On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:24:33 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 3/9/16 3:14 PM, John H. wrote:

I was in the Fire Direction Control center for an artillery battery. One of our last
demos for the brass before the 196th Light Infantry Brigade deployed was a
time-on-target air burst of the entire battalion's guns - 18 105's. The calculations
were extensive and had to be done by hand then - no computers (1966). I didn't get to
see the results, but my lieutenant said it was spectacular. Eighteen rounds going off
within a few seconds of each other from about 10 to 50 yards above the target. The
batteries (3) shot from different locations also. I would like to have seen it. Saw a
demo at Ft. Sill before graduating there - hell of a sight, and that was an 8-inch
battery.
--



Boys and their toys...

The boys and their toys have ensured you don't speak Chinese or Russian, Krause.

But you're the guy who lies about his Vietnam service. What a joke.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:04:04 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 3:07:30 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:23:12 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:40:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:28:48 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 8:37:57 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:43:33 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 5:06:05 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 2:54 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 3:13:15 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 1:21 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 2:16:38 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:

Quiet counts when shooting zombies.

Exactly. Everyone knows a zombie is attracted to noise.

The Walking Dead is entertaining, but there are considerable gaps in the plot. 3-4 year old gas just seems to happily run. And it took forever for them to start using suppressed AR's. I'm not sure I've ever seen a .22 on the show. A suppressed .22 would be a perfect zombie eliminator.


Yeah, the gas thing usually makes me chuckle. Although, anecdotally,
I have seen gas weed-eaters that were not drained start after about 3
years. They did NOT run happily, though...

Your average .22 doesn't look impressive enough for a post-apocalyptic
TV show... that's probably why we don't see them. If you look online,
though, you can see a lot of manufacturers that make a .22 in an AR-like
configuration. I've been tempted to buy one. Seems like it would be an
insanely fun (and cheap) plinker.

Absolutely. S&W M&P 15/22. Eats anything thrown at it, tons of fun, can be made very quiet if that's your thing.


Ahh.. the key to surviving any apocalypse. A gun that doesn't care
what you feed it. That's what I like about my SR9.

I have a Ruger Mark III with a threaded barrel. Not many rounds through it, but so far it appears to be a good zombie gun as well. The Burris Fastfire 3 on it is sweet!

I keep telling myself I don't need a Ruger Mark III. I think I'm losing. Seems like
'the Hunter' would be a great zombie gun.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

I didn't technically get a Mark III. I actually got this one with the two picatinny rails.

http://www.ruger.com/products/2245ThreadedBarrel/models.html

I was going to ask how you mounted the Burris fastfire on the mark III.

===

I have a Mark III Hunter with the fluted barrel. When I bought it the
top of the barrel was already drilled, tapped and fitted with filler
screws. All I had to do was back out the fillers and install a small
piece of Weaver rail. I assume that was done at the factory and not
the previous owner.

Just looked at the Ruger site. From the Hunter description:

"Accurate sighting system features fixed or adjustable sights and drilled and tapped
receiver for Weaver®-style scope base adapters for easy mounting of optics (adapters
included, not on fixed sight models)."

http://www.ruger.com/products/markIIIHunter/models.html

Good to know. Thanks.

Now, is the fancy grip worth $70? It is nice looking.
--

Yup. And if you go with a Burris sight, they have dedicated mounts for the Mark III. They do make some really nice looking Mark III's. I already have a more traditional Mark I that I shot when I was a kid with my father. I wanted the unique features the 22/45 had.

Hush, damnit! I need reasons *not* to buy the damn thing!
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 16:01:49 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:14:33 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:25:25 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:45:09 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Mar 2016 20:51:38 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 08 Mar 2016 20:28:08 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:46:17 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 6:43:49 PM UTC-5, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/16 5:06 PM, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 2:54 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 3:13:15 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 1:21 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 2:16:38 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:

Quiet counts when shooting zombies.

Exactly. Everyone knows a zombie is attracted to noise.

The Walking Dead is entertaining, but there are considerable gaps in
the plot. 3-4 year old gas just seems to happily run. And it took
forever for them to start using suppressed AR's. I'm not sure I've
ever seen a .22 on the show. A suppressed .22 would be a perfect
zombie eliminator.


