Anyone yet have a Ruger Mark IV?

V

vito

New member
Not long ago I sold off my Browning Buckmark because I just got tired of the problems I was having with it. I almost bought a Ruger Mark III but then saw an article about the new Mark IV with its extremely simple way to take it apart for cleaning. I'm having a bit of a problem actually finding one at any of the local gun shops but I'm hoping some forum members here have had the chance to own/shoot one and might share their impressions of this newer 22LR pistol.
 
Ive been thinking about a 22 pistol and have been leaning towards Buckmark. I have seen some Mark IVs locally and the stainless hunter sure is purty.
 
Lots of them locally, the new take down procedure is fantastic. FYI - over the past week or so, Ruger has introduced the mark IV in the 22/45 configuration also.
 
When it comes to revolvers I prefer S&W. For semi auto, I prefer Ruger. All of my Ruger semis work flawlessly, the P97, Sr40c, lcp, LC9s.
 
Just bought a Mark IV last Thursday but all I have done is clean it and wipeded down the action with Gig-a-Loo so it's all ready to shoot,we have a ice storm/snow issue going on so I need to wait to get to the shooting range plus I have a picatinny rail ordered for it so I can mount a FastFire III I have sitting on a shelf,would like to have it mounted so I can site it in at the same time.
 
Now that you have the Mark III there really isn't any reason to buy the Mark IV.

Only problem with the III is taking it apart to clean it. Look on YouTube and you will find How To clips that will make it easy to take apart and put back together. It only takes me 5 minutes to reassemble mine after watching the videos.

The trigger is better on the Mark III and there are a lot of companies that have kits to make it even better. Mark IVs have about a 5 lb trigger and Volquartsen is in the process of making a kit for it.
 
Vito,
What was wrong with your Buckmark?

.22s are generally pretty good.
Just about every one I've owned from a major brand has worked very well.
Even some oddballs, too.
Those that haven't could be traced to either ammo or magazine mischief.
Probably any one you choose will serve you well.
 
I inherited my Mark III from my Dad. I made the mistake of taking it apart to clean 10 years ago. I have come to the conclusion it does not need cleaning.
 
While these are currently a "Distributor" version, they will soon be one of the regular production pistols. Patiently waiting on one like below:



Anxious to do some "Ransom Rest" testing of the Ruger Mark II Competition Target, Ruger Mark III Competition Target, Ruger Mark IV Competition Target, Ruger Mark II Government Target, all 6 7/8 inch barrel lengths, and the Browning Buckmark Contour in 7 ¼ barrel length.



 
Last edited:
The only thing wrong with the Mk IV is all the stuff Ruger shorts you on with the new ones. No scope mount, cardboard box instead of plastic case, and the rear sight on the Hunter model just plain sucks. That v-notch is not good with my old eyes. I broke down and bought the scope mount and put a Bushnell TRS-25 on it. The loaded chamber indicator wont be missed, and the way the new magazines eject is pretty sweet.
 
Have the hunter model. Also have a Mark iii target and 22/45. These days, just too many advantages of the Mark IV to consider buying anything else. Just as accurate as my Mark IIIs, very good fit and finish. If only they had dumped the stupid mag disconnect.
 
I had my hands on the new Ruger in my LGS the other day and it was a nice piece. If I were to get a new semi 22 it would be the Ruger.
 
Is the takedown button/latch on the MKIV metal or polymer? Hopefully it is metal which would fit with the overall quality of the pistol. A slab sided MKIV may be in my future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top