Ruger mark iv won't clean

I have a Ruger 22/45, owned it or about 11 years, a few thousand rounds have gone down the barrel. never cleaned it, never had it apart, am afraid to try to take it apart. I have sprayed it liberally with brake cleaner, blew out the innards with compressed air, then liberally doused it with clp.

I read this thread because I was wondering about cleaning it. I have never had any buildup in the bore that did not come clean with a brush and a few patches. I would love to know the outcome of the OP's problem and if it ends up getting sent back.

David
 
I'm at a loss for what to do. It feels wrong that I have had so many issues with this gun. I have maintained other firearms in the exact same manor as this one and have never had any issues. This gun has been sent back to ruger twice already and it has been in their possession longer than it has been in mine. I use only CCI ammo, I clean with Hoppes 9, rem oil, some patches and copper wire brush. I don't know what could be causing this.
 
Try applying a liberal amount of a good but not an overly aggressive ammonia-based solvent (I've had good results with Shooter's Choice) to the bore and let it sit overnight before removing it with patches. On occasion, more time works better than more scrubbing when it comes to removing all powder, lead and copper residues.
 
Try this old trick that we used to do on old, dark, dirty military surplus barrels.

Find a rubber or plastic plug that fits your barrel end.
Fill your barrel with Hoppes No. 9.
Let it sit upright with the fluid in it.
Leave it for a day or two.
After that let the fluid out and then brush out the bore
And put several patches through it using either more Hoppes or
Break Free CLP.

That process used to do wonders in those old Mil Surp. Rifles with dark, real dirty bores.
 
I clean with Hoppes 9, rem oil, some patches and copper wire brush. I don't know what could be causing this.
Click to expand...
You use a solvent that dissolves copper (#9), and , you use a copper brush with that solvent.........and you're at a loss as to what's going on?!?!?

Let's run that again....copper brush with copper eating solvent.....


Try some Ballistol & a nylon brush....
 
I would not get too quick to feel stupid. OK, you use a copper solvent with a copper brush. so tell me how that combination leaves residue of the copper brush IN the bore, and lets it attach it so tenaciously. Probably the brush is brass, which while having copper in it, is not likely to release copper particles so easily and deposit them in your bore. I think you need to keep looking for an answer to your issue.

David
 
...so tell me how that combination leaves residue of the copper brush IN the bore, and lets it attach it so tenaciously.
Click to expand...
Take a bronze/brass bristle brush and use it to vigorously brush a piece of steel and look at the steel when you're done.

Now imagine some copper solvent in the mix. The copper solvent will dissolve the copper/brass/bronze residue left by the brush creating a bluish/green color.

You patch out the bore and then brush it again with the bore cleaner and the brass/bronze brush. More green on the patches. Repeat as many times as you like. The brass/bronze brush leaves a residue in the bore that the bore cleaner will turn green. Every time. Every time the patches will come out green.

It's not that it attaches tenaciously, it's that you're constantly redepositing more "fouling" every time you use the brush.
This is an expensive gun and personally one of the reasons I'd pay the extra is because of it's good looks/beauty. For me that includes insides as well as outsides.
Click to expand...
If it's shooting accurately and not malfunctioning then there's really not a problem unless part of why the gun was purchased was to admire how spotless the inside of the bore is.

Even then, it's not a problem that the manufacturer should be contacted about because no manufacturer I know guarantees that the inside of their firearms bores will be pretty. They guarantee them to work and generally to shoot with reasonable accuracy.

Bores are difficult to get clean if, by clean, the person means that it must shine like new steel. I can do it, but it requires alternating a combination of at least two solvents, brushing with a bronze/brass brush, cleaning with tight patches and a half hour or more of work. Usually it also requires finishing up with a mild abrasive on a tightly fitting patch to polish out the last of the fouling and get the bore looking like it's brand new. That's for a gun that hasn't been shot a lot with a bore that's pretty smooth. It's a lot more work for a gun with a rough bore that has been shot a lot since the last time it was cleaned back to shiny metal.