Yeah, the gas thing usually makes me chuckle. Although, anecdotally,
I have seen gas weed-eaters that were not drained start after about 3
years. They did NOT run happily, though...

Your average .22 doesn't look impressive enough for a
post-apocalyptic
TV show... that's probably why we don't see them. If you look online,
though, you can see a lot of manufacturers that make a .22 in an AR-like
configuration. I've been tempted to buy one. Seems like it would be an
insanely fun (and cheap) plinker.

Absolutely. S&W M&P 15/22. Eats anything thrown at it, tons of fun,
can be made very quiet if that's your thing.


Ahh.. the key to surviving any apocalypse. A gun that doesn't care
what you feed it. That's what I like about my SR9.


The M&P 15-22 is a fine, fun rifle. I had one for about two years. A
silencer and subsonic ammo will fire quietly, as far as the ammo goes,
but the reciprocating parts of the rifle are noisy. I sold mine to buy a
bolt action CZ 455... *very quiet* with the silencer attached.

But slow. A zombie will bite you while cycling the bolt. And 5 rounds won't stop a zombie crew.

if you're going to use a rifle for zombies, you'd better get one that'll carry a
bayonet.

I guess my M1A qualifies and I imagine I can also mount a rifle
grenade launcher but I have never actually seen one.
If we wanted to send explosives down range on the ship, we would use
our 5" gun.
Out to about 17,000 yards, with the right projectile, it will take out
every zombie in about a 25 meter radius, wound a bunch more a tad
farther out

You'd have to do an air burst. We had the VT fuses for 105 howitzers back when, but
don't know if the 5" guns had them. That way you'd get 'em in the heads.

Yup, the VT fuse was developed in WWII and it was originally designed
for shooting at airplanes, trying to get better than one hit per
100-200 rounds fired. I am amazed they did that well considering they
set the time delay manually using a mechanical computer you wound up
with a key before they actually got the round loaded.

I was in the Fire Direction Control center for an artillery battery. One of our last
demos for the brass before the 196th Light Infantry Brigade deployed was a
time-on-target air burst of the entire battalion's guns - 18 105's. The calculations
were extensive and had to be done by hand then - no computers (1966). I didn't get to
see the results, but my lieutenant said it was spectacular. Eighteen rounds going off
within a few seconds of each other from about 10 to 50 yards above the target. The
batteries (3) shot from different locations also. I would like to have seen it. Saw a
demo at Ft. Sill before graduating there - hell of a sight, and that was an 8-inch
battery.

The "computer" was really a pretty crude thing, working on gears and
cams. All you really got on the radar was range and you computed speed
with a stop watch, then put all of that into the computer with dials
and it gave you a fuse time with a load time offset. That gets relayed
to the fuse setter who dials up the delay, they loaded and fired.
All of this happens while the plane is closing in on you.
Not stressful at all ;-)
I suspect that in the heat of battle, they didn't use it at all. They
just put in a typical delay and fired, just to keep the rate of fire
up to the max. If the gunner had a pretty good idea when the shell was
going off he just used Kentucky windage and fired when he thought the
time was right.
I know our GM-1 "killed" a F4 phantom at the Gitmo exercises that was
flying at about double the speed our equipment was rated for, using
the same method.

We had a lot of time compared to what the anti-aircraft folks would have. We didn't
have radar, of course, but 1/50K maps to get our range and azimuths from. Wind data
came from our local weather folks, and I don't remember what else we used. Only did
it once.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

John H. wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:24:33 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 3/9/16 3:14 PM, John H. wrote:

I was in the Fire Direction Control center for an artillery battery. One of our last
demos for the brass before the 196th Light Infantry Brigade deployed was a
time-on-target air burst of the entire battalion's guns - 18 105's. The calculations
were extensive and had to be done by hand then - no computers (1966). I didn't get to
see the results, but my lieutenant said it was spectacular. Eighteen rounds going off
within a few seconds of each other from about 10 to 50 yards above the target. The
batteries (3) shot from different locations also. I would like to have seen it. Saw a
demo at Ft. Sill before graduating there - hell of a sight, and that was an 8-inch
battery.
--



Boys and their toys...

