Posted: 9/15/2024 1:13:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Plumber576][Edited]
|
TL:DR Email Ruger's CEO to say the Ruger MkIV needs increased capacity. Link goes to Ruger's "Tell The CEO" page. I've been saying for a few years now that the Ruger MkIV needs a capacity upgrade to compete against the TX22, the P322, the KelTec P17, FN 502, and others. Some of you may have read my previous posts on the idea. I love my Ruger Standards. I grew up with a pair of MkII's and still have one, and happily own a pair of MkIV 22/45's. They're great guns. But as I think about adding a new .22 pistol to the stable for plinking, training, and some rimfire action shooting, I'm leaning more and more towards the Taurus or the Sig. I've been quite loyal to Ruger for my main rimfire pistols (Beretta 21a's are just toys, right?), but I don't think they're ideal for my next rimfire pistol. I wish Ruger would give the 22/45 a 2011 treatment and make a 22/11, basically the 22/45 with a new frame that takes 17- and 21-round magazines. The great part is that the upper on the MkIV is the serialized component, so ideally, Ruger could sell these grip frames and magazines direct to consumers or through their dealers as an upgrade part and not a firearm. Here's where I need your help - Ruger has a page where you can directly email the CEO this idea Tell the CEO (ruger.com) If you think this is a good idea and want to see the MkIV brought up to speed in the 2020's, I encourage you to join me in sending a message and letting him know. I know this idea isn't for everyone, but I still think it'd be a great option. I read more and more people looking for rimfire guns today are passing over the Ruger for the guns with larger capacity mags for multitudes of reasons, but particularly, they want something that has a similar capacity to commonly used and carried centerfire pistols. 2011's are seeing more use than ever these days, so this could even be considered a training aid for those shooters, if the frame is similar in size and shape to something like a 2011. A couple-few years ago when an increased capacity MkIV bug first bit me, after some googling, I stumbled across these airsoft pistols during a google image search. I think they give somewhat of a representation of what an increased capacity MkIV could look like.  
|
|
Originally Posted By DVCER: I think it would sell well. Originally Posted By GlockPride: Interesting. I like this idea. I’m half-heartedly been searching for a .22 pistol and have ruled the Ruger out due to limited capacity. Leaning towards the P322 for double the capacity of the standard Mk IV. Glad you guys agree. I posted this on RFC this morning and the idea is meeting some resistance over there. If you haven't yet, please take a moment and send a message to Ruger's CEO indicating you'd like to see this product made. https://ruger.com/dataProcess/tellTheCEO/ |
Joined:
Dec 2022
Posts:
990
EE: 100% (42)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: Feels like one of those things that if they haven’t done it yet, they never will. They’d have to redesign the frame and all. Current frame definitely won’t accept a magazine higher than 10rnd capacity. Of course. A 1911 frame won't accept 2011 mags. The CEO needs to know there's a market that wants and will buy a 22/11 or wide-body 22/45 if they take the time and money to develop it. Ruger didn't always make a 22/45, a new frame had to be developed. The gun didn't always have a push-button takedown, new frame had to be developed. The Lite models didn't always exist, Ruger needed to develop a new upper. Those were reactions to what consumers wanted. Reaching out and saying we want more capacity is letting Ruger know what consumers want. History tells us they will react to what the market wants. Next, we let them know we want a Charger pistol version of the American Rimfire Rifle 
|
|
Originally Posted By cschaeff: The grip frame is already pretty big, a double stack mag would be a 2X4. The existing double stack guns seem to be alright |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Joined:
Dec 2022
Posts:
993
EE: 100% (42)
TX, USA
|
Buy more magazines. Designing a .22LR hi-cap magazine to work well can be a bear. I'd much rather buy a small bucket of mags than another rimfire handgun that might or might not be reliable. I can't remember the last time I had a non ammo related hiccup with my two MKII's. |
|
Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: My guess is they don’t want to abandon that 1911 size/angle grip. So I doubt it’ll ever happen. Or they’ll do it and it’s giant like a 2011. Lol Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: Originally Posted By cschaeff: The grip frame is already pretty big, a double stack mag would be a 2X4. My guess is they don’t want to abandon that 1911 size/angle grip. So I doubt it’ll ever happen. Or they’ll do it and it’s giant like a 2011. Lol There’s a lot of extra room in it as is so I’m not sure it would have to get a whole lot bigger. It’s that size to mimic the 1911 not because it needs to be. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Joined:
