fourth marky mark

I miss the tapered pencil profile barrel of the originals.

But yes, the Mk4 is pretty good.

>>33890284
Looks like they may have fixed the shit-assed teardown of the earlier version. If they did it sould be good.

>>33890773
yes they did. they finally adressed one of the biggest issue about the gun.

And looks pretty good, too. Since it's a Ruger mark, it will be surely plenty of aftermarket and various versions of the base gun.

Good job.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjsMSToXO60&t=556s

Are they worth about tree fiddy plus tax?

>>33890284
Don't you mean the S & W model 41?

im pretty sure my next purchase will be a mkiv target blued. the more i think about it, the more fun it seems.
anyone know where mags are cheapest? just from a cursory search, it seems it might be ebay for $23 each free shipping

>>33890773
It's a great design, that somehow made the trigger garbage. But that might be something that get worked out over time.

Right now a factory Buckmark has a better trigger than a Mk IV.

File: 20170507_184310.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

I picked up mine today! Can't wait to put my 45 suppressor on for even more added silliness.

>>33892083

Do they use normal Mark mags?

If so, CDNN will have the generic brand ones for 10$ each if you watch their weekly sales.

>>33890284
FUCK no.

Literally the worst trigger in any hobbyist-tier target .22lr available today. It's legitimately a worse trigger than what's in the Neos.

It's less mechanically accurate than the MkIII, which was already at best middle of the pack on mechanical accuracy when compared to the 22A, Victory, Buckmark, and Neos.

Why does a target pistol need a mag disconnect safety and LCI? Why implement versions that literally shit all over reliability and good trigger pull?

Literally the ONLY thing it has going for it is the ease of field-stripping, something that isn't really necessary with a target .22lr pistol anyway, and that ease of field-stripping introduced enough slop that it's a major contributor to its accuracy issues and shit tier trigger pull.

File: 20150327_164605.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px)

3MB, 4128x2322px

>>33892048
This. Still #1

The Mark 4 is still pretty neat though. Looks like a great improvement to the Ruger series

>>33892583
Factory Buckmarks have had better triggers than factory Ruger Mk's for as long as the Buckmark has been around. Hell even the Buckmark's predecessor, the Browning Challenger II, had a better trigger than the Mk1.

And the Heggis Flip (turning the sear spring around) gives the Buckmark a better trigger than a full-Volquartzen Ruger Mk-series.

>>33893429
IIRC they have a different baseplate. I think you can switch out the plates to make older mags work

File: 164.jpg (689KB, 1971x1305px) Image search: [Google]

689KB, 1971x1305px

>>33893464
>Why does a target pistol need a mag disconnect safety

In my experience, the mag disconnect has been more useful on a target gun than a normal one, but not for safety wen shooting. It keeps me from accidentally dropping the hammer on my 41 when I disassemble it.

File: 1453395890900-pol.jpg (75KB, 864x540px)

75KB, 864x540px

>>33890857
Definitely worth the money.

>>33892583
>>33893464
the comments about the trigger are disconcerting for sure

File: IMG_1651.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>33890284
No. The Gen 1 is still the best. the 2s, and 3s are almost the same level, but gen 1 doesn't have a single lawyer warning engraved on it. The Gen 4 completely changes the design that has lasted for decades. It may be easier to take apart, but if you learn how to take apart the others properly, it's not hard. Nor do you need to do it often.

Pic related, 2 mark 3s and a mark 1. All shoot reliably, and accurately. Ruger makes the best production target .22 on earth.

>>33893588
I disagree desu senpai. The MKII was the peak of the design. The MK1 is missing LRBHO which should be on every 22.

>>33893750
and the mkii has a lawyer warning, and shittier magazines.

when will there be a target or hunter with a threaded barrel?

>>33893832
You mean the shitty 9 round MKI magazines that don't have a bolt hold open?

I would rather have and early MKII 10 round model. There were some later SKU's without the read manual text too.

>>33893901
T/F:
1. The mki factory magazines are all metal.
2. The mkii factory magazines have plastic.

