If a Mini 14 can

[Magog]

Drop a coyote 300 yards out, then how is it inaccurate.

A coyote is 1/5 the size of a man, so that is damn good accuracy in my book.

Are people thinking when they bash the Mini 14 at all?

It seems this type of motivation comes form anger, that they wasted 500 bucks more on a rifle that is no better then a Mini 14, and this is how they cope with the lost of $$$, and rationalize their purchase.

Also the true haters are fixated on the pass thin Barrels, and they are thing of the pass... Also, they were an easy fix to correct, and many old Mini 14 are still in use to this day...

people are funny.

[PawPaw]

Well, okay then!

The gun culture these days is fixated on long-range gunnery and MOA accuracy. This is not a bad thing. The benchrest gurus have taught us a lot about tiny groups and our boys in the sandbox have shown us how that knowledge has practical applications.

The Ruger Mini 14 was introduced in 1974 and when introduced was not noted for stellar accuracy. Designed as a scaled-down carbine, it was supposed to represent, in the minds of the shooter, a miniature M14, a rifle that had become passe in the mid '70s. It was at best a 2.5-4.0 minute rifle, depending on a number of things, not the least of which was the shooter. It became noted in the gun rags as a rifle with ho-hum accuracy, based on an out-of-date design.

Those of us who look beyond the gun rags appreciated the Mini 14 for what it is; a lightweight, rugged, dependable carbine designed to ride behind the seat of a pickup truck. Times change and fashions change and nowadays the fashionable shooter needs a rifle capable of tiny groups at extreme ranges.

Those of us more concerned with practical riflery don't discount the Mini 14. In the hands of a capable shooter, it will put metal on meat at any reasonable range. For myself, I'm currently in a tug-of-war with another dismally inaccurate rifle. One even more dated than the Mini.

I'm trying to turn a 4.0 minute Winchester 94 into a 2 minute Winchester 94, with iron sights and cast bullets. Right now the contest is an even draw, but I've not given in. If you'll excuse me, I have an appointment at my loading bench.

[Carry_24/7]

When I lived in Texas, our local Game Warden carried a Mini 14. We knew the guy, he was a serious cop, that's all I had to know about the rifle.

I've never owned one, but have fired those belonging to others, and have nothing negative to say about it.

[ChrisJ715]

I owned one for years, and sold it in a time of financial difficulty. I wish I had it back, it was a fine lil rifle and accurate enough for me.

[jmr40]

It seems this type of motivation comes form anger, that they wasted 500 bucks more on a rifle that is no better then a Mini 14, and this is how they cope with the lost of $$$, and rationalize their purchase.


If this were a true statement you might have a point.

Mini's are what they are. A reliable, lightweight, overpriced, 223 caliber carbine that will give acceptable, but mediocre accuracy. I've owned many Mini-14's over the years and when AR's were selling for $700-$1000 and a new Mini could be purchased for $350 and used ones were in the $250 range they made a lot of sense.

That is simply not the case today. Like almost every AR owner I started with a Mini and replaced them with AR's. I've found both rifles to be extremely reliable as long as quality magazines are used. The problem is that quality Ruger mags are $40-$50 and I can get quality AR mags for under $12.

Then there is the cost of the rifles. The Ruger is a great rifle @ $350, but new ones are now selling for $600+. I can get a much better, much more accurate AR for LESS money than Mini's are selling for today. The last AR I purchased came to $650 out the door. This included two 30 round magazines, a cleaning kit, a hard case as well as sales tax. A comparable Mini-14 with the same accessories and sales tax would have cost $800+.

[wingman]

Depends on what is accurate to you personally, I've owned the Mini-14 and the the mini-30 both never failed to function but neither were very accurate for me, however both can be improved with add ons, reloading, etc. I do understand there is an improvement in new models. I think many people compare the Mini-14 to the AR which is superior in accuracy with the 223 round.

For a self defense law enforcement truck gun the mini-14 is tough to beat, but to consider it a 300 yard varmint rifle is a stretch.

[brmfan]

Magog: Sounds like you are the one with the anger issue! There's a reason people spend more $$ for a rifle that is truely accurate (1/2 minute or less) versus one that is just "good enough". I often shoot anywhere from 50 to 1000 yards with my rifles, and a 2 MOA envelope is not going to cut it for me. So, I pay extra for greater (and more consistent) accuracy. I had a mini and have shot several others, and none ever impressed me in the accuracy department. Reliable? Sure, but long shots were always pot luck.

This isn't a rationalization... it's simply the cost of higher quality and performance. If you are upset that a Walmart rack rifle isn't receiving the same love as a match grade AR then that's your issue to work through. You really need to do your homework and readjust your expectations of a rifle that is built for plinking versus precision. There is a huge difference, and cost is part of it. As the great philosopher Balboa once said, "You want to dance, you have to pay the band. You want to borrow, you have to pay the Man!"

[Art Eatman]

I keep hollering that there is a difference between paper punching and hunting.

In hunting, tight groups are less important than reliability of the first shot going where it's intended. The Mini is fine at that. Mine were all as reliable as any of my several sub-MOA rifles.

In paper-punching where tight five-shot groups are important, the early Minis generally were not good for that. That sort of "inaccuracy" was irrelevant to my use in hunting.

[Magog]

I bought a mini 14 because I could not afford a AR...

I like my mini a lot.

I like AR's a lot.

I was thinking I will always pick up an AR later on down the road, but now, I think I am happy with the mini and put that AR money into Magazines, and ammo.

Yeah the Sand box have a lot of viability, were I live in the Northwest, we have a lot of thick forest and line of sight is not much more then 100 yards at best.

[skoro]

After wanting one for years, I got a Mini-14 two years ago. Mine's the old-fashioned ranch rifle: blued, with a wood stock. While it's no target rifle, it's plenty accurate enough. I can hit a 12" x 12" gong at 400 yards consistently.

[tobnpr]

I've never really understood the Mini "haters"...
Nor have I understood why it's usually accompanied by a comparison in one form or another to Stoner's rifle...

Other than both being semi-auto rifles in .223, there are no other similarities.
When Ruger introduced their AR years ago, they didn't discontinue the Mini. It's a different gun, with a different purpose.

I have a 188 series Mini. I've done all the accurizing mods (flash hider to improve harmonics, Accustrut, bedded receiver, trigger job) and I'm still disappointed in the accuracy dept. Why? It's a solid 2-3 MOA rifle...

Problem is, EVERY rifle sale these days is all about itty bitty tiny groups.
Manufacturers guarantee out-of-the-box accuracy.