Dec 2022
Posts:
994
EE: 100% (42)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: There’s a lot of extra room in it as is so I’m not sure it would have to get a whole lot bigger. It’s that size to mimic the 1911 not because it needs to be. I’m well aware. And it’s exactly why I don’t expect they’ll change it to accommodate a higher mag capacity. Many people buy them specifically for that reason. |
|
Originally Posted By Gunjunki: I sent the CEO a request! Originally Posted By KB7DX: Message to CEO sent. I'd have to buy MOAR! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/108158/DSCN6556_JPG-3191769.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/108158/LH_JPG-2898825.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/108158/DSCN5254_JPG-1636080.jpg Thanks to everyone who sent a message. If you haven't yet but agree with the idea, please use the link in the first post to let Ruger know! |
|
Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: I’m well aware. And it’s exactly why I don’t expect they’ll change it to accommodate a higher mag capacity. Many people buy them specifically for that reason. Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: There’s a lot of extra room in it as is so I’m not sure it would have to get a whole lot bigger. It’s that size to mimic the 1911 not because it needs to be. I’m well aware. And it’s exactly why I don’t expect they’ll change it to accommodate a higher mag capacity. Many people buy them specifically for that reason. And what about all the ones that aren’t 1911 shaped that they sell? One of the few criticisms I regularly got while selling these was capacity and I think they’d sell piles of a higher capacity version regardless of the configuration. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
While high capacity may be the current in thing, ten rounds has been a standard capacity for rimfire semi auto handgun magazines since about 1920, and it was never deemed inadequate before. I recall all the people bemoaning the glock 44 being introduced with a 10 round magazine. I will actually counter that ten round magazines are a good thing- hear me out: Acceptable in all the ban states Most competitions that focus on 22 rimfire guns ( for example steel challenge) it is ten rounds max per string anyway When practicing, as you go through a high capacity magazine, you tend to get fatigued and sloppy in technique near the end of that long string, which doesn’t promote the fundamental training value a 22 brings to the table As mentioned double stack mags are difficult to get to run with the rimmed 22 ( I see enough postings about people tinkering with ten round mags to optimize reliability as it is) I am pretty old school admittedly and more often than not do a lot of my 22 handgun shooting with a revolver that only holds 6 so the obsession over high capacity is a bit lost on me. I understand having options is good, and the point in the ruger that a redesigned non serialized grip module and larger magazine seems doable is valid. Bear in mind old Bill Ruger didn’t even want to sell full capacity mini 14 magazines to civilians ,so I imagine there may still be some resistance to such an idea at the factory but who knows. |
 Some of my Rugers. Only thing I “collect” You guys late to the party are complaining about magazine capacity? I’m the reason they took the loaded chamber indicator out post mk3. However they added the goofy hinge take down deal for the fags that can’t open a trash can. So I don’t own a Mk4. Just out of principal. .22lr mag capacity has to do with reliable feeding due to the rimmed case. Sure Sig seems to have done something. But I’d it as reliable as a MkII Ruger? I’m open to change as long as it has the same reliable feeding. |
|
Originally Posted By Plumber576: Glad you guys agree. I posted this on RFC this morning and the idea is meeting some resistance over there. If you haven't yet, please take a moment and send a message to Ruger's CEO indicating you'd like to see this product made. https://ruger.com/dataProcess/tellTheCEO/ No surprise as RFC has a lot of Fudds |
|
