Caliber: .22LR
Capacity: 10 round detachable magazine
Action: Semiautomatic
SAO Front Sight: Serrated ramp (from factory; I upgraded mine)
Rear Sight: Square notch (from factory; I upgraded mine)
Price:
This is the pistol with which I started. I don't think it will win any beauty contests. Hopefully the following information will help you out if you plan on doing a similar project. I researched a lot and did a lot of trial and error with parts. I hope this will save you some hassle or at least offer a consolidated point for research. There are links throughout the page to useful information and places to buy parts. Enjoy!
This is the end result.
Pac-Lite Project: The Search for Parts
I've been wanting a Ruger with a Pac-Lite upper for several years, since about 2001. Last year I set up a Buckmark with a Trail-Lite barrel. I did that project first because I only had to purchase the original pistol as a firearm; no paperwork is required for the Trail-Lite. The upper receiver of the Ruger bears the serial number so it transfers as a firearm, via FFL. On my last Iraq deployment I filled some of my idle time researching the Ruger as a project pistol, and that is what it was intended to be. I bought the model pictured above brand new and immediately gutted it without shooting it. I would have only purchased the lower frame, mainspring housing and bolt assembly but I found it impossible to buy the lower frame without the upper. Most of the other parts were going to be aftermarket.
I shopped and shopped for just the right Pac-Lite. I was very particular. I wanted this pistol for plinking and perhaps close-range small game hunting. I also wanted it to be a high-quality piece of hardware. The Pac-Lite I desired was to be 4.5", matte green, non-threaded (hard to find in 4.5") and not drilled/tapped for a scope mount. I also thought it would be neat to get it in the full bull diameter (no step-down but equal diameter for the length of the upper) such as Tactical Solutions uses for their threaded models. However, as in all life's little adventures, I had to make some compromises. But the end result surpassed my expectations and I have a pistol I love. As is often the case, what I thought I wanted and actually wanted were not in tune.
I tried to set up the acquisition of the Pac-Lite while I was still in Iraq, using my lovely wife as a mule. I could find no place online that carried a configuration to meet my demands save one: Paul Zint in Ketucky. My wife mostly dealt with them over the phone and stated they were very friendly and helpful. But in the end they just couldn't get it done for me. They did not have what I wanted in stock but stated they could most likely order it from Tactical Solutions. I tried to arrange it through email and my wife via the telphone but they just didn't get back to us. It probably would have gone better if I'd been in the States. I started to scour the Internet once again and found another promising lead on a gun forum. I got in contact with JC Weaponry in Washington state. He was very helpful and had a unit in stock that was not exactly what I wanted but close enough. Plus he gave me a deal on it I could not refuse. When he sent me photos of the Pac-Lite I recognized the style from some GunBroker auctions I recently viewed. Consequently I looked up JC Weaponry as a GunBroker user and found he had about 80 positive feedbacks (100%). That made me more comfortable buying from him, though the deal was not through GunBroker. We had some trouble with delayed shipping and a misplaced FFL but he came through in the end. I recommend contacting him if you are looking for a Pac-Lite.
I made a few concessions in my project pistol but I was not disappointed in any of them: it was not the full bull diameter, but I don't know if Tactical Solutions will even do that without threading the end; it was glossy instead of matte; it was drilled and tapped. But for me it had the important attributes: color, length and nonthreaded. The glossy finish gave me a gun that looked great. The matte barrel looks better on the Buckmark due to matte finish on its frame. The Ruger frame has a very glossy finish so the barrel I got looked right. Score one for not getting what you want. I did contact Tactical Solutions long before ordering my Pac-Lite to inquire about getting a bull diameter, nonthreaded barrel. They never got in touch with me about it. That surprised me because they have always been so responsive in the past.
After owning the Buckmark (my third one) for a while I remembered something I didn't like about them: the front sight base screw works loose while shooting, even with Loctite. The threaded end added another issue in that the thread protector or compensator, depending on which was attached, worked loose as well. I wanted nothing that would work loose on the Ruger while shooting. That's why I wanted nonthreaded and not drill/tap. I settled for a drill/tap model because I've never had an issue with those screws coming loose on other pistols. Even if they did I could remove them and just keep shooting. I do really like my Buckmark though and plan on using it as a host for a suppressor later.
