Ruger Mk III 22/45 accuracy is bad....or is it me?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Ruger Mk III 22/45 accuracy is bad....or is it me?

Posted: 8/4/2012 10:39:34 PM EDT

I took my new 22/45 threaded barrel gun out today. I did all my shooting at 7 yards; I used Fed Bulk Pack and some older Winchester Xpert

In addition to the POI being off by about 2" both up and left, I couldn't hold a group tighter than about 2.5" SUPPORTED, with either ammo.

Unsupported, it was like patterning a shotgun, about 5" or greater groups, again with either brand of ammo.

I took out my Glock afterwards and proceeded to punch out the x-ring with boring ease.

Now, I'm no newbie to shooting. I am used to shooting .45s and everything on down to .22, but this IS my first Ruger .22.

Before I took it out, I removed the mag disconnect and polished up the internals with a little flitz. The crown looks good to go and being new the gun is obviously in good shape.

Has anyone encountered similar issues with this gun, or am I just sucking in spite of it all?

Posted: 8/5/2012 4:03:03 AM EDT

[#1]

in my experience - 22 ammo is very inconsistant (to say the least) in accuracy and performance, so I wouldnt fault the pistol just yet..

I would try some CCI stuff - mini mag, stinger and report back...

OR if you want to see the best performance buy some really high end .22 stuff to see the best performance

brian

Posted: 8/5/2012 6:43:35 AM EDT

[#2]

I would let someone else try first just incase somethign was throwing you off on that gun.

at 7 yards you should be able to clover leaf or better. 2 inches is terrible. and while I agree 22 ammo is not the most consistent, I use bulk pack all day and can do better that close.

if the second shooter has the same issue, I would be calling ruger to have them check out the gun.

Posted: 8/5/2012 9:44:48 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
I would let someone else try first just incase somethign was throwing you off on that gun.

at 7 yards you should be able to clover leaf or better. 2 inches is terrible. and while I agree 22 ammo is not the most consistent, I use bulk pack all day and can do better that close.

if the second shooter has the same issue, I would be calling ruger to have them check out the gun.

+1. Also try some CCI Blazer. It seems to be the most accurate 22 ammo I can find, except for the match stuff.

Posted: 8/5/2012 10:43:40 AM EDT

[#4]

Did you check the muzzle for a burr from when it was threaded?
Is there any lead built up in the barrel?
I have been shooting the Federal bulk ammo in matches for years, and it is much more accurate than that.

Posted: 8/5/2012 12:09:48 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

Did you check the muzzle for a burr from when it was threaded?

Is there any lead built up in the barrel?

I have been shooting the Federal bulk ammo in matches for years, and it is much more accurate than that.

Checked the muzzle...the crown appears uniform but ridged, is that normal? Most crowns I have seen are smooth, this one almost looks like it has a tiny coin knurl on it.

Also, upon closer examination, the rear sight is visibly off. I hate drifting sights.

Pic of ridged crown:

Would a roughly-finished thread protector cause problems as well? I know the bullet doesnt contact it...

In the pic below you can see burrs in the thread protector; that's not lead, it appears to be unfiled steel:

Posted: 8/5/2012 3:11:28 PM EDT

[#6]

I have the same model as you and my crown and thread protector look nothing like that. My gun also shoots point of aim unless shooting suppressed then it shoots high and left like yours. I would contact Ruger about that crown. I wouldn't be happy with that.

Posted: 8/5/2012 3:58:00 PM EDT

[#7]

I have never seen a crown like that. I'm not saying I am an expert but that just doesn't look right.
The crown is the last thing on the weapon that affects the bullet. Anything that upsets the bullet as it leaves will destroy accuracy.
You might call a local gunsmith and see how much it costs to crown the muzzle. I would also have the thread protector smoothed.
I am no machinist but it looks like the tool they were using started chattering while cutting.
If you take it to a local 'smith it will cost some money- probably not much, but you won't be without the pistol nearly as long as if you send it to the manufacturer.

Posted: 8/6/2012 7:38:01 AM EDT

[#8]

Mark II>Mark III

too bad they only make the "improved" one now

Posted: 8/8/2012 8:28:30 PM EDT

[#9]

Wow!!! I would be on the phone with Ruger about that one, think they missed that one on the QC check.

Posted: 8/12/2012 2:23:58 PM EDT

[#10]

I'm having the same exact problem with the same exact pistol. I was really surprised to find it grouping 2" off a rest at 10 yards with Federal bulk, Winchester HV, and CCI minimags. Here's a pic, albeit crippled by my weak photo-fu, of the crown; it looks OK to me, nothing like the previous one.

I may try some other kinds of ammo before I send it back to Ruger. I've never tried Wolf Target.

If it does go back to the factory, does Ruger pay shipping both ways since the thing is brand new?