File: MKMags.jpg (73KB, 589x536px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 589x536px

>>33893919
Oh my~
"Plastic" baseplates

Such an unusual exotic technology.
How could I ever entrust my life to a handgun with "plastic" parts

>>33890857
Wtf where are they 350?

>>33893990
Its purely a cost saving measure. It doesnt offer any benefit over the steel ones, it's just cheaper and indicative of rugers changes beginning in the 80s. Good luck buying a new 10/22 without a plastic trigger guard and barrel band, faggot.

File: IMG_0323.jpg (2MB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x1600px

>>33890284
Damn I'm glad they fixed the take down pain... other than that I like my mark 3 with mark 2 trigger parts and tact solutions upper. Sucked I had to mod it to make it right. The lighter threaded rugers came out soon after I put it together. Funnest gun I own by far.

>>33894018
it was an objective improvement. The Original metal design had fixed and welded baseplates and the follower came out through the top when disassembling.

They realized having a removable floorplate would make it easier to dissemble the magazine and the weak round holding tabs were deleted which were objectively bad design due to the jams it caused when they bent the wrong way.

>>33894071
I have 2 ruger magazines from 1959, neither have ever misfired in the 12 years I've owned it. If you bent the maglips on a target pistol, you are the failure.

>>33893990
Never understood why mags for these things are as expensive as they are.

Which variant of the Mk IV do you guys think is best? Will having a lockup where a polymer or aluminum frame contacts a steel receiver lead to durability problems in the long run?

>>33894275
yes, get a mk III for a fraction of the cost, it's a better gun.

>>33890284
tfw you live in ca

>>33893995
Some local store an hour away from me is selling Mark 4 target models for $325 + tax, according to their armslist listing. It seemed like a good dealio but I'm between that and a buckmark for roughly the same price.

File: Retard_776adc_273314.jpg (16KB, 327x344px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 327x344px

>>33893483
>Paying $1500 for a .22 pistol

File: 98105_2.jpg (28KB, 848x438px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 848x438px

Nope.

File: Rugermkii82x.jpg (102KB, 971x677px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 971x677px

>>33890510
this is GOAT, you may not like it, but this is what perfection looks like.

File: IMG_7243.png (59KB, 658x662px)

59KB, 658x662px

>>33894275
That was my thinking so I bought a Stainless Target model. It shoots great except for the fucked up bolt face that I have to send in for warranty :( Tbh family for the $775 cdn I paid I should have got a S&W Victory for $300 less... But I thought I'd treat myself on my first handgun.

File: ew.png (387KB, 944x268px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 944x268px

Jesus Christ Ruger fucked up with the mk IV.

>Aluminum frame unless you get stainless
>bad aesthetic compared to older versions
>anodized frame doesnt match blued upper
Seriously what the fuck Ruger? Look at the side by side pic, and try and tell yourself the IV is as good looking as the III, II, and I.

>>33890284
Nope, buckmark. Factory trigger 200% better.

>>33895225
>he's too poor to buy a nice gun

Is rimlock a common occurrence with people who aren't retarded?
Or is it only when you mis-load the rims into a mag?

File: par.png (604KB, 788x773px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 788x773px

>>82517802
It´s hasn´t won olympic gold, so it´s not

File: 1494187716128.jpg (18KB, 500x157px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x157px

>>33890284

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.........................

File: IMG_20170506_111851.jpg (2MB, 3464x4618px)

2MB, 3464x4618px

I just picked one up last week, and I fucking love it.

File: 1475537562925.jpg (4MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2448x3264px

>>33890284
I've been asking for many fucking threads but never got a reply.
Aside from the trigger group, are there any moving parts directly contacting the frame or does all of the moving happen in the upper ?

>>33896658
The only part of the upper that moves is the bolt.

In the lower, the entire trigger group, safety mechanism, magazine release, magazine ejector and takedown button all move. Just like on any other pistol, I'm not sure why you're asking.

ask a guy who bought a mk3 2 days before the mk4 was announced anything.

>>33896713
whats the difference

File: 162.jpg (1022KB, 1971x1305px) Image search: [Google]

1022KB, 1971x1305px

>>33895225
>Paid $1000 for the best .22 pistol

Ftfy

>>33896633
Autism

>>33896633
I don't understand why this bothers people so much.

