Ruger mk2 vs mk4?

[Gumby0961]

Couple days ago my brother came over to help me prepare to move. While there he figured he would grab some of the guns left to us from our late Dad. I do have the majority (90%) so I didn't have a problem with that. He did take the Ruger Mk2 target 7 in., one of my favorites. My question is should I find another mk2 or buy a new mk4.
I never had a problem with reassembling the mk2. I believe my dad installed Volq. trigger. Looking for opinions from those who have shot both.

 

[AlexanderA]

The Mk. 2 is the "classic" of the series. The trigger pull is pretty good right out of the box.

The Mk. 4 is better, but only if you make some modifications. Primarily this involves getting rid of the magazine-disconnect mechanism. (That's mostly responsible for the terrible trigger pull.)

Here are pictures of some of the offending Mk. 4 parts.

Below, from left to right, are (a) the magazine "kicker," which is not necessary if you remove the magazine disconnect, (b) the issue trigger with the "hump" on the back, and (c) a replacement Clark trigger without the hump but with an overtravel adjustment screw.



In the following picture, we see, from left to right, (a) the Mk. 2/3 sear (this is the type you want), (b) the Mk. 3 magazine disconnect mechanism, (c) the Mk. 4 magazine disconnect mechanism (notice how much more complicated it is), and (d) the Mk. 4 "long tail" sear.



For upgrading the Mk. 4, I would recommend getting the Volquartsen sear (available from them separately), and a standard Mk. 2 hammer. The Clark trigger is good, but has been discontinued.

 

[doubleh]

I put the Volquarton kit in my MK Iv. It turned it into a very nice pistol instead of an annoying one all due to the crappy factory trigger these come with. It is a pretty easy job if you use tweezers to install the sear, the slickest, hardest to hold on to little piece of steel I have ever encountered.

 

[Spats McGee]

I've never owned a Mk 2. I did own one Ruger .22 Standard, back before they called them "Mark" anything. It was a good pistol, but I eventually replaced it with a Mk IV. I didn't want to thread the barrel on my old pistol, but I wanted a suppressor host, so I got a Mk IV 22/45 Lite. There's no doubt as to which one has easier takedown, but I'm what you might call "mechanically reclined," so that may or may not be an issue for you. The one real advantage that I see to the Mk IV is that Volquartsen sells "uppers" in their clearance section from time to time. So now, I have the Lite and for about $150 all total (upper, transfer, tax, shipping, and a set of sights), I also have a 22/45 Target pistol. My best guess is that the uppers that VQ sells are from Mk IVs, not 22/45s, but my pistol runs like a champ with either upper.

 

[1KPerDay]

Of those choices I’d personally get a MKII. I don’t care for the whale nostrils of the MKIV nor the safeties nor the disconnect guts.

 

[doubleh]

I don’t care for the whale nostrils of the MKIV nor the safeties nor the disconnect guts.

I suppose I am just dense but what the heck are whale nostrils on the gun? To me the safety seems to operate just like other safeties and has the option of removing the right side. The Volquartson kit solves the disconnect problem while producing a very nice trigger.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

I prefer the MKII.

 

[tlf65]

I have a 7in MKII Target with a great factory trigger, I would like to have the new style mag release but I'm staying with the MKII

 

[MrShooter]

For my 2 cents, I'd look for one of the 75th anniversary MK IVs, they're beautiful, look like an original but are easy to clean. My ffl had one but it's for his trap club raffle. It was right at 500 I believe.

 

[Lefty38-55]

I suppose I am just dense but what the heck are whale nostrils on the gun?

My guess is the barrel/receiver pivot pin ... says me, a MkII owner.

 

[zeke]

Recently bought 2 Mark IV's, and their triggers were simply atrocious. May not have felt too bad in the store, but they didn't break in and seriously affected accuracy. Both now have Voltz trigger kits , but with the stock springs and have crisp/clean 3 lb triggers. My Mark II target never needed a trigger job, but never liked dissembling it for cleaning.

 

[tuckerdog1]

Never handled a MKIV, so no opinion good or bad. But very happy with my MKIIs. Don't even mind the cleaning regiment.

 

[AlexanderA]

The Volquartson kit solves the disconnect problem while producing a very nice trigger.

I don't like the Volquartsen kit for two reasons:
(a) the hammer is skeletonized, which supposedly speeds up lock time, but reduces the weight of the hammer fall and thus possibly reduces ignition reliability, and
(b) the trigger has an odd profile.

The Volquartsen sear (part of the kit) is good, and is available from them separately. That alone solves most of the trigger pull problem, once you have gotten rid of the pesky magazine disconnect.

