Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated - Page 3 - The Firearms Forum

Suwannee Tim · 12-15-2009, 05:44 AM

It is amazing that there are so few good guns in this class. The Ruger, the Browning, the High Standard, what others? Each has it's flaws which could have been corrected with some engineering. Its a shame. My current fav large 22 auto is my Kimber. Handles like a 1911 because it is a 1911!

dhbvino · 03-13-2010, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suwannee Tim

In my opinion the Ruger 22 pistols are the most highly overrated handgun of all time. They shoot good, I concede that. I had one years ago and after shooting it I cleaned it. Took two days. Took a day to take it apart, ten minutes to clean it and a day to put it back together. Ridiculous and absurd. It was stolen not much later and good riddance. I have several High Standards now, both old Hamden models and the new ones made in Texas. They field strip in about 20 seconds. Much better.

Robert Stevens at
drfrankenruger@aol.com sells a mod kit that makes it easy as 1,2,3 to clean the Marks'
(772) 340 4424
I bought the kit from him and is has cut my re-assemble time down to 1 minute or less. He also has a tool for installing the bolt back in your 10/22 and has done trigger kobs on both my MkII and 10/22. These Rugers are the best target guns in 22 LR period. I have a P22 and Mosquito which are junk compared to the Ruger.

LDBennett · 03-14-2010, 01:19 PM

Suwannee Tim:

Boy, you must have a real hard time working on anything if you take 2 days to clean a Ruger Mk pistol!

All it takes is following the directions in the box that the pistol came in. I'll admit it could be be easier but the pistol was designed and first sold in 1947, 63 years ago. It was meant to be an inexpensive, reliable semi-auto pistol using what was then new processes (stamped sheet metal parts). The target models have excellent accuracy. There are a bunch of after market parts for them. They shoot almost any ammo you can find. Yes, they are tricky to put back together but only if you fail to follow the instruction book.

Don't get me wrong. I too have several Hi Std pistols but they have their problems too, like:

Cracked frames if you don't use Standard Velocity ammo and change out the recoil spring regularly.

Feeding problems if the magazine lips are not perfectly adjusted. Poorly adjusted mag lips can also cause failures to fire, bolts that don't fully close and fail to fire the cartridge in the chamber.

And often a like for only a few different ammos.

So nothing is perfect. Ruger MK pistols can be found used for about half the price of an equivalent Hi Std model and you can still buy a new Ruger (the Texas Hi Std guns are not in the same league as the Connecticut Hi Std's.... I know as I have one of the Texas Turkeys).

It is fine for you to dislike a particular brand based on your own experiences (like I hate GM cars and love Ford's) but to denigrate them as over rated is not really fair. In my opinion the target models are just about the best semi-auto target pistol you can get for the money. Add a bit more and the guns can be as good as guns twice as expensive. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 5 1/2 inch target gun I use to own or my currently owned 678G Target gun. But I would not own the plastic framed version, but that's just me.

LDBennett

UncleFudd · 03-14-2010, 04:20 PM

another point of view.
I had the rental program at the range for twenty years and always had at least two of the MK series Rugers for people to try. I also attempted to keep a mod 41 and a Buckmark or two at times but the only guns that would stand up to the rigors and heavy use were the Rugers.
I learned very early on that it is not possible to keep the S&W mod 41 as they are just too finicky and ammo particular. The Buckmarks although very accurate were also ammo particular and will not stand the test of time and number of rounds.
So the bottom line even to this day is to keep the Ruger 22LR pistols if we wanted to always have a gun for rent and to have it available all the time.

Something else that comes to mind is the number and types of accessories available for the Ruger pistols. They are very accurate to begin with but there are so many items that can be added to make them even more so or at least from the operators standpoint such as the grips and sights and barrel configurations from the likes of Volquartsen etc.

I find it very difficult to imagine anyone being more accurate than the MK11 right off the shelf but if so, there are of course some very expensive pistols and the same in the ammo for them.

