Home > Firearms Forums > Rimfire Forum > New Ruger .22

New Ruger .22

  1. I am looking at 22LR pistols. Ruger seems to have a strong following, but I've read about some issues on the newer pistols. I'm thinking about the standard or tactical model due to it's barrel length. This will be used for a woods gun/plinking.

    Any advise as to what to look for and what to avoid would be appreciated.
  2. Not sure what issues you've heard about. The MKIV is a heck of a gun from all accounts. You can't go wrong with either of the models you're looking at.
  3. I too don't think that you'll have anything to worry about with newer Ruger pistols nowadays.

    The Ruger Mark IV series have of course been redesigned to allow for quicker and easier field stripping, cleaning, and reassembly, which is considered a plus by those who for whatever reason have found the reassembly of their earlier model Mark I, II, and III pistols difficult. I think this was a welcome upgrade as most other .22LR semiauto handguns have a much more standardized, familiar, and therefor easier method of disassembly and reassembly, without having to resort to firearm calisthenics.

    So go ahead and buy yourself the Ruger Mark IV pistol of your choice. If anything, changing out the sights or installing a Volquartsen Accuracy or Competition Kit will probably be all you'll ever consider needing to do to one :D
  4. I have a Mark IV 22/45 Lite.

    Fun for the whole family.

  5. Great guns. They're not light though... Not sure how far through the woods you are going to carry it.
  6. I have 2 Mark IVs, a Hunter and a Standard with the 6in barrel. Both are very accurate. The Standard would make an excellent woods pistol.

    I’ve installed the Volquartsen Accurizing Kit in each bringing the trigger pull down to 1 1/2-1 3/4 pounds.
  7. I don’t think you can do any better than Ruger MK pistols. They built like tanks and have so many available accessories to choose from. I own MKII pistols but I wouldn’t be afraid for a second to buy a MKIV. I’d be afraid to guess how many rounds I’ve ran through my MKII over the years and so far I’ve never had to replace a worn part. It just has to be cleaned about every 200 rounds to remain 100% reliable. I shoot garbage practice ammo in it most of the time and it gets very nasty inside.
  8. Here’s a 25 yard 10 shot group fired from the Mark IV Hunter while I had a scope on it. The aiming dot is 1 inch.

  9. If there are any kind of widespread issues with the MKIV, I haven't heard about them. Of course, I live under a rock, so maybe that's the problem. Seriously, tho, perhaps you can elucidate.
  10. I’d suggest skipping the Ruger and getting yourself a TX22 for the use case you describe. You’ll be glad you did.
  11. Check out the S&W 22 Victory.

  12. ......and, off topic we go. :dog:
  13. At least the Victory is a viable alternative. The TX22 is a completely different class of gun.
  14. Not at all. He wants a .22 for plinking and woods carry.

    He said he heard that Rugers were good and asked about them.

    I told him for his use case he should forget the Ruger and go with the TX22.

    Talking about a solution to the use case he described. On topic.
  15. I haven’t heard of any issues with the Mark IV. I’ve had a Target Model for nearly a year and it’s been 100%. It makes it into the range bag on every trip.
  16. Any Ruger 22 is a good shooter. The best deal is the new single action Wrangler. Being old school, my favorites are the slab sided Mark II Government Competition and the Single Six. If you can read & follow directions or watch You Tube tutorials, the MK 2 Rugers aren't too difficult to take apart and put back together.
    Ruger KMK678GC.png Ruger Single 6 convertible.png
  17. My 2 Mark IVs hasn’t received much love this year. I’ve been shooting my G44. I now have around 11,000 rounds thru it.

    Twice I’ve carried the MK IV Standard. First time, I fired 1 magazine. Second time, I fired 2 magazines. It is just too boringly accurate.

    I would love to have an older Mark series Ruger just to learn the takedown. If I co e across one someday at a good price, I may have to pick it up.
  18. There was a recall on early Ruger Mark IV series but that was a few years ago and would not apply to any new ones manufactured for sale on or after June 01, 2017 which are solid pistols, very high quality, with amazing accuracy.

