S&W Model 41 old vs new and vs Ruger Mk 4

[oysterer]

What do you all think about the SW model 41. I have a couple of questions:

-what difference can be expected between old vs current production in terms of trigger, accuracy etc

-How do the current model 41s stack up against the new Ruger MK IV target guns in terms of accuracy and overall quality etc

Just looking for thoughts, experience and general insights.

Never owned either a 41 or Ruger MK.

Thanks

 

[D Brown]

I have both a newer version of the Model 41 (shipped June 20, 2016) and a Ruger Mark IV.

In my opinion, the Model 41 is a much more refined target pistol. The factory trigger is a crisp 2.25 pounds.

The factory trigger on my Mark IV is a huge disappointment, especially when being compared to my Mark I and Mark II's.

Best of luck with your search and decision.

 

[Dave.357]

I have several Rugers and 1 model 41
The older the Ruger the better the trigger
But none of them come close to a model 41
Trigger

 

[6string]

What is the intended use?

The answer, or at least the direction to look, depends on your intended usage.
If it's general fun and informal shooting, you might be better off comparing the Ruger to a Browning Buckmark or S&W Victory. Basically, inexpensive pistols that reliably go "bang", with so-so triggers and accuracy. Good enough for goofing around with on the weekend with your kids, etc.
If for serious target shooting (i.e: precision bullseye) the above are all passable entry level guns.
The S&W 41 is honestly neither fish nor fowl. Expensive, and often problematic in terms of trigger and reliability. And, there is zero adjustment available in terms of premium trigger, sight picture, etc. They enjoy a reputation with guys who remember the good old days. But, their time in the winning circle is long gone, assuming you can even get one that can get through a match without jamming.
For that kind of money, and serious use, your best bet is to look at a real target pistol such as Pardini, Feinwerkbau aw93, older Hämmerli 208/208s, Morini CM 22, Walther GSP, etc.
You'll get better grip options, better accuracy, better sights, utter reliability, overall superior fit and ergonomics, (and did I say better accuracy?).

 

[series guy]

I paid $800 a few years ago for my Model 41. With the base and sight I'm at $1k. I bought the MK4 because I liked the new design. Of course the trigger didn't come close to the Model 41. So a trigger kit, base, and optic and I'm at $900. Accuracy isn't bad but the trigger isn't close to the Model 41.

 

[SweetMK]

I have a cocking indicator vintage Model 41 thaqt I shoot sometimes,,

but,,,

when I want to plink 500 rounds, I get out my Ruger MK pistol with the VQ accurizing kit installed,,

Ruger MK IV & 22/45 | Volquartsen Firearms

I have the MKIII, but, I would imagine the MKIV is similar, the parts look the same,,

I have a 1.75 pound trigger on my MKIII,, with no creep, or overtravel.

Yea, the Ruger is a little "Klunky" compared to the Model 41,,
but,, BOY does the Ruger shoot.

I was hitting 6" diameter rocks at 150 yards with the MKIII today (2X scope)

For me, that is usually something that I need a rifle to do..

 

[gwpercle]

I own a Ruger MKI Target (6 7/8" tapered bbl.) , Ruger MKII Target (5" bull barrel) and 1974 era S&W model 41 with two different barrels.

I competed in indoor NRA Bullseye (Precision) Match with all three for many years . The Ruger's weren't bad and did well compared to the factory stock S&W 41. But... after sending the model 41 to Clark Custom Guns for a Target Trigger job , Reliability Package and some minor tuning ... The S&W now takes first place in the accuracy department . The Target Trigger Job done by a world class shop makes the biggest difference .

Do you get what you pay for ... In Spades and then some !
The model 41 is a true target pistol and Clark Custom knows how to work magic on them ... shooting it makes me smile !
Gary

 

[Old_Cop]

The answer, or at least the direction to look, depends on your intended usage.
If it's general fun and informal shooting, you might be better off comparing the Ruger to a Browning Buckmark or S&W Victory. Basically, inexpensive pistols that reliably go "bang", with so-so triggers and accuracy. Good enough for goofing around with on the weekend with your kids, etc.
If for serious target shooting (i.e: precision bullseye) the above are all passable entry level guns.
The S&W 41 is honestly neither fish nor fowl. Expensive, and often problematic in terms of trigger and reliability. And, there is zero adjustment available in terms of premium trigger, sight picture, etc. They enjoy a reputation with guys who remember the good old days. But, their time in the winning circle is long gone, assuming you can even get one that can get through a match without jamming.
For that kind of money, and serious use, your best bet is to look at a real target pistol such as Pardini, Feinwerkbau aw93, older Hämmerli 208/208s, Morini CM 22, Walther GSP, etc.
You'll get better grip options, better accuracy, better sights, utter reliability, overall superior fit and ergonomics, (and did I say better accuracy?).

