Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

Ruger Mark IV

62K views 282 replies 112 participants last post by  BKDinTexas 
#1 ·
Mark IV?

These pictures have been floating around on the internet recently and you guys are the Ruger experts, so is this legit? They supposedly came from http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/08/daniel-zimmerman/coming-soon-ruger-mark-iv-22-pistol/ but it seems to have been deleted. Even the cache is gone.





An elaborate forgery? An answer to the Victory? Something for shot show next year or the new unannounced product? Sorry if this has been posted before, I didn't see a thread.
 
See less See more
2
#109 ·
People will not just buy one for the easier takedown. There are quite a few improvements that will make a better choice over the Mark III...

1. Push button takedown
2. NO loaded chamber indicator
3. Aluminum frame, which makes it 6.5 ounces lighter
4. Mags actually come out without having to physically pull them out
5. Ambi safety
6. Upgraded slide release
7. Trigger has been reported to be much better

Those are enough reasons for me to sell my Mark III and buy a Mark IV! It seems like they fixed all the problems we wanted fixed.
 
#122 ·
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:
 
#110 ·
The MK series are great firearms. Solid, accurate, plenty of aftermarket stuff....but their one shortcoming was ease of disassembly/reassembly. I bought two...and neither would run more than 300 to 400 rounds without the chamber getting dirty which caused stoppages. Yes I could clean the chamber and bore without disassembly but not properly. I sold them both.

I would venture that this one button release of the entire barrel/reciever/bolt is a big deal and will boost sales. The MKIIIs will take a big hit price wise if the new pistol is in the same price range. MKI and II....not so much. Takedown of the old ones kept me from purchasing another one. M1911
 
#112 · (Edited)
It also looks like it will have a slingshot bolt release unlike the Mark III.
I will also probably buy one after all the hoopla dies down, along with pricing and availability.
In addition: it only took Ruger 50+ years to come up with a takedown system similar to High Standard.
I love the ease of which I can takedown my Victors.
 
#113 ·
It looks like the ultimate Mark, if it proves to be free of problems in the long run. In my early shooting life I had a Standard, and more recently a Mark III Target with all the lawyer crap removed. I found both to be disappointments compared to revolvers. Too heavy, and still not quite the dependability of wheel guns. PITA to detail clean, or even field clean, though I could do either without a problem. Plus you just can't help but want lots of mags, which cost more than speedloaders.

It's beyond my budget, so it's just as well I've finally learned I'm a revolver guy. The only semi-auto I own now is a 10/22.
 
#114 ·
Most of us have done things so that the older Rugers can function better. For me I have all my Rugers worked on so I don't need another. For someone who doesn't have one or doesn't want to do work on their older Ruger the new one would be great. If I didn't have so many I would buy the MKIV in a heartbeat!
 
#116 ·
Too many Ruger Mark pistols? Cast off the "older" models in lieu of making life easier? And they say the kids these days are spoiled? I don't believe that for one minute, they just smell that way. :p

Actually, I've enjoyed experiencing the evolution of the Ruger Mark & Standard pistols over the years that I've been involved with working on all the specimens, from very early to latest, that have been available. Anything and everything that's unlikable concerning the older pistols can be modified, and everything concerning dis and re assembly can be learned, if you want to learn how, bad enough.

I applaud Ruger for listening to customer complaints involving some of the complaints that have haunted the Ruger Mark III guns since 2005. Too bad it took 12 years for those complaints to seem plausible to them. Another case of "time" being the teacher?

Have too many Ruger Mark pistols? How many is too many? I have a bunch of 'em, the amount I will not divulge, but I can promise one thing............there's gonna be one more soon.
 
#133 ·
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!

