Ruger Mk IV Standard!

[JayFramer]

Got my Ruger Mk IV Standard in!

LOVE IT!!!

Guys I bought the Target model as soon as the IVs came out. It was the closest thing to a classic looking pistol in the line, and truth be told I'd have greatly preferred a taper barrel fixed sight Standard model which of course was not available at launch...

See where this is going? Yep, Ruger decided to bring out my ideal model a year or so later, and I'm just now getting around to picking one up. Guys it is a BEAUTIFUL gun and it runs like a Swiss watch!! SUPER fun! Very accurate and has run several different loads without flaw, including some light subsonic CCI ammo.

Compared to my Target, it's night and day, seriously. The Standard is about 7 ounces lighter than the Target, which has a 5.5" bull barrel and the Standard has a 4.75" taper barrel. By comparison the Target feels piggish and ungainly and is certainly a bigger gun and would not make as good a piece for carrying in the field as the lightweight Standard.

Granted the Target probably is better for different loads and competition, but as an everyday plinking companion the graceful Standard is absolutely ideal. Lithe in the hand, trim in weight and dimension, easy on the eyes, and evocative of simpler times, I believe so far that the Ruger Mk IV is the best .22 handgun I have ever owned.

Just thought I'd share guys, my Target is for sale in like-new shape if anyone wants it, I'll cut you a good deal. I frankly have no use for it anymore.

-Jay

 

[OLDSTER]

IMO,not a "classier" looking modern handgun on the market (and since 1949) than the Ruger , blued with fixed sights and the tapered barrel. I've own several, but the standard is my favorite. Nice MKIV ya got there

 

[Marshwheeling]

I prefer the looks a d portability of the Standard, too. Mine is a Mark III, sniffed at by conoisseurs and kind of a pain to take down, but there is really nothing wrong with the way it shoots.

What is the yellow sodbuster? I don’t recognize the shield and couldn't make out the tang stamp.

 

[The Norseman]

The fantasic 22lr Ruger

Congratulations

A young man was shooting that same exact
model at the Indoor Range last week.

We talked about it. He showed me how easy
it came apart to clean.

I had a Mk I Target in the late seventy's, really
liked it, wish I would have never traded it.

Thank you for the nice picture too.

 

[686-380]

Congratulations! I absolutely love my 22/45 lite Mark IV.

 

[OLDSTER]

More "classic" eye candy. This is my MKIII.

 

[sigp220.45]

Now you’re talking! Classic lines of the Standard Auto and the convenience of easy takedown. Nice snag.

 

[JayFramer]

I prefer the looks a d portability of the Standard, too. Mine is a Mark III, sniffed at by conoisseurs and kind of a pain to take down, but there is really nothing wrong with the way it shoots.

What is the yellow sodbuster? I don’t recognize the shield and couldn't make out the tang stamp.

It's a Kissing Crane brand knife. My father got it for me, I don't know much about them and think they're now made in China, but it's a good knife and was just handy as a prop.

 

[one eye joe]

Now you’re talking! Classic lines of the Standard Auto and the convenience of easy takedown. Nice snag.

"All caps=unread post"

WELL I GUESS THAT YOU'LL NEVER READ ANY OF MY POSTS, AND GUESS WHAT.....

THAT'S JUST FINE WITH THIS OL' SOLDIER.......

 

[PALADIN85020]

Yep, Bill Ruger started it all with the Standard in 1949. Classic lines, light weight, balances well, accurate and trouble-free. This "red eagle" standard was made during the first full year of manufacture in the "red barn." Still works great.

John

 

[JayFramer]

Yep, Bill Ruger started it all with the Standard in 1949. Classic lines, light weight, balances well, accurate and trouble-free. This "red eagle" standard was made during the first full year of manufacture in the "red barn." Still works great.

John

That's a beaut!!

 

[DWalt]

A year or so back, I found an extremely nice condition Standard Model Ruger .22 (ca. 1955, so of course mine has the black eagle), perfect (looks like the one pictured above) except for two very small areas of rust pitting. I cleaned those spots up, polished them, and used some cold blue which made them pretty well vanish unless you look really close. It came with two of the old-style magazines with zig-zag springs, but the springs on both were quite weak. Maybe they were always that way, I don't know. I bought a pair of new Mec-Gar mags, and they seem to work fine.

The only problem with it was adjusting the sights. The rear sight was an absolute bear to move to adjust windage and it really took some brute force with a hammer and brass punch to budge it. I nearly gave up, but perseverance finally got results. Also, I had to file down the front sight about 1/8" to get it on target at 50'. Before I worked on those sights, I couldn't even hit the paper from 50' using sand bag rests on the bench. I doubt any previous owner could have hit the paper either, and that was probably the reason that it appeared to be in nearly factory-new condition - no one wanted to fire it as they couldn't hit anything.

Regarding takedown and re-assembly of the earlier Rugers. Everyone complains about how difficult it is, but in fact it's fairly easily done if you remember one rule - always keep the hammer down, not cocked, when opening or closing the grip backstrap. That removes the tension on the hammer spring.