When I first started out shooting, I was under the impression that if you didn't clean back to absolutely shiny bare metal every time you weren't doing a good job of cleaning. That was a lot of years ago. Over the decades I have learned that as long as the gun is functioning properly and shooting accurately enough to please the shooter, the bore is clean enough.
 
Wow do I feel stupid. Just ordered a cotton and nylon bore brush on Amazon. That should definetly fix the issue.
Click to expand...
No harm, no foul....
I'll tell you some time about how the laser sight on my wife's Browning Buckmark got all gooked up once and quit working.
Like a total idiot, my first reaction was to tuern the gun towards my head & try to see if the thing was still working.

Talk about feeling stupid!

(P.S. - - I did stop myself from doing it though at the last second!)

Anyhow, the reccomendation for switching over to Ballistol still holds - along with the nylon brush.
 
This is an expensive gun and personally one of the reasons I'd pay the extra is because of it's good looks/beauty. For me that includes insides as well as outsides.
Click to expand...
If it's shooting accurately and not malfunctioning then there's really not a problem unless part of why the gun was purchased was to admire how spotless the inside of the bore is.
Click to expand...
To each their own. I'm pretty sure that manufacturers care about more than mere functionality. There are product features and there are product benefits... they put money into advertising both.
 
I have had pretty good results with Bore Tech’s Chameleon Gel™.

http://www.boretech.com/products/btck-40002

I find that Hoppe's #9 (new formulation) works great with powder fouling.

The same goes for Hoppe's Elite and M-Pro 7.

The EPA ruined them when certain chemicals were banned, specifically the nitrobenzene. The poor guys have struggled ever since to create something that will work, but their resources are limited now.

I have used Montana Xtreme products and the Bore Tech products with good success.

Also, the Sharp Shoot R products, specifically Wipe Out Foaming Bore cleaner with /the Accelerator is excellent for removing stubborn copper fouling.
 
I'm pretty sure that manufacturers care about more than mere functionality.
Click to expand...
Of course they do, but this is about the inside of the bore, not the appearance of the gun.

Manufacturers (most of them, anyway) try hard to make their products attractive and are generally amenable to claims that a new gun's appearance has been damaged or is substandard and should be replaced/repaired. But it's stretching things more than just a little bit to imply that a rough bore on a gun that shoots well is a problem that a manufacturer should be expected to fix at their cost because it affects the "looks/beauty" of the gun. And that would even be true on a new gun, let alone one that's had between 1000 and 2000 rounds through it.
 
It's a matter of standards, and where one wishes to draw the line. A bad bore is never going to perform better than a good bore unless significantly more time is put into maintaining it and agonizing over how to get out persistently accumulating crud out. It's a defect that has consequences. Manufactures should take care of a gun with a defect even if it's not visible from the outside. Or should we just settle for crap now? It's not as if they (generally... and not specifically Ruger) aren't trying to cut every corner possible. Most products these days are built with enough care and attention to get them off the shelves and subsequently out of/past the warranty period. That's not good enough. There are exceptions of course especially with some optics manufacturers, or rather brands. I wouldn't settle.
Just my 2c.

Edit: I guess, what I'm saying is I'd give my money to a manufacturer who did care enough. Unicorn right?
 
Last edited:
A bad bore is never going to perform better than a good bore...
Click to expand...
Now that's a different story. Up until now your comments have been specifically focused on appearance, not performance/functionality.

"This is an expensive gun and personally one of the reasons I'd pay the extra is because of it's good looks/beauty. For me that includes insides as well as outsides."
"I'm pretty sure that manufacturers care about more than mere functionality."

I've been specifically responding to that comment and explicitly qualifying my statements in each of my responses:

"If it's shooting accurately and not malfunctioning..."
"They guarantee them to work and generally to shoot with reasonable accuracy."
"...as long as the gun is functioning properly and shooting accurately enough to please the shooter..."
"...a rough bore on a gun that shoots well..."

I've been responding that way because the OP hasn't made any comments at all about function or accuracy problems.
It's a defect that has consequences.
Click to expand...
IF it has performance consequences and can be shown to be the fault of the manufacturer then it is a defect that the manufacturer should remedy.

