Final update - FOLLOW UP ON A FRIENDS RUGER MARK 4 TARGET PISTOL

[chief38]

Almost no human can consistently shoot to the true potential of a highly accurate and consistent target pistol. That said, I need to know that the potential is always there if I do my part.

I understand that liability is "the tail that wags the dog" these days but Ruger should either sell a "target designated pistol" with a capable trigger or remove the roll mark of "target pistol". Ya can't have it both ways!

My S&W M41 (made in 1979 and purchased new) has not been touched, lightened or played with at all as far as the action goes. The only thing I've ever done to it to improve it for me is to install a Sport / Field barrel on it (drop in). The action remains stock, it's crisp and light at about 2 pounds. The gun is scary accurate and will outshoot me or anyone I know. That's what a true target pistol should be IMHO.

 

[Krogen]

Almost no human can consistently shoot to the true potential of a highly accurate and consistent target pistol. That said, I need to know that the potential is always there if I do my part.

I am not equipment limited! Except between the ears, that is. All my pistols shoot where they're aimed. THAT is the problem . . . .

 

[reddogs]

Even a ransom rest needs to be properly set up and used.Some guns can be outstanding most are pretty good.I thought i had a problem with some revolvers turned out to be my eyes.

 

[Rule3]

You should inform your friend that if ever she needs (or wants) to send the pistol back to Ruger, they will not return it with the Volquardsen trigger group installed. They will return it with their OEM trigger and not return the VQ parts. More legal concerns on their part, I think. Anyways, if ever it gets returned to Ruger, you (or she) should first restore it to its original horrible trigger configuration. -S2

No different than Smith and Wesson.

 

[AZgman]

I tried out a Ruger Mark IV back-to-back with a S&W Victory 22. I bought the S&W because of the better trigger. I have also shot a friends Mark II with the long barrel and the trigger on it was better than the Mark IV. Of course, the Mark II was fully broken in!

 

[chief38]

The S&W Victory (IMHO) is an excellent plinker for just over $400 bucks but not a true target pistol. I have put hundreds of rounds through my buddies Victory and while it is accurate, the sights and trigger are no where's near target shooting grade in my book. It is just my opinion but target sights should not have a glow in the dark 3 dot system. The victory's trigger out of he box is better than the Mark 4 - but not that much better. It is by no means a target pistol's trigger either. I also dislike the way the Victory takes down and do not like the grip frame - but arguable, that's an individual opinion. The Victory is also too heavy and bulky for my liking - again, an individual opinion.

 

[Dvus]

It sounds like a lot of time could have been saved by just getting an old Hi Standard Citation. Fully adjustable trigger and straight up rival to the M41. You can pick them up in the $600 - $700 range.

 

[much ado]

22 Pistols

Chief38`s point about the fiber optic sight in a Victory is well made (at least for me). I was perusing the S&W Catalogue a month or so back and saw that S&W has a "Target" Victory. Noticed that it had a solid blade front sight and thumb-rest grips. Found out I could order those parts and did. The front sight was less than $5 and and I felt like my accuracy immediately improved with those parts but particularly the solid blade sight.

 

[chief38]

It sounds like a lot of time could have been saved by just getting an old Hi Standard Citation. Fully adjustable trigger and straight up rival to the M41. You can pick them up in the $600 - $700 range.

The OLD VINTAGE Hi Standards are incredibly well made, accurate and reliable pistols! They are as accurate if not more so and usually have better triggers than even a M41. I have shot many of them. The two reasons I don't own one are the following:

I dislike the magazine release being on the butt of the gun.

I dislike the slide catch/release control being of the wrong side of the pistol for right handed shooters.

Had it not been for those two issues, I would have bought one back in the 1970's.

 

[BigMuddy]

With regards to trigger pull weight,the Ruger MK 1 is superior right out of the box!

^^^this^^^.

I found one used in a gunshop several years ago for a ridiculously low price. They thought the trigger was broken It would be a tough battle between that Ruger and my M-17 revolver.