As far as longevity, I don't think you will find another 22LR pistol on the market that will last as long with just about any ammo you run through it or take more of a beating with less time cleaning than the Rugers and my rental counter has been proof positive for a long, long time.

UF

Citizen Carrier · 03-14-2010, 06:14 PM

I would not say they are overrated at all. The Ruger came along at a time when the rimfire bullseye sport was dominated by the Model 41, High Standards, and to a lesser extent the Colt Woodsman match models.

To bring in a product for about half or even a third of the price that can compete with such expensive designs continues to speak for its quality. As such, I would not call them overrated.

Earlier in my bullseye interest I went through a "High Standard" phase. I had a Hamden-made one. A Citation with a fluted barrel. It would only reliably work with the one original magazine I had with it. Newer Texas magazines weren't reliable enough. Ditto that Triple K crap. Magazines made for the Stoeger Pro-Series 95 copies of the High Standards DID work okay. (You can still get Stoeger Pro-Series magazines directly from the guy who used to make the Pro-Series 95 Stoeger guns, if you know what to research)

I also had a Texas-made Citation built specifically for a red dot scope. The Texas factory built it for me on the stainless frame of an inferior HS copy I sent to them. The HS guns were superbly accurate with wonderful triggers from the start. Undoubtedly the most accurate .22s I owned until I up-gunned to a Pardini.

But they didn't run reliably. I hated having to constantly alibi fire at the matches. And I was sick of spending $40-$60 for a single decent magazine...when they could be found.

Then I switched to a Ruger Mk II slabsides. With Volquartsen upgrades, which I installed myself, I started to score a lot better. And I got perfectly functional magazines for $20 or less.

dld · 03-14-2010, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suwannee Tim

In my opinion the Ruger 22 pistols are the most highly overrated handgun of all time. They shoot good, I concede that. I had one years ago and after shooting it I cleaned it. Took two days. Took a day to take it apart, ten minutes to clean it and a day to put it back together. Ridiculous and absurd. .

I guess some people just aren't educated enough for some firearms, they best leave them to simpler folks

Maybe some folks ability to handle a simple task might be just a touch overrated

In forty years of handling and shooting firearms I have never had to send one back to get worked on or trade for a new one, maybe I am just lucky, maybe...

capndan · 03-27-2010, 09:14 PM

Just bought a MKII and have learned how to reassemble, but have a hard time aligning receiver & grip frame. Is there a trick to this, is there a need to fluff and buff something, or should I go ahead and get a plastic end hammer?

The_Rifleman · 03-28-2010, 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capndan

Just bought a MKII and have learned how to reassemble, but have a hard time aligning receiver & grip frame. Is there a trick to this, is there a need to fluff and buff something, or should I go ahead and get a plastic end hammer?

Don't make any modifications or hammer anything!

I suspect your hammer is not in the right position. I made a video of how a Ruger Mark II is disassembled and assembled.

I have seen people try to assemble that pistol and come to the same conclusions you have. After some practice you will be disassembling and assembling it with your eyes closed.

LDBennett · 03-28-2010, 07:35 AM

capndan:

I use a rubber mallet to disengage and re-engage the grip frame with the receiver. Some are tight like mine and others are not and probably don't shoot well because they are loosely fitted.

As for alignment of the two I use the hammer spring assembly with the captive pin that goes through both the receiver and the grip frame... but from the top. When I can slip the pin into the receiver and down through the grip frame from the top then all is aligned.

These are great guns but they can be a bugger to put back together. Use the instruction book every time and the job is a lot easier. Rely on your memory and you will have to fight it to get it back together. The hammer strut is the problem. It has to be positioned just so or the gun will go back together such that the bolt can not be cycled. Checkout the instructions the next time you tear down the gun and have to reassemble it.

LDBennett

Bobitis · 03-28-2010, 11:40 AM

The best sight available for Ruger pistol maintenance:

http://guntalk-online.com/

jim brady · 03-28-2010, 12:04 PM

Don't know about Ruger pistols being higly over-rated. I have handled lots of other .22 pistols, and the Ruger just handles and points better to me. Seems to have really good quality control. Putting it back together after cleaning? Takes me twice as long to assemble it. Instructions? Shoot, I thought that was a Glossary of cuss words to use so I just tossed that right away.

