Yah! That's probably it. The Mark IV having an "ambi safety" probably doesn't mean much of anything. The lack of the LCI will probably get whole neighborhoods killed. And then, I'm sure somebody will try firing the dang thing with the barrel tilted forward, and then complain about that. :rolleyes:

http://i915.photobucket.com/albums/a...0IV%20TILT.jpg

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (as are the past "problems".

First, as mentioned, they didn't fix the big issue of a serialized barrel, by far the biggest issue for me.

1. Takedown of the Mark3 is not difficult IF you take the time to actually understand what you are doing. Most youtubes don't really explain that well. As often as a Ruger actually need cleaning, the one button likely has as much exposure to future issues as it actually help. In time, perhaps we will see threads on " the push button is stuck". or the doohickie it rotates on is cracked"? My High Standard Victor has a push button for take down as well. Perfect, as long as it isn't stuck.

2. ??

3. I shoot target, a lighter frame is not good for me, plus there is/was already a "lite" version? Will be a real PIA to experiment with different heavier target barrels due to the real issue Ruger didn't fix.

4. On my two Mark 3s I have never had to pull out a mag? Not sure what this reference is, unless the mark 2?

5 & 6 seem like Ruger advertising, although I am not left handed and use target grips.

7. Apparently the trigger still needs to be be upgraded! I am getting the impression that stock, it isn't as good as the Victory trigger, but it doesn't really matter. Better than crummy is rather faint praise.

It sort of seems like if you are the type to modify and play with alternatives to improve the gun, it is not as versatile as the Victory. Stock, the guns are similar, except the trigger might not be as good on the Mark 4, doubtful it is better. Time will tell.

All that sais, in time, after it has been vetted, and new triggers etc are available, I will likely get one just if for no other reason than I have one of most US 22 target pistols. Unless the formal reviews reveal some other real benefits, its not high on my list. It seems Dr Doom is correct:bthumb:

No internal lock/key and no loaded chamber indicator.:bthumb:

http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/w..._4_diagram.jpg

* PARTS SO MARKED MUST BE FACTORY FIT
Key No. Part Name
* 1 Grip Frame
2 Frame Lug
3 Receiver Frame Screw
4 Bolt Open Stop Spring
5 Trigger Spring
6 Trigger Spring Plunger
7 Bolt Open Stop
8 Trigger Bar
9 Trigger Bar Pivot Pin
10 Trigger Pivot Pin
11 Magazine Latch
12 Magazine Latch Spring
13 Magazine Latch Screw
14 Sear
15 Sear Spring
16 Hammer Bushing
* 17 Hammer
18 Hammer Strut
19 Magazine Disconnector Spring
20 Safety
21 Spring Plunger for Auto Safety
22 Safety Lever, Left
23 Safety Lever, Right
24 Mainspring Housing
25 Hammer Spring
26 Hammer Spring Plunger
27 Latch Spring
28 Latch
29 Bolt Stop Pin
30 Bolt Stop Thumbpiece
31 Left Grip Panel
32 Grip Panel Screw
33 Right Grip Panel
34 Magazine
35 Lug Retainer Screw
36 Magazine Latch Plunger
37 Sear Pivot Pin
38 Hammer Strut Pin
39 Bolt Stop Thumbpiece Screw
40 Trigger Pivot Retainer Spring
41 Bolt Stop Retainer Pin Retainer
42 Safety Detent Spring
43 Trigger

The grips from a Mark III might fit, the magazines are the same. You might just need to cut out for the safety & bolt release.

People absolutely will buy this because it is easier to take apart. I'm just surprised it took Ruger so long to come up with this. Even if discounted, I can't see any new buyer in his right mind choosing a new MKIII over a IV. With several MKIIs in the safe already, I really had no desire to purchase another take apart hassle,reassemble hassle, loosen the frame/receiver fit Ruger. But now I probably will. Personally, I will wait several months just to ensure all the bugs are out and to see what Ruger comes out with on the IV platform. Too bad Ruger left the serial number on the receiver barrel instead of moving it to the lower frame. Without going through the FFL cost and process on each one, it would be cool to easily mail order Ruger or aftermarket barrels (bull, short, long, threaded etc.) and switch them quickly out in the field.

I agree with Sophia. I don't fear breakdown/reassemble on Rugers, I own several MKIIs. But when compared with the current competition, there is just no excuse to continually put up with the multiple step hassle needed to properly clean one of these. This is a major long awaited improvement that will certainly entice me to buy another. Its about time. Because of the now one second takedown, I can definitely see Ruger picking up market share in the recreational .22 semi auto pistol market. The biggest plus is that the wife will no longer have any excuse for not breaking down and cleaning her own gun.

Will grips from a Mark 3 fit a Mark4? (sorry if this has been asked before). I'm assuming no, but.....

What is that front pivot pin (as in peened rivet or threaded pin)? Does it come out in order to disconnect the upper from the frame?

I understand the mainspring assembly comment, but what do you mean by the "Kwy and lock" set up?? Just trying to understand.

It looks like a great idea that was long overdue, they should be able to sell loads of them.I probably won't buy one since I have a couple Mark Is and a tricked out Mark III that drove me buggy the first few times trying to get back together [emoji15][emoji41]

I see here get rid of the older ones. Get rid of the cast offs. Who is going to buy them? Everybody reads that the MKIV is easy to take down. Why would they buy your older MK's that are a PITA to take down and reassemble. I have no problem taking the older Rugers apart and putting them together. A lot of people on RFC have a problem taking them apart and will be buying the MKIV. If I didn't have many I would be buying a MKIV. The MKIV devalued the MKIII's that you are trying to sell.

The new ruger
 

Just my 2 cents, It looks nice, but when they left up on the barrel it looks cheap, madly made. its a weak spot, no two ways about it, bad move on them. If you like it that's fine, think I will steer clear. thanks

I always appreciate your posts, SGW. I have a standard model manufactured in 1966. I bought it 40 years ago for a song because he had a lot of wear. I hadn't fired it in decades until I joined a great range/club a year ago. I LOVE this gun... when it operates well. Problem is... the ejector is ready to fall off (and thus many failures to cycle) and it is very worn. I've spoken with Ruger and was ready to send it back to them for refurb until the announcement this week. I would LOVE to have a Mark IV Hunter!

Take a new buyer unfamiliar with Ruger MKs. Sit him/her down with a new MKIII and a new MKIV. Have them read the owners manual. Come back an hour later after they have spent 10 seconds taking apart and reassembling the MKIV and are still trying to fiqure out how to put together a MKIII. Guess which one they are going to buy. At the shop I worked at the Ruger MK was the only, and I mean the only, handgun where a customer would actually come back with his pistol in pieces and ask us for help in reassembling it. Happened more than once. Just saw an online American Rifleman article titled "Ruger Takes Steps to End World Profanity".

On another of the FOUR (I think, maybe more) threads on the Mark IV, someone posted the exploded view and parts list. The front pivot is a screw.