This is accurate.

 

[oysterer]

Thanks for the replies. Looks like the MK iv with a Volquartsen trigger upgrade shall fit the bill a bit better. I am looking to do some casual steel shooting, some ocasional drills, shooting w the kids etc. I would still like the gun to be real accurate. I do not do any 1 handed BE shooting. I tried some yesterday. Both 41 and Mk IV can be shot with both hands but the Ruger maybe better so. I liked the 6.88'' Hunter with fiber front sight the best.

 

[Sevens]

Long before I would consider or accept a MkIII or MkIV, I would spend the same or a little more money for a clean MkII.

The MkIII gives you the ability to mount an optic without drilling the gun and it gives you the traditional push-button magazine release. The MkIV adds the easier field stripping.

However both of these come at a great cost... the horrific loaded chamber indicator, the awful magazine safety -AND- less quality across the board as we’ve seen from basically any/every/all gun makers in recent years. And I loathe the S&W 22-A series of pistols almost as much.

I would choose a pre-2000 S&W Model 41 over any Ruger, but know going in that it may be finicky. I would take any Ruger Mk-series over any Model 41 made in the last 20 years.

And I would choose a five dollar gift card to Tim Horton’s over absolutely any S&W Victory .22 pistol.

 

[wproct]

The older model 41 pistols definitely have a superior finish to the newer ones, but performance wise, based on my own experience they are about the same. Like Sevens, I am a big fan of the Ruger MKII pistol. I have always had a soft spot for American made target grade semi-auto .22 rimfire pistols. I own a 2007 year production model 41, a couple of target grade Ruger MKII pistols, and a Smith & Wesson Victory. The Ruger MKII's and the Smith & Wesson Victory have had some trigger/action upgrades. Most of my shooting is casual target/plinking. While I love my model 41, I actually prefer shooting either the MKII Rugers or the Smith & Wesson Victory. However, for me where the model 41 shines is when it comes time to clean the pistols. The model 41 is by far the easiest pistol to disassemble for cleaning that I have ever came across. I know that the Ruger MKIV takes down quite easily also, but I have just never owned one.

 

[quikdraw67]

Long before I would consider or accept a MkIII or MkIV, I would spend the same or a little more money for a clean MkII.

The MkIII gives you the ability to mount an optic without drilling the gun and it gives you the traditional push-button magazine release. The MkIV adds the easier field stripping.

However both of these come at a great cost... the horrific loaded chamber indicator, the awful magazine safety -AND- less quality across the board as we’ve seen from basically any/every/all gun makers in recent years. And I loathe the S&W 22-A series of pistols almost as much.

I would choose a pre-2000 S&W Model 41 over any Ruger, but know going in that it may be finicky. I would take any Ruger Mk-series over any Model 41 made in the last 20 years.

And I would choose a five dollar gift card to Tim Horton’s over absolutely any S&W Victory .22 pistol.

Totally agree. To me the MkII was the best Ruger pistol produced. The MkIII was the nanny gun, with unnecessary safety features. And the MkIV was made for idiots who couldn't figure out how to reassemble the previous Marks. And they promptly had a recall shortly after being introduced.

Also, the quality of all aforementioned guns come into play. The older, the better.

And Tim Horton's coffee is the best. Period.

 

[lhump1961]

" And the MkIV was made for idiots who couldn't figure out how to reassemble the previous Marks."

That's quite a statement. You must already have enough friends. I have a MKI I've shot since I was a kid and a MKII from some time later. I cleaned and reassembled them just fine. But I would be an "idiot" if I didn't appreciate the ease of take down on the MKIV's I also own. The MKIV's are a fine example of engineering that keeps what's good and improves what's not so good.

As for triggers I would agree the MKII has a good enough out of the box trigger but as with all firearms if you want to shoot your best then a really good trigger is key. A Volquartsen trigger puts my suppressed MKIV at about 1.75lbs with no take up or overtravel. The great thing about the MKIV's is that the serial number is on the upper. That means you can send the lower to Volquartsen (or vendor of choice) without FFL if you want them to install it. I'm sure there are other good trigger choices but I only have experience with Volquartsen. Excellent trigger for about $140 or installed for $70 more.

I've not owned a S&W 41 but what I've read in this thread reflects the consensus I've seen reported over time.

 

[kleiss1]

I like my 60’s 41.