It's not like with old RIA 1911s where the slide was basically a big billboard.

>>33896647
nice flag cuck

>>33896658
The hammer in the lower contacts the bolt in the upper obviously. But the bolt assy is contained in the upper assy and doesn't contact the lowe4 frame at all

>>33897757
>opposing the idea of an overreaching state makes you a cuck
The absolute irony of your statement.
Head on back to >>>/reddit/ where you belong.

>>33897670
Because its ugly, and implies that the owner is stupid. It's insulting. How would you like it if every time you turn on your computer it pops up the tutorial windows.

>>33898022
But it's not the same thing.

What you're suggesting is if a safety flag popped up every time you loaded a magazine, and it had to be depressed manually for you to shoot.

This is at best a small disclaimer text along the copyright information.

>>33893995

ruger mark 4s go for $1200 in California because they can only be purchased off a scalper

File: automag_002.jpg (100KB, 800x547px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 800x547px

All I want for xmas is a Mark 4 pimped up like an Automag.

It's actually been done before (I'll post it below), but not convincingly. They are now collector's items, but they could be so much better.

File: AMT_Lightning_BabyAutomag.jpg (136KB, 1031x958px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1031x958px

I'd pay well over $1000 for a Mark 4 that's machined to look almost exactly like an Automag (if it had a great trigger). But this AMT Lightning BabyAutomag is just a dressed up Ruger. More like a homage than an actual repro.

>>33898594
>AMT (who sold the Automag) making a clone of the AMC AutoMag (a different gun altogether)
Activates my almonds.

>>33898594
Oh yeah, they got sued by Bill for straight up copying the Ruger Mk.II and 10/22

>>33894275
>>33894301
I don't understand how this is a problem, it's just a 22, what durability problems could it even have?

>>33893464
Substantiate your claims.

>>33896647
well shit, now i want the stainless model. its not as shiny as id thought itd be. plus, steel lower is a bonus for me

>>33898899
Are you aware of the problems that Sigs have with erosion on their slide rails/frame? They don't stem from things like cartridge pressure but a design where a moving part made of aluminum is contacting one made of steel. I figured it might be a concern for the Mark IV given the possibility that the aluminum of the lower may wear over time and loosen the lockup with the upper.

>>33893567
He's lying. The trigger is wonderful on the mk4

>>33894018
>doesn't offer any benefit over the steel ones
weight. but that's negligible
but the real thing is that there is absolutely no downside to using plastic baseplates, so it's fine to do it purely based on costs

>plastic 10/22 trigger guard
literally not a problem at all

>>33894018
>a gun made for a low powered caliber allowing you to use cheaper, lighter materials and not suffer any kind of serious drawback
>on a gun where like half of everyone who owns one will take it apart and modify it or kit it out anyway
You're the kind of fudd faggot who cries about MIM too, aren't you?

>>33898576
How about an Automag pimped out like a MKIV (sorta)?
https://vimeo.com/184202495

>>33900224
That's actually interesting, those things can be a chore to handload for, so that's a way to shoot one.

Also the felt recoil must be nothing.

>>33897757
Faggot.

>>33899001
It's pretty based. They're about $150 more than the blued ones, but the steel lower gives it some nice heft, plus it just looks better imo.

>>33900884 here, just noticed the complaints about the trigger.

Feels fine to me. I've never shot a buckmark or a s&w victory to compare it to, but it feels good enough to me that I have no desire to buy an aftermarket trigger.

>tfw commiefornia handgun roster

I love the aesthetic of Ruger's .22 pistols.

>>33895268
Those are so goddamn sexy. They point like a dream.

>>33895225
What does the calibre mater?

>>33898089
No, there is a small disclaimer engraved into a gun that is going to last for well over 100 years.

>>33895448
gtfo pol

>>33899440
Exactly, they do it for the sole purpose of cost cutting. That's disgusting.

>>33899475
Did they lower the price when they switched from steel to aluminum?
>no they didnt

neck yourself.

