User Panel
Posted: 11/10/2016 2:22:55 PM EDT
Seen one guy on line has one and some people pointed out he had some play (slight) between the frame and the barrel by the charging handle.
How are yours? |
|
|
Quoted:
Mine is tight as a drum, quality is miles ahead of the older MK I,II, III's I have owned. http://<a href=http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b389/MBaugh/IMG_2842%20-%20Copy_zpsfp6akgou.jpg</a>" /> View Quote What kind of optic is that? |
|
That is a beautiful gun.
Do the OP, the occaisional gun with defects can make it off the production line. I would buy one myself if I didn't just buy a MK3 22/45. If there were any issues Ruger would take care of you. |
|
The IV completes my collection of Marks. It is easily the best finished Ruger I've
ever had. They showed a lot of pride in making this one. |
|
It is a Leupold 2x handgun scope with the Ruger base and Nikon low rings. With the low rings I had to remove the blade from the rear sight and lower it all the way. I have some Warne high rings coming in to see if they will work with the rear sight intact and zeroed.
|
|
I want one bad, but really want to wait for a threaded version.
|
|
I'll probably pick one up in a couple years after I make sure there's no bugs to work out, but I won't be selling my older Mk II and III's.
|
|
I'll probably pick one up in a couple years after I make sure there's no bugs to work out, but I won't be selling my older Mk II and III's. View Quote The Mark IV is an evolutionary development, so there really aren't any "unknown" bugs. The "known" bugs are easy to deal with, and you will have to deal with them no matter when you buy it. The worst thing is the trigger pull. To improve that, you have to get rid of the magazine disconnector. Just substitute a Mark II hammer and sear. There's a lot of backwards compatibility in this design. While you're at it, ditch the little magazine ejector at the base of the grip. The stock trigger is loose and sloppy. I prefer the Clark steel trigger. To install it, you have square off the front corners of the trigger opening in the frame with a needle file. This is a simple job, but you have to do it carefully. The following is my earlier post on exactly what I did with my pistol: 1. Replaced the "holster-ripper" front sight with a sight from the Ruger Single Six, with the base ground to conform to the Mark IV barrel contour.
2. Removed the magazine disconnector. This is actually an assembly consisting of the hammer, the magazine disconnector itself (which wraps around the hammer), its spring, and the hammer bushing. (The bushing appears to be installed in such a way that it's not easily removable, and it holds the other parts together.) Replaced these parts with a Mark II hammer and bushing. (If you can't find a Mark II hammer, you can do the same thing with a Mark III hammer and Tandemkross bushing.) 3. Replaced the stock sear with a Volquartsen Mark II target sear. This goes a long way toward improving the trigger pull. 4. Replaced the stock trigger with a Clark Custom steel trigger. This required a little fitting. First, the trigger pin hole in the Clark trigger needed just a tiny bit of reaming so that the stock trigger pin would fit. More importantly, I had to do some filing on the frame, at the front of the trigger opening. This is because the Mark IV frame is a one-piece CNC-milled aluminum forging, as compared to the welded-together components of the previous Marks. This difference means that the front inside corners of the trigger opening are rounded, rather than squared. They must be squared off so that the Clark trigger can fit and function correctly. This is a very worthwhile improvement since the stock trigger is very sloppy. In addition, the stock trigger has a nub that engages the magazine. This is totally unnecessary and adversely affects the trigger pull. (The three things that vastly improve the trigger pull are replacement of the trigger, replacement of the sear, and removal of the magazine disconnector.) 5. Removed the little magazine ejector at the base of the grip. This is totally unnecessary once you remove the magazine disconnector. 6. Replaced the magazine release with one from the Mark III. The only difference is that the Mark III release protrudes less. I found that the Mark IV part made it too easy to release the magazine unintentionally. 7. Replaced the stock plastic grips with the laminated wood grips from the Hunter version. This is a vast aesthetic improvement. (Note that the orientation of the medallions on the Mark IV grips is different from that of the previous Marks. They are now perpendicular to the barrel rather than following the slant of the grip.) View Quote Some of these things, such as the sight, the magazine release, and the grips, are matters of personal taste. |
|
I recently purchased a stainless Mark IV Hunter. It looks like a work of art. Absolutely zero slop in fit or the finish. Have not had the opportunity to shoot it yet, but I have no doubt it was a excellent purchase even though it's a brand new model.
|
|
Do I understand correctly, the IV is easier to take apart and clean also?
|
|
|
After handling one a little bit in the shop, I don't think I'm going to get one. The safety killed it for me, and I'm left handed. Didn't like the operation, size, shape, etc.