  19. Personally I'd like a Mark IV, S&W Victory and a TX .22- probably in that order. That Mark IV is a real modernized improvement on the Ruger line of .22 pistols. I think you should get one of those. Obviously the .22/45 is trying to feel like a Colt's 1911, but I really like the fit and feel of the old Ruger "drill handle" frame even better. That "Hunter" model is a really cool pistol. Dang it, now I'm gonna be thinking about that all night!
  20. Any, and all of the early issues have been rectified. The so-called "safety recall" was a CYA effort on Rugers part, but they changed the safety plate & sear to accommodate the few who didn't know how to operate the safety properly.
    All the Mark IV pistols that I have had cross my bench for over a year now have been fantastic shooters.
    I would recommend the "all-steel" Mark IV with the 5½ Blued Bull barrel. It has adjustable rear sight and D/T for an optic if so desired. Carried in a "good" leather holster, it will not be a burden at all.
    The Ruger Mark IV Lite version has a sleeved barrel that bounces around during recoil, which is most annoying to experienced shooters who want target recovery much quicker.
  21. I scouted all over this "blessed country" looking for two years until I finally found the Ruger Mark III Hunter I was after:
    Found this NIB Mark III up in Michigan at Williams Gun Sight Co. Great shooting pistol and not very many made. It's my favorite "walk-about" pistol in a leather DeSantis holster when I gad-about over our empire looking for "ANTIFA chipmunks".
  22. The hell it is! Not in this lifetime spanky. :eric:
  23. The S&W SW22 Victory certainly is a viable alternative to the Ruger Mark series; it can often be found for less money and has a better "out of the box" factory trigger than any stock Ruger Mark pistol. The SW22 may not have the aftermarket following that the Mark series has but there are notable upgrades available for them particularly in regards to barrels, with the beauty of their design being that one doesn't need to involve a gunsmith to change one out or need to spend the $$ or time with an FFL dealer to perform a transfer...that new barrel will arrive at your doorstep, and all that's required to swap it out is an allen wrench.

    I can attest to the very nice trigger on the SW22 as I own one, along with two Ruger Mark pistols, and it's noticeably better than the stock triggers on the Rugers. What has helped my Mark II was the installation of a Volquartsen kit, which made a noticeable improvement in trigger smoothness and reduced it's trigger pull weight, again, all without the requirement of a gunsmith.

    Whether it's a .25 trigger job performed on a Glock pistol by it's owner or a Volquartsen kit installed in a Ruger Mark IV pistol by it's owner, it's nice to have these options available for people to perform in their gun room or shop...with most if nearly all who undertake these changes by themselves being ultimately quite satisfied with the results.
  24. Concerning what's being sold as accuracy kits, I've been doing some testing. First, I clamped a Ruger Mark IV Competition Target in this rest, with all factory parts installed as arrived:


    I fired 50 rounds, five magazines full of CCI Standard, and recorded the accuracy.
    Next, I installed what was sold to me as an "Accuracy Kit", and again set the Ruger Mark IV Competition Target pistol in my Ransom Rest and shot 50 of the very same lot of CCI Standard velocity ammunition. Accuracy was almost persactly the same as before the kit install. Here's the kit:


    ♣ #1 Ruger Mark II Light Hammer Get a bit faster "lock-time" Minimal aid for accuracy

    ♣ #2 Trigger adjustable for pre and over-travel. Adjustments just provide the trigger with minimal movement

    ♣ #3 Trigger Plunger and Spring. These parts lift the front end of the disconnector up and off the sear. This disconnector is the heaviest of all that I've weighed. The trigger plunger spring must lift this heavier disconnector from one end only, with all the weight involved forward of the spring and plunger.

    ♣ #4 Sear Spring. From all of my measurements, this spring is so close to being the same as the Ruger factory sear spring that I found very little difference to offer much improvement.

    ♣ #5 Target sear. If anything, this is the KEY component involved with this accuracy kit. It will reduce trigger pull to a very safe 2½ to 3 pounds, but I achieved no substantial improvement in what the kit was perceived to provide. Accuracy.

    ♣ #6 Disconnector. This is a steel, machined part. It's sole purpose is to connect the trigger to the sear for release and then re-set. It is heavier than the factory disconnector by almost 37%.

    ♣ #7 The hammer bushing. This part rides inside the hammer and the right end is captured in the disconnector window at the rear. As the trigger is pulled the bottom piece on the disconnector leaves the sear, and then the right end of the hammer bushing contains the disconnector from flying upward.

    The two thin spacers are not meant to provide any accuracy improvement but only fill any voids between the bushing and contain side to side movement if needed.

    So, not too many of these parts can, or will, provide much for accuracy improvement, or so I've found. What part does provide the most improvement, is the target sear. It would be terrific if we could only buy the sear, but that's not in the works at this point in time. What would be a considerable gain, is if the $150.00 + cost with shipping could get more palatable with a kit that ONLY helped with creating a much better, lighter and smoother trigger weight and pull could be acquired.
    I know someone who is getting very close to achieving that end, and much more affordable.

    BTW: One S&W S22 pistol does not a benchmark make. Ruger Mark pistols have a 70+ year history involving FINE performance, the S22 has what? A couple of years. I can't wait to get one in here and then run an accuracy comparison with the Mark IV vs. the fugly SW22.
  25. You have us on the edge of our chairs.
  26. Well, that's GOOD!
  27. When tested in a Ranson Rest device every pistol will show it's inherent mechanical accuracy potential, whether it's got it's OEM trigger installed or one that's been worked to death by a gunsmith. But people aren't mechnical Ransom Rest devices, so it's up to the i.n.d.i.v.i.d.u.a.l to utilize whatever means they can afford themselves to allow them to be more accurate with a particular handgun, and the one means that's been proven the world over is for a person to provide themselves with a smoother and reduced trigger pull, and that's what an end user can afford themselves utilizing a Volquartsen Accurizing kit - and with no need whatsoever for a gunsmith.