 

[n c rod]

Older/newer/41’s vs Roger Mk 4

I have seen good 41’s and bad 41’s of each old and new vintages. The Ruger is OK after you spend $300.00 in aftermarket trigger and grip upgrades, but I prefer the 41. I get the most accuracy by spending my dollars on “fancy“ ammunition. Garbage in Garbage out. It is not literally that simple , but It’s close. A 41 is a good place to start with premium ammunition until YOU can out shoot your pistol. That’s hard for most to do.

 

[Racer X]

I have an original Ruger 22/45 Target, a Mark II Target, a Mark III Target, a Stainless Mark III Competition Slabside with a spare Stainless Mark II Comp Slabside Upper with 4x scope, and a Stainless Mark IV 6.88" fluted Hunter with a spare stainless 5.5" Target upper.

A VQ Mark II/III trigger kit is $60 on eBay from the VQCloseouts website. You can eliminate the LCI *** with a $15 blank steel insert, and remove the magazine disconnect BS with a Mark II bushing, or a custom Mark III bushing. Target grips start at @$30 on up. My most expensive set was $100 mint used.

A blued bull barrelled Target model plus a VQ trigger kit will outlast your grand kids. And if something happens to it, buy another. STILL money ahead.

I would not turn down a 41, but when I had the chance recently, I got the Mark IV Hunter with the spare upper and 14 new magazines. Other than the recoil spring assembly and the extractor, nothing really wears out on them. Both are less than a 5 minute swap.

 

[quikdraw67]

" And the MkIV was made for idiots who couldn't figure out how to reassemble the previous Marks."

That's quite a statement. You must already have enough friends. I have a MKI I've shot since I was a kid and a MKII from some time later. I cleaned and reassembled them just fine. But I would be an "idiot" if I didn't appreciate the ease of take down on the MKIV's I also own. The MKIV's are a fine example of engineering that keeps what's good and improves what's not so good.

As for triggers I would agree the MKII has a good enough out of the box trigger but as with all firearms if you want to shoot your best then a really good trigger is key. A Volquartsen trigger puts my suppressed MKIV at about 1.75lbs with no take up or overtravel. The great thing about the MKIV's is that the serial number is on the upper. That means you can send the lower to Volquartsen (or vendor of choice) without FFL if you want them to install it. I'm sure there are other good trigger choices but I only have experience with Volquartsen. Excellent trigger for about $140 or installed for $70 more.

I've not owned a S&W 41 but what I've read in this thread reflects the consensus I've seen reported over time.

I've owned a 80's vintage 41. Great target pistol. not much fun for anything else.

I have a collection of Mk1 and MkII Rugers and find them a joy to shoot.

I have 1 MkIII 22/45 I bought as a trainer for my wife when she showed interest in shooting 1911's. It's a nice shooter, but the nanny safety features are annoying.

The problem I have with the MkIV is that as soon as it came out it had a recall. I love Rugers as much as Smith revolvers, but the quality of both brands seems poor compared to the older models.

Also, I think that the MkIV ruined the classic looks of the previous Marks.

And finally, I got a really nice MkII in the box with papers for free when a very good friend of mine took it apart and couldn't get it back together. I did it for him, and he said keep it, I'll never get the hang of it.

I love him like a brother, but he's not mechanically inclined.

So he would be the target customer for a MkIV.

 

[BAM-BAM]

I like my 60’s 41.

I have my Dad's........they are great target gun. For field use give me a Smith 18 or 63.......... but a Ruger will fill the bill.

 

[Dave Lively]

I've owned a 80's vintage 41. Great target pistol. not much fun for anything else.

Is your 41 unreliable or have some other problem that makes it less fun than a Ruger? I find being able to consistently hit what I am aiming at great fun!

But while a lot of fun my 41 is finicky and heavy. The finicky part means it jams more than I like with anything except CCI MiniMags but after giving up on trying to get the gun to work reliably with CCI std velocity that is not a big issue. There are times though when I bring my 22 Compact to the range instead because it is lighter and as reliable as a 22 gets even though less accurate.

I bought a 617 a few months ago that is getting a lot of range time right now. Not quite as accurate as my 41 but much more accurate than my 22 Compact.

 

[Sevens]

I have gotten lucky with my 41, though I purchased two cases of CCI-SV, I have tried running Aguila SV in it and it really seems to love that ammo.

I have two items I can list that would make it NOT the best choice every single time... it is extremely heavy and it has excessively sharp edges at every angle of the trigger.

So it is not my best choice for sharing with new shooters that aren’t accustomed to holding a heavy handgun at arm’s length.

Beyond those items, it’s phenomenal and for about the last year, it’s the single gun that has digested about 95% of my rimfire shooting.