Indians For Guns

Today I went to the range, figuring on spending a long afternoon shooting. I have been lazy of late and have not cast any bullets, and have shot up my stock, so I figured that I would shoot my Wife's pistol, which is a Ruger Mark IV Target 22. I have been shooting this pistol about the last five visits, and it has been a challenge to me. I can shoot my 9mms, my 38 Detective Special, and both of my 45s (Auto and Colt) better than this thing, and I have found that frustrating.

Several visits ago, I found that the front sight was loose when I got home. In the ever-present need to save manufacturing costs, Ruger attaches the front sight with a single screw now, like the cheap 22 I bought for my grandkids to shoot. My old 45 has the sight soldered or brazed on - I don't know which - so it has never come loose.

Then I went back and figured that I would set the world afire, but although there was some improvement, it wasn't much. I started having trouble getting the magazines out when they were empty. I pulled the grips (having been fooled by the front sight, I began taking a set of tools to the range) and still it took a bunch of fiddling around the get either of the two magazines out. The last time was very bad, but today it became impossible to get the magazines out of the gun.

It was a good thing I brought the old Star and a few boxes of ammo, because my Ruger shooting was done for the day. I was not happy at all.

Tonight when I got home, I tried tearing the thing down to figure out what the problem might be. I found out that the fancy adjustable sight that comes with the Target model ("Target" stated proudly on the receiver side) has 0.014 inches of play in it. i'm going to get my math friend to figure out what this means at 25 yards, but obviously I won't be shooting this Ruger any better then that error.

I have handguns over 100 years old and rifles even older, and they are not made this poorly. Even my old Norinco Star, which is about as refined as a construction worker's staple gun, doesn't have any of these issues. Yes, I know, I need to locktite all of the screws -- excuse me, Ruger, I didn't know that your thread tolerances were so poor, even worse than the kid's 22 rifle. Now I have learned.

When I bought this for my Wife, I had thought that I would buy her an old Colt Police Positive in 32. But, i got lazy and thought that I would just buy this Ruger for her and she'd be able to shoot to her heart's content without any casting and reloading work for me. Little did I know! The pistol now has about 1000 rounds run through it. My Dad had one of the early Ruger Sandards with the 6 inche barrel. All it ever needed was loading, shooting, and cleaning, and Dad, my brother, and I did plenty of that.

I will call Ruger service on Monday and see what they say. Maybe they will have a fix. Whether I keep this turkey or not, I don't know. I told my Wife tonight that I would probably be in the market for another handgun for her. Whatever, you can be sure that it won't be another Ruger -- i'm through with them. Maybe an old Police Positive, or maybe an old Colt Woodsman. We shall see. I need to cool off a little more before making any decisions.

Woodsman- any day

A perfect reason (not an excuse) to buy another gun.

Able, for sure! The only answer one needs about buying any gun or number of guns: because I want to! After all, we're not supposed to be living in some kind of dictatorship, are we?

Asif: yes, throughout the whole afternoon, I could hear you saying "bedpan mechanic" in my mind. I listen to others online praising Ruger to the sky, and saying how the gun (this particular gun) will shoot better than I can. Well, I own other Rugers and they are good guns in many ways (although not all ways), but they were all made in the 70s and certainly something has changed at Ruger. Even when this gun does shoot, I doubt that it will shoot as well as I can.

I thought about the math again and it works out this way: the target distance (25 yards) is 900 inches, divided by the sight radius, 8 inches, times the free movement of the rear sight, 0.014 inches, is 1.575 inches. The gun will not shoot any better than that, even if my hold, sight pattern, and ammunition is perfect. That, to me, is unacceptable for a gun called "Target" by a supposedly reputable firm.

BTW, the magazines are made of metal so thin that one would think that they are made of aluminum beer cans, and the bottom is plastic. They are as light as a feather. With both magazines, I get a jam about every 20-25 rounds, where the empty is laying cross-wise on top of the feeding fresh round. This makes the removal of the magazines a common need. My Dad's old Ruger Standard had a proper substantial steel magazine.

The trigger is nothing to brag about, although everybody complains about triggers and because I'm tired of it, I figure that everyone else is, too.

Even though this pistol looks like a striker fired pistol, it is not. It has an internal hammer and the safety has a notch that engages a spur sticking out of the side of the sear -- it's not drop safe, in other words. Even though few would carry such a pistol for self defense, it is important to know that it and all of the other models of this pistol are not drop safe and thus unfit for defensive carry -- they are range guns. Carrying one in the field would be an "Israeli carry": no round in the chamber. Anyway, for hiking and field use, I now prefer the Galco thumb break or a full flap holster to keep things where they belong when scrambling up and down rocks and such.

On line, I'm not only told that I have to buy a particular kind of 22 ammo that the gun "likes." Well, we shot whatever came to hand with my Dad's old Standard, so obviously this is a case of Ruger fanboys who have to defend their visions of perfection.

The gun is an improvement over the older Marks and the Standard in that it's so much easier to take apart. The old ones with the riveted stamped thick steel sheet metal frames were very difficult to disassemble.

Can it be that a Woodsman suffers from all of these maladies? We have come a long way from John M Browning, and that is not for the best, I fear.

It is particularly disappointing to witness a lemon from a reputable firm like Ruger. I hope they repair/replace the pistol.