My old Mark 1 is a little finicky about ammo. Have an old 10-22 and a new 10-22 Carbine, and the old one shoots anything reliably while the new one only likes Remington Yellow Jackets. Maybe that's just a curse with newer Ruger products?

LDBennett · 03-28-2010, 12:30 PM

There are a sequence of gun positions that you have to go through to position the hammer strut on the top of the hammer spring plunger. Fail to follow that sequence gets you a gun together but the bolt can not be pulled to the rear and obviously the gun can not be used.

No amount of intuition or expertise will get it right unless you go through the sequence. The strut disappears from view as you close up the gun so you are working in the blind. Follow the instruction to the letter and the gun goes together without a problem.

LDBennett

12-15-2009, 05:44 AM	#51
Suwannee Tim Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 2,227	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated It is amazing that there are so few good guns in this class. The Ruger, the Browning, the High Standard, what others? Each has it's flaws which could have been corrected with some engineering. Its a shame. My current fav large 22 auto is my Kimber. Handles like a 1911 because it is a 1911!

03-14-2010, 01:19 PM	#53
LDBennett Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hesperia, CA Posts: 5,715	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated Suwannee Tim: Boy, you must have a real hard time working on anything if you take 2 days to clean a Ruger Mk pistol! All it takes is following the directions in the box that the pistol came in. I'll admit it could be be easier but the pistol was designed and first sold in 1947, 63 years ago. It was meant to be an inexpensive, reliable semi-auto pistol using what was then new processes (stamped sheet metal parts). The target models have excellent accuracy. There are a bunch of after market parts for them. They shoot almost any ammo you can find. Yes, they are tricky to put back together but only if you fail to follow the instruction book. Don't get me wrong. I too have several Hi Std pistols but they have their problems too, like: Cracked frames if you don't use Standard Velocity ammo and change out the recoil spring regularly. Feeding problems if the magazine lips are not perfectly adjusted. Poorly adjusted mag lips can also cause failures to fire, bolts that don't fully close and fail to fire the cartridge in the chamber. And often a like for only a few different ammos. So nothing is perfect. Ruger MK pistols can be found used for about half the price of an equivalent Hi Std model and you can still buy a new Ruger (the Texas Hi Std guns are not in the same league as the Connecticut Hi Std's.... I know as I have one of the Texas Turkeys). It is fine for you to dislike a particular brand based on your own experiences (like I hate GM cars and love Ford's) but to denigrate them as over rated is not really fair. In my opinion the target models are just about the best semi-auto target pistol you can get for the money. Add a bit more and the guns can be as good as guns twice as expensive. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the 5 1/2 inch target gun I use to own or my currently owned 678G Target gun. But I would not own the plastic framed version, but that's just me. LDBennett

03-14-2010, 04:20 PM	#54
UncleFudd Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phoenix, Az Contributor Posts: 549	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated another point of view. I had the rental program at the range for twenty years and always had at least two of the MK series Rugers for people to try. I also attempted to keep a mod 41 and a Buckmark or two at times but the only guns that would stand up to the rigors and heavy use were the Rugers. I learned very early on that it is not possible to keep the S&W mod 41 as they are just too finicky and ammo particular. The Buckmarks although very accurate were also ammo particular and will not stand the test of time and number of rounds. So the bottom line even to this day is to keep the Ruger 22LR pistols if we wanted to always have a gun for rent and to have it available all the time. Something else that comes to mind is the number and types of accessories available for the Ruger pistols. They are very accurate to begin with but there are so many items that can be added to make them even more so or at least from the operators standpoint such as the grips and sights and barrel configurations from the likes of Volquartsen etc. I find it very difficult to imagine anyone being more accurate than the MK11 right off the shelf but if so, there are of course some very expensive pistols and the same in the ammo for them. As far as longevity, I don't think you will find another 22LR pistol on the market that will last as long with just about any ammo you run through it or take more of a beating with less time cleaning than the Rugers and my rental counter has been proof positive for a long, long time. UF