Posted: 8/12/2012 3:34:36 PM EDT

[#11]

My MkII will group better than 2" off sandbags at 25 yards. I do use a reddot that I can dial the dot size down to 2moa, so that really helps accuracy. Are y'all using iron sights or an optic?
A 2" group at 10 yards is not acceptable, even with the Federal bulk ammo I use in plate matches.

Posted: 8/12/2012 3:55:47 PM EDT

[#12]

My neighbor has a Mk III that is inaccurate as well. I first thought it was because he shoots wearing bifocals.

it turns out that it's just a pice of shit. We gathered up all sorts of 22LR ammo and both shot 10 round groups from his Mk III and Beretta Model 76, my S&W 41 and Mk I in the same configuration as his Mk III: tapered 6" barrel.

With all ammo types, the 41 came out on top with the Beretta a close second. Distant third was the Mk I and pulling up the rear by a lot was the Mk III.

When he first got it and it shot poorly, I thought the groups would tight up as it got broken in. That hasn't been the case. It hasn't gotten worse, it just hasn't gotten better.

Posted: 8/12/2012 4:14:56 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
My neighbor has a Mk III that is inaccurate as well. I first thought it was because he shoots wearing bifocals.

it turns out that it's just a pice of shit. We gathered up all sorts of 22LR ammo and both shot 10 round groups from his Mk III and Beretta Model 76, my S&W 41 and Mk I in the same configuration as his Mk III: tapered 6" barrel.

With all ammo types, the 41 came out on top with the Beretta a close second. Distant third was the Mk I and pulling up the rear by a lot was the Mk III.

When he first got it and it shot poorly, I thought the groups would tight up as it got broken in. That hasn't been the case. It hasn't gotten worse, it just hasn't gotten better.

Maybe there are some that are not accurate, but I shot my highest score in NRA Bullseye Pistol with a stock MkII and Federal bulk ammo. Go figure- crap ammo and I shot an 835 out of 900.

Posted: 8/12/2012 6:29:24 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My neighbor has a Mk III that is inaccurate as well. I first thought it was because he shoots wearing bifocals.

it turns out that it's just a pice of shit. We gathered up all sorts of 22LR ammo and both shot 10 round groups from his Mk III and Beretta Model 76, my S&W 41 and Mk I in the same configuration as his Mk III: tapered 6" barrel.

With all ammo types, the 41 came out on top with the Beretta a close second. Distant third was the Mk I and pulling up the rear by a lot was the Mk III.

When he first got it and it shot poorly, I thought the groups would tight up as it got broken in. That hasn't been the case. It hasn't gotten worse, it just hasn't gotten better.

Maybe there are some that are not accurate, but I shot my highest score in NRA Bullseye Pistol with a stock MkII and Federal bulk ammo. Go figure- crap ammo and I shot an 835 out of 900.

I didn't say anything about the Mk II.

. I had a Mk II myself and sold it to fund the 41. It was a great pistol and I'd buy it back if I had the chance. It had a bull barrel and was pretty accurate.

Posted: 8/12/2012 6:37:49 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My neighbor has a Mk III that is inaccurate as well. I first thought it was because he shoots wearing bifocals.

it turns out that it's just a pice of shit. We gathered up all sorts of 22LR ammo and both shot 10 round groups from his Mk III and Beretta Model 76, my S&W 41 and Mk I in the same configuration as his Mk III: tapered 6" barrel.

With all ammo types, the 41 came out on top with the Beretta a close second. Distant third was the Mk I and pulling up the rear by a lot was the Mk III.

When he first got it and it shot poorly, I thought the groups would tight up as it got broken in. That hasn't been the case. It hasn't gotten worse, it just hasn't gotten better.

Maybe there are some that are not accurate, but I shot my highest score in NRA Bullseye Pistol with a stock MkII and Federal bulk ammo. Go figure- crap ammo and I shot an 835 out of 900.

I didn't say anything about the Mk II.

. I had a Mk II myself and sold it to fund the 41. It was a great pistol and I'd buy it back if I had the chance. It had a bull barrel and was pretty accurate.

The MkIII should have the same accuracy as a MkII.

Posted: 8/12/2012 7:56:09 PM EDT

[#16]

Believe it or not, my 2" groups are shot from a rest with an EOTech. Yes, it's stupid, but it's all I have available until Primary Arms frigging comes out with their green micro dot.

So it occurred to me that I hadn't actually run anything through the barrel, so I gave it and the crown a good cleaning. Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to test again.

It makes sense that guns will prefer certain ammo, but you're absolutely right - 2" for Federal bulk or Minimags is just plain unacceptable.

Posted: 8/12/2012 7:59:07 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Believe it or not, my 2" groups are shot from a rest with an EOTech. Yes, it's stupid, but it's all I have available until Primary Arms frigging comes out with their green micro dot.