All the other parts were easy to acquire. The base pistol and Hogue grip only required a trip to a local gun store. The Volquartsen parts were all ordered online directly from volquartsen.com. I really wanted a Mark II for the base pistol. This proved impossible to find locally. Even the selection of Mark III's was sparse but I found what I wanted. The major differences between the Mark II and III seem to be: The Mark III has a chamber-loaded indicator (useless and ugly in my opinion and part of the upper, therefore eliminated with the Pac-Lite)
They use different styles of magazine release; I like the European-style magazine release on the heel of the grip, used on the Mark II
The Mark III has a magazine disconnect (I feel another unless feature); the sear is locked and the pistol will not fire without the magazine in place
The Mark III has a locking feature (I can take it or leave it); a key is used to lock the gun in the "safe" position
Mark III pistols vary greatly in price. The price variance derives mostly from the configuration of the upper receiver. I definitely wanted a blued frame and since I planned on replacing the upper I shopped for the cheapest pistol I could find. I didn't need adjustable sights or a bull barrel. The Pac-Lite would have sights on it, which I planned on upgrading anyway. It would be great if Ruger would either deal with Tactical Solutions and offer a line of pistols with the Pac-Lites, as they are very popular, or sell the frames as a part.
Pac-Lite Project: Installing the Parts
I won't go into a step-by-step process as there are other resources available. Links for several of them are on this page. If you have a question or comment please email me. This is meant to document my journey, offer you a single source to access useful information and share a few helpful tips I picked up along the way.
First of all, have the following tools handy
Plastic/rubber-ended mallet: $12 at Sears
Punch/alignment pins (at least 1/8" and 5/32"): $11 at Sears for set of 5; 1/16", 3/32", 1/8", (2) 5/32"
Needle-nose pliers
I found good tweezers helpful for getting some springs in place
I found a magnet helpful to hold small parts (I also used it to identify the titanium disconnector when I got them mixed up; has no effect on nonferrous metals)
A dental-style pick can be very helpful too, especially one with a 90 degree bend: $6 at Sears for a set of 3 I believe
Vise or clamping device would probably be useful. I did not use one but it would probably have been easier.
The accurizing kit really does improve the feel of the trigger; I recommend it. I admit I did not fire this pistol with the original parts. I did own a Mark II and have shot many others so I do have a base for comparison. I also messed with the pistol a bit at home before the new parts arrived. I really like the look of the black Volquartsen trigger better than the original silver, though my wife did not, one and wish I could get a black trigger to install on my Buckmark. To be honest a lot of people will not need the Volquartsen upgrade; I probably don’t either. But I bought this as a project gun, something with which to tinker. Half the fun of this gun purchase was putting it together.
If you are patient and really study the inside of the gun before disassembly you can install this yourself. Volquartsen will do it for $45. I took photos at various stages of disassembly and it was helpful. The video on volquartsen.com and included instructions were some help; have your pistol manual open to the schematic. By the time you’re done you will really know how your pistol functions. It took me about 2.5 hours to complete the job. I had to repeat several of the steps multiple times to get it all correct.
Instructions for replacing the extractor can be found here. It's not too bad at all. Once the extractor is removed be careful not to let the plunger go flying out of the bolt! It got away from me once and chipped a glass bottle nearby. It could easily damage an eye. But you shouldn't be concerned with that because you're wearing safety glasses, right?