Originally Posted By cheeks: https://i.imgur.com/cX7YjUb.jpg Some of my Rugers. Only thing I “collect” You guys late to the party are complaining about magazine capacity? I’m the reason they took the loaded chamber indicator out post mk3. However they added the goofy hinge take down deal for the fags that can’t open a trash can. So I don’t own a Mk4. Just out of principal. .22lr mag capacity has to do with reliable feeding due to the rimmed case. Sure Sig seems to have done something. But I’d it as reliable as a MkII Ruger? I’m open to change as long as it has the same reliable feeding. That's an impressive collection! I think KelTec, Taurus, and Sig have proven that staggered-stack rimfire mags can be reliable. At this point by not making it an option I think Ruger is just losing part of their market share they've worked so hard to gain in the last 76 years since the Standard was introduced. Originally Posted By Blacktoothgrin: No surprise as RFC has a lot of Fudds It's a bit disappointing how much some of them just want to argue. Have to bite my tongue and accept that this proposed idea isn't for everyone and that's okay. I don't see it as a zero-sum game, it doesn't have to mean radical change or the loss of 10-round frames. |
|
Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL: I have an old RamLine 12rnd mag for my MkII. It is a flawless feeding mag that is really easy to load too.   |
Preferred pronoun: MARINE
|
I wouldn't mind it, but meh. I have a TX-22 compact that holds a few more, but don't mind the 10 rounds in my 22/45. It is a target/vermin pistol. I don't imagine having to fend off a massive heard of man-eating squirrels. If you use one for gun games, I could definitely see the value of a few more in the box tho. But, there are already several options that check that box. |
|
Originally Posted By koz4guns: The frame isn’t the serialized component, any company could make a double stack frame for a Mark gun, but no one has. It isn't an easy thing to do. Be pretty hard to come up with something that cost less than the gun. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: It isn't an easy thing to do. Be pretty hard to come up with something that cost less than the gun. Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: Originally Posted By koz4guns: The frame isn’t the serialized component, any company could make a double stack frame for a Mark gun, but no one has. It isn't an easy thing to do. Be pretty hard to come up with something that cost less than the gun. Yup. I think Tandemkross is the only aftermarket frame out there, and the are almost the price of a new gun. |
|
Just to follow-up with everyone here, I sent my own email telling the CEO I'm the one pressing for an increased capacity MkIV and that's why there may have been an influx of requests for one lately. I received this response from the product manager: Plumber576, Our CEO, Mr. Killoy asked that I drop you a line to address the issue of increasing the Mark IV magazine capacity. This is a request that we get frequently. Magazine development is one of the most difficult aspects of designing a firearm. Factors such as grip angles, widths, cartridge shapes and lengths, bullet shapes, rim type, etc are all factors that will change the design and capacity of a magazine. In some cases, like in the Mark IV, the sum of those factors can introduce severe limitations. The grip angle and width of the Mark IV limit the number of rounds that can be loaded in the magazine before the bullet nose of the cartridge at the top of the magazine presents too low to feed. There are things that we can do to increase the number but it will still only add an additional two rounds. And, depending upon ammunition type, the bullet nose dipping may be problematic. With all of that said, we are looking at some creative options to solve the problem. But they will likely involve moving away from the traditional Mark Series pistols. I hope this helps explain why Ruger hasn’t introduced a higher round magazine. It is a complicated issue of physics and space. Please let me know if you have any further questions. I knew the idea would be a challenge, and unfortunately, it sounds like one Ruger won't be taking on anytime soon. Still, I appreciate their taking the time to respond. Sounds like the next standard-capacity Ruger rimfire pistol we'll see won't be in the Mark series. Thanks to everyone who sent a message. If you haven't yet, I'd encourage you to still send a message letting Ruger know an increased-capacity Ruger Mark pistol is worth the time and effort. |
|
