New Ruger 22/45 Mark IV Lite

homeslice · Jan 6, 2017

Hey guys, just wanted to show off a purchase I made today. Hope you enjoy the unboxing video, can't wait to shoot this thing.

https://youtu.be/zqCoZ3kz8_0

MOTOR51 · Jan 6, 2017

Thanks for the video. Nice pistol and glad to see these types of threads on BS

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RG43 · Jan 6, 2017

Thanks for the review, glad to see they are going to continue the 22/45 line. It looks to me like the magazine is the same as the 22/45 Mark III magazines. The 22/45 series is different than the regular 22 pistols, the grip doesn't have that same angle like a Luger, but more like a 1911 grip angle. There are some other minor differences as well. I learned about it the hard way when I purchased some Mark III magazines, only to find out they don't fit in the 22/45 MarkIII I had use of.

RG43 · Jan 6, 2017

Also, can you change the grips on the 22/45 mkIV? Looks like there are screws to remove the grips. You can't on the 22/45 mkIII, which is another difference between it and the regular 22 mkIII.

homeslice · Jan 6, 2017

RG43 said:
Thanks for the review, glad to see they are going to continue the 22/45 line. It looks to me like the magazine is the same as the 22/45 Mark III magazines. The 22/45 series is different than the regular 22 pistols, the grip doesn't have that same angle like a Luger, but more like a 1911 grip angle. There are some other minor differences as well. I learned about it the hard way when I purchased some Mark III magazines, only to find out they don't fit in the 22/45 MarkIII I had use of.
View attachment 67645 View attachment 67646

The magazines are EXCEEDINGLY similar, but with only one small diference it's easy to overlook. I covered it in the video and you'll be able to spot the difference on your picture here. The baseplate on the Mark III magazines portrudes about a quarter inch past the back of the magazine. This causes the Mark III magazine to not seat in the Mark IV (I tried). The Mark IV magazine rear baseplate is flush with the magazine. I didn't see if the Mark IV magazine would work in the Mark II though, I doubt it would. Hope this helps!

homeslice · Jan 6, 2017

RG43 said:
Also, can you change the grips on the 22/45 mkIV? Looks like there are screws to remove the grips. You can't on the 22/45 mkIII, which is another difference between it and the regular 22 mkIII.

That's my initial impression. Screws to remove = grip changing. But, it does look like the grips have slots to make room for the levers of the gun, so it may not be an even swap to 1911 grips.

topgunz1 · Jan 6, 2017

My wallet is angry at you, thanks for posting this!

RG43 · Jan 6, 2017

homeslice said:
The magazines are EXCEEDINGLY similar, but with only one small diference it's easy to overlook. I covered it in the video and you'll be able to spot the difference on your picture here. The baseplate on the Mark III magazines portrudes about a quarter inch past the back of the magazine. This causes the Mark III magazine to not seat in the Mark IV (I tried). The Mark IV magazine rear baseplate is flush with the magazine. I didn't see if the Mark IV magazine would work in the Mark II though, I doubt it would. Hope this helps!

So you had 22/45 mkIII magazine you tried? Different than the regular mkIII magazine, correct?

This is the 22/45 mkIII magazine:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/23...45-mark-iii-22-long-rifle-10-round-steel-blue

and this the the standard mkIII:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/38...er-mark-iii-22-long-rifle-10-round-steel-blue

I had heard the mkIV was backward compatible with the mkIII magazines, but it sounds like that isn't true with the 22/45 then.

EDIT: Ok, I just went back to your video and then looked at my magazine, now I see what you are saying. That really sucks!! I wonder why they did that? Seems to me it was just more cost for them to retool to make the new magazines, when they already had the old magazines. Plus, I can tell you this will likely be a deal breaker for me as I've already invested in extra magazines for the mkIII and I don't want to have to do that again. I have access to this mkIII whenever I want (it's my father in-laws) and was considering getting my own mkIV. But now, I'm free to consider a S&W Victory, which I understand has a better trigger and is at least $100 cheaper. Ruger blew it, they are leaving the door open for people to go to the S&W if they already have the mkIII and invested in extra magazines. Sure, the S&W requires an allen wrench to take it apart, but other than that it's just about as easy. Heck, even 22Plinkster said he likes his 22 Victory better than the mkIV (the one he customized at least).

tuan · Jan 6, 2017

Easily breaks apart with one hand.... as an owner of a mark III, I hate you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

homeslice · Jan 6, 2017

RG43 said:
So you had 22/45 mkIII magazine you tried? Different than the regular mkIII magazine, correct?

This is the 22/45 mkIII magazine:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/23...45-mark-iii-22-long-rifle-10-round-steel-blue

and this the the standard mkIII:

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/38...er-mark-iii-22-long-rifle-10-round-steel-blue

I had heard the mkIV was backward compatible with the mkIII magazines, but it sounds like that isn't true with the 22/45 then.

The MKIV 22/45 Magazine may be compatible with the MKIII 22/45, but I didn't test it that way. I can only confirm with 100% certainty that the Mark III 22/45 magazine will not seat in the Mark IV 22/45.

tuan said:
Easily breaks apart with one hand.... as an owner of a mark III, I hate you.

