Ruger Mk IV?

[osteodoc08]

Just saw a new issue of G&A on the news rack and they are touting the new Mk IV pistol. Seems to have a unique one push take down thingy on the back with same control locations otherwise. The controls are a bit "updated". I look forward to seeing one in person. I did forget to see if they retained the ridiculous loaded chamber indicator. I also hope the Mk3 mags are useable. If not I hope the Mk4 mags are reverse useable.

And to to think I had a plain stainless Mk II 5.5" Target model tempting me today at the LGS.

[osteodoc08]

Went to their website and I did not see the ridiculous left sided loaded chamber indicator and the Mk3 mags are comparable with Mk4.

May have to pick me up another Hunter model.

[snowwolfe]

I just sent off payment today for a SS Target model. It should be here by the end of next week. Seen quite a few positive comments about it. Two main reasons I wanted to try one is because it now has a ambidextrous safety which aids my left handedness and the ease to break it down to clean.

Time will tell.

[rancher1913]

are the mark 1's worth much or are they obsolete

[snowwolfe]

are the mark 1's worth much or are they obsolete

No firearm is ever obsolete, some just evolve with newer different models.

[NavyVet1959]

No firearm is ever obsolete, some just evolve with newer different models.

Yeah, newer and different, but not necessarily *better*. :)

A lot of modifications to products are to cut down on production costs. For example, stamped steel parts cost less to make than machined steel parts. Making things from aluminum or plastic will be cheaper than making them from steel. From what I've read, the government has required some changes to certain firearms because the government thought that it was too easy to convert the original firearm to fully automatic. Sometimes, it's just change for the sake of change. As far as I'm concerned, change for just the sake of change is seldom a good idea.

[dtknowles]

are the mark 1's worth much or are they obsolete

I would take a Mk I over a Mk III anytime. I don't know anything about the Mk IV that is not in this thread and I probably don't care, I have two MK II's and like them a lot would seem hard to improve on but I did add an after market trigger and slide release on my MK II hunter. My MK II bull barrel is still stock.

Tim

[NavyVet1959]

I suspect my Mk-II is my most accurate handgun, even with just the Remington and Federal "promo" brick loads.

Of course, that *might* have something to do with the fact that it is the 10" bull barrel model and thus has a pretty long sight radius. :)

[dtknowles]

I suspect my Mk-II is my most accurate handgun, even with just the Remington and Federal "promo" brick loads.

Of course, that *might* have something to do with the fact that it is the 10" bull barrel model and thus has a pretty long sight radius. :)

My MK II Hunter has a 10" barrel and I have a scope on it. I think it also has a match chamber, it is tight, it won't extract an unfired round. It is the most accurate handgun I have ever shot. Shoots under an inch 10 shot groups at 25 yards even with cheap ammo. With real Match ammo I have shot under half inch groups but at that point I am the weak link, I have blown more tiny groups with shooter caused flyers than I want to count.

Tim

[Ithaca Gunner]

I'll just keep shooting my Mk1...it's been working fine for almost 50 years.

[bpatterson84]

The Mk4's don't have loaded chamber indicator? Nice! Hope they did away with the mag disconector as well. I have a mk1, mk2 and 2 Volquartsen Scorpions, the ultimate expression of Bill Rugers original design!

[CraigOK]

Being able reassemble without the struggle will be a nice change

[mcdaniel.mac]

This pistol just needs one thing: a bolt lock, for firing extra quiet.

[35remington]

The earlier Rugers were never that hard to assemble. If you think they were you never learned how to do it well.

Hint: look for a swinging dingus. The gun is properly assembled muzzle up. Once you have that it is easy to reassemble and pretty fast too.

[dtknowles]

The earlier Rugers were never that hard to assemble. If you think they were you never learned how to do it well.

Hint: look for a swinging dingus. The gun is properly assembled muzzle up. Once you have that it is easy to reassemble and pretty fast too.

He said it should be easier but what he means is it should be more obvious. It can be hard if you don't have instructions. It is not obvious.

Tim

[dragon813gt]

Pass, it still has a mag disconnect. I have some that have been removed but it typically effects the trigger in a negative way. My MKII Target is very accurate. There was no need to make any changes to that model.

As far as assembly. We live w/ the internet at our fingertips. Finding instructions takes all of two seconds. They're not hard to take down and people make to much of it.

[M-Tecs]

I like the machined lower. http://ruger.com/products/markIVHunter/models.html

[snowwolfe]

No one said there was anything wrong with the Mark I, II, or III. I owned them all and enjoyed them all. But my current Mark III Hunter is my least favorite due to the loaded chamber indicator. Its still more accurate than I can shoot it as it wears a Fast Fire red dot sight.