Once I got all the parts installed in the frame I had to wait a few days for the Pac-Lite to arrive. It felt like a few weeks. Getting that upper on the frame was one hell of a task. I attempted to seat the upper onto the frame without a mallet but was unsuccessful. It was an insanely tight fit. While I was attempting to mount the upper my wife pulled me away to have dinner with friends. I agreed only so I could go buy a rubber mallet. The frame ended up rubbing some of the anodizing from the upper which irritated me. It’s barely noticeable installed because it's where the upper and frame meet in front of the trigger. I feared this and lubricated that area well but it still rubbed too much. I had to give it some seriously hard whacks with the mallet to get it in place. This is due to the frame, not the upper. The finish on the factory upper was worn in the same area. But now that it’s together and functioning, I don’t plan on removing the upper again. I did have to remove the upper several times after I finally got it mounted because:
Once the upper was mounted I completely assembled the pistol. To my dismay I found the trigger would not fully reset after the bolt cycled. I had to grab the trigger and pull it forward slightly to reset it. (When the bolt comes back it pushes the disconnector down so the trigger is not connected to the sear. There is a cut-out in the bolt that allows the disconnector to rise up when the bolt is fully seated. The disconnector was not resetting and engaging the sear properly.) I had to completely disassemble the gun (also removing the upper) about 8 times, trying different combinations of parts, to get the pistol to function properly. I ended up using all the Volquartsen parts except the titanium disconnector and trigger plunger spring; I used the factory parts for those. That was a very long Friday night and my wife was not too happy it was wasted on a gun. I’m sure all the Volquartsen parts will work on some pistols, I was just not so lucky.
Note: You will want to be careful when setting the pretravel screw on the trigger. Before the upper came I set the pretravel and overtravel screws very precisely by watching movement of the sear as I pulled the trigger. I took out all movement of the trigger that did not move the sear. If you do this the trigger will not reset after the bolt flies back and pushes the disconnector down. You must adjust the pretravel screw to allow enough trigger movement to reset the disconnector; for that to work the trigger will have a little free movement before it begins moving the sear. I could find no instructions from Volquartsen on setting these screws. Once I knew how to set them I used Loctite while installing them the final time. This was not the cause of the issues stated above but it would have similar symptoms. But if I had the pretravel screw set too far I would not have been able to pull the trigger forward to reset it, as I could when facing the problem above.
If you follow the link to the Volquartsen accurizing kit you will notice it came with a new bolt release having a larger, flat surface area. You may also notice it does not appear on my finished pistol; it does not fit well in a holster. I may use it later. It's a relatively easy part to change. It is a lot easier to use than the factory part but I bought a really nice holster to use with this pistol (see photo below). The Volquartsen bolt release was just too big. To change the bolt release you must remove the grips. The pin that holds the hammer, safety, disconnector, magazine disconnect and bolt release is 5/32". If you carefully use a 5/32" punch/alignment tool you can push the pin out from right (side without safety) to left (side with safety). The punch should hold all the internal parts in place and allow you to swap bolt releases. I would pull the trigger to uncock the hammer before doing that.
As much as I like that holster, it does not work well with the Pac-Lite. The adjustable rear sight is much larger than the fixed rear sight and hits the top of the holster before allowing the pistol to fully seat, by about ¼”. The holster strap comes up slightly short and will not snap. I decided to return the holster instead of cutting off the strap. I'm shopping around for another nice leather one that will work better.
Pac-Lite Project: Shooting
My first session had mixed results. I put about 500 rounds through it to break it in. The pistol had teething issues I have come to expect from most new pistols, especially .22's (except my S&W Model 41 of course). It had a little trouble feeding at first but that began to clear up after about 100 rounds. However, every few magazines the first round would get locked up and not feed correctly. After examining the malfunctions I belive they are caused by the magazines. Read this article for information on the issue I think may be causing it. I'll try shooting the gun more and if the issue persists I'll try the fix action documented in that article. When it locks up I just pull the bolt back slightly, release it and the round will feed. I used a different rear site insert for my first shooting session. I wish I had used the original Tactical Solutions insert. Read the section below called The Ruger One Hole Sight for more information on my rear sight issues. I usually post photos of my targets but they were so bad I decided not to do so; the rear sight was that bad. The groups would start out pretty decent then go bad quickly as my eye tired of trying not to focus on the huge rear sight and the windage screw worked loose.