    There are literally thousands of completely satisfied customers who've installed these Volquartsen kits, and even though it's a relative newcomer to the scene, thousands more who've found the S&W SW22 Victory pistol to be a viable entry into the .22 semi auto pistol world. To argue these facts is just silly.
  28. What's silly is to argue that the expensive VQ kits are worth the investment for improving the accuracy of the Ruger Mk series pistolas by improving the trigger pull.

    The kits have have been around in one form or another for over 15 years and contain many parts that do nothing to improve accuracy by making the stock trigger into a target trigger. VQ has a great reputation for producing quality parts and are savvy marketers of said parts.

    It has be discussed ad nauseum on many different forms for years and most experienced shooters/tinkerers agree, the VQ sear will lighten the trigger pull significantly and the addition of the VQ trigger will help minimize pre and over travel. The aforementioned parts are all that is needed to aid the shooter's accuracy by way of trigger improvement. The remaining parts contained in the VQ kit are simply not needed.

    Of course it's your money. Spend it on a kit if you wish or take the savings and buy more ammo.
  30. I have a MKIV Tactical and S&W Victory.
    The trigger on the Victory is noticeably better which allows me to shoot it more accurately. The Ruger’s trigger is very gritty and heavier so I’ll be upgrading it eventually.
  31. It's not silly when a marked improvement in a shooter's ability to be more accurate with a given firearm is observed after such a kit or parts are installed. Are the "other" parts included with these kits worth the extra money? A person might see a polished trigger spring plunger being of benefit, and maybe they think they'd like that extended bolt release over the original, or perhaps they have a use for that hammer bushing that's used to eliminate the magazine disconnect that they dislike so much in their Mark II or III. I'm sure that many folks find it a nice option to have all these parts and others available to them as a kit, and if not, noone's holding a gun against anyone's head to buy a kit - every part included in these kits can be purchased individually if so desired.
  32. That's a very nice looking Victory 'arn, thanks for sharing :)

    Your experiences mirror mine in regards to the comparison between the Victory and Ruger MK factory triggers, and this is the reason why I decided to purchase Volquartsen trigger parts for my Ruger(s), and I'm very satisfied with the results. I guess this makes the both of us heathens? :eek:

  33. Why does all of the Bullseye shooters lighten their trigger pulls? Simple, so they can increase their handheld accuracy.
  34. The marked improvement in a shooter's consistent accuracy is from the installation of the sear and to a very small extent the trigger. Where you and I disagree is in the value of the other parts in the kit and their contribution to the improved trigger resulting in an increase in consistent accuracy.

    As I've stated before, the other parts in the kit don't contribute any significant improvement in the trigger pull and resultant increase in consistent accuracy. If you want to believe otherwise, fine. Just don't expect me to agree with you. That's all have to say about that, Forrest.
  35. That is exactly correct.
  36. Just curious, what does a trigger pull gage read for each pistol? Gritty feel is a very simple malady to correct. Quite often, a smoother operating trigger pull can be deceiving as being lighter, especially if "newbie" owner, unlike yourself, is sorta fumble fingered and can't tell one from the other, anyway.
    The Ruger Mark pistol wins the "BEAUTY" contest hands down and the upper removal only requires the method thoughtfully built right into the pistol. Don't need to carry a hex wrench around with you all the time.
    And I see you put a very excellent barrel on the otherwise "fugly" , S&W, to replace the "hit or miss" for accuracy, factory barrel. Grip replacement [email protected]@KS much better also. Good move!
  37. This has to be the dumbest test I've ever seen. None of these parts make the gun more mechanically accurate. They make the gun easier to shoot accurately.
    We all know you're a condescending *******, but now you're making us question if you know anything about shooting at all.
  38. And as I clearly stated above, the "other" parts of these Volquartsen kits can provide benefits that may also be appealing to the buyer, and if not, they won't buy the kit but instead may order the individual parts that they require if they want to, e.g., order just a trigger and sear, etc.