LOL - Like I said in the video - "I just blew your mind" :mamoru:

RG43 · Jan 6, 2017

homeslice said:
The MKIV 22/45 Magazine may be compatible with the MKIII 22/45, but I didn't test it that way. I can only confirm with 100% certainty that the Mark III 22/45 magazine will not seat in the Mark IV 22/45.

I'm not sure if the compatibility back to the mkIII will mean much as most people will be moving forward I'm sure.

In case you missed it, I added these comments to my last post:

Ok, I just went back to your video and then looked at my magazine, now I see what you are saying. That really sucks!! I wonder why they did that? Seems to me it was just more cost for them to retool to make the new magazines, when they already had the old magazines. Plus, I can tell you this will likely be a deal breaker for me as I've already invested in extra magazines for the mkIII and I don't want to have to do that again. I have access to this mkIII whenever I want (it's my father in-laws) and was considering getting my own mkIV. But now, I'm free to consider a S&W Victory, which I understand has a better trigger and is at least $100 cheaper. Ruger blew it, they are leaving the door open for people to go to the S&W if they already have the mkIII and invested in extra magazines. Sure, the S&W requires an allen wrench to take it apart, but other than that it's just about as easy. Heck, even 22Plinkster said he likes his 22 Victory better than the mkIV (the one he customized at least).

homeslice · Jan 6, 2017

RG43 said:
I'm not sure if the compatibility back to the mkIII will mean much as most people will be moving forward I'm sure.

In case you missed it, I added these comments to my last post:

Ok, I just went back to your video and then looked at my magazine, now I see what you are saying. That really sucks!! I wonder why they did that? Seems to me it was just more cost for them to retool to make the new magazines, when they already had the old magazines. Plus, I can tell you this will likely be a deal breaker for me as I've already invested in extra magazines for the mkIII and I don't want to have to do that again. I have access to this mkIII whenever I want (it's my father in-laws) and was considering getting my own mkIV. But now, I'm free to consider a S&W Victory, which I understand has a better trigger and is at least $100 cheaper. Ruger blew it, they are leaving the door open for people to go to the S&W if they already have the mkIII and invested in extra magazines. Sure, the S&W requires an allen wrench to take it apart, but other than that it's just about as easy. Heck, even 22Plinkster said he likes his 22 Victory better than the mkIV (the one he customized at least).

I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments here - if you're already into some Mk 3 mags, going to be a tough sell. As for me, I sold off all my mags with the last Mk I owned because I never considered they'd fix the disassembly problems. Anyway, the video that initially sold me on the 22/45 Mk 4 was from 22Plinkster on YouTube. He mentioned that Ruger may have to follow up and sell some new Mk 4 cross-compatible baseplates, and I hope they do! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-Vd8YCo98

RG43 · Jan 6, 2017

homeslice said:
I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments here - if you're already into some Mk 3 mags, going to be a tough sell. As for me, I sold off all my mags with the last Mk I owned because I never considered they'd fix the disassembly problems. Anyway, the video that initially sold me on the 22/45 Mk 4 was from 22Plinkster on YouTube. He mentioned that Ruger may have to follow up and sell some new Mk 4 cross-compatible baseplates, and I hope they do! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-Vd8YCo98

Thanks for the video link. I notice he said he still doesn't like the trigger. It was odd because he said he got a new trigger installed in that gun, but that Ruger had sent it to him to evaluate...I guess they gave it to him. Either way, I guess his evaluation is to replace the trigger...lol.

Anyway, he said they will be releasing the bottom plate upgrade for the old magazines, which I guess is a good thing. But I would guess they won't be backward compatible to the 22/45 mkIII if you do that? So you won't be able to keep both guns and swap magazines. I don't know who would, but still. At lease he gave the reason for the change, to allow the magazines to fall freely out of the gun, and I suppose that's a good reason.

Anyway, it looks like a nice gun, would be a good one for competition shooting I'd guess...with a new trigger.

Blex · May 2, 2017

very nice!

topgunz1 · May 2, 2017

I got a MkIV Tactical a few weeks ago, very sweet gun. I like the heavier barrel, and the rails unbolt if you don't want them. I removed the bottom and left the top, looks very nice. Very accurate, I just haven't had time to shoot it much.

mike84z28 · May 2, 2017

Your killing me, I have wanted one since they came out. I guess it's gonna be Christmas in May

topgunz1 · May 2, 2017

I've been wanting one too, I was only able to get it because I won a gun at the Duck's Unlimited Gonzales banquet that I sold to buy the MKIV, otherwise it would have remained on the wish list for awhile longer.

rcm192 · May 2, 2017

I have a MKIV 2245 Lite in black and I love it. I also dumped my mkIII for it. So much easier to clean after running it suppressed.

iwhodat · May 4, 2017

That is one beautiful piece. It looks comfy in the hand. I love that you couldn't wait until you got home to start filming.

AK shooter · May 4, 2017

I bought the tactical. As for the magazines you can get mark IV base plates from ruger for a couple of dollars each, or jut take a Dremel and remove the little bump on the back of the mark III mags.

New Ruger 22/45 Mark IV Lite

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

Be honest.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Be honest.

Be honest.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Be honest.

Well-Known Member

Be honest.

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Sic semper tyrannis

Active Member

Redneck with a gun!

Log in

Forum statistics