RUGER MARK 4 TARGET PISTOL - AN OPINION

One of the Gals I've recently taught to shoot (and she shoots incredibly well BTW) has tried a bunch of 22 Target pistols out over the last few months and finally settled in on and purchased a new Ruger Mark 4 Target model with the bull bbl. and in the blued version. She was interested in spending under $600 and so a Model 41 was out of her budget.

She took the pistol out of the box, shot 150 rounds without one single hiccup. The ammo was CCI 40 grain standard velocity and after a few magazines full, I had the sights zero's in for her eyes. The model she bought (#40101) was way lighter than the S&W Victory which also has a bulky and wide grip that was just too large for her hands (she's 5' 0" on a big hair day - lol). She also looked at the Browning Buckmark but did not care at all for that one. She liked my M41 but it was out of the budget as was an older High Standard. I shot a few magazines and I have to say I was absolutely blown away by just how accurate the gun was. On a B3 target at 50 feet I put 9/10 shots in the X ring with 6 of them in the same hole (left target there - hence no pic.). Basically I'd say the pistol has about the same exact accuracy potential of my coveted M41 at 1/3 the price!

About the only negative comment I can make about the Mark 4 is that the trigger absolutely SUCKS for a "target pistol"! Ruger sells this as a Target pistol and I would not consider any gun a target gun that has a creepy, long, heavy trigger pull. If they want to sell their standard plinker with a trigger like that I could understand, but something that is billed and roll marked "TARGET PISTOL" should not be shipped like that IMHO. She didn't really balk at it since the only other gun she currently owns is a Ruger LCP Max in 380 and has a heavier and creepier trigger than the Mark 4. After she shot the 150 rounds I let her shoot my M41 and she immediately realized the difference.

Thankfully, for under $150 she will be ordering a Volquartsen trigger kit which after firing this kit in other guns I know to be spectacular! It basically turns the Ruger Mark 4 into a poor man's M41 for less than 1/2 the total price. So all in all, she put 90% of her 150 shots in the black at 50 feet after sighting it in for her (and that's with a crummy stock trigger). I believe that for the price of $519, I don't think there is a better value for a true target pistol that is capable of that accuracy. The S&W Victory and Browning Buckmark are OK, but IMO they are just not capable of similar accuracy.

So for what it's worth, that's my review. I only WISH Ruger would step up to the plate and include a descent trigger on their so called Target version! I get the liability part, but to call this trigger target quality is ridiculous. Trigger pulls are my main gripe with pretty much all Rugers! Other than that, the pistol is a winner!

I've never owned a Ruger Mk 4 target. My Mk 1 Ruger has a very crisp but light trigger. It's never been modified and it's extremely accurate. I might have to look at a Mk 4 for comparison. Think I would like the bull barrel version.

I like the Ruger. I bought one for my wife back in the 1990’s (don’t know what version it was). Very nice shooting pistol and accurate. We loaned ito our son when he was working on his concealed carry permit and haven’t seen it since.

I like both tandemkross and volquartson trigger upgrades.The pistol being reliable and accurate out of the box i think it would be worth it to help the trigger out.Congratulations.

TJm15.38 said:

...My Mk 1 Ruger has a very crisp but light trigger. It's never been modified and it's extremely accurate...

Click to expand...

Same here. I have a 1974 Ruger Standard (a Mk 1, but not labelled as such). It has the best trigger I have ever pulled. It's light (maybe 3-3.5 lbs.), smooth, and has minimal takeup. I've read a number of complaints about the Mk IV trigger, and I've wondered what Ruger did to mess it up. Whatever they did, it's good for business at Volquartsen. My Standard is a keeper.

I shot a Mk I 678 Target for years in postal matches shot in the basement firing range of the department.

It didn’t break the bank and as I improved the addition of a Volquartzen trigger kit helped ensure it was good enough that it still came down to the shooter, rather than the gun.

Way too many people think they can just buy higher scores. A great pistol helps a lot, but it helps a really good shooter a lot more than it helps just an average shooter. My Mk I and I outshot a lot of S&W 41s and High Standard Victors owned by average or above average shooters.

I acquired a Mk II 512 Target as well, and it got a aftermarket trigger as well. However I found I still liked the balance of the tapered 6 7/8” barrel better.

I came across a MK II Govt model a couple years ago and it still has its original trigger as it really is worthy of being considered a target trigger, but I have never shot a match with it.



That said, when I acquired an early High Standard Victor for $500, My scores increased, but if I’d gotten one as a fairly new shooter I don’t think it would have made a difference at all.

I currently have two Victors and a pair of S&W 41s and I shoot the Victor a bit better as it just fits better. But that Mk II Government model doesn’t give up much to either the Victor or the Model 41.

I picked up a std bbl mk2 at a gun shows years ago for $160. Was gonna sell it, but took it to the range to check it out. 1st magazine went into a quarter at 15 yds. Wasn’t really trying. It has a creepy, hard, nasty trigger. Don’t shoot it because of that trigger, one day I’ll fix that.

