Good Grief! Another Mark IV Recall?

S

SGW Gunsmith

Moderator
The parade of Ruger Mark IV pistols heading back and forth from Ruger hasn't even died down and we find another "issue" with the newly introduced Ruger Mark IV. Oh Lord! What could that be?

WWSiNWNl.jpg


The firing pins are breaking on a more than regular basis, and in many instances, the free moving firing pin tip is then, imprinting chamber mouth dings in the breech face. Seems some engineer had a "brain fart" that involved putting a #30 diameter lightening hole too close to where the radius where the firing pin stop pin and firing pin collide. :eek:
My recommendation? Cease and desist with shooting your Ruger Mark IV pistol until you can change out that Mark IV firing pin for the old style, solid firing pin. The firing pin on the bottom:

xMvqwEOl.jpg


Maybe with this recall, folks will get a "tin-foil hat" rather than a new magazine.
 
Is this a conclusion you have arrived at on your own, or has there been a Ruger recall on this issue? I have not returned mine for the first issue, maybe I can get them to take of them both at the same time.
 
Okay, while I have never torn apart a 1950's Ruger semi-auto, we all know the design started back then and fundamentally... they got it "right." I have no idea if the original firing pin design made it all the way from 1949 until now.

Yeah, that's a long route to ask this question: What is the purpose for this added 'lightening' hole? Has this firing pin been too heavy for 60 years and now it needs to be more svelte?
 
Aside from the obvious second hole, the earlier firing pin appears to be dimensional different from the MKIV firing pin. I don't know, maybe just the picture? I assume the MKIII firing pin is a direct replacement?

Jim
 
More evidence that Ruger rushed the Mark IV out after S&W came out with their Victory.

Which is a bit ironic considering the folks at S&W can claim a victory over Ruger on the best, latest, and safest .22 target pistol.
 
Damn. I have around 25,000 rounds through my Mark II Target Competition since I bought it in 2011 or 2012. No issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
I seriously don't find removing/reinstalling the main spring assembly to be that big of a deal in my 22/45 or my MK II, or my MK II Government.

While I give Kudos to Ruger for changing things up and addressing a common complaint, it seems like they rushed a design and I can't help thinking it was informed by a desire to sell people a replacement for what they had.

After all, if you have no issues with the takedown of a MK II, why get a MK III or a MK IV?

[agreed: MK III was for California market requirements- and is now not available here.:rolleyes:]


Is it just me, or are the MK IV tabs/wings on the bolt just as bad to grab as the MK III?

My MK II is better there.
 
A very old rule of thumb was to have at least one diameter of material between hole and edge.
How is the part made ? Stamped sheet metal or the wonder material MIM?
 
Hmm, not seeing official about this. Just got mine back for the safety recall - even though I couldn't seem to get mine to misbehave beforehand. What does "more than regular" mean?
 
They should have stuck with the Mark II and left well enough alone or even the Mark I despite the "none modern" no slide lock after the last shot and heel clip mag release, these are totally utilitarian .22 auto loaders.

I have had a mark II, 22/45 for about 20 years, countless number of rounds, and no problems at all.

...I think the old saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is says all.
 
But it was broke... A massive design failure of epic stupidity and unneccesary complexity.

Just stating the obvious.

Boo. :D
 
Your right Turtlehead...somewhat of a pain to field strip, even the earlier marks.

But it doesn't need to be field stepped very often if at all....Massad Ayoob wrote about one they had and I'm sure it was a MK I, that had something like 10,000 rounds through it. IIRC, It was NEVER even cleaned let alone field stripped.

He wrote about it in one of his handgun books, I think...Maybe someone on the forum can recall the article?
 
Oh wow, maybe we should get a replacement from Sarona Gun Works?

Misleading thread title and obvious product placement. I thought this type of advertisement wasn't allowed on this board?
 
Last edited:
good IV nothing?

Another issue with the new MK?

I'll stick with my MK I that I shoot in competition and has yet to disappoint after 500,00+ rounds.

Don't "fix" it if it aint broke!
 
The older pistols are difficult to disassemble in comparison to others... Especially for new owners or those less familiar with firearms.

It is possible to get the hammer strut hung up in such a way as to make it very difficult to get unhung, making assembly impossible until it's fixed.

I am fairly well versed in firearms and their function, and read the manual several times, and I still had issues the first time I went to put my Mk III together... (Ask how I know about the hammer strut thing)

Now my 22/45 is much easier to disassemble and reassemble.

The easy disassembly and the lower frame being made from one piece... Those are definitely improvements to the design... Whether you think you need to disassemble/clean a Mk pistol or not... Being able to do so easily is a good thing.

If there still a problem with the firing pin, then that's an issue for them to fix. An engineer not adhering to edge minimums is an oversight for sure...

But that isn't a reason to dismiss the easy disassembly feature. It's not related at all. Why they changed the firing pin, I don't know, seems an unnecessary change.

You can't really dismiss the design on the whole either... It's basically at it's core much the same.


Every pistol model ever made has had some issues... But designs that have been around a while, seem to illicit bigger reaction and criticism when an update has issues...

Always "not as good as it used to be" kind of things.


On the whole, modern machining and manufacturing techniques are superior to the old ones. Computer controlled machines are much more precise.

The biggest thing I see that limits quality, is the use of tooling past it's prime, leaving tooling marks on some items... Or running the machines at higher speeds, which limits their ability to hold tight tolerances. Also the use by some companies of less than stellar casting and mim parts. (Not that those types of parts are always bad, they can be made very well if done correctly)

And the biggest...

Lack of hand fitting and finishing... So you get less polished and blended fit of parts.

My Mk III is an example... The welded frame is horrendous inside, they took no effort to clean up the welds inside. The polishing of the frame and subsequent blueing is lack luster as well.

Manufacturing capabilities now are superior, if you are willing to pay for it... Not many are.
 
No, I haven't arrived at this conclusion on my own. Firing pins have been breaking on a regular basis. If/when you do send your Mark IV in for the recall, you might consider mentioning the firing pin.
It has been reported from those who didn't notice the broken firing pin that "chamber mouth dings" have resulted from the pin then going too far forward. As always, it's your choice as to what you want to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top