03-14-2010, 06:14 PM	#55
Citizen Carrier Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 1	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated I would not say they are overrated at all. The Ruger came along at a time when the rimfire bullseye sport was dominated by the Model 41, High Standards, and to a lesser extent the Colt Woodsman match models. To bring in a product for about half or even a third of the price that can compete with such expensive designs continues to speak for its quality. As such, I would not call them overrated. Earlier in my bullseye interest I went through a "High Standard" phase. I had a Hamden-made one. A Citation with a fluted barrel. It would only reliably work with the one original magazine I had with it. Newer Texas magazines weren't reliable enough. Ditto that Triple K crap. Magazines made for the Stoeger Pro-Series 95 copies of the High Standards DID work okay. (You can still get Stoeger Pro-Series magazines directly from the guy who used to make the Pro-Series 95 Stoeger guns, if you know what to research) I also had a Texas-made Citation built specifically for a red dot scope. The Texas factory built it for me on the stainless frame of an inferior HS copy I sent to them. The HS guns were superbly accurate with wonderful triggers from the start. Undoubtedly the most accurate .22s I owned until I up-gunned to a Pardini. But they didn't run reliably. I hated having to constantly alibi fire at the matches. And I was sick of spending $40-$60 for a single decent magazine...when they could be found. Then I switched to a Ruger Mk II slabsides. With Volquartsen upgrades, which I installed myself, I started to score a lot better. And I got perfectly functional magazines for $20 or less.

03-27-2010, 09:14 PM	#57
capndan Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Vero Beach FL Posts: 13	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated Just bought a MKII and have learned how to reassemble, but have a hard time aligning receiver & grip frame. Is there a trick to this, is there a need to fluff and buff something, or should I go ahead and get a plastic end hammer?

03-28-2010, 07:35 AM	#59
LDBennett Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hesperia, CA Posts: 5,715	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated capndan: I use a rubber mallet to disengage and re-engage the grip frame with the receiver. Some are tight like mine and others are not and probably don't shoot well because they are loosely fitted. As for alignment of the two I use the hammer spring assembly with the captive pin that goes through both the receiver and the grip frame... but from the top. When I can slip the pin into the receiver and down through the grip frame from the top then all is aligned. These are great guns but they can be a bugger to put back together. Use the instruction book every time and the job is a lot easier. Rely on your memory and you will have to fight it to get it back together. The hammer strut is the problem. It has to be positioned just so or the gun will go back together such that the bolt can not be cycled. Checkout the instructions the next time you tear down the gun and have to reassemble it. LDBennett

03-28-2010, 11:40 AM	#60
Bobitis Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 6,612	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated The best sight available for Ruger pistol maintenance: http://guntalk-online.com/ __________________ ^.^ A point in every direction is the same as having no point at all

03-28-2010, 12:04 PM	#61
jim brady Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 1,073	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated Don't know about Ruger pistols being higly over-rated. I have handled lots of other .22 pistols, and the Ruger just handles and points better to me. Seems to have really good quality control. Putting it back together after cleaning? Takes me twice as long to assemble it. Instructions? Shoot, I thought that was a Glossary of cuss words to use so I just tossed that right away. My old Mark 1 is a little finicky about ammo. Have an old 10-22 and a new 10-22 Carbine, and the old one shoots anything reliably while the new one only likes Remington Yellow Jackets. Maybe that's just a curse with newer Ruger products?

03-28-2010, 12:30 PM	#62
LDBennett Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hesperia, CA Posts: 5,715	Re: Ruger 22 auto pistols, highly overrated There are a sequence of gun positions that you have to go through to position the hammer strut on the top of the hammer spring plunger. Fail to follow that sequence gets you a gun together but the bolt can not be pulled to the rear and obviously the gun can not be used. No amount of intuition or expertise will get it right unless you go through the sequence. The strut disappears from view as you close up the gun so you are working in the blind. Follow the instruction to the letter and the gun goes together without a problem. LDBennett