If I had ONE rifle, for self-defense, it would be the Mini. Unlike Stoner's rifle, it isn't picky about what you feed it, doesn't crap where it eats, and you could run 1000 rounds down the tube without cleaning or oiling it without a single FTF. Same reason manycurrent/former active duty troops will tell you that they'd carry a seized Kalashnikov over their shoulder instead of their issued M-4.

If my life depended on the gun going "BANG" each, and every, time I pull the trigger, my choice would be the Mini-14.

And yes, old reputuations are slow to die. The new Mini's are much better in the accuracy dept. due to the heavier barrels. Now, if only Ruger QC would get their act together.

[603Country]

I scoped and sighted in the neighbor's new stainless Mini 14, and I really liked it. I had the ammo he brought over, and it was a random bunch by several makers, so it didn't shoot great groups. I should've loaded up a bunch of decent ammo. Just from that short time with the rifle, I got the impression that it shot pretty well from a cold barrel. If I can pry it out of his hands soon, I'll see what it'll do with good ammo. If I could have either the Mini or an AR for my ranch rifle, I would choose the Mini 14 and hope that I could tune up the accuracy.

[Tuzo]

"Same reason many current/former active duty troops will tell you that they'd carry a seized Kalashnikov over their shoulder instead of their issued M-4."

During 1-1/2 infantry years in Vietnam and looking at many photos of US troops operating in Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, etc. no regular US soldier or Marine has been seen using a Kalashnikov as their firearm. My son served in Iraq with US and British forces and he did not see this phenomenon. This seems to be an urban legend.

Contract security forces do indeed use whatever firearms they choose. Kalashnikovs are popular with them because they are cheap and ammunition is plentiful.

By the way, I like my Mini-14 Ranch Rifle.

[Magog]

If I had ONE rifle, for self-defense, it would be the Mini. Unlike Stoner's rifle, it isn't picky about what you feed it, doesn't crap where it eats, and you could run 1000 rounds down the tube without cleaning or oiling it without a single FTF. Same reason manycurrent/former active duty troops will tell you that they'd carry a seized Kalashnikov over their shoulder instead of their issued M-4.


I doubt these stories. Ok, they can carry that new acquired AK, but what are they going to feed it, 5.56 rounds? I dont think the army supplies 7.62x39.

Sure they could get the rounds off the dead enemy, but that is going to run out...

[wingman]

I keep hollering that there is a difference between paper punching and hunting.

In hunting, tight groups are less important than reliability of the first shot going where it's intended. The Mini is fine at that. Mine were all as reliable as any of my several sub-MOA rifles.

In paper-punching where tight five-shot groups are important, the early Minis generally were not good for that. That sort of "inaccuracy" was irrelevant to my use in hunting.
__________________


Exactly Art, I grew up in a rural section of the country in the 40-50's guys I hunted with used open sights on there 30-60 or 30-30 and were happy hitting paper plate at 100 yards and yet they consistently killed deer most still use same rifles somehow during the years I switched over to targets/scopes and I would be unhappy hunting with the old 30-30 and open sights, it all comes down to how the rifle is used and what your comfortable with.

[Edward429451]

I'm so glad I never got bit by the 1/4" bug. I was able to appreciate the Mini for what it is. Back when I was buying Mini's, I got 3 for the price of one AR so at that price I wasn't looking for MOA accuracy. But you guys paying AR prices for a Mini should demand more than you get.

My older Mini will shoot 3 to 4" at 100 yards. What won't that do?

[chack]

When I was in Iraq I saw Ugandan gate guards and some Iraqis carrying AKs. The only US soldiers I've ever known that carried an AK did so as a "drop gun", toy to play with, or last resort if all US ammo was cut off due to some extremely unlikely chain of events. That was back when we just confiscated what we wanted and didn't have to do a bunch of paperwork anytime we pointed a weapon at someone. The rules have tightened up so much now that it's just about impossible to do it anymore.

I never fired 1000 rds between cleanings with my M4 or A2 back when we had them. That wasn't because it couldn't handle it, but because I'm a good soldier and keep the tools that my life depends on well maintained.

I'm sure that my vehicle (not nearly as reliable as my AR 15s) could operate for tens of thousands of miles without an oil change. I change the oil because I want them to last.

I realize that I've written about ARs and AKs in a ini thread, so allow me to get back on topic.

My most recent cost $350 for the DPMS upper and $120 for the fully assembled plum crazy lower. I'll have less than $500 into it and fully expect it to run reliably, be MORE accurate than a target mini, use cheap surplus mags that I have a hundred of, and utilize the ergonomic muscle memory controls that I trained for years with.

To be fair to mini 14s:
Their first (cold) shot accuracy is OK. It isn't until the third or fourth shot that accuracy plummets. That's not an issue for a ranch rifle used for casual hunting and depredation. That's all a mini was intended for and anyone that wants a rifle to use for serious work repelling the faceless hordes of their dystopic fantasies already knows that the mini isn't going to cut the mustard.

Minis look cool. ARs are cool too, but in a different way. I like the way steel and wood look on a rifle and minis just have a more traditional look. It's what made me keep going back and trying them again after they continued failing to meet my expectations.

I realized after a short time that after market magazines were the source of most of the unreliability problems, and the first two I got were very unreliable. This was back during the Clinton/Democrat ban and, for the time being, acceptable Mini 14 mags are available for only 2-3 times the cost of M16 mags. I am still suspicious of the though because so many bad mags are out there and you can't be sure what you have until you run a few hours worth of your pay through it.

Once I got decent magazines I discovered that minis have a serious problem with vertical stringing if you shoot more than about 2 or 3 RPM. I hear that the new minis have addressed that somewhat, and that's a good thing, but the cost of that fix puts minis MSRP higher than a basic AR.

Minis are also difficult to work on, parts are expensive, and there are fewer accessories and what there is available is harder to acquire.

The only real reason to own a mini, aside from looks, is that they aren't banned in some localities where ARs are illegal.

Finally, I must point out the obvious fact that mini 14s have never been used by any military anywhere. They have been used by a quite a few US and a few international police forces though. Virtually every police department that isn't run by big city anti gun politicians has gotton rid of their minis and moved to AR15s or M16s.

[Ignition Override]

Tuzo:

Maybe regular forces did not want to try an AK, partly due to the sounds made by guns used by enemies.

We have a coworker at another base who was in US Special Forces in Desert Storm.
We were on the hotel shuttle for the short bumpy ride to the Courtyard Elis. at EWR airport.

I only asked how he compared US-made with Russian-made rifles.
His only comment as we arrived at the hotel: "Our guns jammed, so we picked up AKs".

If this seems hard to believe (& considered unpatriotic by our young troops), send me a pm and a pair of local coworkers can be reached, as they have his phone number. The former soldier's name is Rick -.

