NEW Ruger Mark IV

Not open for further replies.
Looks like the "machined" frame is aluminum. I've always been surprised they didn't do aluminum, sooner.
I have three MKII's. I believe that is the pinnacle of the design, but I haven't handled a MKIV yet. It has to be better than the MKIII. I can take down, clean, and reassemble my MKII's in less than five minutes.
Buy a Beretta U22 NEOS if you want one that's simple to take down. Mine happens to shoot just as well as the MKII. It's also not as picky about ammo. I understand why people want things to be simpler. It's why I own Marlin instead of Winchester levers. But I don't see the takedown of a MKII/III to be difficult.

I did buy a Neos a few years ago when I was considering a MKIII. It takes down quickly and mounting an optic to easily it are it's main benefits. In use, the grip is too small and the safety location is horrible. However, the ladies in my family like the size just fine.

Compared to the Neos, I shoot my friend's stock MKIII 22/45 much better. As much as I dislike the take down procedure of the MKIII, I do wish I'd have bought a MKIII (make that MKII) over the Neos.
I haven't had a .22lr pistol since I sold my Ruger MkII. I rarely took apart my MkII to clean since it was such a pain in the rear to get back together. Though that was a double edged sword I suppose since, because I rarely took it apart, I never really learned how to get it back together easily (I understand there is a trick and if you know what you are doing it isn't so tough).

With that problem gone, I can see getting one of these MkIV's. The Rugers are pretty much the best out of the box .22 pistols you can buy, and if they've fixed this one big issue, and assuming the price increase isn't too crazy, I don't see how I have a choice.
Just right now was about to get a S&W Victory 22 and Ruger arrived to ruin my budget again. Glad the wifey does't visit THR. of last Monday, the thing at the top of my priority list was a Mark III Hunter.

Now it's a Mark IV Hunter.

Unfortunately, that's not going to happen before November, so who knows.
I look at this as a win. I don't mind taking down the MK series. Sure, I've had my share of headaches with them, but it's all part of the learning curve.

Right now I am without a Ruger .22 auto pistol. I'll either save for a mk4, or pick up a used MK1-3 from someone trading in theirs to upgrade. I don't care- every ruger .22 auto pistol I've shot has shot great.
Did they ever have one on there? I was surprised when folks were implying that they had taken it off. Come to find out, they had not. Like I said, just don't see a manufacturer taking a safety off a new model. I understand if it was never there..............

The LC9s, and I believe the LC9 before it, had a magazine disconnect. LC9s has a thumb safety. Ruger took these off (again, they were there) and called the slightly different model an LC9s Pro. They still sell the regular (non Pro) model which has both safeties. Like chocolate and vanilla ice cream, you can pick. Similarly, S&W took key locks off of some models. I expect to see more off this as manufacturers give up on certain restrictive markets
Glad to see that the loaded chamber indicator is gone.

I'm surprised that they went to a machined grip frame and also that doing so didn't raise the cost significantly.

Takedown of the older models (don't know about the MkIII--I never bought one) wasn't nearly as hard as everyone makes it out to be. A friend of mine bought a new MkII and I remember visiting his house immediately afterwards. I took it apart on his coffee table with only what I had on my person. Then I adjusted the trigger for him (most MkII models had a trigger with an internally accessible overtravel adjustment) and put it back together. I did have to borrow an allen wrench to adjust the trigger overtravel screw. No drama, no trouble. You do have to follow instructions or you'll cause yourself trouble during reassembly.
It's true that if you read the manual, you can take the gun down and put it back together. But the problem is, if you don't do it all that often, you better have the manual there every time.
It's true that if you read the manual, you can take the gun down and put it back together. But the problem is, if you don't do it all that often, you better have the manual there every time.

