Jesse H
Member
Wonder if this is part of the reason I'm having zero luck finding a MKIV 22/45 with a threaded barrel in stock anywhere.
Mark IV Recall
- Thread starter Jack B.
- Start date
- Status
Confederate
Member
The nasty part of the problem is that if the gun goes click, and you manipulate the safety, the gun may go off.
I don't always send my guns in for recalls, but I think I'd do this one. I have a S&W 686 no-dash I haven't sent back because it's a collection piece with a stamped sideplate. It's never been shot and I have another one I shoot. I asked friends at the range when the recall was first announced and they said they've never seen one malfunction. I can't even remember why it was recalled now. I had a 4-inch one at the time I never sent in and that one also never malfunctioned.
I don't always send my guns in for recalls, but I think I'd do this one. I have a S&W 686 no-dash I haven't sent back because it's a collection piece with a stamped sideplate. It's never been shot and I have another one I shoot. I asked friends at the range when the recall was first announced and they said they've never seen one malfunction. I can't even remember why it was recalled now. I had a 4-inch one at the time I never sent in and that one also never malfunctioned.
Trey Veston
Member
Pretty sure I'm done buying Ruger garbage, as I've had issues with two out of the three guns I've bought from them the past year. They were great years ago, but are now turning into Taurus or Remington. Every gun forum I'm on there are multiple reports of issues with Rugers.
45_auto
Member
trey weston said:
Is there such a thing as a gun forum without multiple reports of issues with every gun made? I'm on a lot of gun forums, and every one of them has multiple reports of issues with guns from every manufacturer, pretty much just like yours with no background or validation. I ignore them all and haven't had any problems.
AlexanderA
Member
Test your gun yourself. If after numerous tries, you can't replicate the problem that has been identified, why send it in? It might be best to leave well enough alone.
A lot of people have invested a lot of time and money to upgrade their Mark IV's trigger pull (which is the weak point of the pistol, out of the box). So now some of them are saying that they will remove their aftermarket parts and return the pistol to "stock" condition before sending it in. Then, when they get it back from Ruger, they will reinstall their aftermarket parts. This will leave them back exactly where they started, except for the little "pretend" "S" on the safety, which will falsely give the impression that the pistol contains the Ruger upgrade. When you stop to think about it, this is really silly.
Rumor has it that Ruger's "upgrade" is nothing more than a rollback to the Mark III sear. I'm waiting to see pictures of the substituted parts.
I might add that the Mark IV's stock 5.5 lb. trigger pull makes it unusable for its intended purpose as a target pistol. Ruger, listening it its lawyers, has progressively mucked up a fine design, leaving it to the aftermarket to make the necessary corrections. So, when you look at prices for Mark IV's, add another $100 or so to have a usable pistol. (The recall doesn't address this issue in the slightest.)
A lot of people have invested a lot of time and money to upgrade their Mark IV's trigger pull (which is the weak point of the pistol, out of the box). So now some of them are saying that they will remove their aftermarket parts and return the pistol to "stock" condition before sending it in. Then, when they get it back from Ruger, they will reinstall their aftermarket parts. This will leave them back exactly where they started, except for the little "pretend" "S" on the safety, which will falsely give the impression that the pistol contains the Ruger upgrade. When you stop to think about it, this is really silly.
Rumor has it that Ruger's "upgrade" is nothing more than a rollback to the Mark III sear. I'm waiting to see pictures of the substituted parts.
I might add that the Mark IV's stock 5.5 lb. trigger pull makes it unusable for its intended purpose as a target pistol. Ruger, listening it its lawyers, has progressively mucked up a fine design, leaving it to the aftermarket to make the necessary corrections. So, when you look at prices for Mark IV's, add another $100 or so to have a usable pistol. (The recall doesn't address this issue in the slightest.)
