TargetTalk

I just joined this forum, and saw this post... Thought I'd chime in regarding the Ruger MK II.

I just participated in my first NRA Indoor BE Match and I shoot a Ruger. My score was 802-11X. I was OK with that for my first match, and I have a specific list of things I need to work on.

A buddy of mine shoots a Ruger and won that match with an 876-42X.

There are 3 things you must do to see if your Ruger can compete: 1) trigger job by a competent gunsmith, 2) shoot it a lot to smooth things out a bit (yes, Rugers are tough, but rough), and 3) systematically discover what 22 loads will provide the best consistent accuracy. Mine likes CCI Standard Velocity.

JMO...

Marlin

I look at it from a reliability standpoint for competition pistols I have owned.

The Hammerli 152 takes the gold on that one. I had numerous problems with the electronic trigger just failing on me. Two instances were during matches.

The second one was the Hammerli 280 since the .32 unit that I had with the conversion kit always threw the first shot way high and then grouped the other four. In addition I never could get the trigger set up the way I wanted.

Just my 2 cents.

marlin1881 wrote: There are 3 things you must do to see if your Ruger can compete: 1) trigger job by a competent gunsmith, 2) shoot it a lot to smooth things out a bit (yes, Rugers are tough, but rough), and 3) systematically discover what 22 loads will provide the best consistent accuracy. Mine likes CCI Standard Velocity.

JMO...

Marlin

Hi

I mainly shoot a Marvel Conversion now, but I kept my Ruger Mk II and absolutely HATE one thing. The trigger isn't consistent over the long hall. There appears to be an optimal amount of crud setting in the trigger "dish". I shot mine for about 2 years, and for the first 18 months things went well. Over time, the trigger began to get "gritty" so I cleaned it. Cleaning it made it stiff. No, I'm not a COMPETENT gunsmith. Is there a brand of grease you could fill the area with?

Thanks

Mike
Wichita KS

mikeschroeder wrote:

marlin1881 wrote: There are 3 things you must do to see if your Ruger can compete: 1) trigger job by a competent gunsmith, 2) shoot it a lot to smooth things out a bit (yes, Rugers are tough, but rough), and 3) systematically discover what 22 loads will provide the best consistent accuracy. Mine likes CCI Standard Velocity.

JMO...

Marlin

Hi

I mainly shoot a Marvel Conversion now, but I kept my Ruger Mk II and absolutely HATE one thing. The trigger isn't consistent over the long hall. There appears to be an optimal amount of crud setting in the trigger "dish". I shot mine for about 2 years, and for the first 18 months things went well. Over time, the trigger began to get "gritty" so I cleaned it. Cleaning it made it stiff. No, I'm not a COMPETENT gunsmith. Is there a brand of grease you could fill the area with?

Thanks

Mike
Wichita KS

I would suggest 1 of 2 things:

1) Install a Voquartsen (sp?) drop-in trigger kit, or

2) Have someone stone the surfaces and alter the engagement. My trigger sears engage at .020". I use ceramic stones and the engaging surfaces are literal mirrors when I'm finished.

You asked about the grease... I only use NAPA Moly Lube. I've found over the years that teflon-based grease can be just a bit "gritty", compared to moly. The moly lube has never failed me. YMMV.

Marlin

deadeyedick wrote:The top half dozen or so worst guns aren't even on the list.

The very worst ones are on the list. As are som very good ones.

The shooting crowd has now spoken,. "The Worst Gun" has been elected....
Aparently, the MG2 deserves the "title".

When I started shooting Bullseye some one recommended the new Sig Mosquito with Factory red dot and frame mount. It sure did look cool and was pretty cheap. But at the end of the day you get what you pay for...........

That was THE worst gun I have ever owned. It could not shoot at all and the red dot was more of a proximity device with about a 6 inch margin. It jammed at will with any ammo I tried. Even Sig advised me that the gun was flawed. As someone new to handguns at the time, I almost went back to archery, fortunately I stumbled on Hammerli SP20 and the rest is history.....

arjuna70 wrote:When I started shooting Bullseye some one recommended the new Sig Mosquito with Factory red dot and frame mount. It sure did look cool and was pretty cheap.

That may be so, but anyway, far off topic:
This thread is, as stated at the top of thread, and again noted above, covering MATCH TYPE .22 AUTO PISTOLS, FOR THE ISSF PROGRAMMES, I believe.
Do not spam this intriguing thread, please.

The shooting crowd has now spoken,. "The Worst Gun" has been elected....
Aparently, the MG2 deserves the "title".

How many of the "shooting crowd" actually own an MG2 ?....unless someone has personal experience with a particular item, then their vote is invalid in my opinion. Besides 7 votes to Matchgun, and 6 votes to Walther is hardly conclusive in decicing any title.
Also... when did you decide that the voting had closed ?

deadeyedick wrote:How many of the "shooting crowd" actually own an MG2 ?....unless someone has personal experience with a particular item, then their vote is invalid in my opinion.

