I recently found that the Ruger Mk3 22/45 I've had and shot for a couple decades would not cock the hammer when the bolt was cycled, which seemed to be a 'new' thing all of a sudden. I had been using the gun more recently because I was using it to test out whether or not a red dot optic was going to be something I wanted to use for my CCW gun. Anyway, I couldn't figure out what was wrong, so I took off The new optic sent the stripped down gun back to Ruger. I called them first, and they indicated that they no longer serviced that firearm but would still accept it for repair. I wasn't sure exactly what that meant but they required it to be sent from AUPS hub or FFL so I went to one of the good FFLs near me and they boxed it up and sent it in evaluation and repair.
Amazingly I got the gun back in around two weeks of time, and instead of just a scribbled note that said 'repaired', Like has happened in the past with Ruger and other companies, I got a detailed note indicating they replaced the rebound spring sear and spring, and did a function test and returned it to me. They did comment that the gun was in need of cleaning and could use more lubrication.
So I picked it up at the FFL today, and upon inspecting it found the same problem. I could rack the bolt, but the gun would not cock the hammer. I was discussing it with the owner of the gun store and they did not have a A similar gun to compare it with because the current Rugers are different. However his wife had one of her own and she said she was pretty sure it would not cock the hammer unless a magazine was in place.
I thought that was strange, because I've only had a couple of firearms over the years that had magazine disconnects, and I tend not like those except perhaps they are good options for people just starting to learn how to shoot. Especially since I had handled this particular firearm for many years I thought sure I would have known if you could disable it by simply having the magazine removed. They did not have a magazine that fits it in the store, so I figured the lady must be right, and proceeded to go home to see if the gun would indeed function Properly if I simply inserted a magazine.
Of course I get home, and that's exactly what I find. So other than the gun needing cleaning and lubrication, which I was aware of, I doubt that I needed to send it in at all.
I doubt that the rebound spring, or sear and spring, needed replaced, although now I have those new parts installed courtesy of Ruger.I just found that sort of humbling and funny that all these years I would not have realized that, and it was only upon starting to use the gun more frequently, and more for CCW type range practice versus hunting and target shooting, that the issue came up at all.
Now I have to decide what sights to put back on the firearm. As I've posted (probably ad nauseam, for which I apologize - - - I'd put links to those threads, but it would take so many lines text that I don't want to overload the server
) on other threads, I am completely enthralled by the use of the Marbles Bullseye rifle sight as a rear sight for handguns. The red dot type sights all the rage now, for me, are just not something I can use on a handgun unless it's purely for hunting or target shooting. In the hopefully never to happen event that I need pull out a handgun, aim, and fire accurately, and do it as rapidly as possible a red dot optic is something I can't count on acquiring visually unless I'm standing at a range in Weaver position or whatever. Self defense doesn't typically happen that way and the presentation of the firearm maybe left handed or from a position laying on the ground or all sorts of other things that are going to delay red dot acquisition, even if you have practiced extensively. Patridge sites are not something I can use quickly, especially with aging eyesight, so that pretty much leaves either laser sights or a ghost ring of some sort. Laser sights can be good if you're in a position where you can't position and fire the gun along your line of sight, but other than that rare situation, for me it pretty much means ghost ring sights if I'm going to be using a handgun defensively. The single-aperture ghost ring like they make for Ruger revolvers as a rear sight blade replacement, or you can sometimes find for Glocks or 1911s, can be nice, but the Marbles Bullseye is nicer because the larger ring is almost instantly acquired, and gives enough accuracy for a torso hit out to 25 yards, where taking an extra half second to be sure using the smaller ring is intuitive and improves accuracy by at least double. Anyway, enough on the sigits, but experimenting with them was the whole reason I wound up changing the way I practiced with the 22LR Ruger pistol, which was the only thing that educated me about the magazine Disconnect.It seems like the other magazine disconnect pistols I've seen would allow the firearm to be cocked, simply not fired. Maybe the difference is that all of the other magazine disconnect firearms I think I've ever seen were striker fired not hammer fired. Although..... that may not be true either because I think the SIG 938 had a magazine disconnect as well, which I bypassed. It's been too long ago and I don't really remember how that disconnect worked period of course the Ruger 22 pistols are kind of a hybrid in that they are hammer fired, and yet the hammer is not manually accessible.
