Which Ruger .22 pistol do you prefer, and why?

**sgtdraino** · 05-26-2009, 03:11 PM

Do you prefer a Ruger Single-Six, or one of the Ruger Mark series?
What are your reasons for favoring one over the other?

**COWBOYSURVIVAL** · 05-26-2009, 03:17 PM

.22 cal is a great choice for survival. Easy to cache and store alot of ammo and light to carry. The six shooter is gonna be the easier gun to maintain or fix a broken part.

**Rick** · 05-26-2009, 08:26 PM

I can't vote because I don't own a Mark series. I've never shot one that I can remember.

The Single Six is the cat's pajamas in my book. It's well balanced, fits my hand well, gives you the flexibility of the 22 or 22 mag and it's made by Ruger. What's not to like?

**crashdive123** · 05-26-2009, 08:32 PM

I don't have either. For 22 pistols I've got the Smith & Wesson 22A-1 and the Ruger Charger. I've been shopping for a single six - trying to find a good deal on a used one.

**SARKY** · 05-26-2009, 11:50 PM

I can't vote, I own both and tey are both great firearms!

**Kankujoe** · 05-27-2009, 12:41 AM

My Ruger Mark IIs are just as reliable & accurate as when I got them in the early 80's. You can't go wrong with a Mark I, II or III.

A .22lr semi auto is the best choice in a survivor firearm according to the USRSOG. http://www.sererescuesog.addr.com/USRSOG-Firearm.htm

**Ole WV Coot** · 05-27-2009, 09:26 AM

Both reliable. Single Six for the mag option. I have a Mark I, Mark II bull barrel and a Single Six I would feel comfortable with either.

**catfish10101** · 05-28-2009, 06:59 AM

Mark II. I remember sitting outside the camp with Father-in-law, drinking a few 12 packs of our favorite "beverage", and plinking those ugly black grasshoppers as they came out of the tall grass about 30 feet away. I don't think I've ever shot a more accurate handgun.

**Clem** · 05-29-2009, 12:03 PM

I have a Single Six, a MK II and two MK IIIs. The Single Six, although a nice reliable, durable gun, isn't in the same class accuracy wise, as a descent MK II or MK III. After being rebarreled and getting new cylinders, my Single Six is pretty good. My MK II & IIIs are terrific with only normal break-in.

I am a revolver guy. While I like my Rugers, my favorite .22 handguns are S&W revolvers: Model 17, 63 and 617.

**sgtdraino** · 05-29-2009, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by remy

I have a Mark III (22/45).

Ha! You have anticipated the question I was about to ask: I saw a gun in the store today that looked like a Mark, but it was branded a 22/45. So the 22/45 is the same as the Mark III?

Originally Posted by remy

I chose the Mark III in relations to survival and the ability to put food on the table. I cannot get more accurate than with the Mark III when it comes to shooting hand guns.

The .22 round is all about shot placement.
But hey...you might be a great shot with a revolver.

I can be a great shot with pistols, although I don't feel like I've ever been exceptionally accurate with my Single-Six. Plus, my Single-Six predates the ones that could also fire .22 magnum.

**SARKY** · 05-30-2009, 11:31 AM

Here's the skinny, The mark II's and mark III's come in many variants (mostly pertains to type and length of barrel) . The 22/45 is a variant of both the mark II and III. The idea was to give it the same frame angle as the venerable .45 thus cheap point shooting practice. The difference being the frame construction and angle of the grip (which changes the feed on the magazines, thus you need a totally different magazine from the mark II or III) . I like the idea of a light weight Ruger auto loader, I think one of the variants of the 22/45 is a 4 inch flutted bull barrel (nice balance in the hand). They also have a polymer framed revolver coming out soon. I would like to see that in .22 rimfire and .327 federal!

**donny h** · 06-09-2009, 01:22 AM

Mark series for me, Mark III to be exact.

On the III, the mag release is on the side of the grip, where it should be, instead of being at the butt end of the grip.

I have a Hunter, like the one pictured below, the fluted barrel gives it bull barrel performance without the front heaviness that bull barrels cause.

It's the most accurate gun I own.

