Re: Ruger MK III Hunter
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alderleet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'd give other 22lr pistols a look
Like the GSG-1911. So far, i've been torture testing mine, fresh from the factory, and running random intervals of suppressed and unsupressed, i still havent had a FTE/FTF for 2500 rds. I didnt strip or clean the gun when i got it, I just shot it and called it good.
Sure, gunk has built up, but the gun so far has been exceedingly reliable.
Plus it's a comfort to know im shooing a firearm that closely resembles and feels like one of my carry weapons. I dont carry a damn Luger, so why the hell would i practice for one with a ruger pistol </div></div>
He's talking about a Mk III, not a Mk I. The MK III carries all the same grip angle and controls geometry as the 1911.
The Ruger 22/45 was the precursor designed to train exactly that, including the balance of the weapon.
The Mk III's and 22/45's are excellent pistols and very accurate. I have a Mk II "Government Model" and a 22/45. There's a difference between sloppy 22's and target pistols, for the money involved the Rugers are one of the best values in the target market. The MK III target models are probably the best route to go in that line as the fiber optic "hunter" sights are pretty poor from my experience with them.