Too many Ruger Mark pistols? Cast off the "older" models in lieu of making life easier? And they say the kids these days are spoiled? I don't believe that for one minute, they just smell that way. :p

Actually, I've enjoyed experiencing the evolution of the Ruger Mark & Standard pistols over the years that I've been involved with working on all the specimens, from very early to latest, that have been available. Anything and everything that's unlikable concerning the older pistols can be modified, and everything concerning dis and re assembly can be learned, if you want to learn how, bad enough.

I applaud Ruger for listening to customer complaints involving some of the complaints that have haunted the Ruger Mark III guns since 2005. Too bad it took 12 years for those complaints to seem plausible to them. Another case of "time" being the teacher?

Have too many Ruger Mark pistols? How many is too many? I have a bunch of 'em, the amount I will not divulge, but I can promise one thing............there's gonna be one more soon.
 
#118 ·
Aluminum Grip Frame Mark IV

Here's a picture of the aluminum grip frame version of the Ruger Mark IV. Will it be the replacement for the 22/45?

Couple of things to notice. No WAG's involved here.

Looks like the hammer is a lightened version. Sides relieved of weight.

Mainspring housing assembly is absent. Therefore, no "key and lock" set-up.

Ambidextrous "thumb safety" function. I gotta see how that deal works.

Looks much better than plastic.

 
#120 ·
Here's a picture of the aluminum grip frame version of the Ruger Mark IV. Will it be the replacement for the 22/45?

Couple of things to notice. No WAG's involved here.

Looks like the hammer is a lightened version. Sides relieved of weight.

Mainspring housing assembly is absent. Therefore, no "key and lock" set-up.

Ambidextrous "thumb safety" function. I gotta see how that deal works.

Looks much better than plastic.

Oh yeah, I like the looks of that. This looks so far like a great improvement over the Mark III. :t
 
#119 ·
Well, I was thinking about a S&W Victory until I saw the Mark IV. I'll probably wait until they are out for a year to see what that reviews are like and let Ruger get any bugs out of the production, but then again, I may not be able to wait that long. :D
 
#123 ·
No internal lock/key and no loaded chamber indicator.:bthumb:



* 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
 
#125 ·
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.
 
#126 · (Edited)
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.
 
#130 ·
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]
 
#131 ·
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.
 
This post has been deleted
#134 · (Edited)
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".
 
#136 ·
Too bad Ruger left the serial number on the receiver barrel instead of moving it to the lower frame.
Yes, I understand this. And, I am thinking as I type, I dont see how moving the serial number would help Ruger? Today if I want a hunter, slab side and a standard I am going to buy three guns from Ruger. If they move the number to the frame, I could buy one gun from Ruger and two stripped uppers else where. I dont even need three bolts. Just the upper frame and barrel. Where is the motivation for Ruger in that?

I dont know,... it worked for the Contender, I guess.... T/C sold the barrels too. I lean toward thinking Ruger is better of numbering the upper.
 
#139 · (Edited)
"Yes, I understand this. And, I am thinking as I type, I dont see how moving the serial number would help Ruger? Today if I want a hunter, slab side and a standard I am going to buy three guns from Ruger. If they move the number to the frame, I could buy one gun from Ruger and two stripped uppers else where. I dont even need three bolts. Just the upper frame and barrel. Where is the motivation for Ruger in that?"

You're correct on that. Its always the bottom line. Still, didn't seem to worry S&W any on the barrel changing Mod 41.
 
#141 ·
The 'key/lock' was in reference to the safety mechanism built into the Mark 3 pistols. It uses a key that spins a threaded pin that, when deployed, will prevent the pistol from operating by locking the safety in the "ON" position. This also means there is a hole through the left side of the grip frame.
 
#144 · (Edited)
I am going to miss looking for my Ruger after I tossed it out the window. You're right though, the initial process was a character builder, a rite of passage. The intro of the MKIV marks the end of an era. When men were men and Rugers had removable mainspring assemblies. Future generations will miss out. Something to sit around the campfire and reminisce about. There will come a time when no one is left to remember how to reassemble these. Sigh
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top