The second session had much better results (see target photos below). I dumped the One Hole rear sight insert for the Ruger V-Notch insert. I also replaced the standard front sight with a Tactical Solutions fiber optic sight. This provided a sight picture (see photo below) I hoped would facilitate nice groups; it did not disappoint. Although this pistol has a relatively light overall weight and short barrel (compared to its original configuration or a S&W Model 41), it provided groups comparable to, though not quite as good as, the Model 41. Seated shooting, using a solid rest, the groups the Ruger and Smith are comparable at 50 feet. But when standing, unsupported the Ruger groups opened up more than the Smith's. Even with the Volquartsen upgrade, the Ruger trigger is not as consistent as the 41’s and the lighter Ruger seems to drift around a bit more. But the reduced accuracy offers a much lighter, easier to carry pistol in trade.
As pleased as I was with the groups, there was an issue. The apex of the V in the V-Notch insert is high compared to the square notch cut in a standard insert. Even with rear sight adjusted completely down, the groups were tight but high. I could see this as soon as I installed the insert and anticipated the issue before shooting. A standard front sight is not tall enough to allow adjustment of the rear sight to lower the groups. This was disappointing. At the range in reinstalled the original rear sight insert and was able to adjust the rear sight to put groups where I wanted them. The groups were not quite as tight as those with the V-Notch but I was still pleased. I need to get a taller front sight to use with the V-Notch.
Unlike other Tactical Solutions products, I was not impressed with the quality of the fiber optic front sight. The light pipe seems frail. It is placed through two holes in the sight, and then the ends are mushroomed to hold the pipe in place. I’m not sure how but a piece of the mushroom facing the shooter, the part used as the front sight, already has a chip missing that happened since I installed it. I am working on removing the light pipe and replacing it with a piece of brass.
Malfunctions were very few; I shot about 400 rounds and only had 4. They were all within the first 100 rounds. Each issue was the same as the one I mentioned earlier, where the first round does not fully seat in the chamber. There were fewer instances than in my first shooting session and I expect it will work itself out with further shooting.
I ended up with this. I think it looks pretty sweet; much better than the original. It has a nice feel too.
That green smudge in front of the ejection port is my attempt to edit the serial number out of the photo.
I installed the Ruger V-Notch rear sight insert and Tactical Solutions fiber optic front sight. This is the sight picture they give me; dot-on-a-stick.
Since the V-Notch sight didn't work out I decided to tweak the original rear sight insert. I got the paint at a local Michael's craft store for about $2 per bottle.
Browning Buckmark vs Ruger Mark II/III
In the past, I've owned Buckmarks and a Ruger. This the first time I have owned them together and had an oppurtunity to compare them side-by-side. Many sources are available online debating which pistol is better; I'll share my thoughts here. In the area of accuracy, with all things being fairly equal, I think either pistol will do very well if the shooter does his/her part. Neither pistol stands out as being significantly better, as far as I can tell. That is assuming both pistols have adjustable sights and a bull barrel. Both pistols have excellent ergonomics. They feel equally terrific in my hands and I could not say one is better, if the Buckmark is a URX model (as pictured) with the rubber, finger-grooved grips and the Ruger sports the same type of Hogue grips.
None of that information is going to help anyone decide between them. Do I have a preference between the two pistols? Yes I do. However, it will depend somewhat on the intended use of the pistol. Overall I prefer the Ruger for the following reasons:
There are many more aftermarket parts avaiable. If you want a project gun definitely chose the Ruger.
While the URX grip of the Buckmark is nice, I still prefer the Hogue grip. Hogues are not available for the Buckmark.
The Ruger is not held together with screws. This is the big one for me. The assembly of the Buckmark relies on two screws that hold the rear sight base on the frame and barrel. As the pistol is fired the front screw works loose, even if Loctite is used. It's not a big deal if the gun is used primarily at the range. But if it's used as a gun for hunting, who wants to carry a tiny wrench in case the a screw needs tightening? Even at the range it gets annoying. I use Loctite every time I reassemble the gun. After a few magazines the front screw still breaks free and needs to be tighened after every magazine or two. Anyone who has disassembled a Ruger knows there is no chance it's coming apart during shooting. Also, if you have a scope mounted on the Buckmark it must be removed to disassemble the pistol, assuming it is long enough to cover the screws. The Ruger does not have that issue.
