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.

Attached Images

Ruger Mk I(1).jpg (129.7 KB, 73 views)

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.

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.

Attached Images

DSCN0588.jpg (74.7 KB, 478 views)

__________________
What, me worry?

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 .

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.

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

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

Attached Images

4 Ruger MkIV.jpg (114.5 KB, 24 views)

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.

__________________
Some Might Say.

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.).

__________________
John

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.

I get your point, but considering how well you shot it would a better trigger really improve your score much? I mean the X ring is .90 inches. Not sure I'd change a thing.

Might help her though.

Have 2 of the newer Mark IV targets with threaded barrels, and agree with the op assessment. However the 4.4 incher (tacticool) with threaded barrel version had a noticeably better trigger than 5.5 incher.

And while am not fond of really really light triggers, a clean breaking tigger is very beneficial for my non-exspurt status.

I started shooting bullseye pistol matches with a Ruger MKI back in the early 70's. I still think that they are great starter pistols for serious competition. They couldn't sell for their price point with a trigger job. That can be easily rectified. Clark Custom does magic with Rugers.

Mike, I think that Ruger could make the trigger 60% to 75% better with nothing more than a lighter spring and would cost them virtually nothing extra since they need to put a spring in anyway. A spring alone might not be a substitute for the Volquartsen accuracy kit but it would be a vast improvement over what currently comes out of the box now. While I have not yet measured the trigger pull on her pistol, I'd venture to say it is between 4.75 - 5.25 pounds. IMHO a "target pistol" should be between 2.25 - 3 pounds and crisp with no creep.

I also agree that their standard model which is not sold as a target grade model might be acceptable with that kind of trigger pull, but a pistol that is engraved and sold as a target pistol should at least have a trigger worthy of that name.

If I owned Ruger, I would offer a Volquartsen kit already installed in the pistol and charge let's say $100 bucks more for it. Volquartsen wouldn't charge them anywheres near the same for thousands of them as they do us for just one. This way it's a winner right out of the box.

IMHO Ruger does this for two reasons. To your point, they save a few penny's but the main reason is more than likely for liability issues. This way someone converting it to a target grade trigger has the liability on Volquartsen and themselves as the owner. If they continue to do this, I would suggest they stop roll marking the barrel "Target Pistol"!

I'd venture to say not many people use a Ruger Mark 4 .22 pistol for CCW, EDC or SD /HD purposes and so the only place these 22's are actually loaded is when on a Range. There is probably little risk in making the trigger "target worthy" and as all of us know, no matter what the trigger pull is (light or heavy) there will always be some Bozo who does something stupid. Like they say in Forest Gump, "you can't fix stupid" no matter how light, heavy or creepy a trigger is. Again, keep the regular production trigger on their standard models - but at least give the marked Target Pistols a descent one.

I bought a Ruger Mk IV a few months ago and haven't really put it through it's paces yet, maybe 50 rounds? I made the mistake of buying a cheap red dot and it stinks!! I knew better, going to have to get an upgrade and try again.

I've always liked the Ruger 22 semi-autos. I've shot many back through the years and they've always been pretty accurate.

I do definitely agree the new Ruger's have horrible factory triggers. I'm going to upgrade that as well.

I have a MK 4 22/45 I for $299 (plus $40 for FFL transfer paper) right before prices went crazy. I installed the same trigger you did and the difference is amazing. I also have an old High Standard target pistol that I inherited and it has the best trigger of any pistol I've every shot.

The Mark III was a HUGE mistake - too laden down with useless doo-dads and a real (rhymes with witch) to field strip and re-assemble without outbursts of language not suitable for children.

The Mark IV was a needed relief from the Mark III's silliness. I love the new takedown system; it's accurate, and although the trigger isn't the best, the gunsmithing to fix it is easy.

I think the Mark II Government model was the best for accuracy, but the Mark IV comes close. I like it!

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

I have many 22lr pistols, several Ruger MK I and MK II Along with a SW 41.

I do not compete but my go to pistol is the MKII SS bull barrel Best 22 ever! (for the price)

Even though I am selling my guns, that one will never go!

Many people complain about the SW Victory, but mine is excellent for all around shooting. No issues at all,

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

For its intended purpose and price point, the S&W Victory is OK may very well fit the bill for some. You will need large "paws" and a strong forearm if you are a woman. It is relatively accurate but for a target pistol I don't really care for the green dot sights - but that is a personal preference. While it is no big deal, I don't care much for the way it takes down either. I think of the Victory as more of a do everything plinker at an affordable price.

Yes ...the sear is really all that's needed . You don't really need the entire kit at least in the MK II and III models . I'm not sure if the sear for the MK IV is available separately though.
My one MK II has both the VQ sear and adjustable target trigger and the other just has the VQ sear installed. The target model MK II's come from the factory with an over travel screw already installed so I decided to stick with the OEM trigger on that one model.
Trigger pulls on both are very nice , light and crisp.

