately. It all lies within the barrel and how that's been machined, along with the chamber being reamed concentric to the bore's ø.

I've tested the accuracy on hundreds of Ruger Mark pistols from those with 4-inch to those with 10-inch barrels, and with various brands of .22 rimfire ammunition from Standard to High Velocity, but never using hyper-velocity as Ruger recommends that doing so should not be done. For example: Stingers, as they produce way too much "recoil impulse energy" that causes the bolt to slam into the bolt stop pin at the top of the mainspring housing assembly quite viscously. In fact I have a bolt stop pin that I removed from a young man's Ruger MK512 pistol where he admitted using Stingers most all of the time:

That bolt stop pin is visibly bent, and the bend is obvious, but what's not to obvious is the elongated hole in the rear of the receiver that this pin pokes out of. Bolt stop pins are cheap, receivers, not so much.

When testing any Ruger Mark pistol for the accuracy it's capable of with a specific brand and type of .22 rimfire ammunition, it's paramount as much, if not all, of "human influence" be removed from the testing as much as possible. Thus, my investment in this Ransom Rest:

I've had owners tell me that they can get the same results from resting their pistol for testing on a sandbag. Until we set up their pistol in the contraption above. That's when the amazement shows up on their faces, after them shooting their favorite.22 Long Rifle rounds off the sandbag and then seeing what happens in the Ransom Rest.
Of all the Ruger .22 Mark I,II,III,and IV pistols I own, these two are indeed thee most accurate:

Here again, the reason they are more accurate than the shorter barreled versions is because the bullet spends more time engaged in the rifling so that it becomes much more stable once it leaves the muzzle, and both of these two pistols like the very same .22 Long Rifle ammunition, yet dislike ammunition of the same brand just as well. So, by golly some alike barrels do indeed like the same fodder.

SGW Gunsmith
It's obvious from your post you like Ruger MK pistols, these have always been my favorite 22 pistols, my first was a standard auto made in the mid 1950's, that little gun was very accurate I shot a box of ammo every day for years, usually what ever brand I could find on sale. That was the first of many standard autos then later the MK series guns. Over the years I have given these guns to my Sons , Nieces and Nephews and a few to neighbor kids with their parents actually taking possession to keep things legal.
My last Ruger is Mk 3 4 inch target 60 year edition, with a trigger job as the only mod this little gun shoots almost as good as my Smith and Wesson model 41 target pistol.
Thank you for bringing up these fine pistols.

Leroy Johnson

 

[searcher]

While there's not much that can be done to improve the accuracy of these FINE pistols, they certainly can be made to "perform" much better, and in many cases, will help the operator to shoot more accurately. It all lies within the barrel and how that's been machined, along with the chamber being reamed concentric to the bore's ø.

I have the Mark 1, 2 , and 3 models. Always in a quest to make things shoot more accurately - I replaced the internal springs with Wolff springs, replaced the trigger, hammer, sear and firing pin with Volquartson parts on all of them. The factory triggers were reduced from around 4 pounds to 1 1/2 pounds with these parts, resulting in a much smoother action - resulting in far better groups. If I ever bought another - I'd do the same thing before even shooting them.

 

[searcher]

As another said - I also have other quality .22's such as the model 41 S&W, Benelli 95E, etc.. Those Rugers, once the triggers, bolt and springs are replaced - are just about as accurate.

 

[SGW Gunsmith]

SGW Gunsmith
It's obvious from your post you like Ruger MK pistols, these have always been my favorite 22 pistols, my first was a standard auto made in the mid 1950's, that little gun was very accurate I shot a box of ammo every day for years, usually what ever brand I could find on sale. That was the first of many standard autos then later the MK series guns. Over the years I have given these guns to my Sons , Nieces and Nephews and a few to neighbor kids with their parents actually taking possession to keep things legal.
My last Ruger is Mk 3 4 inch target 60 year edition, with a trigger job as the only mod this little gun shoots almost as good as my Smith and Wesson model 41 target pistol.
Thank you for bringing up these fine pistols.

