Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Mark I Std vs Tgt

3K views 21 replies 11 participants last post by  SGW Gunsmith 
#1 ·
I am looking to buy a Mark I just to have an early Ruger; I have most other brand target pistols from the mid 1960's-1970's. Locally I see a Ruger Mk I Standard with red box from about 1963, and also a couple of Mk I Targets from about 1975 with the box too. Is the target trigger any better than what I would get on the standard model?
I do like the adjustable sights and the bull barrel on the target, but I like the earlier date on the standard. I will not be shooting in competition but would like a nice trigger on whatever I buy. Thanks for any advice, Willyboy.
 
#2 ·
Triggers are the same for the most part. Be aware that the Standard will NOT be stamped Mark I.
Mark I was the stamp they put on the target model. There are also two version of the early pistol grip frames. Read old posts here to determine what you are buying. Just collecting Ruger pistols can be a quest in and of its self.
 
#5 ·
Here's a comparison of the various triggers involved with the early Standards and the Mark I target:



The "steel" pins that were cast into the two triggers on the right were supposed to act as pre and over-travel pads. The problem is, those pads floated a bit as the molten aluminum flowed into the injection molds, so the pins are at slightly varying depths, and there is no means available to adjust those pins.

The sears and hammers used by the factory made no differentiation between standard or target, so there's really no help there for the triggers. Same is involved with the discos for each variation. I've never been able to find any sort of "meaningful" difference between triggers, even when using a digital trigger pull gauge. As with any semi-auto pistol, the more the pistol gets used, the more the internal parts become smoother. Sometimes that can and will give the perception of being better.
 
#6 ·
I think the triggers peaked in the Mk II, but it's still not on the same plane as a S&W 41, etc. I would also not let the trigger drive your decision making process when considering a pre- MK I, a MK I or a MK II

Right out of the box, the trigger on my MK II Target was better than the trigger on my MK I T678.

However, I replaced both of them with Volquartzen hammer and sear kits. I'm not a fan of the Volquartzen lightweight hammer and titanium firing pin kits however as even though they improve lock time, they seem to result in light strikes with many brands of ammunition.

The conversion process was a straight drop in process on a MK II Target. With my MK I T678, I had to do just a wee bit of filing where the sear engages the safety to get good, positive engagement with the new sear, and to allow the slide to lock back when the safety was applied.

In both cases, the process is reversible. Just keep the old parts and you can restore it to its original condition.

 
#7 ·
I think the triggers peaked in the Mk II, but it's still not on the same plane as a S&W 41, etc. I would also not let the trigger drive your decision making process when considering a pre- MK I, a MK I or a MK II

Right out of the box, the trigger on my MK II Target was better than the trigger on my MK I T678.

However, I replaced both of them with Volquartzen hammer and sear kits. I'm not a fan of the Volquartzen lightweight hammer and titanium firing pin kits however as even though they improve lock time, they seem to result in light strikes with many brands of ammunition. If you are getting "light hammer hits" look elsewhere, it's not the hammer.

The conversion process was a straight drop in process on a MK II Target. With my MK I T678, I had to do just a wee bit of filing where the sear engages the safety to get good, positive engagement with the new sear, and to allow the slide to lock back when the safety was applied.
In both cases, the process is reversible. Just keep the old parts and you can restore it to its original condition.
Some MYTHS just never seem to die. I have extensively tested the Volquartsen "light-weight" hammer over a very wide range of .22 rimfire ammunition and have never found those hammers to be a cause of light hits. I even went so far as to "Swiss cheese" a Ruger Mark II hammer until it weighed 32% less than the VC hammer weighs as it arrives. 300 rounds later using various brands of .22 rimfire ammunition, and not one single light hit to where the primer did NOT ignite the gunpowder.



On the left Volquartsen hammer On the right S.G.W. LLC lightened hammer

Now, if someone has actual PROOF of the light hits, and that they were caused by the Volquartsen lightweight hammer, please post that up. The fictitious claims about the Volquartsen hammer causing light hits is false.
 
#19 ·
It's not very often that SGW and I agree on things, but in this instance, we do. :eek:

The energy stored in the mainspring is transferred to the hammer. The spring doesn't care if the hammer is solid steel, "swiss cheese" steel, or G10 with steel sleeves and plates. It delivers the same energy to any of them.