If it is not affecting performance then it's not really a defect/"bad bore" since no manufacturer that I'm aware of guarantees the inside of their bores to be pretty or smooth.
Or should we just settle for crap now?
Click to expand...
Absolutely not! But this isn't about settling for crap. Up until the last post when you switched gears, what it was about was dreaming up a new "defect" (i.e. The inside of the bore isn't good looking/beautiful enough.) and expecting a gun manufacturer to deal with it free of charge.
 
I'm talking about how much elbow grease it would cost to keep it in a shootable condition with reasonable accuracy. Too much, and that's a defect...whether you like the look of it or not. I've been on the fence with the MkIV. But the more I read the more I hear people making excuses for it.
Over and Out...
 
I'm talking about how much elbow grease it would cost to keep it in a shootable condition with reasonable accuracy.
Click to expand...
If, indeed, the owner were having problems with accuracy or shootability, (which he has not claimed) and could demonstrate that it was due to a manufacturing problem (which might be difficult given that the gun has had 1000-2000 rounds through it), then it would be reasonable to expect the manufacturer to deal with it.

That is precisely why I asked the question about function and accuracy in my initial response.

If you've abandoned your initial position focusing on looks/beauty and are now talking about function/shootability and accuracy then your position has changed sufficiently that we now agree.
I've been on the fence with the MkIV. But the more I read the more I hear people making excuses for it.
Click to expand...
I'm not making excuses for the Ruger MkIV. I couldn't care less what people think about them. I don't have one and never intend on buying one. I gave up on the Ruger Mk .22LR pistol line 13 years ago when Ruger decided to add a magazine safety and loaded chamber indicator.

I'm not even making excuses for Ruger. I would make the same comments in any discussion where someone was advocating returning any gun to any manufacturer solely because of the bore appearance. Because no gun manufacturer that I am aware of makes any claims, either stated or implied, about the pleasing appearance of the inside of the barrels of their firearms.

If you're still on the fence, let me help you a little. Buy a Buckmark.
 
The new brushes more or less solved the issue. I shot it while I was still having issues with the gunk but there were no performance issues at all. I am a terrible shot with most handguns but I shot very well. I guess it helps when the barrel extends half way to the target... but it shot well and the issue seemed mostly resolved
 
Good to hear that..
Thanks for the feedback.

Just remember when you're shooting at a target to keep your focus on the gun's sights and not try to look at the target to see where the shots are going.

Just "assume" in your mind that all the shots are going right where you want them to go.

Do that, and you'll find that when you check your targets that things are a whole lot tighter than they were before (shots are much closer together).

That and ignore the fact that you're shooting a .22.
Don't fall into the trap that because the ammunition is inexpensive, you can afford to flub a shot or two or three or four.

That's the number one reason why I never recommend a .22 to a new shooter. As a second or third gun,,yes,,but,,never as a beginner gun.
 
That and ignore the fact that you're shooting a .22.
Don't fall into the trap that because the ammunition is inexpensive, you can afford to flub a shot or two or three or four.

That's the number one reason why I never recommend a .22 to a new shooter. As a second or third gun,,yes,,but,,never as a beginner gun.
Click to expand...

I never thought of this rationale for not starting a new shooter off with a .22. I'm not sure I agree entirely but you make a good point.
 
Have to disagree with that logic. The .22 is perfect for beginners. Low recoil and cheap to shoot means they will continue shooting it. They will learn from their mistakes. If you want to preserve ammo or slow them down, give them a single shot rifle to start. I got my daughter a CZ Scout. It comes with a single shot adapter. When she was ready to shoot more the mags from my other 452 models fit it just fine. I can see not giving a new shooter a 10/22 with a 25 round mag, but trying to start them off with 9mm or some other more expensive ammo kind of defeats the purpose of getting a new shooter at the line and letting them practice. Airguns are also an excellent training aid, but the springers are always very easy to shoot, a pump up style pellet gun isn't so picky about the "artillery" hold. Target shooting is fun, no matter what caliber you are shooting, but I still love shooting .22's even though I have others to choose from. The .22 ammo shortage seems to be easing up now too. Great excuse to get some new shooters out there going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top