Leroy Johnson

My first Ruger was a Standard with the A54 grip frame also, but almost 10 years newer than yours. My Dad had to sign for it as I was too young. I still have that pistol, but now it has a rear adjustable sight and a much better, smoother, trigger pull. I left it sit in the safe until the Mark II pistols became available and found that the newer style Mark II magazines fed rounds much better than the original magazine does:

 

[SGW Gunsmith]

nice pictures .. I own a 10" bull barrel blued steel MKII, bought NIB in mid 80's, very accurate .. Ruger stopped making the 10" barrel for a long time, glad to see they brought them back

The Mark IV version is what I consider "redemption" from Ruger for inflicting the Ruger Mark III version with all the safety devices provided to protect us from ourselves.
This is the above grip frame with a blued IV is quite a "marvel" and as far as I'm concerned, redeemed their engineering department after all the safety stuff that was inflicted on the Mark III to protect all of us from ourselves.
This is my Ruger Mark IV Competition Target, and it was not sent back to Ruger for the recall. I kept getting phone calls and emails from Ruger as the S/N falls within the range of those Mark IV pistols having the alleged safety problem. I told them I cured the issue myself and didn't need an extra magazine for sending this pistol back as I already had plenty of those:

One of the
reasons I think Ruger did well on this design is the fact that uppers will interchange in a nanosecond:

This is the grip frame from the pistol above with a blued Mark IV upper assembly that fit onto the grip frame perfectly. Don't know if anyone here knows about Volquartsen selling Mark IV upper take-offs, but I bought two of those, less sights, for $25.00 each plus $15.00 shipping:

Then, around a month later, I bought another upper, with sights and a hard case for $40.00 plus $15.00 shipping. All of the purchased uppers fit on my initial grip frame like a ducks foot in mud:

If anyone is interested, I suggest you visit Volquartsen's web site and check their closeout section every so often to see what they have available. Last time I looked they had Standard Mark IV uppers available.

 

[SGW Gunsmith]

Well let's see the groups by golly!

I have all of those collected, just need to spend the time digging them out of my file cabinet, but I have 'em to prove what I posted.
Anyone else have the targets they've shot from their Ruger Mark pistols off sandbags? Let's see those.

EDIT: Here's one picture that I have that I've used as an avatar:

10 rounds, full magazine, shot at 35 meters from the above mechanical rest.

 

[Tommy Leroy Johnson]

My first Ruger was a Standard with the A54 grip frame also, but almost 10 years newer than yours. My Dad had to sign for it as I was too young. I still have that pistol, but now it has a rear adjustable sight and a much better, smoother, trigger pull. I left it sit in the safe until the Mark II pistols became available and found that the newer style Mark II magazines fed rounds much better than the original magazine does:

I may have given you the impression I bought that standard auto in 1955, I did not I bought it in February 1971 when I turned 21 and could vote, it was well used and beat up I think I paid around 40 dollars for it, but I thought it was the best pistol in the world because it was mine, that little gun accounted for thousands of ground squirrels and other small game.

 

[Rsadams]

Let's be honest.... It's hard to beat the fun of shooting a .22 pistol especially even a half way accurate one... They have been the end of many coke cans... I had all but forgotten this till early this year when I bought a Glock 44 to practice with since it's the same size , trigger and sights etc as my carry gun a Glock 19.... I have enjoyed that thing since the first bullet down the barrel.... A new Ruger can not be far behind when all this mess goes away... Even my wife who carries a glock 9mm has fallen in love with it... That may just be my excuse , she needs a nice .22 for herself and a Ruger mark would be very nice for her.... There very hard to beat and normally a lifetime gun....

 

[nwmnbowhunter]

My high school graduation present was a mark II. Love shooting that thing

 

[Rockchuck]

The rugers shoot wonderful and they will digest just about anything you put in them. But the hi standards of old and the sw 41 are a notch more accurate.