Last edited:
doubleh
Member
Actually the Volquartson Mk IV and Mk II/III sears are slightly different. I installed a Mk II sear in my Mk IV after reading that it would work on another forum. It did not function correctly. I replaced it with the Volquartson kit and compared the two sears side by side and there are slight differences between the two. The Volquartson Mk IV sear performs exactly as they say it will and gave me the 2 1/2# trigger pull as advertised. I have spent quite a little time trying to get my Mk IV to duplicate the unsafe situation with the Volquartson kit installed and it will not do it. The safety is either on or off and will not stop in a middle position.
AlexanderA
Member
Were you trying to keep the Mark IV hammer with its wrap-around magazine disconnector? Part of the process of improving the Mark IV's trigger pull is to ditch everything having to do with the magazine disconnect. I'm using a Mark II hammer and it obviously works well with a Mark II-type sear.
Of course, if you install the complete Volquartsen kit, including their "speed" hammer, you don't have a compatibility problem. I never trusted the lightened speed hammer. It seems to me it would result in a faster, but lighter, hammer blow and less reliable ignition.
That's because of the ball detent and spring on the safety. BTW, these parts are easily lost in careless disassembly. I suspect that the "intermediate position" being talked about in Ruger's recall notice may be at least partially due to incorrect reassembly, omitting these critical parts. One improvement that Ruger could make to the safety would be to stake in the detent, so that it doesn't fly out during disassembly.
The Mark IV sear with its long "tail" is obviously trouble-prone. Just look at it! It's like a Rube Goldberg device. This is a perfect example of over-engineering.
ClickClickD'oh
Member
I'm pretty sure the Remington 700 had been on the market a few years...
red rick
Member
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2009
- Messages
- 3,140
Is that the only other firearm recall you know of ? I think firearm companies are more responsible now . Remington did the wrong thing in the pass and now they are making it right . They have made a few recalls lately on newly released modles and didn't wait 50 years to do it .
Trey Veston
Member
What validation would you like, or accept?
Would you like the official defect rate of the manufacturer and model? Good luck, because firearms manufacturers don't release those figures. Consumers have had to rely on accounts from other owners and gun shop feedback for decades. My brother needed a deep concealment weapon for undercover work. He settled on either the XDS or Shield in 9mm. He went to the gun shop in town and talked to the gun guy. He told him that they have had several Shields needing to go back to S&W for repair and not a single XDS has had issues. He bought the XDS.
45_auto
Member
For each example you want to give of a "gun guy" at a gun shop claiming that one brand has problems and selling a different brand I can easily give you an example of the opposite situation.
My personal experiences have been that sales people (guns, cars, houses, boats, airplanes, etc) tend to not be the most honest people in the world. They are in it to make money and will many times, to put it nicely, "embellish" the actual facts to sway your opinion towards the outcome most favorable to themselves.
As an example, it's not hard for you to put "XDS problem" (25 pages of posts) or "Shield problem" (24 pages of posts) into the search function on just this forum to see the myraid of problems reported with both the guns your brother was considering. Both were the object of safety recalls a few years ago, XDS for firing when chambering a round or double firing on a single trigger pull, Shield for drop safety problems. Hopefully your brother didn’t buy a used XDS, or if he did it was one that has already been returned for the safety modification.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/personal-defense/update-springfield-armory-xd-s-recall/
http://www.gunsandammo.com/blogs/news-brief/smith-wesson-issues-safety-recall-for-mp-shield-pistols/
My personal experiences have been that sales people (guns, cars, houses, boats, airplanes, etc) tend to not be the most honest people in the world. They are in it to make money and will many times, to put it nicely, "embellish" the actual facts to sway your opinion towards the outcome most favorable to themselves.