    I don't expect you to agree with me, but I do expect you to display some semblance of reading comprehension so I won't find it necessary to repeat myself. And I take it your "Forrest" remark directed towards me was an attempt at what exactly, being derogatory when all else fails? Such behaviour seems eerily familiar... :whistling:
  39. I think that Mk IV is really neat, but I purchased a MkIII .22/.45 a few years back. Took it to club and shot it yesterday. Sorry, but thing is terrible. Jammed about 3 out of 50 hollowpoints (36g Minimags.)
    I'd stay away from the 22/45. Magazines are weird (and don't eject or drop) and the old Ruger drill-handle type frame is far more ergonomic.
    I got a Ruger .22/45 mk III with 4 magazines I for sale....
  40. I thought the OP just wanted info on Ruger pistols,not what everyone has done to theirs. There are volumes on custom work on Ruger. I thought the question was should I buy one.
  41. Don't kid yourself. The reason is for "better performance" of the pistols trigger. That doesn't account for better accuracy. Accuracy comes from much practice with trigger release and a steady hold when pulling the trigger, nothing mechanical will improve accuracy that's already there, only better performance of the particular pistol. Accept the facts or don't, no sweat off my "two boys".
  42. I discussing increasing consistent accuracy via improving the trigger pull not some precieved other benefit the other parts in the kit may provide. That's your circular thinking, not mine.

    Yes you do expect me to agree with you and I simply don't. Get over it.
  43. Quite often with a new Ruger Mark pistol, including the Mark III version, I have found over the 50+ years with dealing with the few vagaries and quirks any "new" Mark pistol will produce, that the springs need some time from shooting to develop the working "set" those springs need, so they will function much, much better.
    With my customers, and this has worked for pretty much all of those who bought new pistols from me, and others, that the first shooting be done with CCI Mini-Mag 40 grain round nose ammunition. Some pistol springs will develop their working length in only a couple hundred of those rounds. Some springs need more to get there. Once those springs are "set", then Standard velocity .22 ammunition, quite often the MOST accurate with the CCI Standard, will work just fine.
    Another cause of Mark III pistol jamming can be caused by the LCI (Loaded Chamber Indicator), which is known by many Mark III savvy owners, including myself to cause spent case "stovepipes". Removal of that Ruger inflicted device is most often the final cure for that malady.
    This advice comes from having many Ruger Mark III pistols cross my bench, for more than just a sear up grade, so consider it for what you will, or you can go by what the owner of only ONE Mark III pistol can offer from the very little experience gained from that. :dunno:
  44. Sir, Mr. Bone does indeed expect that all involved should take only his advice gained from owning just one, or maybe two pistol(s) of a certain make. Well, I'm not buying into that faulty investment either.
    I can only reiterate what my experience has been, being involved with a multitude of Ruger Mark pistols from contact, testing and internal inspection of these guns that I've personally done.
    He has never accepted the experienced knowledge I offer and as for me, I don't give a "CRAP" if he ever does. Truth be known, I'll bet some local gunsmith ran over his pet turtle years ago, and he's been P/O'd about that ever since. His thinking and "wrongful banter" will never convince me over to his errant way of thinking. Will he ever "get over it"? Most likely beyond his ability to work well with people, who don't always accept that his way is the only way. Poor guy has a problem with trying to "get along", and just likes to argue feeble points made.
    If I see a post with BS, I WILL indeed offer my experience rather than blindly accept bovine excrement included in any post.
  45. Include Browning's line of Buckmark rimfire pistols in your research. Mine has been great.
  46. From what you post, most of the time, I really don't expect anything worthwhile coming off your keyboard anyway. Save your "bovine excrement" for someone else. To me you're just a silly person who has no worthwhile purpose involving firearms. "We ALL know"? Who made you the spokesperson for "WE". Richard, you're full of it.
  47. Oh, yes sir I have. I've run several Browning Buckmarks over my chronograph and setup in my Ransom Rest. Most of these pistols were borrowed from several of my good customers, who found the test results very helpful in choosing which .22 rimfire ammunition THEIR pistol liked best. In fact, testing a couple of the Browning Buckmark Contours and seeing how well those pistols performed, I bought one for myself. Only changes I made was to rework the sear, replace the extractor, and the trigger with an over-travel screw I installed:


    I found the above pistol to be well worth the investment made, and even a very good competitor with the only Smith & Wesson .22 rimfire pistol I found worthwhile to own:

  48. I have the stainless Camper 4", similar to the one in your pic. I had a long eye releif scope on it but it now wears a simple red dot for plinking. Been very reliable and accurate with mini mags.
  49. Except for some of the "low end" Remington stuff, I also have not found many brands of .22 rimfire my Browning Contour didn't put up with. Using the Ransom Rest I produced some very awesome groups with SK, and Wolf Match Target .22 rimfire ammunition. I have some Eley that I want to run through it, and see how that performs for accuracy. My testing from the Ransom Rest only provides me with a set goal to shoot for. Pun intended. :flag:
  50. I don’t have a trigger pull gauge so can’t tell you the weight on either guns.

    The stock barrel was plenty accurate but I wanted to suppress it. Stock threaded barrels were hard to find in stock at the time so decided to go aftermarket.