 

[SGW Gunsmith]

Let's be honest.... It's hard to beat the fun of shooting a .22 pistol especially even a half way accurate one... They have been the end of many coke cans... I had all but forgotten this till early this year when I bought a Glock 44 to practice with since it's the same size , trigger and sights etc as my carry gun a Glock 19.... I have enjoyed that thing since the first bullet down the barrel.... A new Ruger can not be far behind when all this mess goes away... Even my wife who carries a glock 9mm has fallen in love with it... That may just be my excuse , she needs a nice .22 for herself and a Ruger mark would be very nice for her.... There very hard to beat and normally a lifetime gun....

My wife used her Ruger SR22 for her CCW class. I gave her the choice of picking her own handgun, and she chose that one with the Crimson Trace green laser:

 

[SGW Gunsmith]

The rugers shoot wonderful and they will digest just about anything you put in them. But the hi standards of old and the sw 41 are a notch more accurate.

I got this one in 1993> It went back to Smith & Wesson three (3) times before it started to fully function with CCI Standard ammunition:

I was constantly changing recoil spring weight to get it to function properly, and was admonished by the techs at Smith & Wesson to NOT shoot high velocity .22 ammunition in it, only Standard velocity. Gave it to my son.

 

[Outrider27]

A bunch of decades ago I shot on the varsity pistol team in college; as a first year team member, I was issued one of the B team pistols, a MK I Ruger. It took me through the first round of the National championships (the second/final round was simply a national compilation of 1st round scores, no head to head competition then), and I have no complaints - the scores shot were on me, not any problems with the pistol.

To be fair, when I got my varsity letter, it was with a High Standard, which shot a bit better for me, but I had improved a good deal by then, so it wasn't all the change in pistols. I like the MK series Rugers fine.

 

[leakeyjohn]

I got this one in 1993> It went back to Smith & Wesson three (3) times before it started to fully function with CCI Standard ammunition:

I was constantly changing recoil spring weight to get it to function properly, and was admonished by the techs at Smith & Wesson to NOT shoot high velocity .22 ammunition in it, only Standard velocity. Gave it to my son.

I have a S&W 41 one of my treasures. My Ruger works more or less, but the trigger on the 41 is a work of art

 

[outasite`08]

My first Ruger was a Standard with the A54 grip frame also, but almost 10 years newer than yours. My Dad had to sign for it as I was too young. I still have that pistol, but now it has a rear adjustable sight and a much better, smoother, trigger pull. I left it sit in the safe until the Mark II pistols became available and found that the newer style Mark II magazines fed rounds much better than the original magazine does:

Ruger Luger. Fun gun and my first semi-auto. I wish I would have kept it. Traded on a bull barrel 5.5 " Jeff

 

[stork]

Full disclosure, I'm an avid Bullseye shooter for the last 25 years. During that time I've owned 9 Ruger mkII target models, a half dozen Hi Standard Citations, 5 Marvel and Nelson conversions and Walther GSP. I refused to even look at the MK III's. Also have my own Ransom rest so have the luxury of testing them all. All my testing is at 50 yards. The Rugers will shoot with any of them. I've yet to have one shoot over 1 1/2" at 50 with CCI standard velocity, and most will do better. They will shoot better with Lapua, Eley, RWS, SK, and others, but those are pricier than I will go for, for regular practice and match ammo. More for satisfying my curiosity than anything. As the 50 yd x ring is just over 1 1/2", and I'm shooting with one hand, it's not worth the price difference to buy pricier stuff.

I have not tried any of the newer CCI, I've heard from several sources the reliability isn't nearly as good as the older ammo was. I expected to get 1 dud per case of 5000 rds, and rarely got that.

Back to the subject at hand. The only thing the MKII's needed was a good trigger job. Hi Standards had the best out of the box triggers, but in my testing, over years, I found I always scored higher with the Rugers, but my x count was always higher with the Citations. For me, the MKII'S grip angle was more forgiving than the Hi Standard, but just a little less precise.

Bottom line is no one should ever feel they're taking a back seat to any other gun on the line when they're shooting a Ruger.
AL