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

**SARKY** · 06-09-2009, 11:43 AM

The thing about the Mark III hunter model is it is not intended for precision shooting. The rear sight is a wide V and the fron sight is a fiber optic insert(which you can change out to different colors). It is quicker on target than my Mark II but I can shoot tighter groups with my Mark II than I can with my Mark III

**glockcop** · 06-14-2009, 12:32 AM

The Single six because of the .22mag option. Try this...Shoot a racoon running full tilt boogie at you with a 22lr. Try it again with a 6 1/2'' single six with mags. Believe me the s/s is the way to go. As far as accuracy goes...There is nobody here that can take advantage of the miniscule accuracy difference while shooting free hand in the real word. Any way the s/s is really a 22 mag revolver with a spare 22 lr cyl. The bore size is actually a little bit larger than typical 22lr specs to accomadate mag rounds. The bore of the ruger auto is 22lr spec. I believe .224 vs .222 cal. This is the reason shooting lr in the s/s will yield SLIGHTLY less accuracy. Put that mag cyl. in and the perceived advantage essentially disappears in the real world hunting application. .22 mags from a pistol is going about as fast as a LR in a rifle length barrel. There is no problem with wasted meat on small game as can be the case with 22 mag in a rifle lenght barrel. The 22lr fired from a pistol can be considered underpowered for more than 25 yrds in hunting applications IMO. Ive seen more than a few squirrels make it back to the den after a 22lr pistol hit. Rabbits are just as dead w/ either. Also the auto is a pain in the A$$ to disassemble and reassemble.

**hoosierarcher** · 06-15-2009, 02:08 PM

Because you loose performance with the .22 LR with the loss of barrel length in a handgun loosing more with the cylinder gap is something I don't want to do so a semi auto is my choice.

**Rick** · 06-15-2009, 03:19 PM

You can never, NEVER trust a raccoon! They wear that mask for a reason you know.

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

**rat31465** · 06-15-2009, 04:18 PM

My mother and I went in together and bought this MK-II 6 7/8" for my Dad back in the late 80"s. I also gave him at the time 10 bricks of Winchester Super-X .22's...which was shot up within 3 months.
We kept careful track of rounds fired through this pistol by saving the empty 50 round boxes until after we reached 50,000. I'm guessing conservatively that it has over 75,000 as of this date.
The gun still shoots extremely well and since Dads death back in Nov 2008 has been in my possession.
Between him and me we taught a lot of family members to shoot a handgun with this firearm and it is my intention to use it to teach my Grandson with when he gets a few more years under his belt.
As to why I prefer the MK series...If I am going to shoot a revolver I prefer to shoot double action...the magnum argument is mute as far as my experiences have shown. .22 mags from a handgun offer little velocity advantage over a good quality .22 LR Hi-Velocity round like the CCI Stinger. I have chronographed both and seen less than a 10% increase with the Magnum. Plus out of a revolver the .22 magnum is just uncomfortable to shoot without wearing hearing protection...Even for a few shots you might take out hunting.

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

**sgtdraino** · 06-15-2009, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by Kankujoe

My Ruger Mark IIs are just as reliable & accurate as when I got them in the early 80's. You can't go wrong with a Mark I, II or III.

A .22lr semi auto is the best choice in a survivor firearm according to the USRSOG. http://www.sererescuesog.addr.com/USRSOG-Firearm.htm

Good article. I see the article gives top marks specifically to the Ruger Mark II, and the S&W 22A.

What do you guys think of the Ruger versus the S&W? I'm not too familiar with the 22A.

Also, is the Ruger Mark II in any way superior to the Mark III? Or vice-versa?

**glockcop** · 06-15-2009, 07:45 PM

The loss of velocity due to barrel cyl gap is inconsequential. You may be talking 25-35 fps here. So what! Using RIFLE barrel length velocity as a baseline for comparison you will get a little bit higher than 22 LR velocity from a magnum pistol. Shooting 22 LR in a pistol you will get a little bit higher than 22 short velocity. That about sums it up. If your gonna use a .22 handgun for hunting, the extra power of the magnum makes it decidedly BETTER than any LR...even Stingers. Stinger bullet construction is too light for hunting (they tear up too much meat on impact) and there are ALOT more accurate hunting rounds than Stingers. The penetration with Stingers sucks pretty bad too (due to light bullet construction). Deer killing wild dogs and duck killing racoons I've delt with have been very "impressed" with the performance of my Single Six and the .22 mags. Real world application is the best teacher. My experiences with both 22 LR and 22 Magnum handguns have made the matter very clear.