Own a bunch of firearms and you have to do this anyway. I can't remember how to take down every handgun I own. Let alone the rifles. Finding the manuals if you don't have one is very simple thanks to the internet.
saw one my lgs. if i knew this was coming i would not have bought my victory and upgraded it. that screw loosens after shooting a bit. the finish is very nice on the ss gun. it looks very much like titanium , darker gray.

you have to get the safety on to lift off the back but i didnt completely take off the upper.

will hold off if i can, i'm assuming they'll have the slabside later on . i prefer the regular sights.
I'm definitely buying one as soon as I can find it. I have the whole series -- Mark I, II, and III -- and this looks like the best yet.

One major complaint I've had with all the Marks is the "holster-ripper" front sight. Years ago, there was an aftermarket replacement called the "Sport-Site" but it is no longer made. Ruger apparently realized that some people were not happy with this sight, and now offers what it calls a "Standard Front Sight" in its web store.

With the Mark IV, the loaded chamber indicator and the internal key lock are gone. That leaves the magazine disconnector as the last "lawyer-mandated" feature. We will figure out a way to remove it.

Regarding triggers, actually the stock trigger on the Mark I was pretty good. Not so much the triggers on the Marks II and III. I replaced those with Clark triggers. Apparently, the stock trigger on the Mark IV is acceptable. We shall see. I may or may not have to replace it.

The Weaver rail, which came included with the Mark III, is no longer part of the package. You have to buy it extra. Better yet, get the Picatinny rail.

Incidentally, the orientation of the grip medallions is different on the Mark IV than on the Mark III. On the Mark III, they line up with the angle of the grip, whereas on the Mark IV, they are perpendicular to the bore. (It's little differences like this that really excite collectors.)
Ruger is getting close to perfection here. My advice for the Ruger Mark V would be:

Lose the magazine disconnector, or include it in the box with instructions on how to install it if you want it.

Add a simple over-travel screw to the trigger blade -- my main complaint about Ruger triggers is you start pulling the trigger in Arkansas, the sear releases at the Arkansas-Louisiana border, and by the time the trigger stops moving, you're treading water in the Gulf of Mexico.

Add a thumb-friendly magazine stud -- I carry a wooden magazine depressor in my pocket that I whittled out one day, just to load the magazine.
I've had all three of the Marks and had no problems with take-down-cleaning of any of them. Just plan on a Saturday morning taking it apart and cleaning, then all Saturday afternoon trying to get it put back together again. That said it looks like I may need to buy a MKIV now if it takes down and reassembly is as easily as they claim. Good job Ruger!
I stick with my Mk II or 22/45 MK III pistols. I've got a bunch of them and they all work just fine.

Vern Humphrey said:
This is another time when I'm seized with an uncontrollable urge NOT to run out and buy the latest new development in firearms.
After spending all the time I've spent learning to take the bloody things apart and putting them back together, I applaud Ruger for making it easier. But I won't be swapping any of mine in for the new ones because it's no longer an issue for me. I don't even need a rubber mallet because there are plenty of surfaces around that will do. The only thing one really needs to keep in mind about the old autos is not to take them apart until they've shot one or two hundred rounds (or it will be very tough to put back together).

Another thing is, I don't like a single button take down. I'd rather press one button, then another. The last thing I'd want in a struggle is to have someone hit that button. In fact, a better idea would be to have to remove the magazine before the button on the back would work.


This is perhaps my favorite model. Lightweight, quick
and a great drawer gun, it's fun to shoot and very accurate.

The last thing I'd want in a struggle is to have someone hit that button.
My guess is that most folks who buy one aren't thinking about using it for self-defense.

That said, the button is on the back of the gun above the grip. Not really easy to access for someone on the muzzle end of the gun. Also I believe the safety must be engaged for the button to work.
My guess is that most folks who buy one aren't thinking about using it for self-defense.
That would be a shame. It's certainly capable of it. Ten shots can be fired in four seconds. I'd hate to walk into that kind of firepower.

If the safety has to be on, that would be perfect.
Not open for further replies.