from MKIII to model 41

What can I expect going from a MKIII with Volquartzen trigger group to a M41? The S&W is a 1984 in 99%.

+1

on the plus side...if you change your mind, the 41 won't leave with half your stuff

...and you won't have to send it a check every month either.

Orpheoet:

Seriously we are talking about 2 mass produced products, and being .22 pistols there is not really any way other than testing and shooting to determine which might be more accurate AND which one might score better for you (these are two similar but different things).

So that's why questions like these sometimes get a different response than you might expect. Take the 41 on a date or two and see how it works out. As with most things the outcome is also dependent on what we bring to the relationship.

Good luck and have fun!

CR

Mechanical design and ergonomics are much in favor of the 41.. The 41 is a true target pistol..The Ruger is not..The 41 is somewhat similar to the Hammerli 208s.
The triggers on the 41 usually require very little or no attention, and remain so for years.. The Ruger trigger is a challenge to even the best smiths and, will still never equal the 41. The MKIII is the least desirable of them all. The chambers/leades/throats of the Ruger are really non existent, and anything but precise. The 41 barrel is not the prime example of a match barrel or chamber, and the bore is nearly always too tight, but at least it looks the part by having a well defined chamber. Most are mediocre in accuracy terms, some are very good as is. It can be easily lined bringing the accuracy potential to equal or rival the very best..

FWIW, the CCM 1911 grips really help with trigger finger placement. I have meaty hands and these grips shorten the length of pull.
http://www.cm-machine.com/Straight-Back-Frame-Adapter-model-41_p_44.html
Hope this helps,
Wes

I started out with a Ruger MKII with all of the volquartzen parts, when I switched to the M41 my scores originally went down because it felt unfamiliar to me (grip angle and balance).
Now after shooting the M41 for years when I go back to the MKII I have a hard time with it. I much prefer the trigger reach, trigger feel and the grip angle of the M41. 
I don't think there is any question that the M41 is a more refined target pistol, but if it doesn't fit your hand that won't mater much. 

Kurt

Thank you Jerry, Wes, and Kurt. The Ruger is obviously far more accurate than I but I always feel I'm trying to make it into something its not. It just never feels completely right in my hand. The few times I've shot M41s they did. I'm hoping for the best. I'm not even a year into this sport but I feel like I've made decent progress thanks to the helpful input of fellow shooters, largely on this forum.

One thing you want to get away from is that the "gun shoots better than you". Being a new shooter any decent .22 will shoot better. What's most important is that the gun can group well within the 10 ring at 50 yards. A serious shooter should look for a .22 that will group X ring at 50 yards and most .22's will. An important part of learning to shoot is to see what you actually done. Remember that  what ever size group you are able to hold the group the gun will shoot will add to it.
 Learning to shoot is a series of Ah Ha moments. If you did everything right so as to have shot an X yet the gun's group size is such that the bullet produces a hole in the 9 ring you do not know what you did and will try to correct a perfect shot. On the other hand if you were to do as before and the gun were able to shoot X ring groups the bullet will produce a hole in the X ring. At that point you will understand what is required to shot an X and say to your self Ah Ha that's how it's done. Naturally the gun's group and the exact location you shot though both are X you may may get a 10 due to the additive effect of the 2 it's of no importance being that you strive to shoot 10's and over time you will develop a a combined group to indicate where you are shooting. The complete other side is you did something wrong, you actually shot a 8 but being the gun was inaccurate and as the gun's group can be additive it can be subtractive too, the bullet now hits the 10 ring. You actually think that the way you shot the 8 is how to shoot 10's an may have a false Ah Ha moment. The next shot you attempt to do everything the same but get a 6! You now have no idea what you did wrong! Soon you will being doing what I see to many new shooters do is adjust the sight!
 I also think the 41 is a better choice. Furthermore a bullseye shooter will have to shoot the 45, the grip angle of the MK3 is not the best to help train for the 1911.

Froneck as it turns out today was the first time I have really been able to sight my guns in at 50 yards off a sandbag. I recently joined an outdoor range. My Springfield Trophy Match will hold the Xring, the MKIII will hold the 10 ring. I was very surprised by the results, I really expected it to be the other way around. Both guns have the same Ultradot on them. Handloaded 200gr swc and CCI SV. Thank you for the detailed answer.

A couple years ago I tested my MK II slabside vs my S&W M41 using different ammo.

At 25 yards with CCI Std Vel the MK II would reliability group ten shots at about 3/4 inch.  The M41 would produce a single hole less than 1/2" with ten rounds of Eley Target ammo and one inch grouping with CCI Std Vel.  We chrono'd some of the ammo and found the Eley to be about 50 fps faster than the CCI.

At 50 yards the M41 would easily hold the X-ring with Eley and the MK II would easily hold the 10-ring with CCI.

The 41 is stock and the MK II has a Clark bushing, a Marvel two-part trigger (no longer made) and I honed the sear myself.

Both have Ultradots and both have 2 1/2 lb trigger pull.  Even with all the work the M41 trigger is better, IMHO.