GunTalk-Online.com

At the range today I shot a friends Ruger Lite 22/45.
http://www.ruger.com/products/2245Lite/models.html
First impression was made when I picked the gun up, it's like it's name says unbelievably light. Polymer grip frame, and aluminum upper. Some of the lightness is obtained via the serrated slots machined the upper. It seemed to shoot accurately, but I only shot one mag full. Strangely, the couple hundred rounds of Rem GB's I shot flawlessly through my Buckmark, the Ruger had a FTE on this first mag. The gun is newer, so I don't think it was broken in yet. One thing the owner commented on was the black on black front/rear sights were a little hard to acquire an accurate sight picture, especially on the black steel plates we were shooting at. One cool thing you will notice is the ability to put a suppressor (silencer, shhhh!) on the threaded barrel. It is definately a 22 pistol for someone who likes/needs a lighter gun. It feels good in the hand with it's 22/45 grip.
Haka

Ruger made them just to try and take the market share back from Tactical Solutions.

R,
Bullseye

probably true, Bullseye.

of course, TacSol has color options and can go on the traditional frame ... so it isn't working, as far as I can tell.

The Mrs is probably pricing out a new mkIII to pimp out as a bowling pin gun right now ... the 22/45lite is NOT on the list of options because she hates the color and the frame shape

Ruger has been coming out with new 22/45 models pretty regularly. Seems like all their "new" for MK's is in the 22/45: 4" fluted barrel, RP, threaded barrel, the lite, etc. Keeps them fresh in the market, I suppose.

The MKIII's seem to be the same old, stodgy, not much variation, shoot forever, pretty accurate, easy to modify line of semi-autos.

Ruger has been the no. 1 .22 handgun manufacturer/seller in the US for quite some time. Wonder if they are feeling market pressure and coming out with the new variations in response.

Hi Hakaman, If your friend isn't already focusing on the front sight blade when

shooting, suggest that he do so. Focusing on the front blade will help him

see his sights more clearly when shooting center mass on a black target.


Tony

paw080 wrote:Hi Hakaman, If your friend isn't already focusing on the front sight blade when

shooting, suggest that he do so. Focusing on the front blade will help him

see his sights more clearly when shooting center mass on a black target.


Tony

A drop of model airplane paint or fingernail polish would help. The lighter pistol also makes it harder to control and will magnify flaws in your shooting technique.

greener wrote:

paw080 wrote:Hi Hakaman, If your friend isn't already focusing on the front sight blade when

shooting, suggest that he do so. Focusing on the front blade will help him

see his sights more clearly when shooting center mass on a black target.


Tony

A drop of model airplane paint or fingernail polish would help. The lighter pistol also makes it harder to control and will magnify flaws in your shooting technique.

Hi Paw, yes that does help when I focus on the front sight blade. I have a pair of shooting glasses that make the front sight blade crisp and clear, while the target is a little blurry. Like Mr Greener said, a little 'hot pink/orange on the front blade is helpful.
Haka

Looks like a great 'kit gun' to take along on a hunt or a hike, for the pot.

It would be better if it were not quite so flashy, though. - I bet a lot of those barrels end up being spray-finished, one way or another.

A natural accessory for this model would be screw-on barrel weights of various sizes, maybe combined with a flash-hider or muzzle brake.

A extra-clunky and heavy muzzle-brake might make it quickly convert into a good target gun, if the barrel and trigger is up to it otherwise.

One thing I would like to mention is the idea that a target gun can be tooo light.
As was mentioned was that it can amplify your shooting flaws. My browning buckmark
has such a comfortable grip and weight that I don't think I would like it any lighter.
http://www.browning.com/products/catalo ... d=421&bg=x
Haka

My new Ruger MKIII 22/45 Lite should be at my dealers this next week. I bought this gun mainly for shooting in the Ruger Rimfire Challange. This past August I used my beloved Ruger MKII 5 1/2" Stainless Bull Barrel and thought I may actually do better with a little lighter gun swinging from plate to plate.

I will be doing some modifications to it, namely Hogue Rubber Finger Groove 1911 Grips, Volquartsen Target Sear, Volquartsen MKII Hammer Bushing, Clark Custom Guns Steel Ruger Trigger, Patza Blast Shield and LCI Filler Piece, ZRTS Compensator and a Bushnell Red / Green Multi Reticle Electronic Sight.

I am quite sure it will see quite a bit of use at the Indoor Shooting Range this winter also for our Falling Plate League.

Larry

That ought to be quite a rig. I haven't been following the latest additions and had an enjoyable time looking up some of the parts. My AV doesn't like rugerforum.net so I couldn't look up the blast shield.

Hakaman wrote:One thing I would like to mention is the idea that a target gun can be tooo light.
As was mentioned was that it can amplify your shooting flaws. My browning buckmark
has such a comfortable grip and weight that I don't think I would like it any lighter.
http://www.browning.com/products/catalo ... d=421&bg=x
Haka

Better than my standard with the integral rail.

Here I went to the old thread and found one of Bruce's 2010 photobucket pictures of the blast shields he was experimenting with for all the models.


photobucket.com/Bpatza

I don't see anything major on the design of the blast shields for the Mark III here, other than the tails of the shield are much shorter than the versions for the earlier generation pistols. This would be to allow room for the spur on the back side of the Mark III pistol's trigger. As in the past one could easily cut one of these out of a piece of pop can with a pair of tin snips or sturdy scissors.

R,
Bullseye

Bullseye wrote:Here I went to the old thread and found one of Bruce's 2010 photobucket pictures of the blast shields he was experimenting with for all the models.


I don't see anything major on the design of the blast shields for the Mark III here, other than the tails of the shield are much shorter than the versions for the earlier generation pistols. This would be to allow room for the spur on the back side of the Mark III pistol's trigger. As in the past one could easily cut one of these out of a piece of pop can with a pair of tin snips or sturdy scissors.

R,
Bullseye

His are much neater than one I cut. I had to drink the beer to get the stock and I've never been accused of being a craftsman.

Greener wrote:His are much neater than one I cut. I had to drink the beer to get the stock and I've never been accused of being a craftsman.

Hopefully you waited a sufficient time after acquiring enough stock to begin the shield cutting process; we wouldn't want you counting in fractions.

R,
Bullseye