[Scorch]

If a Mini 14 can Drop a coyote 300 yards out, then how is it inaccurate.
A coyote's kill zone measures about 6". At 300 yds, that is 2 MOA, so your rifle has to be able to hold 2 MOA to reliably hit a coyote at that range. Most Mini 14s I shot "back in the day" would hold about 2.5"-3" at 100 yds (most of the new ones are reportedly much better). Not totally worthless, but not as good as some would like. Mini 14s are rugged and reliable, just not target rifles. But if you hit a coyote where it counts, it will go down.
I live in the Northwest, we have a lot of thick forest and line of sight is not much more then 100 yards at best.
So it doesn't matter that the rifle can shoot accurately out to 300 yds, it only matters that the rifle can shoot 6" at 100 yds. A Mini 14 will do that just fine.

[chack]

I'd like to point out that 99% of the "Special Forces" soldiers I met were never anywhere near group or had a long tab. If I had a dollar for every charletan who claimed to be SF, a ranger, a seal, or recon I'd be able to buy a case of ammo through my new AR when it comes in.

I was in the SF pipeline and didn't make it through the SFQC. I busted my balls getting as far as I did and it really offends me to see people misrepresent themselves and it happens all the time.

NO US soldier casually gets rid of his weapon and uses a battlefield pick up instead unless he is a total moron with no supervision.

[Bamashooter]

My mini 14 is a 580series skinny barrel. I have added a trigger job and an accustrut to stop the shot stringing which it does. With my handloads I can get near moa accuracy. 1.2''@100YRDS to be exact. I have dumped 2-20rd. mags then shot a 2'' group with 5 shots to prove the strut works. Thats a very hot barrel shooting 2'' groups. Obviously some of you guys dont know a whole lot about the newer mini, since you refrence the older one you had or your buddy had back in the day. Regardless of the fact that its not an AR or was never adopted by most law enforcement or military, I know my mini can do any job asked by a .223 carbine. Moa accuracy is plenty good out to the distances the .223 will be shooting. The AR will also string shots after it heats up to, this isnt only a mini-14 thing. 2moa is pretty good after 40rds. fired as fast as you can pull the trigger. The newer mini with the thicker barrel is probably a better mini than the one I have.

I paid just over $20 for the ruger 20rd. mags I have and less for the promag 20rd. that so far are as reliable as the ruger mags are. I was in the Army for 8yrs. and always qualified expert. I have seen extremely clean AR's FTF,FTE for no apparent reason. Not one of the rifles I ever shot was sub-moa. Im sure that most of the malfunctions were magazine related. I have yet to experience the same problem with my mini, even with the promag magazines.

[NWdude83]

If I had a dollar for every charletan who claimed to be SF, a ranger, a seal, or recon I'd be able to buy a case of ammo

LOL same here, funny how just about everyone is a current or former SF guy.

[markj]

NO US soldier casually gets rid of his weapon and uses a battlefield pick up instead unless he is a total moron with no supervision.

:) I asked my nephew this, he just got back from afgan he also was in iraq he is a marine wit ha honorable discharge now. He said that gun makes a sound only it makes and looks like no american weapon so if someone was silly enough to try to use it he would probably get shot. Oops why you using a enemies weapon? Oh you are dead...... sorry

Josh was in some heavy action, I belive him.

[Single Six]

I am issued a Colt M4 by my department. I have seen ARs jam, but I have yet to see a Mini jam. I would gladly trade my issued M4 for a stainless Mini anytime and never look back. Not the gospel, just one guy's opinion.

[Father Time]

Their first (cold) shot accuracy is OK. It isn't until the third or fourth shot that accuracy plummets.

Exactly. This is common with mini 14's. The Mini is a good rifle but pointing out its faults isn't "hating" on it. It is just being honest. I like mini's too but getting angry and saying things like:

It seems this type of motivation comes form anger, that they wasted 500 bucks more on a rifle that is no better then a Mini 14, and this is how they cope with the lost of $$$, and rationalize their purchase
about others opinion's is just stupid and immature.

[tobnpr]

http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9257

Look at the weapons being fired at 1:20 into this video. Sure look like Kalashnikov's to me...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=91e_1173797730

[Father Time]

Look at the weapons being fired at 1:20 into this video. Sure look like Kalashnikov's to me...


They sure are. But those arn't American's shooting them, those are Iraqi troops

[GONIF]

Don't flame me for asking 1 very important question . Why would anyone want a Mini 14 when a good AR15 will do everything better ? And don't tell me a proper AR15 is not as relieable ,because it is 100% relieable. Price ? Looks ? What is the reason i realy want to know ?:confused:

[Father Time]

GONIF:

I like Mini's because they are not AR's...

Let me explain.. I love AR15's and shoot mine regularly.
However, every so often I want something "different". You can't eat the same meal everyday. You would get bored of even your favorite foods.

My AR has never malfunctioned BTW so its not a reliability thing.
AR's are more reliable than people give them credit for just like AK's are more accurate than people think.

Plus a Mini is more PC than a AR so if you live in a state with backwards firearms laws a Mini 14 becomes a more attractive option.

[Ignition Override]

chack: That might be true about lots of guys, but if anybody wants me to find the guy's phone number, he will provide the unit he was with, and can be researched.

I guess that his only point was the need to have reliable weapons. As we reached the hotel, there was no time to learn the context of the situation he described.
Send me a pm or such, as I can easily get his friend's number and have the guy call me. The only way I noticed any sign of a military background was from a very small, subtle (former) unit sticker on his 'brain bag'.

[GONIF]

Maybe it's just me ,but I had 2 Minni's that were stinkers . 1 was a standard beech wood I bought new in 1979,and the other was a ranch rifle I bought new in around 1986 . They never gave good consistant accuracy with any ammo ,not even my hand loads . That soured meon them .I'm no kid I'm 60 and an avid shooter,hunter and reloader . As far as hunting I never use a a semi on anything except varmints (coyote's) . ;)

[CUBAN REDNECK]

I'm not a Mini-14 hater. I even owned the folding stock one in the 80's like in the A-Team, which I regret selling. But it is what it is. I could not afford an AR back then and when I could afford one the AR was banned, so a Mini was my consolation rifle. I have an AR now and a Mini, with a Butler Creek folding stock and I alternate range dates, if you will. Yes, the AR is much more accurate, but the Mini is good enough and easy to use. Though not a BATTLE rifle by any means, home defense and small animal control can be handled confidently with it. That being said, I would also recommend picking up an AR right now due to their variety, price, and accessories which can be added to it. There are many AR manufacturers during this Golden Age of the AR platform and you might just be happier with it. ;)

[Art Eatman]

GONIF, forget group size for a minute. Did your Minis put the first shot where you wanted it?

Mine always did that, so that's why I don't bum-rap them. As long as that first shot hits a coyote or a jackrabbit, what more would I need?

And this thread does not include AKs and such as topical.

[GONIF]

Art , for me a weapon needs to be accurate consistantly . A rifle that I can not count on for follow up shots is a rifle I do not want to own . I expect a new rifle with good ammo in the hands of a compitant shooter to deliver . You would not want inconsistant Scotch,automobiles,watchs ,clocks,boats,seat belts,computers,apliances,or airplanes .Why would you want to settle for a rifle that is hit and miss ? I never said anything about AK's ,but since you bring it up my 5.56 milled receiver Arsenal Bulgy AK74 groups better than any factory stock Mini I have ever seen all day long and smokeing hot . No knock on Ruger ,I like thier revolvers ,but they need to get the mini sorted out .It is 2011 ,they could do it if they wanted . We put a man on the moon ,and they can't get a decent 10 shot group . I'm not looking for an arguement ( although i do enjoy a good arguement from time to time ),just saying to Ruger Fix it or Forget it and stop dissipointing people . Let's hope you don't lock the post ,I'm just voiceing my not so humble view on the subject and don't expect everyone to agree.

[budd]

Over the years I have 3 Mini-14s and one Mini-30. The Mini-14s would shoot 3-4 inch groups at 100yds with some flyers every so often with regularity. The Mini-30 no matter what ammo I fed it would not keep the rounds on a 25 yd NRA regulation pistol target at 100 feet, and 50 feet. The best I ever got was one round out of 20 on the paper at 50 feet. I now have an AR in 7.62X39 that will shoot 1.5 to 2 inch 100 yd groups all day. I like the Mini's looks and feel and balance, but it is not an overly accurate rifle and the Mini-30 is just plane obscenely inacurate. I hear that the entire Mini line has been improving with better sights and better and thicker barrels and improved triggers. Well they can't get any worse, and there is a lot of room for improvements.

J.Budd

[radom]

Have had a few mini-14s over the years and still have one. If you look at them as just a moderan replacment for a M-1 carbine then they make sence.

The one I have now I traded a knot headed horse for and I have more use for the gun than I did for that horse. With what a new one costs now I would never buy one due to being able to get a AR for around the same price. My 5.45x39 AK shoots better though.

[NWdude83]

Some AR15 owners (not me though) feel they must hate anything thats not an AR15. Just like some Glock owners feel that they must hate every other pistol. Mini's (the new ones and some of the older ones) are decent affordable rifles period. Most people dont need 100rd beta-c mags or sub-moa accuracy.

[GONIF]

Lets face it Eugene Stoner was a genius . Bill Ruger was not on the same level. ;)

[Crosshair]

Lets face it Eugene Stoner was a genius . Bill Ruger was not on the same level.

You might want to check the histories again. Most of Stoner's designs were failures, the only two to see any significant use are the AR-10 and it's little brother, the AR-15. Two more see limited success, the AR-7 and the AR-18. Calling the AR-7 a success is a bit of a stretch and the AR-18 is more of a collectors item than a range gun. (This being said as someone who likes the AR-18)

Bill Ruger, on the other hand, pioneered many groundbreaking designs and manufacturing techniques. The Ruger 22 automatic, Blackhawk, Redhawk, 10/22, Mini-14 etc. Far more of Ruger's designs saw market success than Stoner.

Ruger didn't just USE new materials as Stoner did, he worked to develop new manufacturing techniques. The investment castings he used in his designs put him far ahead of any competition and to this day Ruger's Pine Tree Castings subsidiary is a leader in the business of investment casting of parts.

[Bamashooter]

Your right GONIF, Bill Ruger wasnt on the same level as Eugene Stoner, He was a level or two up. :)

[bamaranger]

For a period of 5-10 years or so in the late 70's, mid
80's, the Ruger Mini-14 was the std agency rifle and a fair number were purchased and saw duty use in the National Parks. We had some stainless folders in Hot Springs, and shot them on our short range qual course. They were completely reliable as long as we used Ruger mags. Don't recall that I ever heard a field Ranger running down the Mini for any reason. I never benched one, but the avg 30 rd/50 yd qualification group, shot from the usual standing, keeling/sitting/prone postions gave no indications of the rifles being "wildly inaccurate". Administrators were often not as opposed to the Mini as they were the AR family because its wood and steel construction was less "offensive". Go figure.

When I got to the academy on some temp details, the cadre there almost universally despised the Mini, which was a surprise and contary to my own observations in the field. The BIG criticism of the academy was "inaccuracy".

By 1990 (appx) the Minis were gone, replaced my full size AR types, which were longer, heavier, offended administrators (and some of the public to a degree) and no more reliable or accurate than their predecessor Mini's.
A fair number of eary M16/Nam era rifles appeared as handme downs and were just plain dogs.

Eventually, AR /CAR carbines were approved, issued, or rebuilt buy interprising instructors and armorers and that is pretty standard at this point.

[AZAK]

I like my Mini 14. I just don't mistake it for a "target rifle". I usually can still get sub 2" groups at 100 yards; nothing like my .3" groups from my target rifle in the same chambering.

My Mini eats anything that I feed it. Never has had a failure. I usually use the 5 round mags, I like to carry the rifle at the balance point. I generally don't carry around my target rifle in .223 much; too heavy and cumbersome. Maybe that's why I have a Mini?

The Mini can be accurized. They even offer a target version; check out the weight and length on that puppy! (Kind of defeats the idea of the Mini, at least to me.)

Bottom line for me: if someone where to offer to buy my Mini for a reasonably fair price, I probably wouldn't miss it much. Until that day comes, I can still enjoy it for what it does and is.

[rodent.22]

I consider myself a ''gun guy'', neither expert nor fool when handling arms, Mr. Average Shooter. The mini is bulletproof reliable, hits what I want and requires no special cleaning. I have neither time nor patience for precision shooting. This in no way runs down those that do. But apples are being compared to oranges here. 2 totally different designs with nothing in common but the round and the sound. This ''mine is better than yours'' is really useless banter, most mini owners are plinkers, NOT precision shooters.

[Bamashooter]

Im sorry rodent but your wrong. The newer model mini's are capable of very good accuracy. My best is 1.2''@100yrds. and Im sure there are mini's that can shoot better. Not all AR's are moa shooters, but a good chunk of them are. My groups dont string because of the strut I installed along with trigger job. To say most mini owners are plinkers and not precision shooters is just flat out crazy. 3-4'' group at 300yrds. is pretty good for a plinker.

[Art Eatman]

Damfino. I've had four early-model Minis. They all shot about 1.5 MOA for the first three shots. More consistency than that is only of academic interest, and is irrelevant to practical use in hunting.

Years and years ago, I had one buck hang in there for eight--yeah, eight--misses. (#9 was the charm.) Other than that, I've never had any opportunity at all to be able to use a third shot, and rarely a second if I missed. Bang, miss, bye-bye.

Fortunately, I have very rarely needed that second shot.

[skoro]

Why would anyone want a Mini 14 when a good AR15 will do everything better ?

I used the M16a1 way back when I was in the military and came to respect its accuracy. With open sights at 500 yds on the rifle range, it'd consistently put 10 in the bull. So, I'm familiar with the AR platform.

But I got a Mini-14 for my personal use. I like wood and blued metal. And I like the retro Garand styling. Call me shallow. I can take it. ;)

[amd6547]

My first personally bought rifle was an M1 Carbine.
Then, I got the Mini 14 itch, and I traded away the M1 Carbine for a circa 1980 stainless Mini 14.
The first time I took it to the range, I wanted my m1 Carbine back. The Mini 14 I owned fired larger groups at 50yds than the M1 Carbine did at 100yds.
The M1 Carbine had been 100% reliable, where the Mini would occaisionally stovepipe.
I quickly sold it and bought my first Kalashnikov, and never looked at Mini 14's again.
I understand that the recent Mini 14's are quite a bit more accurate than the one I owned. I have even heard that Ruger has decided we are to be trusted with standard capacity magazines now.
But the reputation the Mini had is what carries over to many today.

[GONIF]

This is the real Bill ruger ,all he cared about was a buck .To hell with the constitution and the secound amendment . His guns are a refection of him ,secound rate all the way .
http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/papabill.html

[Rob3]

Comparing the new Minis to the old ones is like comparing an M4 to the original M16. They are apples and oranges. I have a Mini 30 and it shoots 1.5 MOA with cheap Walmart russian ammo at $4.99 a box. I have gotten groups just under an inch. I plan on taking it still hunting this year. Why not?

Bill Ruger is dead and gone. It's a whole new company now, and better than a lot of the other so-called gun makers that are really just a brand name belonging to a conglomerate.

[Crosshair]

Why would anyone want a Mini 14 when a good AR15 will do everything better ?
Put a folding stock on your AR and then get back to us on how well that went.;)

Have magazines that you only have to buy once.

Find an AR that can compete with the Mini at the same price that people would actually buy. (Nobody buys those $600 Vietnam carry handle guns.)

That's just off the top of my head.
This is the real Bill ruger ,all he cared about was a buck .To hell with the constitution and the secound amendment . His guns are a refection of him ,secound rate all the way .
Henry Ford was VERY Anti-Semitic and praised by Hitler for his views. Does that mean nobody should buy Ford cars?

[T. O'Heir]

"...bash the Mini 14..." It's more about the accuracy for the money demanded.
"...Stoner's designs were failures..." Stoner was ahead of his time. Did his designing in the early to mid 50's. 'Plastic' just wasn't used on firearms then.

[amd6547]

"...(Nobody buys those $600 Vietnam carry handle guns.)..."
my favorite AR is a retro style M16A1 I built using a GI surplus Colt upper...one of those "vietnam carry handle guns"...I have less than $400 in it. With it, I easily break clay pigeons at 100yds.
With the Mini 14 I used to own, I could break clay pigeons...if I walked up to them and bashed them with the butt stock.

[Crosshair]

my favorite AR is a retro style M16A1 I built using a GI surplus Colt upper...one of those "vietnam carry handle guns"...I have less than $400 in it. With it, I easily break clay pigeons at 100yds.
That's fine, but it still doesn't counter the point that those uppers are cheap for a reason, few people want them.

With the Mini 14 I used to own, I could break clay pigeons...if I walked up to them and bashed them with the butt stock.
I've seen the same with AR's, Mausers, and Enfields. My factory folder mini-14 used to be that way until I replaced the rear sight with one that wasn't drilled out into a ghetto ghost ring and properly torqued the gas block.

I once owned a Browning Hi-Power that couldn't cycle 5 rounds of ball ammo without jamming even after spending good money trying to fix it, haven't bought a Hi-Power since. If I went into a BHP thread and started out about how Hi-Powers are all unreliable trash you know darn well I'd get called on it.

[kenno]

I can give you Line and Verse why Mini's don't shoot worth a sheet becuase I have made 2 outa the 4 that I have owned shoot well.
I even have a Mini that will shoot one ragged hole at 100 yards but it cost me an extra $300 and it weighs 8 pounds!
I have a Mini 30 with the same treatment, 2 bullets in one hole and then it climbs and shoots like a shotgun!
My AR cost LESS than the $800 I have in each of my mini's, shoots better and mags are not $30 each, they are $11 each
Next time I will get a Kel Tec and a Siaga and I will be VERY happy

[chack]

Here's a new $569 M4 style AR15 made by DPMS:

http://www.surplusammo.com/products/*DPMS-Panther-5.56-NATO-Oracle%252d-New-in-Box.html
It comes with 2 mags, and a case. I could post links to a dozen other NEW ARs for $650.

Can anyone post a link to a NEW mini 14 for the same price point? How about with 2 mags and a case?

I think its telling that no other company makes a mini style .223 rifle or uses mini14 mags, but Ruger makes an AR 15 now and there are about 20 new rifles that use AR15 mags.

Even Keltec, which designed their sub2000 carbines to use multiple magazines has never offered a mini 14 magazine model.

Furthermore, Ruger and aftermarket manufacturers have gone out of their way to make the mini 14 look more tacticool like an AR. Wood stocks for the AR are a fairly recent development and are hard to find and expensive.

[gc70]

A lot of people miss the point that a gun is good if it meets the needs of its owner and a gun that meets someone else's needs is not better.

[rshanneck2002]

I have owned 4 or 5 Ruger rifles over the yrs including a mini-14 in 223, a Ruger M77 in .270 one in 30-06, and currently a hawkeye in 25-06. Granted i shoot company ammo in them all such as remington,winchester etc. I have came to the conclusion that i will never buy another Ruger rifle, their barrels are just to inconsistent in the accuracy dept. I am sorry but every time i took them the the range after 2 or 3 rds barrel heats up and wammo their go the flyers sooner than later. I really dont know why Ruger cant seem to make good barrels consistently? Very beautiful rifles and barrels that get 2 to 3 sometimes 4 MOA, not acceptable in my book with factory ammo at all. Their new trigger great. I have Weatherby Vanguards that just smoke the Rugers i have owned. Im retired and will not waste my time or money on their rifles anymore., their barrels have been their major problem for yrs. $800 for a mini these days? Dont think so? the Hawkeye will soon be sold or traded for another 25-06., shame too a very pretty rifle that wont hold 3 rds under 1.5 MOA with any type ammo. Sorry everyone but that has been my exsperience with Ruger rifles, no more of them, i own AKs that can hit a paper plate at 100 yds with iron sights. My money aint going their no more.

[Skans]

I like the Mini-14. Here's why:

1. It's made of steel.
2. The receiver is quite rugged and well made.
3. It is proven to be able to handle full-auto fire with no difficulty - It's cousin, the AC556 is a great little full-auto .223; also a number of Mini-14's were legally converted to full-auto and they work well also. So, you can have no fear that the semi-auto Mini-14's are actually over-engineered and will last multiple lifetimes.
4. The Mini-14 was the first semi-auto rifle to be made in all stainless steel, including fire-control parts, and is a proven "boat-gun" in salt water environments.
5. The folding Mini-14's make a very compact .223, especially if you SBR it.
6. Newer ones come with the "thicker" barrels. Still, there are some excellent after market barrels and gas blocks made for the Mini-14 that make it an even more robust and highly accurate rifle. Let's not forget that the AR's made around the same time as the first Mini-14's had basically the same "pencil-thin" barrel.
7. It's not "just another AR-15"
8. It doesn't have that goofy "charging handle" that AR's have - if there is any one design feature of an AR that I really can't stand, it's the rear-mounted charging handle.

Now, what I don't like about the Mini-14:

1. The op-rod is crudely made, and will have to be modified when adding a true heavy barrel. Those thicker barrels on the new Mini-14's are only thicker where you can see them - but they are still thin just past the chamber. This is because Ruger was too lazy to design a new op-rod to fit a full-length thicker barrel.
2. The newer stainless models are "ugly gray", rather than the semi-polished stainless steel used in the older stainless models. They also show more casting marks - which I don't like. Tells me that Ruger has gone "cheap" on finishing their rifles.
3. Removal and assembly of the Gas Blocks and gas bushing is not simple - not impossible, just not a simple snap-together process. Also, the bolts for the gas block are staked at the factory. They need to be properly torqued on re-assembly
4. Barrel replacement requires a competent gunsmith - not snap-on like an AR-barrel. The barrel needs to be properly indexed and drilled for the gas bushing. On the other hand, barrels actually screw into the receiver which I tend to like.
5. If you want a really nice trigger on your Mini-14, you will need to send it out for some expensive work. No plug-and-play match triggers (that I know of) like the AR.

I feel that this is a pretty fair analysis - if anyone has differing views or wants to add - go for it, that's what forums like this are for, right.:)

[amd6547]

Quote:
my favorite AR is a retro style M16A1 I built using a GI surplus Colt upper...one of those "vietnam carry handle guns"...I have less than $400 in it. With it, I easily break clay pigeons at 100yds.
"....That's fine, but it still doesn't counter the point that those uppers are cheap for a reason, few people want them...."
In reality, the GI A1 uppers sold out very quickly...they now are selling for a premium. I bought my GI surplus Colt upper for $175....I could probably get $300 for it...quickly. Lots of demand for a lightweight 20" barreled upper with simple rugged sights.
Yes...any Mini 14 of the earlier generation can be made very accurate with enough parts and money. That option, born of necessity, by the way, did not exist when I owned my Mini 14.
Again, I have read that the current generation of Mini's are much more accurate, and that is great. But, for me, I much prefer the lightweight AR with it's plethora of cheap magazines, tons of accessories, and ability to change configuration.
For my A1 AR clone, I found a barely used bushmaster 16" HBAR shorty upper for $150...ICANN switch it out on my rifle, add a CAR stock, and make a shorty easily. In fact, at this point, if I buy another lower receiver and lower parts set, I will have a complete second rifle.

[kd7sgm]

I have a new series mini as well as a dpms AR bought 3 months after the mini. Both rifles cost almost the same money, shoot almost identical accuracy, but the mini seems to be a little more reliable. I have had several rounds where the bolt hangs up on the top round. I think this is a magazine issue rather than the weapon.

[Magog]

New Mini 14 Tactical 579.99

CDNN

http://site.cdnninvestments.com/CDNN2011-1/index.html


Page 37


I got, scope mount, rings, ear plugs, safety classes...

No case, but Hammered forged Barrel. Built like a tank.


Also I was at CDNN, and saw sale on Mini 14 mags, 19.99 limit 3. I bought 3, it was a good deal.

[chewie146]

People bash on them, but it was just an American AK. Don't flame me for that statement, but it was a gun designed to work when others wouldn't. They aren't long-range prairie dog guns. Maybe if it had been chambered in .44 magnum or .357, people wouldn't have the same bias. The .223 seems to be a cartridge people desire accuracy from. For me, they're a handgun replacement. Powerful enough for plenty of chores, with a high rate of fire, and much easier to use than a handgun are all great attributes. If you look at it more like a M1 carbine than a rifle, then they seem to fit the bill fine. Of course, now that they cost as much as a low-end AR, they don't appeal to me much.

[radom]

I have to agree totaly with chewes idea on them as a M-1 carbine type of gun or an american AK. Used beaters make great truck guns for the occasional coyote or what ever that pops up.

[Art Eatman]

Having read through a gazillion threads about the Mini, particularly the skinny-barrelled variety, one thing stands out: Those who bash them are generally target shooters and are not hunters. Most folks who use them for hunting have had good results.

So, beyond a feeling on my part that today's price is too high (which is generally true for me for lots of stuff) I don't see much reason for all the excitement and harumphing about them...

[Father Time]

Maybe if it had been chambered in .44 magnum or .357,
A Mini in .357 mag, .45acp or even 9mm would be neat.

[GONIF]

Ford was a rabid antisemite,so much so that he spent Millions of his own money publishing and distributeing his renamed version of The proticalls of Zion ,he calling it the International Jew http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_International_Jew . And peolpe buy his cars every day ,Ruger was willing to screw his compitition and discard the constitution and secound amendment ,and people buy his guns every day . Point is a serious charcater flaw ,and disregard for others rights is a sign of a greedy,selfish,manipulative person willing to hurt others to get what he wants . I say you need to know the facts and decide what you are willing to accecpt . I don't care what others buy. I have had to learn by my many costly mistakes in the past ,and want to let others know the truth and let others decide for them selfs after they know the facts . Let me tell you why I won't buy Ruger guns anymore .
1-- 2 stinker Mini's
2-- a 1022 that never shot as half as good as my Marlin 60,Rem Nylon66,Rem 552.
3- a Ruger Super Black Hawk 44 mag that went back to Ruger 3 times with transfer bar failures
4- Ruger a M77 300 mag,1776/1976 bi centenial special edition that I bought new and sold and replaced with a Rem 700 BDL 300 WM in 1976 .Could never get it to shoot worh a damn,took the Leupold VX3 off the Ruger mounted it on the Rem and it has never lost zero yet in 35 years and both were box stock rifles.
5-a 1973 Regur Speed six or Security six, can't remember the exact model .First week I owned it the trigger guard fell out after dropping it and parts flew all over never to be found again, fixed it and sold it for a S&W 19 ,4 inch that I still have ,and has never failed after being dropped many times.
The fit and finish,and preformance of every Ruger I have owned was awfull.
So that is why I no longer spend my hard earned money on Ruger firearms . As to Vehicles I have had most over the years and prefer GM,MB,BMW,Toyota,and Subaru. Life is too short to settle for less than good.

[Rob3]

I agree with Art. The original post was about hunting, and hunters usually choose their tools based on handling, function, and sentiment. They have no delusions of being pseudo-snipers.

From what I've seen, the flat-range commandos who deride your Mini are the same ones who obsess over where their AR falls on "The Chart" or how it looks with their 5.11 Gucci-flauge.

[GONIF]

Been an avid hunter since 1965, rifle,Pistol ,black powder,shotgun,but no bow hunting since1993. Rabid Elkaholic and varmint hunter,still prefer accurate rifles and pistols.;)

[gc70]

How's your PSG-1 shoot? And have you gotten a P-210 Legend yet, or do you have one of the originals?

[Come and take it.]

with the 180 series you can either try 69 grain boattail hollowpoints. I got consistent 1.5 inch groups from a mini once with those, and 2.5 inch groups with m855. 55 grain ball fired a shotgun pattern on the target paper, which is very typical of all the 180 series.

You can also tune in a good handload for a mini and get surprising accuracy.

The newer generation ones are acceptably accurate with ball ammo and steel cased economy ammo but should do really well with hunting ammo and handloads.

I think it has always been the downfall of the mini in that people expected it to shoot 55 grain ball accurately and could not understand why it would not. would you shoot ball through a bolt action varmint rifle to test its accuracy?

[Father Time]

The original post was about hunting

Actually the OP's original post was more of a "Don't bash my mini cuz its just as good as your AR15. And your just angry because you wasted money buying an AR15" post.

[amd6547]

55gn ball shoots tight groups in my AR, and 110gn ball shoots tight groups in my M1 Carbine. The Mini was designed with dreams of military and law enforcement contracts...it should have been optimized for use of the then most common 5.56 round.
I was not aware that accuracy is not a requirement for hunting rifles.

[Rob3]

"I was not aware that accuracy is not a requirement for hunting rifles."

MOA accuracy is a relatively modern phenomena. Over the last few hundred thousand years a lot more game has been taken with spears, arrows, and flintlocks. None had properly staked gas keys, were not parkerized under the front sight base, were not MOA accurate, and yet mankind somehow hunted and survived.

[amd6547]

I am not looking for MOA accuracy. I want at least the accuracy a Winchester Model 94 is capable of at 100yds. after all, the 94 is a classic American hunting carbine.
In the case of the 30-30 model 94 I used to own, that was a grapefruit sized group on a paper plate, fired standing, offhand, without trying hard.
The Mini 14 I owned would have been lucky to keep 5rds out of 20 on the same plate.
All in all, I would rather have the 94 than the mini.

[BigJerm79]

Man, this thread is HILARIOUS!!! Ford a "rabid anti-semite". Bill Ruger, "disregarded the constitution and the 2nd Amendment". Classic. Not anti-Semitism or disregarding one of our most sacred amendments..just the content of the thread.

Any who, if I could add my $.02. I've been shooting my buddy's Mini for, oh, about 20 years and by today's standards, it's a freakin' pile. But I LOVE that gun!!! Like many said, it is what it is. It's a FANTASTIC gun to have out at the property. Varmints, cans, fruit...whatever. It dispatches them with equal disdain. Pop a 30 rd mag in & it just keeps on going. Accurate? Heck no. Fun?? Yup. All day.

Btw, 'cause Mr. Ruger made a business decision and pandered a little bit to the unenlightened, that hardly makes him a liberal, anti-constitutional, devil. That makes him a capitalist that didn't want to lose his arse on account of the liberal, anti-constitutional devils having their panties in a bunch. I hate that magazine capacity B.S. just as much as anyone else. But given the choice, I'd rather have a 15 rd mag than nothing to put it in.

Jerm

[Jeff F]

Having read through a gazillion threads about the Mini, particularly the skinny-barrelled variety, one thing stands out: Those who bash them are generally target shooters and are not hunters. Most folks who use them for hunting have had good results.


Art pretty much nailed it.

I have a 185 series mini that has the skinny barrel that I use at the ranch for predator control. B Square scope mount and a 4 power scope and I own any Coyote or Coy-dog out to 300 yards when I do my part. It also makes for a fine home or homestead defense rifle. Some of my friends that own AR's always want to shoot it when we get together for some plinking fun.

[amd6547]

I even tried putting a scope on the Mini 14 I owned. I used a B-square mount suitably tightened and loc-tited. Put a nice scope on, one that had worked on other rifles. I still got patterns, not groups, at 100yds.
By comparison, I have been intrigued by the 5.45 soviet round, and tempted by the cheap surplus ammo. I bought a Saiga IZH-240 and a case of ammo.
First time out, I fired about a 2.5 or 3 inch ten shot group at 100 yards. This, using the Kalashnikov notch sights and the quirky Saiga trigger...in a stamped receiver rifle...using steel case surplus ball. The Mini I owned, which cost roughly twice as much, would have needed major custom gunsmithing to equal that. I can't wait to see what the Saiga will do with a short variable scope and the Hornady V-Max load...it ought to be great on coyote.
I have hunted...a lot. I believe in trying my hardest to give the animal a clean kill. Even a coyote deserves better than being gutshot by an inaccurate rifle.

[Come and take it.]

Many guns that are sensitive off the bench can shoot very well offhand. A guns vibrations are magnified to their highest level when the gun has no place to freely move when firing.


same thing with many lever actions, falling block rifles, and many other guns where there is no glass bedding or free floating. The only reliable exception would the tc contender rifles and pistols.

[Steve_in_SEMich]

Magog - I purchased my 1st AR just 5 years ago, love it, bought an extra heavy barrel target upper. HOWEVER, a stock Colt HBAR is no dream to carry in thick brush and woods. And in my hunting experiences, pistol gripped rifles are constantly getting tangled in cold weather coats from the "in the lap, ready to be brought up for a quick shot" gun hold position.