So it occurred to me that I hadn't actually run anything through the barrel, so I gave it and the crown a good cleaning. Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to test again.

It makes sense that guns will prefer certain ammo, but you're absolutely right - 2" for Federal bulk or Minimags is just plain unacceptable.

Be sure to check for lead built up in the barrel. Some ammo, especially Remington, will lead a barrel quickly and accuracy will suck.
If you do find lead you can clean it out with a small piece of a copper chore boy pan scrubber wrapped around an old bore brush.

Posted: 8/12/2012 8:18:58 PM EDT

[#18]

Hmm...that Winchester HV that I started with wasn't jacketed. And there was a metric assload of buildup and/or lead on the muzzle from suppression. Stupid question, but what's the best way to check for lead in the barrel? I cast for my 1911s, and it's easy to see it there, but I haven't taken the plunge to dis/reassembling the Ruger yet. Is that necessary to check for lead?

I've got a new VQ kit and bushing on the way and would love to be able to establish that the gun is accurate so I can take out the stupid mag disconnect and put the new parts in, but of course I won't until I'm sure the gun won't need to go back to the factory.

Posted: 8/12/2012 8:28:58 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Hmm...that Winchester HV that I started with wasn't jacketed. And there was a metric assload of buildup and/or lead on the muzzle from suppression. Stupid question, but what's the best way to check for lead in the barrel? I cast for my 1911s, and it's easy to see it there, but I haven't taken the plunge to dis/reassembling the Ruger yet. Is that necessary to check for lead?

I've got a new VQ kit and bushing on the way and would love to be able to establish that the gun is accurate so I can take out the stupid mag disconnect and put the new parts in, but of course I won't until I'm sure the gun won't need to go back to the factory.

It isn't really that hard to disassemble /reassemble the pistols. Read the manual and watch a few videos. Once you do it 2 or 3 times it gets to be easy.
Yes, you do need to check for lead, especially if shooting ammo with lead bullets- non jacketed.
If you can look down the barrel with good light on the other end lead will show up. It will look like gray streaks in an otherwise shiny bore.
If you have a lot of fouling near the muzzle that will probably be the problem. Since the muzzle is the last thing to affect the bullet as it leaves it has the most effect. Lead built up in the bore deforms the bullet slightly and makes it impossible to maintain stability.
I do not have a suppressor, but I think I remember reading that those who do have to clean more often.

Posted: 8/13/2012 12:13:53 PM EDT

[#20]

Thanks, pepper - I will do that tonight. Yeah, suppression essentially delays the release of all the gas propelling the bullet down the barrel, so it absolutely fouls the crap out of everything before finally working its way out. Especially with .22, the dirtiest of all calibers. Heck, even my 24" AR-10 is bad when suppressed - by the time I get to the bottom 7-8 rounds of a 19-rd. mag, the remaining rounds are basically a greyish-black because they're uniformly coated with fouling from DI and suppression. BUT - it sure is still worth it :)

It's kinda funny to watch smoke coming out of the triggerguard and anywhere else it can escape the receiver after a couple of suppressed rounds through the AR-10. I guess that means my ghetto-fab silicone redneck gasbuster fake on the charging handle is doing better than I thought...

Posted: 8/14/2012 10:06:17 AM EDT

[#21]

Alright, had a good look in the bore today. On the muzzle end, there was a bunch of stuff that looked like normal pieces of crap that you get after shooting before you clean. Ran the boresnake down twice and it was clean and shiny. Then I shot some groups at 8 yards off a rest through the EOTech. Here's what I got. In fairness, the target was resting on a bank at a bit of an angle backwards and to the side, but that's still no excuse for this accuracy. The EOTech is zeroed for my AR, so of course the groups are going to be 3-4" low. The grid squares on the target are 1".

CCI minimags:

CCI standard velocity:

Federal bulk:

Winchester 555:

No exactly minute-of-hitting-a-bull-in-the-ass-with-a-bass-fiddle. Seriously, am I expecting too much from this pistol? This just doesn't seem like it could possibly be right. The Federal group was a little better - at least with one flyer pretty much one hole, albeit a big hole. Do these guns need to be broken in? I've probably but 150 rounds through it, cleaned the barrel 4-5 times, but not taken it apart to clean, but that doesn't seem like it should be impacting accuracy.

Of course my VQ pimp upgrades are here, but it would be stupid to install if I have to send it back to Ruger.

Posted: 8/14/2012 12:58:18 PM EDT

[#22]

Well I called Ruger and got a prepaid return label, so looks like their customer service is on top.