It's worse than that, unless someone has tried ALL of the guns on the list then their vote is meaningless. How can they say that one gun is the worst if they haven't shot them all.

Another problem, "worst" based on what criteria; accuracy, shootability, reliability, finish, engineering tolerances, etc, etc.

An interesting thread but, I'm afraid, totally meaningless results.

The poll should really include ALL current manufacture 22 semi auto pistol intended primarily as competition arms, plus those of recent manufacture that are still in common circulation. (It does say "is/was"!) Maybe it should be set up as a two question poll. 1) Choose the best and 2) choose the worst. I bet some pistols would show up in both columns.

deadeyedick wrote:
Also... when did you decide that the voting had closed ?

I have not decided hat the voting has closed. That is up to the threadstarter to decide, isn`t it?

But judged from the voting, I had better be reluctant to buy a MG2.

I was responding to "former MG2 besitzer" Frederick, with regards to the poll closing.
After owning nearly all of the .22 pistols produced over the last 25 years, I find it absurd to even see the MG2 on such a list. After a minor extraction problem was sorted out by the factory, I would rate my MG2RF as the most amazing pistol I have owned......and one that I would have no hesitation in recommending to anyone.
As a bonus, the after sales service from the Australian importer/distributor Euroarms, has been beyond reproach. I am definately a happy MG shooter, with full intentions of buying more Matchgun products, based on ownership and responsible after sales care provided by Stefano Calzetti at the factory, and John Moore, the Australian distributor. A very rare double act indeed.

As a new MG2 owner I have to say mine has so far shot very well and has been very reliable. I guess it pays to buy one after the bugs have been worked out.

deadeyedick wrote: After a minor extraction problem was sorted out by the factory, I would rate my MG2RF as the most amazing pistol I have owned......

The tales of the shooting crowd are different. Most find their MG2 less amazing, less recommendable. The crowd has spoken, "deadeyedick". Are you trying to convinse all the unlucky MG2 owners that their troublesome MG2s are actually shooting wonders? You are fighting invain.

Amazing, yah said? Yes. It is amazing how much trouble so many owners are facing with their MG2s. That is truly amazing, yes. I agree.

From the beginning of this thread I wonder what this poll really mean and what use can be done with its results.

When I see the votes, almost all pistols are the worse for one or another shooter.

Forgetting the endless discussions about the MG2, the second worse is the Walther/Baikal I assume this is the KSP and IZH35 that are not known as bad guns.

The third is the GSP, the most sold match pistol. Seen how many were sold and are used and for having used one myself, this is definitely not a bad pistol and surely not the worse gun.

And so on with the Hammerli SP20 that definitely cannot be qualified of "worse gun".

The poll really is useless, Jipe read the results again the GSP isn't third on the list either, it only has two votes (which for it is pretty good considering how were sold).

Like some others have pointed out unless you've tried them all you really can't say one pistol is worse than another.

I don't own an MG2, but would consider getting one, it shoots wonderfully and from what I've seen the company has been very responsive to the issues that arose with a new handgun, which could be expected with any new gun especially one as radically different as the MG2.

I think it would have been better if it was properly termed as "What is the worst pistol you have owned", still useless info for the most part but more accurate.

" Crowd has spoken"? The unhappy-unknowing crowd just happens to be the loudest. I have had my MG2 for over two years, 21xx, and it is more reliable and I shoot it better than my former Pardini. I know of over 6 guns here in TX that the owners are very very happy w/ thier MG2's. Of course they either do not post or dont care about this post. You may choose to listen to the few that are very vocal or the ones that just shut up and go shoot thier MG2's. IMO this poll is stupid and should die and sink to the bottom, nothing meaningful has come out of it.

Brooks

jipe wrote: When I see the votes, almost all pistols are the worse for one or another shooter.

If you are able to read, then please note no shooter has labeled the Pardinis as worst gun(s). (!)

jipe wrote: I assume this is the KSP that are not known as bad gun.

The KSPs owned by members of my club have been less reliable. But they come at a lower cost...

jipe wrote: And so on with the Hammerli SP20 that definitely cannot be qualified of "worse gun".

The SP20 has had very many issues. Frokes frames, broken bolts etc. As severel threads have covered. Just use the "search" option here....and you will find. The SSP have had, and still has, flaws.

But the MG2 has won the "worst gun" election. No doubt.

Olav wrote:But the MG2 has won the "worst gun" election. No doubt.

Aren't you easily convinced.

As I type this the MG2 and Walther/Baikal are level on 8 votes each with the SP20 3rd on 6 votes. We have the enormous total of 32 votes, hardly what you would call a significant sample.

David Levene wrote:
Aren't you easily convinced.

No.

David Levene wrote: As I type this the MG2 and Walther/Baikal are level on 8 votes each...

The Walther Baikal was discontinued some time ago.