I’m not surprised it didn’t get much traction. And a bit relieved. - 10 rounds has been the traditional capacity for .22 LR pistols going back certainly to WWII and ina. Few cases the late 1920s. The Walther Pp designed in 1929 eventually came out in a 10 round .22 LR version. When Walther introduced the current PPK/S in .22 LR they put ka great deal of effort into improving the magazine and did a stellar job, but stayed with 10 rounds. The CZ Kadet also stayed with a 10 round magazine even though it’s housed in a double stack 9mm grip frame. - the Ruger Mk I found traction as a target pistol and target models have persisted through the Mk IV. Rimfire precision shooting is based on 10 shot strings. I have shot in .22LR classes at bowling pin shoots and most didn’t have a magazine limit for the simple reason that if you could not clear the table in 10 rounds you were at best fighting your way up the losers bracket from that point forward. - The other major niche for .22 LR pistols is small game hunting and I never needed more than 10 rounds hunting rabbits, etc, or as a trap line pistol. - you can argue that today’s spray and prey plinkers get off on high capacity magazines, but that’s also a big reason most of them can’t shoot worth a shit. - self defense isn’t a huge niche for 22 LR pistols, but 10 rounds delivered rapidly center of mass is most likely going to be fatal, even if sometimes not totally successful in obtaining rapid incapacitation. The thing is 15-20 rounds would not be much more successful. - there’s also the market challenge posed by magazine ban states that are evolving from banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds to banning pistols capable of holding a magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds. Those bans require design differences to prevent a high capacity Mag from being used in the pistol. It splits an already potentially limited and competitive market. Personally in a world infested with cheap polymer frame pistols focused on high capacity or alternatively too small to be fun or effective to shoot sized Micro pistols, I kinda like well made, well balanced, old school .22LR pistol designs like the Ruger Mk series, the S&W 41, Browning Buckmark, etc. —— But don’t take it too hard. After all the receiver is the serial numbered item so feel free to start a kick starter to develop and after market high capacity lower for them, or chew on the ears of the many companies out there that designs aftermarket accessories for the Ruger pistols. You might be able to sell one of them on the idea. |
|
Originally Posted By DakotaFAL: I’m not surprised it didn’t get much traction. And a bit relieved. Relieved? You were worried? That seems like a weird thing to be bothered by. Higher capacity hurts nothing. It allows you to do more and still do everything you could with 10 rounds. Eventually I think we'll see an OEM do it. For now those that have to have one have to buy something else. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
In my humble opinion one of the biggest things Ruger F'd up on when they released the 4th version was to make the mags different, hence screwing over all their customers that have mark2's and 3s. I was all excited about when the mark4 came out, but as soon as I found out my big ass pile of mags won't work in it, I said F that. And yes I know that people have came up with ways to mod their older mags to work in it, but I am not going to mess with that crap. I have glocks from gen2 to 5, and guess what all my mags work in all of them. No mods needed to be done on anything. But honestly the 10 mag limits on rimfire mags is no longer worth the time. I still have my mark3 22/45 and I won't get rid of it, but I hardly take it out anymore since getting tx22s and my p322 (which had to get sent into sig-not going into that here). |
Joined:
Dec 2022
Posts:
1002
EE: 100% (42)
TX, USA
|
I really don’t think Ruger is losing any sales over it, therefore no real reason to do it. 99% of people buying a TX22 aren’t doing it because the mag capacity is better than a MK 4, they’re buying them because they’re half the price. |
|
Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: I really don’t think Ruger is losing any sales over it, therefore no real reason to do it. 99% of people buying a TX22 aren’t doing it because the mag capacity is better than a MK 4, they’re buying them because they’re half the price. I bought the TX-22 Compact because the size and controls, as well as ergo's, are nearly identical to 9mm carry piece. It fits the kiddies well too, size and weight. |
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: I bought the TX-22 Compact because the size and controls, as well as ergo's, are nearly identical to 9mm carry piece. It fits the kiddies well too, size and weight. Originally Posted By s4s4u: Originally Posted By TactiCoolBro: I really don’t think Ruger is losing any sales over it, therefore no real reason to do it. 99% of people buying a TX22 aren’t doing it because the mag capacity is better than a MK 4, they’re buying them because they’re half the price. I bought the TX-22 Compact because the size and controls, as well as ergo's, are nearly identical to 9mm carry piece. It fits the kiddies well too, size and weight. Same reason I bought an SR22. I like the TX22 Competition model and think it would make a great blasting and walking around the desert gun. |
BikerNut:
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
Normal people like motorcycles. Real people like motorcycles.