That does not mean I don't like the Buckmark. I shot several raccoons, ground hogs and squirrels with Buckmark 5.5" Target I owned previously. My wife prefers the Buckmark, but I do all the cleaning and maintenance. The Buckmark is a little easier to assemble/disassemble but the Ruger is easy enough after two or three times. If you want to buy different barrels for your pistol the Buckmark is much easier to work with. Every barrel for the Ruger is considered a firearm since it bears the serial number.
So if I had to choose one it would be the Ruger, but only by a slight margin. When I put together this Ruger pistol I planned on getting rid of either the Ruger or Buckmark, whichever I liked least. I find it's a decision I cannot make. I have no plans to get rid of either now. All together I have four .22LR pistols and have no plans of letting any go. Try to shoot both if you cannot decide what to buy, but honestly that's only half the story. As I stated before, the shooting characteristics are similar, though you may favor one grip angle more. A big factor in the decision will be the assembly/disassembly process for some people. Try to do this for each pistol, as well as shoot it, to see which you prefer. Whichever one you get, consider sprucing it up with Tactical Solutions gear; it's worth the investment.
My two Tactical Solutions upgrade pistols; my favorite pistols. Notice how the matte barrel/frame on the Buckmark and glossy barrel/frame on the Ruger go well together. I stepped up my game a little and used Photoshop's patch tool to get rid of the serial numbers instead of the paint brush. It makes a much nicer photo and takes only a few extra minutes.
This is the holster I got from Cabela's. It's a nice, quality item; it just didn't work out for me. Notice the gun pictured in the holster is the Ruger Standard, the pistol pictured at the top of this page. Its rear sight is tiny compared to the adjustable rear sight on the Pac-Lite, which will not let the pistol fully seat in the holster.
This target was shot from 50 feet in seated, supported position with the Ruger V-Notch rear insert. I was very pleased with the precision but the higher rear insert did not allow enough rear sight adjustment to lower the group. I need a taller front sight.
This one was shot at 30 feet in a seated, supported position. Once again, a nice group but a little high. Going out to 50 feet, as in the previous photo, makes the point of impact much higher with no rear sight adjustment.
This one was shot from 50 feet using an unsupported Isoceles stance. Point of impact started high and went down as I compensated by aiming lower, since my rear sight was adjusted fully down. As you can see by comparing the seated and standing targets, the pistol is capable of much better precision than I am.
This one was shot from 50 feet with the unsupported Isoceles stance again. I was very pleased with that group.
I shot this one form 50 feet seated, supported again to adjust the sights after reinstalling the original rear sight insert. This insert allowed enough adjustment to get the rounds in the center of the target without adjusting my point of aim.
This one was at 30 feet after I sighted in for 50 feet, still seated and supported. The group was a little low as expected.
Here I stood up using the unsupported Isoceles stance with the original square notch rear insert at 50 feet. It's not bad, I got one decent little group there, but it just does not quite offer the precision of that V-Notch insert.
Here I used the square rear insert and switched between the Isoceles and Weaver stances at 30 feet; not too bad. The larger holes on the lower right were from test firing a friend's Kel-Tec .380ACP. He can have that thing. I'll stick to my Beretta 85 despite the extra weight and bulk.
This target was shot with the Tactical Solutions fiber optic front sight and the original rear sight insert that I painted with three lines. See the photo above with the paint bottles in it. I am VERY happy with this setup; it's very accurate. This target and the one below were both shot at 50 feet using a a Weaver-style stance. The Tactical Solutions fiber sight was flimsy so I fashioned my own front bead sight. See the "Sights" section below.
Once again, I am very pleased with the "bead" front sight and the rear sight I painted. It's very accurate. There is an obvious improvement over the groups using the other sight combinations. The gun is very accurate and precise.