I'd venture a guess that over 90% of owners don't shoot matches and wouldn't appreciate a refined trigger. You do have a good point about the legal liability aspect.

You're probably right about that. Most guys I know with Ruger 22's are looking to shoot cheap and not have to be held hostage for ammo. They have little interest in competition or learning how to properly shoot. As a serious competitor, I obviously think about that constantly when looking at 22's.

Anyway, it's GREAT to now know what the damned thing is truly capable of!!

As for "target" accuracy out of the box and a great trigger to boot, the winner has got to be the MKII Gov't Target Model.

__________________
John

I'm a big fan of the Ruger MK series. I have several MKII's, a MKIII, and MKIV as well as a Browning Buckmark and a S&W .22 Victory. Of all of these, I like the MKIV the least.

Attached Images

22 Semi Autos 29.jpg (105.3 KB, 231 views)

__________________
- Change it back -

I've had one of these since about 1989 and the regular shorter bull barrel version since '76. I've never done a side-by-side 25 yard benchrested accuracy comparison, but I suspect it would be a tie or very close to one. My guns are also straight-out-of-the-box, unmolested. I shoot Bullseye style, usuallly at 25 yards. I've never noticed the alleged bad triggers in either of my guns.

fyi, for the mark 2s through 4s, "Target" refers to a bull barrel, not the trigger. May or may not have thumbrest grips. I have 8? ranging from 2 Government targets, comp slabsides, an original 22/45 P4 and mark III and IV 6 7/8 Hunters. All the triggers sucked when I got them. I think I missed one or two.......

__________________
NRA RSO

[QUOTE=Racer X;141758144]fyi, for the mark 2s through 4s, "Target" refers to a bull barrel, not the trigger.

Actually when Ruger used/uses the term "Target " in reference to the Mark series of pistols they are referring to any model with an adjustable rather than fixed sights. I own a MK II model that does not have a " bull " barrel but does have adjustable sights. In Rugers catalogue/brochure of that era it is referred to as a Target Model. It's a MKM 678 with a 6 7/8" tapered barrel and has adjustable factory sights. It's a beautifully balanced gun and shoots very well .

My Mark II 6 7/8” tapered is clearly marked ‘Target’. It came with a decent trigger but got the Volquartsen treatment anyway. Now it has a great trigger and is substantially more accurate than my Volquartsen LLV upper.

My first .22 pistol was a Mark III 22/45 Lite. I wasn't very impressed with the trigger, disappointed with groups I was shooting with it and proceeded to kind of forgot about it for a few years. Once I replaced the trigger with a Tandem Kross trigger and removed the magazine disconnect with the Tandem Kross bushing it was like a new gun. The gun is actually super accurate and easy to shoot once you fix it up right.

The Ruger MK series are accurate guns as are most 22lr . As far as serious target use the most important aspect is trigger control , especially if one handed & on your hind legs . No handgun target discipline is shot from a bench . My MK1 taper barreled has a crisp trigger , MK2 bull barrel has a VQ sear & a med roll trigger . Both will clean a target @ 25 & 50yds if shooter does their part . I've been a Outdoor Conventional Pistol shooter for a long time . I've had a pretty good selection of 22 pistols over the years & difference between what determines a keeper vs a discard is often highly subjective . Gun must fit the shooter , sights must be highly visable & have precise repeatable adjustments & lastly must have a smooth usable trigger . Many shooters these days like a roll trigger rather than a crisp one . I too find it easier to keep trigger moving while gun settles into it's range of movement , trusting my hold & focusing on trigger . Gunny Zins said it best " use the trigger to steer the sights onto target center". I still have both Rugers , High Standard Military Citation 5 1/2 Bull & shoot a Marvel Conversion setup same as my 45 wadgun in matches . A Ruger with some trigger work is quite capable of taking a shooter to Master level if shooter does his part . While this is a S&W forum IMHO the Model 41 is an antiquated design based on pre WW2 Walther Olympia . Barrel is not a match grade as lands / grooves have wrong dimensions , extractor is a problematic item that the factory has refused to address for eons . A VQ Edge extractor remedies that . Trigger is crisp period & inferior to other makes . For a crisp trigger the High Standard has the best break . The cost of a new 41 is dang near in Euro territory . I went all thru one trying to make it usable for me . Relined barrel with a Lothar Walther liner as factory barrel 50yd groups were a joke , after relining it was capable of shooting a clean 50yd slow fire target . Bottom line the gun just did not fit ME & went down the road .

I bought a MK 4 tactical a few months ago, took the scope base and rail off, and I'm pretty happy with it so far as a fairly lightweight utility/plinker .22. Kinda thinking of it as a bug-out bag gun. The trigger on mine is tolerable if not great, but I may put a Volquartsen in it, too.