People who don't like motorcycles are just... weird.
|
I went with a SP101 because if I'm gonna abe stuck with a 10 round limit, might as well get a revolver that would be more fun to shoot and easier to load. Well, I went with a revolver for those reasons, I went with the SP because it was cheaper, and was I stock at the gun shop. Still kinda want a mkIV, though. |
Joined:
Dec 2022
Posts:
1003
EE: 100% (42)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By Wandering_minstrel: I went with a SP101 because if I'm gonna abe stuck with a 10 round limit, might as well get a revolver that would be more fun to shoot and easier to load. Well, I went with a revolver for those reasons, I went with the SP because it was cheaper, and was I stock at the gun shop. Still kinda want a mkIV, though. I don’t have a MK IV, but I have a Black Mamba (build on a MK IV frame) and there’s absolutely, positively, no way in hell that any .22lr revolver in existence is more fun to shoot than that gun is lol. Can’t imagine there’s many, if any, .22lr pistols period that are more fun that that thing is. |
|
Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: Relieved? You were worried? That seems like a weird thing to be bothered by. Higher capacity hurts nothing. It allows you to do more and still do everything you could with 10 rounds. Eventually I think we'll see an OEM do it. For now those that have to have one have to buy something else. Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: Originally Posted By DakotaFAL: I’m not surprised it didn’t get much traction. And a bit relieved. Relieved? You were worried? That seems like a weird thing to be bothered by. Higher capacity hurts nothing. It allows you to do more and still do everything you could with 10 rounds. Eventually I think we'll see an OEM do it. For now those that have to have one have to buy something else. This kind of attitude would fit in at RFC, which is too bad. I'm not against the current MkIV and I happen to love the pair I have. I don't even think the 10 round frames should go away if a wide-body does come into existence. Originally Posted By JThompson: Did see that anyone posted it but if Plumber576 decides to run for president, I will vote for him.  What a f***ing great idea. Hopefully you get some royalties. Hahaha thanks. I don't want royalties or anything for free, I just want to be able to purchase a complete pistol or replacement frame for a MkIV that takes 17 and 21 round factory mags. |
|
Originally Posted By WarNerve: Why not an extended 30 round single stack stick magazine? You may not be able to go prone for those 300 yard squirrels but it could be fun in the off hand position. or the drum type mags you see for pistols. |
I can't think of anything to say. Nada, zip, nothing.