The boys and their toys have ensured you don't speak Chinese or Russian, Krause.


Weren't you
Fighting the Vietnamese...and lost?


--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 5:25:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:04:04 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 3:07:30 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:23:12 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:40:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:28:48 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 8:37:57 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:43:33 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 5:06:05 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 2:54 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 3:13:15 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 1:21 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 2:16:38 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:

Quiet counts when shooting zombies.

Exactly. Everyone knows a zombie is attracted to noise.

The Walking Dead is entertaining, but there are considerable gaps in the plot. 3-4 year old gas just seems to happily run. And it took forever for them to start using suppressed AR's. I'm not sure I've ever seen a .22 on the show. A suppressed .22 would be a perfect zombie eliminator.


Yeah, the gas thing usually makes me chuckle. Although, anecdotally,
I have seen gas weed-eaters that were not drained start after about 3
years. They did NOT run happily, though...

Your average .22 doesn't look impressive enough for a post-apocalyptic
TV show... that's probably why we don't see them. If you look online,
though, you can see a lot of manufacturers that make a .22 in an AR-like
configuration. I've been tempted to buy one. Seems like it would be an
insanely fun (and cheap) plinker.

Absolutely. S&W M&P 15/22. Eats anything thrown at it, tons of fun, can be made very quiet if that's your thing.


Ahh.. the key to surviving any apocalypse. A gun that doesn't care
what you feed it. That's what I like about my SR9.

I have a Ruger Mark III with a threaded barrel. Not many rounds through it, but so far it appears to be a good zombie gun as well. The Burris Fastfire 3 on it is sweet!

I keep telling myself I don't need a Ruger Mark III. I think I'm losing. Seems like
'the Hunter' would be a great zombie gun.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

I didn't technically get a Mark III. I actually got this one with the two picatinny rails.

http://www.ruger.com/products/2245ThreadedBarrel/models.html

I was going to ask how you mounted the Burris fastfire on the mark III.

===

I have a Mark III Hunter with the fluted barrel. When I bought it the
top of the barrel was already drilled, tapped and fitted with filler
screws. All I had to do was back out the fillers and install a small
piece of Weaver rail. I assume that was done at the factory and not
the previous owner.

Just looked at the Ruger site. From the Hunter description:

"Accurate sighting system features fixed or adjustable sights and drilled and tapped
receiver for Weaver®-style scope base adapters for easy mounting of optics (adapters
included, not on fixed sight models)."

http://www.ruger.com/products/markIIIHunter/models.html

Good to know. Thanks.

Now, is the fancy grip worth $70? It is nice looking.
--

Yup. And if you go with a Burris sight, they have dedicated mounts for the Mark III. They do make some really nice looking Mark III's. I already have a more traditional Mark I that I shot when I was a kid with my father.. I wanted the unique features the 22/45 had.

Hush, damnit! I need reasons *not* to buy the damn thing!
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

You want a Burris #410329 Fastfire mount for Mark I, II or III.

On 3/9/2016 5:25 PM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:04:04 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 3:07:30 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:23:12 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:40:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:28:48 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 8:37:57 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:43:33 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 5:06:05 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 2:54 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 3:13:15 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 1:21 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 2:16:38 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:

Quiet counts when shooting zombies.

Exactly. Everyone knows a zombie is attracted to noise.

The Walking Dead is entertaining, but there are considerable gaps in the plot. 3-4 year old gas just seems to happily run. And it took forever for them to start using suppressed AR's. I'm not sure I've ever seen a .22 on the show. A suppressed .22 would be a perfect zombie eliminator.


Yeah, the gas thing usually makes me chuckle. Although, anecdotally,
I have seen gas weed-eaters that were not drained start after about 3
years. They did NOT run happily, though...

Your average .22 doesn't look impressive enough for a post-apocalyptic
TV show... that's probably why we don't see them. If you look online,
though, you can see a lot of manufacturers that make a .22 in an AR-like
configuration. I've been tempted to buy one. Seems like it would be an
insanely fun (and cheap) plinker.

