Ruger MK IV Target vs 22/45 lite

[druryj]

My MK III 22/45 is pretty close to the 1911 ergowise so to me it's a no-brainer, but I love the 1911 grip angle, size and controls. The original Rugers are "glocklike" to me so you may like them better. And I could be wrong, but I thought the MK IVs were a snap to dis-assemble and clean?

They ARE a snap to take down, clean and reassemble...how'd we get to this? I just wanna hear people's opinions on which is the better shooter for them. I shoot my MK IV target well; been looking to buy a 22/45 lite just cause.

 

[MacFromOK]

They ARE a snap to take down, clean and reassemble...how'd we get to this?

Lol, you actually wonder about that on OSA...?

 

[druryj]

Lol, you actually wonder about that on OSA...?

Well, I'm new you know. I haven't got this place quite figured out yet. Gimme say...20 more years or so.

 

[beardking]

They ARE a snap to take down, clean and reassemble...how'd we get to this? I just wanna hear people's opinions on which is the better shooter for them. I shoot my MK IV target well; been looking to buy a 22/45 lite just cause.

For me, the 22/45 lite is a lot better than the MK series. The main reasons are the grip angle and (on the older MKs) the magazine release. I haven't messed with the MK IVs, but they still have the same grip angle, so I'm not a fan. Plus, as far as I know, they don't make an MK with a threaded barrel.