Walther Forums banner

Muzzle Coupling for Ruger Mk II adds threads

11K views 11 replies 3 participants last post by  surrealone 
#1 · (Edited)
Recently I attended a seminar about suppressors and the upcoming change in regulations about background checks, LEO signatures, etc. Decided that since I am teaching my daughter how to shoot and a silencer makes some sense in eliminating a lot of the startle, allows for easier communication while on the firing line, etc. that getting one for the 22LR made sense.

I have a Ruger Mark II with a 6 7/8th Target Barrel that has always been a tack driver for me. Looked into replacement barrels, way too expensive and since the serial number is on the barrel of the Mk II it is a new gun. Looked at a new 22LR - again a good bit of money and I already have a great 22LR. Looked at threading the current barrel but there is no guarantee that the crown will be right, and it costs nearly what a new barrel costs.

Finally I found an alternative. I thought I recalled something about adapters back in the stone-ages when I was competing but couldn't quite recall. Google can be your friend and I quickly found a couple companies. Did a search for reviews and settled on a bit of an oddball company D.A.Q. in Missouri. Apparently the owner is a retired machinist with a passion who likes to keep active. His couplings were $35 for most Rugers ($3 extra for the thread guard). He only takes paper orders, checks, and ships via USPS for $5. So, for <$45 I ordered a muzzle coupling for my Ruger Mk II about a month ago. It arrived in Thursday's mail and I got it to the range on Saturday.

First, the threads are smooth as silk. It fit on the end of the muzzle tightly but did not require any force. Perfect fit. Opening is precisely aligned with the barrel. Fit and finish is excellent.

Second, it tightened down with counter threaded c-cut nuts that use the front sight as the tightening point. Again, smooth and well made.

Suppressor went on without any issues and it shot as well as it did without the rig attached IMHO.

So, a $40 option to adding threads to a nice old target pistol has turned out to be a great investment.
 

Attachments

See less See more
3
#2 ·
Awesome, PPS. Too bad I can never have the pleasure of shooting my MKII without hearing protection or being a good neighbor with a suppressor here in MA as they're highly illegal for no reason whatsoever. No amount of licensure will get me around the Commonwealth's ignorance either... it's really pretty sad but I'm very happy for you!

Incidentally, I can shoot my MKII with subsonics and it's not too bad - they cycle the bolt just enough to make the action work and are a little quieter than a firecracker.

-Pilotsteve
 
#4 ·
Too bad I can never have the pleasure of shooting my MKII without hearing protection or being a good neighbor with a suppressor here in MA as they're highly illegal for no reason whatsoever. No amount of licensure will get me around the Commonwealth's ignorance either...
I'll be legally deer hunting with a suppressed Remington 700 short action, this year. No more hearing protection while in the tree stand. You seriously need to relocate!
 
#8 ·
I don't have a pistol-caliber can ... yet. I bought one at the end of June and with current ATF wait times I'm easily looking at mid-late Q1 2017 before I'll have it. The funny thing is that it'll go on my 9mm carbine, not a pistol. :)

I just haven't found a practical application for a suppressor on a pistol, yet. Your use case for tutelage makes good sense, though -- and I may acquire a threaded barrel or two (and multiple pistons to handle multiple calibers) next year for precisely that use case. You've given me good food for thought! :D
 
#10 ·
I know the feeling. My second can (purchased in late January 2016) should be out of ATF jail in about a month. Who the heck knows how long it'll take for my third one given the ATF-41P-driven spike in sales prior to July 13.
 
#12 · (Edited)
Sadly the new regs that go with ATF-41P don't actually solve anything -- since a felon can't legally posess a firearm even if s/he is listed as a trustee ... and since a NICS or equivalent (a la CC permit in states that allow it) background check is conducted when a NFA item is picked up after the tax stamp is approved. i.e. There is no so-called 'gun trust loophole'. Realistically, all the new regs do is make it more difficult for people who use a trust for its intended purpose (i.e. as an estate planning tool) if that trust is the entity that holds NFA firearms -- under the guise of solving a problem that wasn't actually a problem.

I am one such person. My trust has six trustees -- all of which are licensed concealed carry permit holders in my state of residence. It would make sense for the new regs to permit these people to provide their CC permit numbers and the state that issued the permits -- in lieu of prints and background checks that cost money to obtain and time for the ATF to run. Clearly, this bit of common sense would save both my trustees and the ATF time and money ... but ATF-41P makes no provision for said bit of common sense.

Since my trustees are spread across the state in which I live -- the new regulations are effectively VERY onerous for me and my trustees when it comes to new NFA acquisitions. One workaround is to reduce the number of trustees in the trust before an acquisition ... and then increase the number afterward, but this has time/money implications each time it's done -- i.e. added and unnecessary hassles.

With that in mind I accelerated my buying this year to get the suppressor purchases I wanted done BEFORE ATF-41P kicked in -- so that they'd be grandfathered. I don't expect to buy any more cans since, when it's all said and done, I'll have:
  • one permanently mounted .22LR suppressor,
  • one rifle caliber suppressor I can use on .338 Lapua (and smaller -- just need to buy end caps and change them), and
  • one pistol caliber suppressor I can use on .45 (and smaller) or even use on rifle calibers of .45-70 GOV, .458 SOCOM, 7.62mm/.308, and 5.56mm/.223 (just need to buy pistons and change them).

I'm not a SBR guy and I already own a bullpup chambered in 5.56 if I want something for CQB ... so I'm now at the point where I officially could give a flying flip about the moronic implementation of ATF-41P. I am, however, irritated by the approach that was taken with it since not everyone is/was in a position to do what I did this year.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top