|
https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/The_Ruger_Letter_of_1989/5-482238/ Bill Ruger himself was one of the first people to promote nation wide mag cap bans. It took over twenty years, his death, and the sunset of the 94' crime bill for Ruger as a company to recover. |
[NO TEXT]
|
Ruger will not make/sell grip frames. If you have a older 22/45 with the integrated grip panels and you want one of the ones that uses replaceable 1911 grip panels, you are SOL. All you need is just a non special non serialized plastic grip housing. But ruger will NOT sell you one. Even if you managed o break the grip frame and send the gun to them for repair, they would only replace it with what it came with from the factory. So do not ever expect to see a grip frame for sale from ruger. While developing a high cap 22lr mag may be more difficult than a standard single stack 10 round, it is not impossible as other companies have already done it. (sig, taurus, kel-tec) Your best bet would be the aftermarket. You would probably have better luck getting volquartsen to make a frame to sell than ruger. https://volquartsen.com/products/1109-vf-target-frame Maybe they could make a grip frame that would take a already developed high cap mag from one of the above mentioned guns. |
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: Ruger will not make/sell grip frames. If you have a older 22/45 with the integrated grip panels and you want one of the ones that uses replaceable 1911 grip panels, you are SOL. All you need is just a non special non serialized plastic grip housing. But ruger will NOT sell you one. Even if you managed o break the grip frame and send the gun to them for repair, they would only replace it with what it came with from the factory. So do not ever expect to see a grip frame for sale from ruger. While developing a high cap 22lr mag may be more difficult than a standard single stack 10 round, it is not impossible as other companies have already done it. (sig, taurus, kel-tec) Your best bet would be the aftermarket. You would probably have better luck getting volquartsen to make a frame to sell than ruger. https://volquartsen.com/products/1109-vf-target-frame Maybe they could make a grip frame that would take a already developed high cap mag from one of the above mentioned guns. Ruger WILL sell you a MkIV 22/45 grip. I purchased one of the $40 uppers from the Volquartsen Clearance Page then called Ruger and asked for a 22/45 grip. They asked me for the serial number for the upper then my credit card number. Took a little less than 2 months and shipped it directly to my front door, as the upper is the serialized part. Sounds like you may be referring to the MkIII, which I understand is out of production. If you have a MkIII w/o removable grip panels and would like a factory frame, you may want to check out Wirthwein. Not cheap, but cheaper than a VQ frame. |
|
Originally Posted By Plumber576: This kind of attitude would fit in at RFC, which is too bad. I'm not against the current MkIV and I happen to love the pair I have. I don't even think the 10 round frames should go away if a wide-body does come into existence. Hahaha thanks. I don't want royalties or anything for free, I just want to be able to purchase a complete pistol or replacement frame for a MkIV that takes 17 and 21 round factory mags. Don’t get all butt hurt over it. Many of us just don’t see the point in trying to turn a Ruger Mk 1-4 into something it just isn’t. As noted several times in this thread, that double stack .22 LR niche is pretty well covered by other manufacturers at a lower price point. There’s no upside in it for Ruger. If Ruger tried to appease those customers, they’d also want it to be optics ready, have a rail, etc. Then they’d still complain about the price and buy something else. |
|
Originally Posted By Plumber576: Ruger WILL sell you a MkIV 22/45 grip. I purchased one of the $40 uppers from the Volquartsen Clearance Page then called Ruger and asked for a 22/45 grip. They asked me for the serial number for the upper then my credit card number. Took a little less than 2 months and shipped it directly to my front door, as the upper is the serialized part. Sounds like you may be referring to the MkIII, which I understand is out of production. If you have a MkIII w/o removable grip panels and would like a factory frame, you may want to check out Wirthwein. Not cheap, but cheaper than a VQ frame. How much did Ruger charge for the frame? |
|
Originally Posted By DakotaFAL: Don’t get all butt hurt over it. Many of us just don’t see the point in trying to turn a Ruger Mk 1-4 into something it just isn’t. As noted several times in this thread, that double stack .22 LR niche is pretty well covered by other manufacturers at a lower price point. There’s no upside in it for Ruger. If Ruger tried to appease those customers, they’d also want it to be optics ready, have a rail, etc. Then they’d still complain about the price and buy something else. I'm not butt hurt, I just completely disagree with this attitude. |
Member
Joined:
Jun 2022
Posts:
7589
EE: 100% (30)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL: I have an old RamLine 12rnd mag for my MkII. It is a flawless feeding mag that is really easy to load too. I wish I’d bought a couple dozen of those things. I have one and it’s still going strong after hundreds and hundreds of cycles. It sure looks and feels flimsy but great mag |
When your state is shaped like a huge, droopy penis, you have to expect there to be some huge nuts as well.
Mech 2007
Mech 2007