Posted: 8/14/2012 2:10:35 PM EDT

[#23]

Posted my dilemma in GD, here's a thread chronicling the customer service experience from Ruger

:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1351631_Is_this_a_normal_barrel_crown__UPDATE__Got_it_back___disappointed___.html&page=1

Posted: 8/17/2012 6:11:15 AM EDT

[#24]

a ruger mk series pistol should be shooting two inch groups at 25 yards no problem- there is either a problem with the gun,ammo or shooter- way for me to narrow it down right?!
if you are shooting tight groups (7 yards don't mean squat - shoot at at least 50 feet and preferably 25 yards if you really want to know what the gun will or should do) with other guns we will eliminate you as the variable
get some cci standard velocity and try that- the old computer cliche garbage in garbage out comes to mind- trying to assess a guns accuracy with cheap bulk 22 ammo is not even worth the trouble. Bulk 22 ammo has the least quality control and is most likely to shoot poorly. (yes some guns will shoot well with it but that would be the rule rather than the exception.
short of that the gun could be the issue- will be interesting to see what ruger says/does.

Posted: 8/19/2012 6:50:18 PM EDT

[#25]

Well said. It arrived back at Ruger on Friday, and they quoted me a 7-10 day turnaround on the phone. I'll report back when I get it back.

Posted: 8/21/2012 2:19:08 PM EDT

[#26]

Ruger called today. The tech asked what kind of sight I had used, and I told him EOTech. He said it may have been off; I tried to explain that my EOTech is rock-solid and is POI at 100 yards easy on my AR. He said the groups weren't too bad - 1.5" at 8 yards??? Come on. I told him these pistols have a much better reputation, i.e. 2" at 25 yards. He said he hadn't fired it yet, but would in a few days. Wonder why they even called.

Posted: 8/22/2012 7:30:05 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Ruger called today. The tech asked what kind of sight I had used, and I told him EOTech. He said it may have been off; I tried to explain that my EOTech is rock-solid and is POI at 100 yards easy on my AR. He said the groups weren't too bad - 1.5" at 8 yards??? Come on. I told him these pistols have a much better reputation, i.e. 2" at 25 yards. He said he hadn't fired it yet, but would in a few days. Wonder why they even called.

Funny I kind of got the same "eh it's within spec" vibe.

Posted: 8/27/2012 1:41:07 PM EDT

[#28]

WOW, I want to buy one of these but now I'm going to think a little more about it.

Posted: 8/30/2012 12:13:27 PM EDT

[#29]

Well, Ruger customer service has lived up to its reputation. I got a call today that there was indeed an issue with my pistol's accuracy, and they are sending a replacement pistol to my FFL. I guess I'm out the transfer cost, but as long as it's accurate I won't cry too much.

Posted: 8/30/2012 12:29:02 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Well, Ruger customer service has lived up to its reputation. I got a call today that there was indeed an issue with my pistol's accuracy, and they are sending a replacement pistol to my FFL. I guess I'm out the transfer cost, but as long as it's accurate I won't cry too much.

If you bought that 22/45 from that FFL they shouldn't charge you a transfer fee.

Posted: 8/30/2012 3:03:36 PM EDT

[#31]

Friend just bought a Mk III slab side stainless. We put trijicon rmr on it.

I wasn't that impressed with the accuracy. But shooting come eley's improved over federal bulk. But eley's are $10 per 50 rounds.

Posted: 8/30/2012 7:39:13 PM EDT

[#32]

Tell me more, yote - is that because we already went through it once? Is that common practice? I had it transferred in through that FFL, so I didn't actually buy the gun from them - should I still expect not to pay another fee? Because that would be great.

Posted: 8/30/2012 7:55:01 PM EDT

[#33]

Generally around here if you buy a gun from a store or even have it transferred, and it has to go back for any reason, you don't have to pay a second transfer fee. Cause it is not your fault the gun was faulty so why should you have to pay twice?

Posted: 8/30/2012 8:16:24 PM EDT

[#34]

Like. Will try.

Posted: 9/7/2012 8:38:45 PM EDT

[#35]

Got the replacement in, and it grouped MUCH better offhand. Haven't bothered to put it on a rest since it did so well offhand. Just finished putting in VQ mkII parts - WOW. That trigger is truly exceptional. I've got it to basically the minimum pre- and overtravel - a pimp setup indeed! Loctite drying now.

AND Ruger sent me a really classy black Ruger hat.

So I'm happy - Ruger customer service is outstanding.

IF you watch Nutnfancy's VQ mkII parts video, be prepared to have another disassembly/reassembly vid handy as he smokes through a few important things and it's hard to tell what he's talking about all the time. Removing the lawyer mag release is SO rewarding both emotionally and dropping those mags straight free.

This is a great pistol. And once you know what you're doing (and get rid of the mag disconnect), it is NOT hard to take it all the way down and back.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Ruger Mk III 22/45 accuracy is bad....or is it me?

Handguns » Rimfire Pistols

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us