Absolutely. S&W M&P 15/22. Eats anything thrown at it, tons of fun, can be made very quiet if that's your thing.


Ahh.. the key to surviving any apocalypse. A gun that doesn't care
what you feed it. That's what I like about my SR9.

I have a Ruger Mark III with a threaded barrel. Not many rounds through it, but so far it appears to be a good zombie gun as well. The Burris Fastfire 3 on it is sweet!

I keep telling myself I don't need a Ruger Mark III. I think I'm losing. Seems like
'the Hunter' would be a great zombie gun.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

I didn't technically get a Mark III. I actually got this one with the two picatinny rails.

http://www.ruger.com/products/2245ThreadedBarrel/models.html

I was going to ask how you mounted the Burris fastfire on the mark III.

===

I have a Mark III Hunter with the fluted barrel. When I bought it the
top of the barrel was already drilled, tapped and fitted with filler
screws. All I had to do was back out the fillers and install a small
piece of Weaver rail. I assume that was done at the factory and not
the previous owner.

Just looked at the Ruger site. From the Hunter description:

"Accurate sighting system features fixed or adjustable sights and drilled and tapped
receiver for Weaver®-style scope base adapters for easy mounting of optics (adapters
included, not on fixed sight models)."

http://www.ruger.com/products/markIIIHunter/models.html

Good to know. Thanks.

Now, is the fancy grip worth $70? It is nice looking.
--

Yup. And if you go with a Burris sight, they have dedicated mounts for the Mark III. They do make some really nice looking Mark III's. I already have a more traditional Mark I that I shot when I was a kid with my father. I wanted the unique features the 22/45 had.

Hush, damnit! I need reasons *not* to buy the damn thing!
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

Here's one. Harry's already begun to ridicule others for being obsessed
with guns and owning more guns than he currently owns.

On 3/9/2016 5:38 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:24:33 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 3/9/16 3:14 PM, John H. wrote:

I was in the Fire Direction Control center for an artillery battery. One of our last
demos for the brass before the 196th Light Infantry Brigade deployed was a
time-on-target air burst of the entire battalion's guns - 18 105's. The calculations
were extensive and had to be done by hand then - no computers (1966). I didn't get to
see the results, but my lieutenant said it was spectacular. Eighteen rounds going off
within a few seconds of each other from about 10 to 50 yards above the target. The
batteries (3) shot from different locations also. I would like to have seen it. Saw a
demo at Ft. Sill before graduating there - hell of a sight, and that was an 8-inch
battery.
--



Boys and their toys...

The boys and their toys have ensured you don't speak Chinese or Russian, Krause.


Weren't you
Fighting the Vietnamese...and lost?


This all boils down to you having a sore ass because Herring refused to
go out in your boat with you.

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 17:31:09 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 16:01:49 -0500, wrote:

The "computer" was really a pretty crude thing, working on gears and
cams. All you really got on the radar was range and you computed speed
with a stop watch, then put all of that into the computer with dials
and it gave you a fuse time with a load time offset. That gets relayed
to the fuse setter who dials up the delay, they loaded and fired.
All of this happens while the plane is closing in on you.
Not stressful at all ;-)
I suspect that in the heat of battle, they didn't use it at all. They
just put in a typical delay and fired, just to keep the rate of fire
up to the max. If the gunner had a pretty good idea when the shell was
going off he just used Kentucky windage and fired when he thought the
time was right.
I know our GM-1 "killed" a F4 phantom at the Gitmo exercises that was
flying at about double the speed our equipment was rated for, using
the same method.

We had a lot of time compared to what the anti-aircraft folks would have. We didn't
have radar, of course, but 1/50K maps to get our range and azimuths from. Wind data
came from our local weather folks, and I don't remember what else we used. Only did
it once.