I had a 1957 Model 41 for many years; sold it last year. It shot very well, but my MK1 and MK II bull barrel guns weren't far behind. I have no idea what the trigger pull is on the Rugers or what it was on the 41. Neither Ruger has had the trigger or anything else tampered with. I've had the MKI at least forty-five years and the MKII about thirty-five years. No complaints on the triggers, though a good quality aftermarket gizmo might (or might not) allow me to shoot a little better.

Consider getting used to the trigger that came in your gun by firing it a lot. You might decide it's really okay. Many seem to think a light trigger (and for the rifle people, a high magnification scope as well) will make up for a lack of shooting skill, but it doesn't.

As much as I like Rugers and have a fair number of their pistols and rifles I think they've gone too far on economizing fit and finish. It's especially evident on their No1 rifles and revolvers. Compare the trigger pull of any current made Ruger 22 semi - pistol to a much older version and it's lacking. Very much so any High Standard.

AMT Lightning made it's name (and downfall) by copying the Ruger and managed to make the trigger much better. I've replaced a few Ruger hammers and sears with AMT. Improves them and doesn't cost all that much.

Most of the Ruger Mark series of pistols shoot very well ...the MK I, II , III or IV. I have a couple of MK II's as well as a MK III that I installed Volquartsen triggers and/or sears in for less than $75.00 and the trigger pulls are very nice. Noticeably nicer on the MK II's than the MK III .
With a temporary red dot and from a sand bag rest my MK II Competition Target placed SK Standard Plus between 1/2 " and 3/4 " of an inch at 25 yards. CCI Standard Velocity at just slightly over an inch.
The S&W Model 41 is certainly more refined than the Rugers but they generally will not shoot any better .

Empe said:

Most of the Ruger Mark series of pistols shoot very well ...the MK I, II , III or IV. I have a couple of MK II's as well as a MK III that I installed Volquartsen triggers and/or sears in for less than $75.00 and the trigger pulls are very nice. Noticeably nicer on the MK II's than the MK III .
With a temporary red dot and from a sand bag rest my MK II Competition Target placed SK Standard Plus between 1/2 " and 3/4 " of an inch at 25 yards. CCI Standard Velocity at just slightly over an inch.
The S&W Model 41 is certainly more refined than the Rugers but they generally will not shoot any better .

Click to expand...

Grip, balance, and general "feel" are all very subjective, certainly, but...

my 1957 41 was capable of better accuracy than my 1950 Woodsman Match Target, but the Woodsman had a much better "feel" to it than the 41. I kept the Woodsman. I'm sure some would agree, others wouldn't.

I'm 88 now, but when I was younger I conducted classes at the range.
I remember well, some of the better shooters used one of the Ruger
Mark series of pistols. I think they are great target pistols.

I like the Ruger Mark series. Good .22s for not a lot of money, all sorts of upgrades available for them. They are accurate and rugged. You can make it into what you what it to be or just plink and woods bum around.
I don’t have a Mk4 but I have a Mk2 that I’ve had for a while. It has had a few upgrades over the years. It has shot in our bullseye league, it has shot rimfire silhouette, rimfire bowling pin shoots. Killed small game and just punched paper and cans for fun.
They have made a bunch of them, find one you like and enjoy it.

I think you really ruin the looks and lines of a handgun with any sort of optical sight. They become unattractive and unwieldy combinations, but I'm pretty sure my tastes put me in a distinct minority these days.

I've installed the Volquartsen trigger, along with a few other bits & parts, and find it to be one of the guns that always goes to the range with me. I've also got a couple of M41's and three other Ruger MkII's, but I can't shoot them any better than that MkIV. And it is soooo much easier to clean and reassemble. -S2

Have had two mark iii’s for a long time now and both have been well worth the investment. Would buy a mark iv but no need. (Yet)

I bought my Mark IV a few years ago and came to the exact same conclusion the OP did- fine pistol, reliable and accurate, AWFUL trigger. Volquartson fixed that for me.

The fit and finish on this particular pistol was descent, especially considering the low price. I mean it's not a deep blued M41, but it's not $1,500 either!

As long as one has it in their mind that after the pistol purchase they need to spend another $150 on a Volquartsen trigger kit to turn it into a real target pistol - that's OK. Without the trigger kit I would rate the Mark 4 a descent plinker but certainly not a "target pistol". Once again, I call Ruger out for marketing this as a "target pistol" and roll marking it as such. It
s a real shame too because accuracy wise it does fit the target pistol bill!

I own one of each, and shoot them a bunch. But of the four, the best trigger, is my 1978 Standard ( unmodified.).

FWIW: If trying to save a little money, I’ve found that the Volquartsen sear is really the magic part. You can buy and install that alone and have much better trigger.