Breaking down any of the older pistols isn't that hard once you figure it out but the Mark IV is easier yet. Plus it now carries a ambidextrous safety which is really nice for us left handed shooters.
Kudos to Ruger for trying to improve on an otherwise good pistol. I just hope when mine comes in it will not be like the last 4 I purchased and require a trip back to them to be repaired.

[mcdaniel.mac]

Pass, it still has a mag disconnect. I have some that have been removed but it typically effects the trigger in a negative way. My MKII Target is very accurate. There was no need to make any changes to that model.

As far as assembly. We live w/ the internet at our fingertips. Finding instructions takes all of two seconds. They're not hard to take down and people make to much of it.
Majestic Arms and Volquartsen make very good safety delete bushings that improve the trigger pull considerably.

The earlier Rugers were never that hard to assemble. If you think they were you never learned how to do it well.

Hint: look for a swinging dingus. The gun is properly assembled muzzle up. Once you have that it is easy to reassemble and pretty fast too.
They're not bad when they're worn in a bit, but the manual calls for a hammer and dowel. Modern guns usually field-strip with no tools, so from that perspective the MkIII and prior are not terribly easy to take apart.

I do also wish they had gone to a serialized lower, like the SW Victory, so I could keep a couple barrels (uppers) around without needing an FFL transfer for each one. Still, I plan on selling mine as I mentioned and picking up a MkIV as soon as they release a threaded model.

[35remington]

dt, agree it is not obvious. Ask and it is pretty easy, though.

Frequent removal of the upper from the lower is not necessary, nor a good idea, for the Mk 1-3. All it does is loosen things up when overdone. All that really needs be done is removal of the bolt and mainspring housing for thorough cleaning. Do not whack the upper and lower apart every time you clean it.

Stick to this regimen and the hammer and dowel become the useless things they actually are. The only tool needed is a loop of monofilament or twine for the mainspring latch.

[NavyVet1959]

I've known people who had the Ruger Mk-I/Mk-II for over 50 years. Other than cleaning the exterior with some WD-40 and maybe running a patch down the barrel every few years, they never did anything to them, much less actually disassemble them. Thousands and thousands and thousands of rounds going through those guns and they just keep shooting without a problem.

[contender1]

When Bill designed the Standard Auto in 1948 & 1949,, he was doing so in a manner to build a good gun at an affordable price for the average guy. He had built hand tools, excellent quality,,, but the sale prices kept them out of many hands. That business failed.
Plus, in that era,,, MOST men were mechanically inclined & did a lot of their own mechanical work on all sorts of things. From cars to washing machines etc. The instructions were printed, and people were easily able to disassemble & re-assemble their Standards & MKI's w/o issues. In the 60's & 70's,, with the peace, love & feminine movements,, many males gravitated away from working on their stuff. Up sprang repair shops,,, and mainly men did jobs that all of us used to do ourselves. Just look at our cars,, and the term; "shade tree mechanic." It used to be EASY to work on your cars,,, but due to modern stuff, it got more complicated. Same thing with most other mechanical items we bought. In 1981,,, along came the improved MKII model of the Ruger. Some feel this it the best variation ever built. Upgraded to 10 rounds, a safety you can engage AND be able to disassemble the gun in a safer manner. Then along came the 22/45,, with a magazine release change. Many had desired the grip angle to be changed from the Luger angle to the 1911 angle. And in doing so, Ruger put the mag release button on the side. MANY feel this was an excellent improvement.
The MKIII came along in a time when lawyers were running to court suing gun makers for defective designs. Before the law was passed to protect them from frivolous lawsuits. So we got the LCI as well as a mag disconnect. And remember,,, John Moses Browning designed a magazine disconnect LONG before Ruger ever built one. Anybody remember the Browning High Power? With the MKIII they changed all of them to use a side button mag release. Again, addressing complaints by users.

Now we have the MKIV. Ruger has addressed the disassembly, re-assembly issue that has plagued them for a long time. A tip up receiver. Now, as a man who has helped many other guys as well as a few ladies with their re-assembly of their Ruger 22 semi's over the years,,, I see this as a step forward in design. I learned long ago how to easily re-assemble a Standard or a MKI, as well as my MKII's. I'm even able to easily re-assemble the MKIII's as I understand the mechanics, and do not feel it all has to be as hard as others make it out to be. Manuals, instruction books, (free from Ruger) videos, youboob, etc all have PLENTY of detailed instructions to help anybody understand how to disassemble or re-assemble the Rugers.