Now, the energy delivered to the firing pin is a different matter. Some of the energy is lost to friction, with only what's left being delivered. Excessive frictional energy loss is the cause of light hits - regardless of hammer style. Reduce the losses sufficiently, and any hammer will work.

That said, just as a lighter hammer accelerates faster than a heavier one - it also decelerates faster. So it's more sensitive to friction..../
There is a difference between momentum and energy.

For example, a .45 ACP with a 185 gr bullet at 975 fps has 390 ft pounds of energy, while a 230 gr bullet at 875 fps has the same 390 ft pounds of energy - but about 12% more momentum and it does a better job knocking over steel targets.

Similarly, the heavier hammer accelerates slower, but has more momentum.
 
#22 ·
There is a difference between momentum and energy.

For example, a .45 ACP with a 185 gr bullet at 975 fps has 390 ft pounds of energy, while a 230 gr bullet at 875 fps has the same 390 ft pounds of energy - but about 12% more momentum and it does a better job knocking over steel targets.

Similarly, the heavier hammer accelerates slower, but has more momentum.
Let's get back on topic, as this is the Ruger Mark I .22 rimfire forum, and has nothing to do with the 1911 style hammer.

Basically then, what your claim is, "you feel the lighter Volquartsen hammer" is fully responsible for the light primer hits you were experiencing with that hammer in your pistol. Is that a correct statement, without being rude?
 
#8 ·
Of the pistols listed by the OP, my choice would be the bull bbl Target model from 1975 era. My reasoning is this. Any factory Ruger action is going to need to be replaced with Volquartsen trigger and sear and hammer while you are at it to get a respectable trigger pull, or tuned by a reputable gunsmith. But it's the bull barrel and adjustable sights that complete the package.

The exception to my advice would be if you want a lighter pistol to holster carry etc.
 
#9 ·
Wproct. I agree with most of what you said but the cost of the VQ hammer ,IMHO, is not needed . I have two of them and have put them in guns but went back to the factory hammer and got better trigger pulls. The trigger and sear is all you need to get the best trigger pull , or so I have found from doing VQ parts or 50 or more Ruger, Mark I's, MK II's ,NK III and MK III 22/45s .I have an old 1972 Ruger MarkI 512 and it is accurate , but my KMK MK II512 is just as accurate as is my MK II678 and my most accurate Ruger semi auto is a Ruger MK II Comp Target. Most of them shoot good , some of them shoot spectacular.
 
#10 · (Edited by Moderator)
JStacy, I'm reading many more reports supporting what you say about the Volquartsen hammer not being necessary. I picked up a MKII stainless 5.5 in bull bbl target model a couple of weeks ago and wanted to do the tune-up. I struggled whether to order the kit with the hammer or just get the trigger and sear. I wound up going with the whole kit and have been really happy with the results, but as you say, it may have been just as good or possibly better had I used the stock hammer.
 
#15 ·
I own a variety of MK pistols from each era. My experience would allow that it is more about each individual firearm than about any particular model or age.

By far my most accurate is a heavily worn standard. So worn, the PO sold it to me in a cigar box complete disassembled for parts. He couldn't figure out how to get it back together, and didn't think it was worth the effort. I identified several parts I thought might need replacing, but reassembled as is anyway at the advice of this board. Many thousands of round later, it's still making the smallest groups of any I own. It kind of defies that whole precision fit concept. Everything in it is loose and sloppy.

As for my experience with the light hammer. I have tried it. Put the hammer in, I have problems with light strikes. Take the hammer out, I don't have problems with light strikes. Same ammo, different ammo - its there. Now perhaps if I spent another pile of money on all the other parts to go with it, the issue would go away. But to replace the hammer by itself, I found it less reliable. No person, can dismiss the experience of others as myth based on their experience alone.

That being said I have several with VQ parts in them. They work just fine. But my best before and after results have been with an old Clark kit from when they were available. How much they really help is subjective. When you buy a new, unbroken pistol and add custom parts, you can definitely feel an immediate difference. When you replace parts in one that has a few thousand rounds through it, the results are more subjective. But then, I only throw a few thousand rounds a year down range. I don't shoot competition, so seconds don't count for me. I really have never objected to a little pre or over travel. I think it is more about spending time with a particular firearm. And, I have big rough heavily worn hands. Too bad they don't make replacement parts for those. Someone with a more delicate touch no doubt may reach more benefit. For me, it's all just in fun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top