|
|
Mine is also tight. I have the stainless Hunter model and it feels and looks like Ruger was making a statement.
|
|
Quoted:
After handling one a little bit in the shop, I don't think I'm going to get one. The safety killed it for me, and I'm left handed. Didn't like the operation, size, shape, etc. View Quote That's really not a problem. There is an O-ring included with them to take the place of the "wrong" side safety. |
|
|
Quoted:
That's really not a problem. There is an O-ring included with them to take the place of the "wrong" side safety. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
After handling one a little bit in the shop, I don't think I'm going to get one. The safety killed it for me, and I'm left handed. Didn't like the operation, size, shape, etc. That's really not a problem. There is an O-ring included with them to take the place of the "wrong" side safety. Except that it absolutely is. The O ring takes the place of the right side safety, completely negating the safety for left handers. It also was oddly shaped, was NOT easy to activate/deactivate, and hinged on the wrong side (front instead of back like a 1911). I think Ruger is going to sell a ton of these, but not to me. |
|
Quoted:
Except that it absolutely is. The O ring takes the place of the right side safety, completely negating the safety for left handers. It also was oddly shaped, was NOT easy to activate/deactivate, and hinged on the wrong side (front instead of back like a 1911). I think Ruger is going to sell a ton of these, but not to me. View Quote I can see why you had an issue with it. I'm thinking about getting a MkIV sometime soon, and in handling the gun in the store, I wasn't a huge fan of the safety either. But at the end of the day, this pistol would just be a plinker, so the actuation ergonomics of the safety is a pretty minor issue for me. But to each their own! |
|
I was looking for an excuse to get one to replace a MkIII 22/45 I have.l but the weird safety kills it for me. I really WANTED to like the MkIV...
|
|
I handled one @ the show. The safety on the right hand side, like a 1911 ambi-safety, was bothersome. But I'll need an ambi-safety for the boy. It's just a part - it can be cut off or reshaped. I don't see how it's a deal killer. There will still be a zillion accessories & parts for it that aren't available for other .22" LR pistols.
|
|
|
You really don't have to replace the hammer and sear. The bushing is removable fairly easy. I just pushed mine out and replaced it with one of the aftermarket bushing and spacers made for the Mark IV. This eliminated the magazine safety and improved the trigger pull. Here's where I purchased mine http://www.triggersgunparts.com/_p/prd1/4589040471/product/mk-iv-magazine-disconnect-delete
Quoted:
The Mark IV is an evolutionary development, so there really aren't any "unknown" bugs. The "known" bugs are easy to deal with, and you will have to deal with them no matter when you buy it. The worst thing is the trigger pull. To improve that, you have to get rid of the magazine disconnector. Just substitute a Mark II hammer and sear. There's a lot of backwards compatibility in this design. While you're at it, ditch the little magazine ejector at the base of the grip. The stock trigger is loose and sloppy. I prefer the Clark steel trigger. To install it, you have square off the front corners of the trigger opening in the frame with a needle file. This is a simple job, but you have to do it carefully. The following is my earlier post on exactly what I did with my pistol: Some of these things, such as the sight, the magazine release, and the grips, are matters of personal taste. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
I'll probably pick one up in a couple years after I make sure there's no bugs to work out, but I won't be selling my older Mk II and III's. The Mark IV is an evolutionary development, so there really aren't any "unknown" bugs. The "known" bugs are easy to deal with, and you will have to deal with them no matter when you buy it. The worst thing is the trigger pull. To improve that, you have to get rid of the magazine disconnector. Just substitute a Mark II hammer and sear. There's a lot of backwards compatibility in this design. While you're at it, ditch the little magazine ejector at the base of the grip. The stock trigger is loose and sloppy. I prefer the Clark steel trigger. To install it, you have square off the front corners of the trigger opening in the frame with a needle file. This is a simple job, but you have to do it carefully. The following is my earlier post on exactly what I did with my pistol: 1. Replaced the "holster-ripper" front sight with a sight from the Ruger Single Six, with the base ground to conform to the Mark IV barrel contour.