Here is the new sight picture with the brass bead front sight I fashioned. It took a few hours work but was well worth it. It looks nice and works great. I expect it to function just like the fiber optic sight, but it looks better and is more durable.
Here's the front sight I altered. It's the original sight that came on the Tactical Solutions barrel with a brass bead installed. See the "Sights" section below for details.
While I was shooting, a spent casing bounced off a wall and got caught between my temple and shooting glasses. I thought it just grazed me so I shot another round or two before realizing it was caught. It may leave a scar shaped like a .22LR casing.
Pac-Lite Project: Sights
I am dedicating a separate section to sights because I spent a lot of time in this area and tried several things. Some worked well and others did not. Despite a few setbacks, I think I've gotten a combination of rear and front sights that function better than the factory setup. I tried several front/rear sight combinations as mentioned throughout this page. I could not find a ready-made front sight I liked. The original sight worked but I really wanted the sights on this pistol to be something special. The Tactical Solutions fiber optic sight I tried fell short of expectations. The plastic insert is flimsy and it was not centered in the base. I bought a Marbles base and insert with a brass bead but chose not to use it because once installed, the insert covers the screw and removal would be difficult. I really wanted a brass bead because they catch light well and look really nice. Since I could not find one I fashioned my own using the original sight that came with the Tactical Solutions upper, some brass I bought online and my Dremel. I bought a one-foot length of brass in both 1/16" and 3/32" diameters from http://www.speedymetals.com/. That gave me plenty of material for mistakes and allowed me to chose the diameter I liked best; 3/32" is definitely the way to go because it's so much easier to see.
I used my Dremel and a 3/32" bit to drill a hole in the front sight. Actually I used a 1/16" bit first to drill a guide hole. The sight is not much wider than 3/32" and I didn't want to drift to either side too much. Then I cut a piece of the 3/32" diameter brass to a length of about 3/16". I used a Dremel cut-off wheel to cut about a 1" piece then progressively finer-grit sanding tools to get the length down to the final size. I made sure to leave the back and side of the brass bead rough for better adhesion of the epoxy. I bought Loctite epoxy at a local Lowes home improvement for about $5. I let the epoxy cure overnight then polish the exposed brass with Dremel polishing compound and felt tips; man does thing shine. All the drilling and such resulted in some marring of the anodizing on the front sight. I used an Elmers paint pen in black to fix the blemishes. It cost about $4 at Michael's craft store. It's very easy and quick to use for touch-ups.
The whole sight setup turned out really well. I don't have the most steady hands for intricate work, so if you look close it's obviously a home job. But it still looks really good in my opinion and the sight picture is fantastic. Painting lines on the rear sight insert yourself is cheap, fast and very effective. I think the combination of a big, bright brass bead and the rear sight painted with horizontal and vertical index lines is as good a setup as is possible, for me anyway. The only question is if the epoxy will hold up to shooting; only time will tell. For now, I feel this pistol is complete.
The Ruger One Hole Sight
I discovered these rear sight insert replacements sold by the folks www.oneraggedhole.com. I was excited about them because I shoot the AR15 well with the same type of aperture rear sight; they did not live up to my expectations.
First, I found it very difficult to focus on the front sight with this large chunk of metal in the way. I think it works better on a rifle because the front and rear sights are much farther apart and the rear sight is much closer to the eye. This allows the rear sight to more naturally go out of focus.
Second, the windage screw would not stay put. It worked out of the rear sight due to vibrations while shooting; noticeably after just a single magazine. If you examine the photos below you will notice the original part (on the right) has notch cut into the right side of the base. That steep notch mates to a hexagon-shaped hole on the inner side of the rear sight windage screw (see second photo below). This is the cause of the "click' heard when adjusting windage. It also locks the windage screw in place while shooting. The "One Hole" sight, as can be seen in the photos, offers no way of holding the windage screw in place. I suppose you could use Loctite on the screw, but what is the point of an adjustable sight locked in place? I contacted the seller and have received no reply.