My point in all this is that Ruger has, over the years,, listened to, and tried to address the complaints by it's gun owners to where they make a better product, all while trying to avoid the lawsuits caused by ignorant people, or anti-gunners.
Yes, in todays society, many guns are made to disassemble w/o tools or in such a manner to make it "easy" etc. That was not the case in 1949,,, EXCEPT in that doing so back then was more expensive. High Standard was an excellent example. Yet the cost to build a HS was more than the sale price of a Ruger. Where is the HS of old? Gone.
So, I think the new MKIV will appeal to many, and hopefully will reduce the number of complaints by users.

[44man]

I do not understand at all. The Ruger is so easy it is crazy, can do it in the dark or my sleep. There was never a better gun ever made. I have had from Mark I's to Mark II's all my life. No other pistol has out shot any. To change for stupid does not make sense.
More problems about taking a Ruger apart then any but your shoe laces will strangle you. Can you walk? Sad to see the wife needs to zip your pants. Men are gone! Mark I easiest gun ever.

[dragon813gt]

I'd imagine the change in the takedown also means it's easier/cheaper to manufacture. Can't see a company changing, because the customers want it, if it's going to cost more or be harder to manufacture.

[randy_68]

I love my MKI. My dad gave it to me for my 8th grade confirmation. I did own a MKII ss for a while but my MKI was more accurate. Plus I have a Clark trigger in it and my dad made a set of real Elephant ivory grips that my mom then scrimshawed. Nothing wrong with the MKII though. It was a nice gun.
http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h81/randy_68/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151112_194654387_zpspudfsdb2.jpg (http://s62.photobucket.com/user/randy_68/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151112_194654387_zpspudfsdb2.jpg.html)

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h81/randy_68/Ruger%20MK1/HPIM2572.jpg (http://s62.photobucket.com/user/randy_68/media/Ruger%20MK1/HPIM2572.jpg.html)

[GhostHawk]

My wife and I each own a Mk III 22/45 I prefer the grip angle, the mag button etc.

Both of them will put 10 rounds into a target group that you can cover with a pop cap.

One is an older target version with adjustable rear sight and old enough that it was not drilled and tapped for scope base.
So I bought her a new one that came with the base installed and put a Red Dot on it for her.
Then proceeded to search for dovetail mounts for Mk III 22/45 till I found one reasonable.

I really need to get both of them out on the prairie and see what they do at distance. I know at zero to 50 feet I can choose an eye and put the bullet in it 10 out of 10.

My rifle range does not allow pistols.

I did dissemble one of them as it was NIB but 18 years old and the lube had stuck the action. I was able to get it apart and clean the gunk up and relube with no issues. You DO need to follow the directions. Incredibly counter intuitive.

I have no desire to run out and buy a Mk4. Perhaps if one drops in my lap some day.

Hopefully ours have many thousands of rounds left in them.

When it starts showing signs of sticky ejection I clean it, I use a airgun cleaning kit, cord inside a small plastic tube. Feed in from the muzzle with the bolt locked back. Open the loop, put in a square of fabric lightly touched with ATF and followed by a couple of dry patch's.

Maybe in a couple of years I'll break them down one at a time and have the wife read me the directions to put them back together.

Till then they are by far my favorite pistol to shoot.

[Hickory]

Here's a link to gunblast.

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-MKIV.htm

[osteodoc08]

Here's a link to gunblast.

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-MKIV.htm


Thanks for the article. Gonna have to order me one of the Mk IV Hunter models for sure.

[The Governor]

When Bill designed the Standard Auto in 1948 & 1949,, he was doing so in a manner to build a good gun at an affordable price for the average guy. He had built hand tools, excellent quality,,, but the sale prices kept them out of many hands. That business failed.
Plus, in that era,,, MOST men were mechanically inclined & did a lot of their own mechanical work on all sorts of things. From cars to washing machines etc. The instructions were printed, and people were easily able to disassemble & re-assemble their Standards & MKI's w/o issues. In the 60's & 70's,, with the peace, love & feminine movements,, many males gravitated away from working on their stuff. Up sprang repair shops,,, and mainly men did jobs that all of us used to do ourselves. Just look at our cars,, and the term; "shade tree mechanic." It used to be EASY to work on your cars,,, but due to modern stuff, it got more complicated. Same thing with most other mechanical items we bought. In 1981,,, along came the improved MKII model of the Ruger. Some feel this it the best variation ever built. Upgraded to 10 rounds, a safety you can engage AND be able to disassemble the gun in a safer manner. Then along came the 22/45,, with a magazine release change. Many had desired the grip angle to be changed from the Luger angle to the 1911 angle. And in doing so, Ruger put the mag release button on the side. MANY feel this was an excellent improvement.
The MKIII came along in a time when lawyers were running to court suing gun makers for defective designs. Before the law was passed to protect them from frivolous lawsuits. So we got the LCI as well as a mag disconnect. And remember,,, John Moses Browning designed a magazine disconnect LONG before Ruger ever built one. Anybody remember the Browning High Power? With the MKIII they changed all of them to use a side button mag release. Again, addressing complaints by users.