The stock Mark 2 hammer works well with the Volquartsen sear.

I really like the Clark trigger. You have to find them on the secondary market (such as ebay) because Clark discontinued them. When installing on a blued Mark 4 (not stainless), you have to square off the front of the trigger opening with a needle file. This is a 5 minute job. But it's the sear, not the trigger itself, that makes the actual difference in the trigger pull.

 

[doubleh]

I don't like the Volquartsen kit for two reasons:
(a) the hammer is skeletonized, which supposedly speeds up lock time, but reduces the weight of the hammer fall and thus possibly reduces ignition reliability, and
(b) the trigger has an odd profile.

The Volquartsen sear (part of the kit) is good, and is available from them separately. That alone solves most of the trigger pull problem, once you have gotten rid of the pesky magazine disconnect.

The stock Mark 2 hammer works well with the Volquartsen sear.

I really like the Clark trigger. You have to find them on the secondary market (such as ebay) because Clark discontinued them. When installing on a blued Mark 4 (not stainless), you have to square off the front of the trigger opening with a needle file. This is a 5 minute job. But it's the sear, not the trigger itself, that makes the actual difference in the trigger pull.

The MK IV hammer works well with the kit too. I left mine in. No light strikes and a 2# trigger pull.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I've never seen any reason to move on from the Standard Target... .

 

[1KPerDay]

I suppose I am just dense but what the heck are whale nostrils on the gun?

That’s just my term for the (to me) very unsightly front pivot pin and cutout for the newfangled rapid takedown. It destroys the looks of a very classic attractive pistol and is IMO completely unnecessary. I realize most people don’t care and they love the quick takedown.

 

[doubleh]

That’s just my term for the (to me) very unsightly front pivot pin and cutout for the newfangled rapid takedown. It destroys the looks of a very classic attractive pistol and is IMO completely unnecessary. I realize most people don’t care and they love the quick takedown.

I have never paid any attention to them. The only time I have ever taken mine down was to install the Volquartson trigger kit. To clean it and my MK III I lock the bolt back, drop the mag, and spray the innards out with Supertech carb cleaner (Walmart and doesn't bother finishes), blow out with hi-pressure air, and repeat. Then I spray the inside with dry lube. I am currently using Hoppe's version because that was what was available at our Farm & ranch store when I ran out of Remington's brand. I can tell no difference between the two except for the name on the container. Both guns stay fairly clean using the dry lube and don't have hic-cups shooting CCI-SV.

 

[AlexanderA]

The MK IV hammer works well with the kit too. I left mine in. No light strikes and a 2# trigger pull.

I suppose the Mark 4 hammer would work, but if you notice in my picture (earlier in this thread), it's part of the magazine disconnect assembly. You'd have to go to the trouble of disassembling it, and even then, the hammer would have notches and cutouts that would be irrelevant to the application. The Mark 2 hammer is simply the more elegant solution once you get rid of the magazine disconnect.

 

[doubleh]

It does it's job with no trouble at all and I am perfectly happy with it. That is what counts in my book and since it is out of sight I could not care less about elegance. Performance is the goal after all.

 

[roval]

one thing i don't like with the mark 2 over the mark 4 is the heel magazine release but after shooting my mark 2 for years and then going to a mark 4, i still find myself fiddling with the now gone heel release.

 

[bannockburn]

I am quite pleased with my Mk. II with a great trigger right out of the box. Have looked at the Mk.IVs on a number of occasions and while I like the easy access design I think Ruger needs to do a better job with the trigger.

 

[Gumby0961]

I figure I need to buy a new mk4 and trade it to my brother for the mk2.

 

[AlexanderA]

I think Ruger needs to do a better job with the trigger.

This is Ruger's way of keeping aftermarket suppliers like Tandemkross and Volquartsen in business. It's a symbiotic relationship. It's like remora fish attaching themselves to sharks. There are benefits for both sides.

Also, by putting lawyer-suggested features, like the magazine disconnector, into the pistol, Ruger insulates itself from liability claims. It knows full well that customers will remove these features, but then the "fault" is on them.

 

[357smallbore]

Bought my MKII back in the mid 90's. It is a 6in standard blued model. Paid $219 for it new. One of the best most fun guns I own. Super accurate, reliable is an understatement and it just looks damn nice. Eats everything I put in it. I have had ftf once in awhile, but that's expected with 22lr bulk ammo.
This gun ain't going anywhere.

 

[nettlle]

Ruger got it right with the MKll's.