2. Removed the magazine disconnector. This is actually an assembly consisting of the hammer, the magazine disconnector itself (which wraps around the hammer), its spring, and the hammer bushing. (The bushing appears to be installed in such a way that it's not easily removable, and it holds the other parts together.) Replaced these parts with a Mark II hammer and bushing. (If you can't find a Mark II hammer, you can do the same thing with a Mark III hammer and Tandemkross bushing.) 3. Replaced the stock sear with a Volquartsen Mark II target sear. This goes a long way toward improving the trigger pull. 4. Replaced the stock trigger with a Clark Custom steel trigger. This required a little fitting. First, the trigger pin hole in the Clark trigger needed just a tiny bit of reaming so that the stock trigger pin would fit. More importantly, I had to do some filing on the frame, at the front of the trigger opening. This is because the Mark IV frame is a one-piece CNC-milled aluminum forging, as compared to the welded-together components of the previous Marks. This difference means that the front inside corners of the trigger opening are rounded, rather than squared. They must be squared off so that the Clark trigger can fit and function correctly. This is a very worthwhile improvement since the stock trigger is very sloppy. In addition, the stock trigger has a nub that engages the magazine. This is totally unnecessary and adversely affects the trigger pull. (The three things that vastly improve the trigger pull are replacement of the trigger, replacement of the sear, and removal of the magazine disconnector.) 5. Removed the little magazine ejector at the base of the grip. This is totally unnecessary once you remove the magazine disconnector. 6. Replaced the magazine release with one from the Mark III. The only difference is that the Mark III release protrudes less. I found that the Mark IV part made it too easy to release the magazine unintentionally. 7. Replaced the stock plastic grips with the laminated wood grips from the Hunter version. This is a vast aesthetic improvement. (Note that the orientation of the medallions on the Mark IV grips is different from that of the previous Marks. They are now perpendicular to the barrel rather than following the slant of the grip.) Some of these things, such as the sight, the magazine release, and the grips, are matters of personal taste. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
It's great. http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h129/Steamedliver/72a274126428f94db2b2bbcc3224293e.jpg http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h129/Steamedliver/f1a402561eceeb6e9bf18fbf1d3cfb5a.jpg View Quote Nice. Please elaborate. |
|
|
I'm assuming the bbl wasn't factory. Who did it? How much, etc? I wish Ruger offered threaded in the regular MK4. Maybe they do and I didn't know it. Thanks.
|
|
Mk4 lite owner here. Its the first ruger Ive bought since my last and only one. Its a mk2.
Because of the new design I was weary of exactly what you described. Im sure a few could escape the factory with that issue, so I checked mine before I took it home. The rear button release is a wedge lock type design. Works pretty well. The only thing I dont like about this gun is it takes a hydraulic press to drop the slide release. After handling a few at the shop it seems this problem is inherent to the lites only. After an inspection I found the release rubs against the inside of the tube from bolt spring pressure. I knocked the top outside edge of it off with a file and that made it a bit better. I think the reg rugers dont have this problem because they're steel, not anodised aluminum which creates more drag on sliding parts. |
|
I just bought the MK 4 22/45 lite. In a word it is awesome. I put a Burris FF3 on it and took it to the range. After 1 sight adjustment I hawged out the center of the target at 15 yd. Super accurate and consistent. The trigger isn't great but not bad either, similar to the Glock. Smooth take up but no grit and breaks around 5lb. As the poster said above, the bolt release is hard to manipulate so I just ended up sling-shoting the bolt. If I had to critical, I don't like the safety as you will inadvertently activate it if you like a high grip. I like the safety on my MK 2 better. Overall, I love this gun.
|
|
All MKlVs manufactured before 6/1/2017 have been recalled due to a design defect that can cause the pistol to fire when the safety is placed in the fire position although the trigger remains untouched.
|
|
I own a mid 1980's Mark III 5.5" Target model that has slop between the frame and the upper receiver. It shoots great, but it definitely bothers me. I used Devcon steel epoxy the last time I had it apart to build up the interference between the forward part of the frame and the underside of the upper receiver. It's better, but not perfect.
|
|
I just ordered a Ruger MKIV Stainless Target. These are post recall. I'll have to get it threaded.
|
|
My kid is getting a MK IV Target for Christmas. Other than sending it in for the recall I doubt I'll change anything on it...may add overtravel/pretravel screws to the trigger...but we'll see.
|
|
Get a recall gun if possible, when you send it in ruger will send you an extra mag, or they did for mine!
I have a competition with hunter grips. |
|
|
The Ruger rep told me that if your safety has a white dot with an "S" in it, it has been fixed or is post recall.
|
|
|
I got a jacked up MKIV from a large online gun shop. The gun was ordered before my SW22, but it took over a week longer to get it. It appeared to have been dropped on the sights. The sights were pretty jacked up, the rear sight blade was broken in half, the grips were scuffed up and the barrel was fucked up. I don't believe it came from Ruger like this. I think the shop I ordered from dropped it and tried to cover it up with touch up bluing on the sights, which would explain why it took so long.
Anyways, one call to Ruger and they had me an RMA and FedEx prepaid shipping label. I just got an email that they are completely replacing my MKIV Stainless Target. Ruger has awesome CS! |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.