The larger guns, usually used to engage surface targets, take into
account everything from the humidity of the air to the curvature of
the earth. They also had to compensate for the pitch and roll of the
ship. That was basically what FT school was all about. They started
out, right after the basic electronics courses, with "the fire control
problem" and the trig necessary to solve the various factors. It took
us about a week to plot the first shot, understanding what each factor
was but the second one went a lot faster. After two weeks you really
started wanting to find out about the computers that do this for you
;-)
These things were still big mechanical boxes way up into the 60s.
Now you could do it on your phone.
There was also a lot of training in the syncros, servos and the
mechanical systems that point the gun.
It was 18 weeks of something new every day but I really had a pretty
good time and learned a lot of things about a lot of things.

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 17:25:18 -0500, John H.
wrote:

Yup. And if you go with a Burris sight, they have dedicated mounts for the Mark III. They do make some really nice looking Mark III's. I already have a more traditional Mark I that I shot when I was a kid with my father. I wanted the unique features the 22/45 had.

Hush, damnit! I need reasons *not* to buy the damn thing!

===

I might be willing to sell mine if you're really interested. There
are red dot sights much less expensive than the Burris and just as
good in my opinion.

http://www.amazon.com/Ohuhu-Green-Reflex-Sight-Reticles/dp/B00YRIHYIW

On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 14:40:39 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 5:25:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:04:04 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 3:07:30 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 13:23:12 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:40:31 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:28:48 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 8:37:57 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:43:33 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 5:06:05 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 2:54 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 3:13:15 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:
On 3/8/2016 1:21 PM, Its Me wrote:
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 2:16:38 PM UTC-5, Ryan P. wrote:

Quiet counts when shooting zombies.

Exactly. Everyone knows a zombie is attracted to noise.

The Walking Dead is entertaining, but there are considerable gaps in the plot. 3-4 year old gas just seems to happily run. And it took forever for them to start using suppressed AR's. I'm not sure I've ever seen a .22 on the show. A suppressed .22 would be a perfect zombie eliminator.


Yeah, the gas thing usually makes me chuckle. Although, anecdotally,
I have seen gas weed-eaters that were not drained start after about 3
years. They did NOT run happily, though...

Your average .22 doesn't look impressive enough for a post-apocalyptic
TV show... that's probably why we don't see them. If you look online,
though, you can see a lot of manufacturers that make a .22 in an AR-like
configuration. I've been tempted to buy one. Seems like it would be an
insanely fun (and cheap) plinker.

Absolutely. S&W M&P 15/22. Eats anything thrown at it, tons of fun, can be made very quiet if that's your thing.


Ahh.. the key to surviving any apocalypse. A gun that doesn't care
what you feed it. That's what I like about my SR9.

I have a Ruger Mark III with a threaded barrel. Not many rounds through it, but so far it appears to be a good zombie gun as well. The Burris Fastfire 3 on it is sweet!

I keep telling myself I don't need a Ruger Mark III. I think I'm losing. Seems like
'the Hunter' would be a great zombie gun.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

I didn't technically get a Mark III. I actually got this one with the two picatinny rails.

http://www.ruger.com/products/2245ThreadedBarrel/models.html

I was going to ask how you mounted the Burris fastfire on the mark III.

===

I have a Mark III Hunter with the fluted barrel. When I bought it the
top of the barrel was already drilled, tapped and fitted with filler
screws. All I had to do was back out the fillers and install a small
piece of Weaver rail. I assume that was done at the factory and not
the previous owner.

Just looked at the Ruger site. From the Hunter description:

"Accurate sighting system features fixed or adjustable sights and drilled and tapped
receiver for Weaver®-style scope base adapters for easy mounting of optics (adapters
included, not on fixed sight models)."

http://www.ruger.com/products/markIIIHunter/models.html

Good to know. Thanks.

Now, is the fancy grip worth $70? It is nice looking.
--

Yup. And if you go with a Burris sight, they have dedicated mounts for the Mark III. They do make some really nice looking Mark III's. I already have a more traditional Mark I that I shot when I was a kid with my father. I wanted the unique features the 22/45 had.

Hush, damnit! I need reasons *not* to buy the damn thing!
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

You want a Burris #410329 Fastfire mount for Mark I, II or III.

Two questions, maybe more...

Did you have to remove the sights to install the FF? Did you do it or have gunsmith
do it?

When you have 392 zombies coming at you, will they actually stop when you say, "Just
a minute folks, gotta put in a new battery."
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!