Quantcast

Ruger Mk III verses IV

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Jimmy Hoffa, May 22, 2019.

  1. Jimmy Hoffa

    Jimmy Hoffa Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2018
    Messages:
    22
    I'm curious how the Ruger 22/45 Mk III compares mechanically to the Mk IV. Does the Mark IV have any weaknesses in comparison?

    I'm obviously not referring to the takedown method.
     
  2. <*(((><
    • Contributing Member

    <*(((>< Luke

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2013
    Messages:
    1,806
    Initially they had a recall for firing pins breaking due to one of the holes being in close proximity to where the firing pin stop contacts causing cracks. There were reports of breech faces being contacted and dinged due to these breakages.

    I have only about 500-600 rounds (not a lot know)through mine but no problems whatsoever.

    I had a Ruger MK III which I sold and bought a MK IV after handling one at a gun store and taking it down in a matter of seconds. The idea of being able to swap uppers in seconds appealed to me as well (just wish Ruger would have serialized the lowers rather than the uppers).
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2019
  3. Jimmy Hoffa

    Jimmy Hoffa Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2018
    Messages:
    22
    That was the info I was looking for. A lot of new guns have teething problems that get resolved.

    I only ask because I am considering a Mk IV 22/45 Lite and didn't know if the Mark III has advantages.

    I presently shoot a modified 22/45 Mark III Target. I take down clean it every 1,000 rounds and it's a simple procedure for me. Here's a note for others, when it's brand new it's a bear to do disassembly and reassembly - tight. After a few times the gun breaks in and so does the owner! Lol Between takedowns I hit it with CLP aerosol and after 30 minutes blow it out with compressed air, then run a bore snake through it.
     
  4. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,822
    Location:
    Virginia
    The magazine-disconnect feature on the Mark IV is more complicated than the one in the Mark III. That makes tuning the trigger more difficult, unless you elect to get rid of the magazine disconnect altogether. (That would involve installing a Mark II hammer or similar, or spacers.)

    On the plus side, the Mark IV no longer has the loaded-chamber indicator.
     
  5. doubleh

    doubleh Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,213
    Location:
    NM-south of I-40
    I have a MK IV Target and love it. I did not love the factory trigger. My solution was to install the Volquartson trigger kit which pretty much solves all the quirks of the MK IV.
     
  6. alfsauve

    alfsauve Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    636
    Location:
    N. GA
    Of course the MK IV can't use MK III mags, unless you file down the back of the MK III magazine bottom plate, or cut a notch in the back of the grip of the MK IV. I did the latter.

    On one of MK IV 22/45s the bolt release pins, which is press fit in the release plate, kept coming loose. I just took it out altogether. I can only release the bolt by pulling back on the bolt.
     
  7. mgmorden

    mgmorden Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,821
    Location:
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Easier take-down. Less lawyer features than the Mk III but more than the older 1's and 2's.

    Personally my preference on Ruger pistols would be Mk II > Mk 1/Std > Mk IV > Mk III
     
  8. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,822
    Location:
    Virginia
    I would agree with you if you kept them the way they came, right out of the box. But the later Marks cry out for customization. IMO the Mark IV is the best if you remove the magazine disconnect and do the other things you need to do to lighten the trigger pull. Admittedly that's creating a sort of hybrid, but still the Mark IV is the best basis for that simply because of the new takedown system.
     
    <*(((>< likes this.
  9. gregp74

    gregp74 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2015
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Rockford, IL
    That's what I ended up doing. Love my Mk IV now! I loved my Mk III also, but I don't miss fighting with it to break it down.
     
  10. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,822
    Location:
    Virginia
    I don't like the Volquartsen skeletonized hammer, which is supposed to reduce lock time but may result in light primer strikes. They say it doesn't, but I prefer a standard (Mark II) hammer anyway.

    I also don't like the profile of the Volquartsen trigger, as compared to the standard trigger. Actually, I use a Clark trigger on mine, which is like the Ruger trigger except that it's steel, with tighter tolerances.

    You get something like 90% of the benefit of the Volquartsen kit from their sear alone, which is available separately for a fraction of the cost of the entire kit.
     
  11. doubleh

    doubleh Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,213
    Location:
    NM-south of I-40
    Everyone has their preferences and I'm a firm believer in doing what YOU prefer and not what someone else does so I have no quarrel with your preferences, just different ones. I don't like the shape of the stock Ruger trigger and also don't care for the TandenKross straight trigger. I do like the Volquartson trigger and find it about perfect. I also wanted 100% of the benefits of the kit, not just 90%. I am very satisfied with the performance of the gun with the kit and have had exactly zero problems after the installation. It's what I prefer. If I ever buy another MK IV it will get the kit because I'm that happy with it.
     
  12. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,822
    Location:
    Virginia
    There is no rule that says you have to get all your upgrade parts from a single source. I believe I have achieved 100% of what Volquartsen offers, but using parts from Clark,Tandemkross -- and even Ruger -- as well as Volquartsen. You are right, though, that each person does what they prefer.

    Note also that the upgrade involves the deletion of parts as well as the addition or substitution of parts. The magazine disconnect, the nub on the back of the trigger, and the little magazine "kicker" at the base of the grip all have to go (IMO).
     
  13. uofaengr

    uofaengr Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2019
    Messages:
    92
    Location:
    AL
    The VQ hammer does induce light strikes. I probably had 7 or 8 out of 10 light strikes per mag after installing the trigger kit. I'd read elsewhere that VQ would send you one of their firing pins (which I found out needs to be replaced anyway) if you let them know about your issues, and that's exactly what VQ did. That was over a year ago and haven't had a light strike since, but I don't know what they're doing these days about it.

    Back in the day, I was considering a Mk III and got a really nice Buckmark instead. If the Mk IV hadn't came out, I wouldn't own one. Love the one I have now, but the trigger that comes in it, much like a 10/22, is pure garbage.
     
  14. George Dickel

    George Dickel Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    636
    Location:
    Florida
    I've had 3 Mark III's and my main complaint is breaking it down for cleaning. I did install a complete Volquartsen kit and the magazine disconnect which made the trigger a lot nicer than the factory one. I've been tempted to buy a Buckmark because of the easier take down, just haven't decided to spend the money yet. The Mark IV is enticing but I'll probably just stay with the Mark III. You don't really have to take one down that often to clean them.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice