Bluing and finish work on MK.IV vs MK.II?

[MZ5]

Hi, all. I have a MK.II pistol I bought new, one of the 50th anniversary models, which is basically the entry level pistol with an anniversary roll mark on it, as far as I can tell. Anyway, I've been wondering about getting another, so the kids can have another 22 handgun to shoot when we go out. My questions are about bluing and finish work.

Is the bluing on the new guns, the MK.IVs, as well done and as durable as the MK.II bluing? What about finish work in general? Degree of polish, edge softening, etc? If I were to consider a stainless gun this time, how does that finish compare on the new VS the old guns?

Thanks for any input.

 

[22/45 Fan]

The MkIV "blued" guns are only blued on the barrel and recreiver. The frame is aluminum alloy and can't be blued.

My stainless MkIV Target is very well finished and certainly as good as the stainless parts of the 22/45 MkII I used to have.

 

[MZ5]

Oh. I probably should know that about the blued guns. Thank you.
How well does the finish match between the two materials, that you've seen? I've only seen I think 2 of the new stainless guns, and that only in passing. Glad to hear that the finish work on the new stainless ones is as good as the older stainless ones. I don't object to stainless, really, though I am slightly partial to blued steel.

 

[hittman]

I don't own one but have seen several at the range. Look like a good match to me but I still prefer the MKII's.

 

[valvestem]

The color on the "Blue" Mark 4 is a good match between the aluminum grip frame and the steel receiver/barrel. Ruger matched them to the point where I would call them the same color, but they are more black that blue.

 

[eveled]

Consider a single six, or Bearcat. So they have something different to shoot. I have several mkII's, single six, bearcat, 3 different double action revolvers. My kids always want the single six.