I think the "One Hole" sight insert would work better with a round front sight, like a fiber optic or bead, or maybe for someone else. I only had the original front sight post when I tried it out. It's definitely not for me. I was very unimpressed with the groups. I know I was not getting consistent sight pictures and with the drifting windage adjustment, bad groups were a forgone conclusion. In my opinion, leave the aperture sights on rifles.
The Ruger V-Notch Rear Sight
I installed a Ruger V-Notch insert and a fiber optic front sight from Tactical Solutions since shooting it the first time. I had higher expectations for V-Notch insert. I shoot pistols very well with the dot-on-a-stick (round front sight and a line in the middle of the rear) configuration, at least on my Sig P239 and Beretta 85 Cheetah. Check this out for some information on options for Ruger pistol sights. The page has good information and the author recommends the V-Notch. It will explain changing the rear sight insert, which is very easy. By the way, a 3/32" pin alignment tool works perfectly for compressing the rear sight windage spring to reinstall the insert. For now I opted to install a Tactical Solutions fiber front sight. I did order the parts he recommends from Brownells for the front sight. But as I stated earlier, the front sight was not tall enough to allow adjustment of groups with the higher V-Notch insert. This is also true for the front sight insert he recommended (0.290"). It ends up being the same height as the original front sight once installed. I would need to order a taller front insert to use the setup he recommends and I'm just not willing to do it right now. I would really love to have a gold (brass) bead on the front but I'm also a little nervous about installing it since the insert is drifted over the screw for the ramp. I can install it easily but drifting it back off if I want to change the front sight might be difficult. I know a gunsmith has the tool to do it or I could order one for about $60. In summary, the V-Notch matched with a bead front sight is very precise. Unfortunately it's not going to work well on my pistol without investing more money and time.
Note: If you have a Brownig Buckmark with a Tactical Solutions Trail-Lite barrel and their integral rail, it will use the same rear sight inserts and front sights as Rugers and Pac-Lites. Both the Trail-Lite and non-threaded Pac-lite barrels are 0.875 inches in diameter.
The original Tactical Solutions insert is on the right. As you can see, the base is shaped differently than those on the Ruger One Hole inserts. Ruger factory inserts are shaped like the Tactical Solutions one; just check out the links to the Ruger V-Notch insert. The cut is not as steep on the V-Notch as the Tactical Solutions, but it's not rounded like the One Hole. The V-Notch engages the hexagon-shaped hole on the windage screw; I get the "click" when I turn it.
Conclusion
Well if you made it all the way here without falling asleep, I thank you for your time. I hope it helped you out in some way or at least entertained you a bit. I found this to be a fun little project and I know I'll enjoy the fruits of my labor for years to come. I highly recommend this if you are looking for a project, especially if you have a Ruger that needs a facelift. The Pac-Lite is a quality upgrade well worth the money. I also recommend the Volquartsen upgrade. Hogue grips are great on any gun. If you do all the work yourself, you will have a great pistol that you can really feel good about. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments.
This page was last modified on 24 Nov 2010 17:46
Links: Consolidation of vendors and information
These are not meant as endorsements (I don't get paid for any of this anyway). I ran across these in my research but have only ordered from a few of them. I found some of these links only by scouring search engine results.)
- Brownells: Source for many parts and tools
- Midway USA: Source for Pac-Lites, Volquartsen parts and an endless array of other parts and tools
Tactical Solutions: Source/manufacturer of Pac-Lites, Trail-Lites and other accessories for Ruger, Browning and AR15 firearms
Paul Zint: Source for Pac-Lites and other parts
Eabco: Source for Pac-Lites; they have low prices right now
Volquartsen: Source for various custom parts and videos to aid in installation
- Replace Ruger extractor: Instructions to remove/replace the extractor
- Ruger: Manufacturer of firearms; source for some parts including V-Notch rear sight insert
- Sight Options: Article on replacing sights on your pistol
- Speedy Metals: Online source for many different metals, including the brass I used for my front sight