Now we have the MKIV. Ruger has addressed the disassembly, re-assembly issue that has plagued them for a long time. A tip up receiver. Now, as a man who has helped many other guys as well as a few ladies with their re-assembly of their Ruger 22 semi's over the years,,, I see this as a step forward in design. I learned long ago how to easily re-assemble a Standard or a MKI, as well as my MKII's. I'm even able to easily re-assemble the MKIII's as I understand the mechanics, and do not feel it all has to be as hard as others make it out to be. Manuals, instruction books, (free from Ruger) videos, youboob, etc all have PLENTY of detailed instructions to help anybody understand how to disassemble or re-assemble the Rugers.

My point in all this is that Ruger has, over the years,, listened to, and tried to address the complaints by it's gun owners to where they make a better product, all while trying to avoid the lawsuits caused by ignorant people, or anti-gunners.
Yes, in todays society, many guns are made to disassemble w/o tools or in such a manner to make it "easy" etc. That was not the case in 1949,,, EXCEPT in that doing so back then was more expensive. High Standard was an excellent example. Yet the cost to build a HS was more than the sale price of a Ruger. Where is the HS of old? Gone.
So, I think the new MKIV will appeal to many, and hopefully will reduce the number of complaints by users.
Good post .�� To me, the 4 solves issues made by the mark 3.
I'll stick with my Mark 2s. They're might be some deals on mark 2s coming up for me to add to my small collection of about 7.

[dtknowles]

Good post .�� To me, the 4 solves issues made by the mark 3.
I'll stick with my Mark 2s. They're might be some deals on mark 2s coming up for me to add to my small collection of about 7.

Man, dude, they are awesome but you got a problem :neutral:

[The Governor]

Lol, I'll post some pics next week.
I particularly like the stainless bull barrel
and have a 4, 5.5, 6 7\8, and 10".

[lefty o]

I'd imagine the change in the takedown also means it's easier/cheaper to manufacture. Can't see a company changing, because the customers want it, if it's going to cost more or be harder to manufacture.
id guarantee it. ruger has seen the $$$ train, they make changes to plastic, MIM, etc all in the name of the almighty $.

[contender1]

"id guarantee it. ruger has seen the $$$ train, they make changes to plastic, MIM, etc all in the name of the almighty $."

A little more history.
Bill Ruger had a picture behind his desk. It was of a couple of wooden barrels,,, overflowing with money. ALL businesses only survive if they make money. It's the reason they are in business. NONE will survive if they can not make a profit. And Bill figured out ways to build a quality product, with less expense than his competitors and that's how he survived AND prospered. Instead of milling a cast or forged frame, he stamped two pieces of flat steel into shape, and then welded them together to make his Standard Auto. Less to build, and he could sell them at a profit, and it started what has LONG been a tradition. Figuring out ways to build something using a quality method, at a lesser expense.
Plus,,, if they do not do such things,,, they will lose to their competition. Just like HS lost to Ruger, as well as how Colt lost to them in the .22 market.
Why does this happen? Because the BUYING public wants it cheaper than anybody else. Everybody wants the high quality, custom built gun like a Freedom Arms,,, yet at the cost of a chinese knock off. Ruger mass produces firearms, while FA builds theirs as a custom. But the FA will cost you about $2500 (more or less depending upon features,) while a Ruger will cost you about $600 for a similar type of gun. Yes, the Ruger will not have the fit & finish of a FA, and it won't have as tight a tolerances,,, but it will STILL do what they claim. "Be a strong, working mans gun."
And why do you see the custom gunsmiths using the Rugers as their base guns? BECAUSE of their strength & reliability.

The almighty dollar,,,,,, a new attitude at Ruger,,, Nope. Bill STARTED it.

[44man]

I don't know about cheaper, but watching the video, I am still sold on Ruger. I have out shot every .22 pistol ever made.
I think back when my Mark I was $37.50, it is tough to justify $750 for one now. I know money is worthless today.
Ruger from Bill on has had the best of the best engineers.
You can buy a used Mark I and it will shoot as good as when new. I am impressed with the Mark IV and it was not cheap to figure that one out.