Ruger announced the Mk II .22 auto in early 1982. In June of that year the the Ruger Collector's Association (hereafter called the RCA) offered the RCA Mark Target with the RCA seal engraved on top of the receiver by Ray Viramontez for $297.50. 801 were produced; a person could have the seal inlaid with 24 karat gold for an additional $75.00, and 166 of the 801 made were so embellished.

They came in a reproduction of the pine "salt cod" box the very first Ruger .22 automatics were shipped in, as well as a cardboard box with the RCA logo instead of the Ruger eagle. The pine box also had a red RCA seal stamped on the corner of the bottom.

In September 1982 the RCA offered elephant ivory grips with an intertwined RCA logo to members for $200.00.

The information above is from Chad Hiddleston's excellent book Encyclopedia of Ruger Semiautomatic Rimfire Pistols 1949-1992, page 206.

I bought this pistol 3 & 1/2 years ago because I had purchased a used Mk II Standard model a couple of months before after not owning one for decades, and had so much fun I wanted a target model to shoot also. This one was marketed by Collectors Firearms for not much more than the same model and era gun without the RCA connections, and I fully intended to shoot it.

But it's so nice I don't want to mess it up; I especially don't to wear off the gold in the seal, or the RCA grip logo. It's only worth a very small fraction of what a Registered Magnum or 1880's Colt SAA brings, but it just seems too nice to mess up. Guess I'll keep on thinking.

I didn't get the original grips, assuming that this one wasn't shipped directly with the ivory grips. I don't belong to the RCA and don't know how that worked.

It's fun to guess, I bet the pistol came from an estate, and original grips were chucked out with a lot of other ephemera that we gun nuts accumulate. I know I have two closets full of stuff that my son will give the old heave-ho to. I could sell it myself, but I'm sooo lazy.
________________________________________________

Edited from my above post of 09/2021. :-) Bought another Mk II Target for shooting, so this one can rest quietly, waiting for my son to sell it for ten dollars.

I've been eyeing a Ruger IV for a while now--so glad to see this thread. I've narrowed it down to the threaded bull barrel target, but can't decide between stainless and blue. If they were the same price, I'd go stainless I think. Any strong opinions one way or the other?

Stainless will hold up better cosmetically, but I'd say go with whichever one you like the looks of best.

I much prefer blued guns myself. While the stainless might take a bit more abuse and be easier to bring back, the blue version is in my opinion easier to shoot outdoors - less reflection. In the case of the Mark 4, I also like the fact that the blued version is about 6 ounces lighter than the stainless version. That is huge for female shooters!

While I do own stainless guns they are all "carry guns" of one sort or another. I've also got several Nickeled guns but the vast majority of my collection is blued steel.

Thanks for mentioning the weight issue. It looks like the frame on the Ruger IV blue is aluminum, which I'd forgotten about. The wife finds the 41 a bit of a handful.

That made a huge difference to my friend who is a small frame short woman. Quite honestly, I too prefer slightly lighter target pistols. When I bought my Sport/Field barrel for my M41 I was a very happy camper! The 5.5” bull bbl. Was a bit heavier than I cared for. Now I shoot my M41 better than ever 😀

Bought my first 22 auto, when I turned 21 in '68, while in the USAF and shooting a Win 52D with the smallbore team.
The Rugers had terrible triggers so I bought a High Standard.

Over the years I never found a Ruger with a decent trigger.
Some years ago the family wanted a full size 22 Auto as we just had some Bobcats.
Ordered a MKIV stainless and the trigger was acceptable.
Have only fired a few boxes with it, modified a 10/22 mount for the DDP, RMR and scopes and put it away.
No need for a trigger upgrade, at the time, so it just sat in the safe for a few years.

Took it out this week, for bi-annual check/oil etc, and noticed that the trigger is really nice.
The Mrs liked it as well.
Will put the RMR or DDP on the MKIV for her.

I'll put the 2x scope or a 3-9x on the 9422 so she can learn to use glass.
Fixed power can be tricky so she'll practice with both before some range time soon.

I loaded some really light loads as she wants to try the 3.5" 460 with irons.
She's shot the Colt GM/45 and her Ruger Sec6 snub over the years.
The K22M was not her favorite with the long barrel and irons.

When I was out of town or country doing marine electronics/computer installs, the Sec6 with six rounds of snakeshot and big Dogs was the home security system.

Attached Images

IMG_1066.jpg (139.7 KB, 11 views)

__________________
Have Fun/Stay Safe

I also have a stainless MKIV Target with most of a Volquartsen kit. It did need the kit. The factory rigger was pretty bad as in too heavy. It's a fantastic shooter now.

I also bought a complete Ruger blue factory target upper from Volquartsen for very cheap. I guess they bought a bunch of Ruger pistols for the lowers for their custom guns and so had a bunch of uppers to get rid of. Worked for me. So now I have one upper set up with an optic and one set up with irons. It's all stainless with the one upper and a pinto with the other. Great fun!

You don't need a picture. It looks like a MKIV Target. There is a picture already here somewhere.