Dan

 

[LostintheOzone]

I am no expert on Ruger .22 pistols, only owning one, an early 50s Standard Model. I don’t consider its trigger to be horrible in any way. A little heavy but a nice crisp let off. I assume the Volq trigger is a popular item, makes one wonder why Ruger hasn’t enhanced its factory trigger (perhaps as an extra cost option) after all the years it has been manufactured. When I bought mine, it was in nearly new condition. But the sights were ridiculously far off, even at close range. It took a lot of work to adjust them to a 50’ zero. I think that is why it looked unfired. The early owner probably couldn’t hit anything with it and retired it to the nightstand drawer.

I have a MKII target. I've never thought the trigger was a problem. I purchased it used so it may not have 100% original parts. That's the thing about buying used, one just never knows. I have a model 28 that has a 2 1/2 lb trigger that I purchased used. I know it didn't come from the factory like that. I like it for targets though. I don't carry it.

I did have to get some trigger work done on my Mini-14 however. Now that was a very bad factory trigger. Maybe a Ruger trademark now.

 

[chief38]

I posted the FINAL UPDATE in the original post (#1) if you are interested.

 

[6GUNSONLY]

I have on of the MK 4 tactical. I took the rail and sight be off, plan to add a trigger upgrade and likely a can. Yeah, the trigger is pretty awful, especially compared to my old Hi Standard Tournament.

 

[reddogs]

I figured groups would be better.Nice work and money well spent.

 

[Jebus35745]

Great final update, have a MKIV Hunter that could have a better trigger pull. Shot bullseye for abt 10 yrs mainly with a model 41. Had a Hammerli 280 for a 1 1/2 yrs and went back to the 41 which I shot better. Loved the Hammerli, too bad. Also have a MKII Government model with all Volquartsen inners and it’s a tack driver, actually someone else’s bullseye gun. Larry

 

[Imissedagain]

OP,
Curious to which target you all used?
Only familiar with the NRA targets that we used,
for 50' four position, back in the '60s with the
AF rifle team.

Thx

While my right shoulder is healing, I'll order or make some,
then out to the range with the SS MKIV Target in a few weeks.
Hopefully.
Will shoot the MKIV and then enlarge the holes
with a scoped 460 and soft shooting Trail Boss loads.

 

[chief38]

OP,
Curious to which target you all used?
Only familiar with the NRA targets that we used,
for 50' four position, back in the '60s with the
AF rifle team.

Thx

While my right shoulder is healing, I'll order or make some,
then out to the range with the SS MKIV Target in a few weeks.
Hopefully.
Will shoot the MKIV and then enlarge the holes
with a scoped 460 and soft shooting Trail Boss loads.

I only use one type of target - the B3 50 ft official NRA. The groupings were excellent - about the size of a Nickel. I even use them at 100 yards when rifle shooting. Aim small - miss small. I use the B3 for everything except 22 rifle - then I use the tiny little targets (you know 10 on a page and about the size of a 50 cent piece in total with the bullseye about 1/4" in diameter.

 

[Imissedagain]

Thanks OP.
I usually use the type target in the picture as it allows me to see .224 size holes against a sand berm.....
with a Weaver T-36 mounted on a rifle or tripod.
We also print targets with multiple 2" orange circles, some with thin black + or tiny dots in the center..... similar to the 10 on a target for 50' small bore, but use them at 25/50/100 yards.
I use them for my bows at 20 yards as well.

I was told that the International small bore targets just had a tiny dot for an X as opposed to the X being about 1/4".
That was in the '60s.

 

[Faulkner]

I admit I am not a serious target shooter.

I have eight Ruger .22 pistols and have never found the need to change out the trigger to get good accuracy. I'm talking squirrel head accuracy.

I've been involved in the training of a lot of people who are inexperienced or have never shot a gun and having a tuned trigger or not never really played into their ability to shoot. Heck, I've won a number of handgun competitions shooting a Glock, and they are not known for tuned triggers. Just my opinion, which don't count for much, but I see people on the range all the time complain about triggers for poor marksmanship but you hand the same gun to someone who knows how to shoot and it's not a problem.

Just for grins, and I've done this over half a dozen times, I've had 1911 aficionados come to the range who can shoot the gnat off a dogs back with a 1911. Hand them something else and they can't shoot squat and complain the trigger is too "squishy" or some such excuse. That doesn't make them bad shooters, it's just what you get used to in your training.

My point in all this is, I don't think stock Ruger MK triggers in general are all that bad. Like anything else, practice can overcome a lot of little things.