[Hickory]

I got to handle a new Ruger Mark IV last night.
Although the price was a little steep, I think I will get one next spring.

[The Governor]

http://i622.photobucket.com/albums/tt309/burley_bucket/bulls4.jpg

10, 6 7/8, 5 1/2, and 4". All sweet, Mk II shooters.

[snowwolfe]

Some of you guys are stuck in the past. As a lefty I am glad Ruger realized we enjoy a good handgun with correct features. The ambidextrous safety is worth the price of admission. My Target model should be at the dealers today.
Plus 1 to Ruger for the updates.

[44man]

I have the old 10" in blue and the stainless target slab side. When I first got the 10", I only shot it a few times at 25 yards before we went to a big bore IHMSA shoot, or so we thought. I told my friend to take the .22's for sight settings if we had time. Got there to see no big bore targets, I asked and was told it was .22 state. They fit us in. There I was with no sight settings.
I got all 15 chickens, missed the first pig, turkey and ram but my friend seen the hits. I also hit all the chicken shoot off targets at 100 yards for 57 out of 60 to win. I was using the early WW Wildcat ammo.
I won Ohio state the same year with my SBH, 79 out of 80. I lost it on the last ram, burned out.
I miss the old Mark I but my brother in law still has it. I also miss the SRH my friend talked me out of so I could buy a BFR. I was surprised to see the BFR is just a huge Ruger with more precision.
I love Rugers.
My slab side will make one hole for 10 shots at 25 yards with RWS rounds. I can hit at 200 with an aim point 53" over.
The .22 failure today are the bullets. Seems as if even cheap in the old days shot good. At one time Rem was tops and WW high speed HP's could not be beat but now you pay 10X more and every shot sounds different with many that don't even go off. I like CCI blue tag HP's but still not as good as I want so if you have a bullet that really shoots good, tell me. I can no longer afford to test them all. If your Ruger does not shoot it is not the gun.
My old Mark I standard hit center at 25 and the bullet crossed the line of sight again at 80 yards. It was amazing.

[snowwolfe]

Picked up my Mark IV yesterday. The fit and finish is the best I've ever seen on a Ruger handgun. Magazines ejected (popped) easily. Trigger was a disappointment. A tiny bit of creep and a best guess 6-7 pound pull. It should smooth out with some use but likely will have to wait for the aftermarket to catch up and offer some replacement parts.

[44man]

That is the lawyer thing. Too hard. my 10" is 28 oz and the slab side is 34 oz-- factory.
The Marks are hard to work, the safety can fail if you don't get it right. After market will be best.
Let us know what you find. Trigger parts should be the same on all of them.

[mcdaniel.mac]

Picked up my Mark IV yesterday. The fit and finish is the best I've ever seen on a Ruger handgun. Magazines ejected (popped) easily. Trigger was a disappointment. A tiny bit of creep and a best guess 6-7 pound pull. It should smooth out with some use but likely will have to wait for the aftermarket to catch up and offer some replacement parts.
Have you inspected the trigger group? I'm curious how much interchange there is with the MkIII.

[snowwolfe]

No, its going to be sitting in the safe for awhile before I get a chance to mess with it. To many other irons in the fire right now.

[winelover]

I'm also a southpaw......have no trouble with the right handed safety of the Mark II. Just learned to cope by reaching it with the off hand. I prefer the bottom magazine release.

179568

Winelover

[44man]

I have shot every .22 pistol made. High Standards and 41's, good guns all and Buckmarks that have twitches. None have ever done as good as a Ruger. The solid receiver and barrel is the key. No floating rear sight on a slide. No slide wear.
They make changes but the basic design is still the best. Like the 10-22 that is the best ever to tweak, change and do anything with. The Mark's will live forever.

[B. Lumpkin]

I look forward to the reviews from those who have them! I want to buy a pair of 22 caliber pistols for my kids and am torn between this one and the S&W Victory 22.

[44man]

The S&W looks great too. So base it on price. Either will do you.

[mcdaniel.mac]

I'm hearing the Victory has interchangeable barrels. That might talk me out of a MkIV.

[osteodoc08]

Went and fondled a Mk4 today. Loved everything except the ambi safety. It sits a touch too low and it rubbed my hand on a high hold. More annoying than anything. If I can swap it out for a little smaller one, I'd be on it like white on rice. Trigger needs work but super easy to disassemble and no LCI like the silly Mk3.

[B. Lumpkin]

Osteodoc08- Grip lower, lol.

Has anybody had the chance to shoot one of the Mark IV pistols yet? I held one in Gander Mountain yesterday, and it felt really good in the hand. The blued target version was only $499.00.