File: Gun-and-Barrels3-600x400.jpg (32KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x400px

I still think this one is the best .22 pistols out there

>>33892583
Eh I always though if them like glock triggers. People replace or work on them immediately anyway so why does the factory care

>>33894018
So the company who's bread and butter is good gun on a budget put two parts that nobody on earth has ever broken are now made of less expensive, lighter material that can't rust.

What was the complaint again?

>>33902341
So fucking grind it off if it bothers you, or fill it in with something hardy and cerakote over it so you'll never see it again.

Markings on a gun is about as superficial as it gets, finish is more important.

>>33890284
>that shitty Times New Roman font
fucking WHY

>>33903677
>having to fix a gun straight from the factory
die nigger, go back to glock

>>33903182
then why didnt they lower the cost when they switched to cheaper materials?

>>33903677
No, I simply won't buy one. The older versions are better all around, and cheaper.

>>33903182
It's a target .22, weight is irrelevant. Did they decrease their prices when they switched to cheaper materials? Nope, they increased the prices. Plastic is not as good as steel, get over it cuck.

>>33903873
"fix"?

It's barely a blemish, the gun works perfectly fine and you won't even see the fucking print when you're looking down the sights.

>>33902353
so?
companies have a right to make a profit and the gun is worth what they ask for it even with plastic baseplates (which is a ridiculous non-issue)

>>33904176
No, it's not worth that much. Ruger is a shit company and I hope they go bankrupt. Every product line of theirs has continually gotten worse since 1983.

>>33902353
>That's disgusting.
Why? They don't owe you shit, you don't want their product at the prices they offer, then don't buy it or go fuck yourself, free market, motherfucker.

>>33904392
Except that's bullshit, the Blackhawk has gotten better, the 10/22 has gotten better, the Redhawk has gotten better, the Mini-14 has gotten CONSIDERABLY better.

Hell, working conditions are better, Bill wasn't exactly the nicest boss at times.
You're a bullshitting faggot with an axe to grind, they'll never go under in your lifetime either, they make shitloads of money outsourcing investment casting, a manufacturing process they're arguably the best at in the US.

File: Benelli-Target-Pistol-MP95E-22-LR_100843059_75493_AB5A0208CD66ACC2.jpg (229KB, 2504x1343px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 2504x1343px

>>33897208
>The best

Oh, herro.

>>33904392
Wrong

>>33905799
>dat bore axis

>>33890284

I'm still pissed that I bought a Mark III.

They had to wait until after I bought one to announce that they were going to fix problems that they hadn't touched for decades.

>>33895268
This so fucking much

>>33904392
This nigger again. Your constant asshurt over one of the best US gun companies is music to me.

>>33905840
It's dreamy. But the best part is the non-bumblefuck magazines.

File: koume frankenstein.jpg (255KB, 2000x1600px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 2000x1600px

>>33904392
Hey, I know you, you're the guy who cried about cast parts on the AR-556 rifle!

>>33907955
Cast parts on AR are substandard. Forged or nothing, cuck.

I wonder if they will make a tapered barrel Mk. IV?

>t. 1959 Standard owner

>>33908001
the mkIV is shit, sorry bro. On the other hand, your standard will probably increase in value for the next several years.

File: IMG_4095.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>33908024
Thanks anon

>>33908034
Original bluing? God damn that thing is well taken care of. Beautiful gun man.

>>33908074
Correct. Original grips too. They're Ruger factory walnuts without a thumb rest

If I wanted to kill people stealthily in a crowd or loud environment, would a Mk2/3/4 with subsonic rounds and a silencer be the ideal choice?

I'm asking for a friend.

>>33909530
Are you trying to get a quote from the infamous military wing of a Right Wing Death Squad forum?

>>33909964
No I'm genuinely wondering if there's possibly a quieter lethal gun than a silenced .22LR with subsonic rounds, so it can be silent like in the movies, with the added reliability of Rugers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rElX_drZWI

>>33911425
operating noise is a thing but anyone can put their thnumb on the end of the bolt

or this is a thing
http://www.tbasuppressors.com/TBA-MK-II-Bolt-Lock_p_38.html