As an example, it's not hard for you to put "XDS problem" (25 pages of posts) or "Shield problem" (24 pages of posts) into the search function on just this forum to see the myraid of problems reported with both the guns your brother was considering. Both were the object of safety recalls a few years ago, XDS for firing when chambering a round or double firing on a single trigger pull, Shield for drop safety problems. Hopefully your brother didn’t buy a used XDS, or if he did it was one that has already been returned for the safety modification.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/personal-defense/update-springfield-armory-xd-s-recall/
http://www.gunsandammo.com/blogs/news-brief/smith-wesson-issues-safety-recall-for-mp-shield-pistols/
Tacoma
Member
I'd be curious to know what Volquartzen parts were installed on the guns that still exhibit the problem. THe Vplquartzen accurizing kit containa a new sear, hammer, hammer bushing, disconnector, trigger plunger, plunger spring and trigger. There isn't a whole lot left (other than the safety lever) to go wrong.
Tacoma
Member
All I know, they bought the complete kit direct from Volquartsen. They were among the first to receive one of the dedicated VQ MKIV kits.
I have a couple of MKIII's with full VQ parts installed and have field stripped these guns dozens of times so I never felt the need to jump on the MK!V bandwagon but If I had I would definately send my frame back to Ruger for approved modification.
As an instructor I can visualize lawyers lining up in the event of some ND down the line.
Tacoma
Member
The earlier MK IV kits didn't include the disconnector. Some of the early production MK IV's had reset consistency issues that it seems both Ruger and Volquartzen have recognized . Volquartzen now includes a new disconnector in their kits.
FWIW, The Ruger Std was my first handgun gifted from my dad back in 1973. I'm a big fan of the Ruger MK X series. My favorites are the K II's and have no trouble breaking them down. ( IT's all about the position of the hammer!) I do fell the MK IV is a significant design improvement in several ways from the MK III though. The collection has eight in total right now (including a pair of MK IV's).
AlexanderA
Member
The key part of the Volquartsen kit, IMO, is the sear. I don't like either their trigger (strange profile) or their hammer (huge hole that reduces the weight and speeds up but lightens the hammer blow). In my Mark IV pistol, I'm using a Clark trigger and a Ruger Mark II hammer. As modified, this gun has no safety issues whatsoever. No matter what I do, I cannot replicate the identified safety problem.
Regarding the recall, I'm waiting to see pictures of the Ruger replacement parts (the sear and safety). I strongly suspect that the replacement sear will be something like a reversion to the Mark III sear, and that the safety will simply have a little "S" stamped on it. We shall see. But I doubt that I will be returning my gun to Ruger for this so-called "upgrade."
Regarding the recall, I'm waiting to see pictures of the Ruger replacement parts (the sear and safety). I strongly suspect that the replacement sear will be something like a reversion to the Mark III sear, and that the safety will simply have a little "S" stamped on it. We shall see. But I doubt that I will be returning my gun to Ruger for this so-called "upgrade."
Whether you can or cannot recreate the event Ruger is recalling the gun for is of no relevance in court.
My belief is if a gun is recalled for a safety issue one has to pay attention to what could happen in court if something goes wrong for whatever reason and your gun does not have the "s" on it. Call me crazy but I would sent it in for correction just to protect myself from possible litigation.
My belief is if a gun is recalled for a safety issue one has to pay attention to what could happen in court if something goes wrong for whatever reason and your gun does not have the "s" on it. Call me crazy but I would sent it in for correction just to protect myself from possible litigation.
AlexanderA
Member
I wouldn't argue with you if we were talking about an unaltered, factory-condition Mark IV. But this gun is typically the basis for modifications and alterations, particularly by people who take their target shooting seriously. (The factory 5+ lb. trigger pull is unacceptable for this use.) When an owner changes the sear, trigger, hammer, etc., he pretty much lets Ruger off the hook, liability-wise, and takes the responsibility upon himself. For people who know what they are doing, this is not much of a problem.
So you take your Volquartsen parts out of your pistol, and send the frame back to Ruger along with a baggie containing the original parts. Ruger replaces the sear and safety, reassembles everything, and sends it back to you. You immediately reinstall your Volquartsen parts. You have not altered your liability posture by one iota. This whole thing was an exercise in futility. It's actually absurdly laughable.
- Status
