Wednesday with the handguns

[bandit1250]

Went to shoot the Buck Mark and the Ruger MK III at our club range. Our weather took a turn back to cold. It was in the upper 30's at the range altitude and after only a half hour or so my fingers were getting cold enough the magazines were getting hard to load. The greasy German made ammo wouldn't function in the Browning mag from getting hard. It worked fine with the Federal and the Aguila. The Ruger will eat any thing you put in the mag for it. Both have Tasco older Pro-Point red dots on them so they are equal in sights. The Browning is accurate with ammo it likes and will hold 5/8-3/4" at thirty yards off bags. Rarely shoots any over an inch from a rest on bags. The Ruger is at least equal and some times better in accuracy. After several trips to the range with both I feel my MK III is the better choice for me. It just feels like it is heavier built and the Browning feels like the materials used are light weight and cheap. Also with my arthritis in my fingers and the narrow slide it is harder to pull the slide back when needed. The Ruger is a piece of cake to operate the slide when needed. They feel completely different on the recoil cycle. The Ruger feels more like my 41 Smith felt and the Browning makes me aware that it is light and shorter in barrel length and jumps more than the Ruger. Another thing is I actually was going to sell the Browning and got a shock at how low a price I was offered for it with only 50 rounds fired in it. They offered almost $200 less than I paid for it and it is their top of the line model. I have been offered nearly $200 more than I paid for the MK III Hunter to sell the Ruger. I also have a very strong preference for the Ruger over size laminated finger groove grips. They feel much better in my hands and I don't have big hands. Another negative on the Browning is only getting one mag. The Ruger comes with two. It cost me another $30 for the extra mag. I think any one thinking about buying either of the pistols like I have they may be better hunting for a used Ruger MK II or III. I don't have any experience at all with the MK IV. I have heard the triggers are the worst of Ruger MK pistols. The most positive thing I found on the Browning is by flipping the sear spring over the trigger can be lowered from 4lb down to 2lb 4oz. So I did find something I like about it.

[North Country Gal]

Thanks for the info on the Buckmark. In all my years of shooting, I've never actually fired one. I know the Browning has a following, so it must be a good shooter and your report backs that up. Still, it was always that lightweight construction quality that had me stay with the Ruger Marks through the years. That, and I could (and still can) take a Ruger Mark apart in my sleep. There's also the matter of proven durability of the Ruger Mark. It still holds all the records for number of shots fired without a breakdown (into the six digits).

I've also had experience with the target High Standards, Colt Woodsman and the Smith 41. The high Standards and the 41 were the best pure target 22 autos I've ever shot, but both had their weak points in construction and design. The Ruger did not. I think the simplicity and ruggedness of the Ruger Mark was a big plus in this regard.

[Sir Henry]

Joanie anyone can take a Mark apart in their sleep. It’s putting it back together where the problem is.

Bandit I like shooting in the cold. I don’t know why but my vision is better. What I don’t like is fingers can get so cold you can cut yourself and not know it.

When I was in Ephrata I built a Henry specific for cold weather with absolutely no oil anywhere. It would even shoot below zero.

Glad you got to the range and made a report.

[North Country Gal]

Joanie anyone can take a Mark apart in their sleep. It’s putting it back together where the problem is. ...

Well, not quite. You do have to follow a couple steps in the proper order to get it done. Overall, though, I've never thought it to be any harder than taking down a 1911. Just takes experience.

Where Ruger screwed up was lousy QC with the MK IIIs, back in the days when they fell way behind in production. Had some MK IIIs that were very poorly finished and apparently assembled with some kind of hydraulic press, they were so tightly fitted. It really did take a mallet and a punch to take those apart. Had some friends bring their MK IIIs to me to take apart. That's about the same time that the internet started to see wide use. Really gave the Ruger Mark a black eye as being hard to take apart. Big part of why Ruger went to the MK IV. As with so many things, Ruger, I seldom had these issues when Bill Ruger was alive and still running the company. Different company after he died.

[BigAl52]

Ive got a III and a IV. The IV is the ultra lite. I like it alot but I don’t have any trouble taking the III down. Just gotta hold ur mouth right when putting it back together. Bandit I use to have a Buckmark the plastic sights I didn’t care for. Other than that it shot ok.