Ruger Mk IV Standard

[Model12Win]

Just saw a new model Ruger Mk IV on the Ruger website:

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/produc...rd/models.html

The "Standard" model with classic tapered barrel and fixed sights. This is the version of the Mk IV I should have waited for! I bought the heavy barreled Target version a few months back only because they didn't have a tapered barrel one.

Not sure why they waited so long to release this... kind of stupid, really. I wish I could swap it out! Still cool, might have to get one!!

M12

[JMag1]

Nice, but I prefer the lines of the Target.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Model12Win]

The Target clocks in at 35.6 oz w/ 5.5" bbl.

The 4.75" Standard weighs but 28.2 oz, with the 6" Standard just over 30 oz.

Much lighter. I'd imagine they balance well in the hand. I find my bull bbl'd target do be a bit heavy at the nose... now the real question is, 4.75" or 6"??

[ttarp]

Definitely 4.75", for the classic Type 14 Nambu look.

[Model12Win]

Originally Posted by ttarp

Definitely 4.75", for the classic Type 14 Nambu look.

Extremely cool, very good idea. I was leaning that way as well.

I only wish they had this model out from the start. I had to buy the chunky Target model instead. Not sure why they waited to do this... if it turns out to be as good as my Target then I'll sell the Target probably.

I know many will be like "ohhh but the adjustable sights and heavy barrel are better!" well yeah go pound sand and get off my lawn, I like the sleek classic look of the Standard and since it's much lighter and more compact it's easier to carry and less fatiguing to shoot. Granted, it might not be as accurate but I use these guns as plinkers and snakers. I'm content popping walnuts down the trail and not bench rest paper target shooting (at least with this gun).

The Ruger Mk series to me has always been an "everymans" .22 pistol. Just a good solid plinker accurate enough to do all that we can reasonably ask a rimfire auto to do and a ball of fun, nothing more nore not much less at all anyway. The new Mk IV Standard exemplifies the simple and no frills look and feel of the classic .22s from days gone buy. It's nice to see at least one company offering a straightforward gun like this. Seems all the others want to tart them up as much as humanly possible to the point they barely resemble a real gun, but more like the penny arcade blaster pistols at the mall.

So yeah... there's that!

[Metric]

I agree there are problems with the way they played the version release game -- at least it looks that way from where I'm sitting.

Earlier this year I was excitedly waiting for the standard to be released -- a stainless one (so still not the one they just now released). Then the recall happened, and rumors of other issues surfaced, and I had a lot of time to sit and think about the logistics of getting a decent trigger that would have been standard equipment on a MKII for half the price. Now I'm back to thinking I might better off with a nice vintage Colt or Beretta for similar money.

[Hanshi]

That new standard is nice, alright. Back in the early 1970s I bought a MKI "bull barrel". Still have it and love it. But I also had a MKI "standard" holster friendly model. I regret letting it go to this day.

[SGW Gunsmith]

Or............you could look around for a nice Ruger Mark II with the "Heavy Tapered" barrel. The 4 ¾ Standard barrels bounce around too much being as light as they are. Rather have a nice "chunky" barrel.

[CalmerThanYou]

My LGS has a Mark III in stainless with the Volquartsen treatment. Seems a bit pricey, but I held it, tested the trigger, and I want it. Surprised how beefy it is in the hand.

[Grizz12]

I'm a simple man, I want them all

unfortunately my bank account does not agree