So, I bought a Mini-14 stainless last year, put a small 1-5x scope on it, and it carrys like a dream. It is MY perfect Dec-Feb coyote gun. I carry it along with a shotgun. Couldn't be happier. Guess that means with all of the other fine Ruger firearms I have, I'll be out of GONIF's will. Oh well.

To all of the posters that don't like the Minis due to their experiences from guns they may or may not have owned from 30 years ago, sorry you had a poor experience. My NEW Mini-14 is 2-2.5" MOA with just about any ammo, and less than 1.5" MOA with some of the heavier loads. Haven't cooked up any handloads yet, but expect sub-MOA when I do.

[rickyrick]

I haven't even finished reading the thread and i encountered this................ If you are upset that a Walmart rack rifle .....................as a match grade AR .......... And these cost the same???

I know this was back a few days, but I have been on in a few weeks.

[plumbernater]

http://i312.photobucket.com/albums/ll354/plumbernater/f380bf71.jpg Im a mini owner and I like mine, I wish I had a AR as well. Heck I wish I had one of every gun. I would like to say this about the mini. Mine shoots pretty good to me ,after I put the strutt on shes even better. I would like to say that the mini is a carbine and it was designed to put to shoulder and shoot. Not a bench rest. Kinda like a pistol stick it out there and shoot. Open sights and all. When I was growing up I was taught to hunt shoot from the ground and generally standing. try hunting hogs with dogs from a tree stand or shooting house I think the hunters today are spoiled.:eek:

[Jo6pak]

A lot of people miss the point that a gun is good if it meets the needs of its owner and a gun that meets someone else's needs is not better.

AMEN.
Shoot what you want, and what you shoot well.
I've seen Minis keep up with just about any other rifle out there for it's intended purpose.

[mes228]

I really like the Mini & Ranch designs, however the accuracy of the new (heavy barreled) was very bad on the two I've purchased. Actually it was so bad it bordered on unbelievable ie 6" or so at 100 yards for both the .223 & 6.8 caliber. Like everything about the rifle but the accuracy. I'd call the accuracy on those two made them un-usable. Every AR rifle I've owned was amazingly accurate. The AR is a very accurate platform from the get-go.

That being said, at the last Gun Show I met a man that had the same experience with the Mini. Only he sent his back to Ruger with the target showing a shotgun like pattern. He received it back and it shot approx. 2" groups or less according to him. I wish I'd taken the time to send the 6.8 caliber back as I like the combination. Just a thought if you have one that is a 6" gun and you are a 1" man.

[NWdude83]

Check out this video I found.

http://www.americanrifleman.org/videos/ruger-mini-14/

[Katophract]

Too expensive for what it is. If you can find a used one for cheap, sure. There are better options for what it is. If you like the gun then don't let anyone stop you from buying and loving it. I haven't had good experiences with them and find my AK more accurate and more reliable, but that's just my personal experiences. AR's have far more options which I'm a big fan of.

[frank2112]

I bought a newer-series Mini 2 years ago while still living in CommieFornia out of no other choice. I didn't necessarily want a Mini and probably would've bought an AR had I been living in a Free State then, but at the time I wanted a semi-auto for fun at the range and plinking, not competitive target shooting. I put the barrel strut on it and put a sling on and have to say it's very impressive.

This will probably get me flamed but at my local rifle range my experience is that people who can't shoot a good newer Mini accurately generally aren't great shooters. I love seeing the looks on the faces of people who peek at my target with their spotting scope and I'm doing tighter groups than their AR. This is not because my Mini is better but because I make a hobby out of improving my shooting and marksmanship (they're also not using a sling, etc.) as opposed to the guys who don't take their marksmanship seriously.

No I never shoot from a rest except for sighting in. What kind of fun is shooting from a rest???

I've also found that it shoots noticeably more accurately with 5.56mm ammo instead of .223 but thanks to the urban legend that it's a .223-only gun, many Mini owners don't use 5.56 which probably adds to the myth of Mini inaccuracy.

As to the mall ninjas with fantasies of shooting oncoming hordes of zombies, if that were my purpose I'd ditch the 5.56 round altogether and go .308 so that makes the Mini vs. AR debate irrelevant anyway.

But I'm just a guy who likes to shoot stuff for fun and make a hobby of improving my shooting. For that purpose my Mini and my M1 Garand are perfect for me. The Mini gets 95% of the shooting time though due to the cost of Garand ammo.

[SHR970]

Comparing a mini to an AR is a disservice. Due to CMP rules, a whole lot of effort went into improving the AR. Original AR's couldn't shoot the 55 grain rounds worth a **** because of their 1-14" twist barrels so they went to 1-12". Due to SS109 ammo, they went to 1-7" (Nato Spec.) while many civi. versions are 1-9". The AR platform also lends itself well to heavy barrels (Colt HBAR), and a plethora of other modifications and tweaks to make them more accurate.

The mini 14 is based heavily on the M14 which while many people in the past have considered them to be accurate, by target shooter standards isn't accurate at all. They also suffer from the same design issues that make them more difficult to accurize like the op. rod system and design. The mini 14 originally camer out in 1-10" twist, then went to 1-7" (wonder why 55 gr. bullets aren't accurate?), then to 1-9". You also have the vibration issues of the overly agressive gas port that makes for the healthy ejection of brass. You also get a looser chamber than a match barreled AR that is far more tolerant of variations of ammo; especially the cheap com bloc stuff. You also have an extractor that won't fall off like an AR's due to steel cased ammo (I know of several AR's this happened to).

Both rifles have their pluses and both have their minuses. Remember, when the AR first went to SE Aisa, many people died due to their defects. Once they debugged McNamara's mistakes it became a descent platfor. Once the competion circuit became the hotbed for accurization, they became even better. The mini has never been the subject of a serious accurization program other than by the likes of Accuracy Systems Int. It has generally been relegated to the status plinker, knock around gun, trunk gun, etc.

For those of you who have had Ruger lemons, bear in mind that there have also been boat loads on AR lemons.

[chack]

My research showed that the inaccuracy issue with 1-14 barrels only manifested itself in very cold, dense air, and that's why they changed the twist rate to 1-12.

Also. the issues with the early M16s were primarily due to using old style powder instead of the IMR powder the rifle was designed for. It increased the cyclic rate considerably and made fouling a much greater problem than it should have been.

The other issue was caused by the army refusing to use chrome lined bores.

[amd6547]

My home built AR is made using a GI surplus M16A1 upper, with the chrome bore and 1 in 12 twist. I prefer the 55gr loads in 5.56, and with these in a stock GI barrel, it is more accurate than the mini 14 I owned, by far.
In my years of shooting, having bought and sold many firearms, I count the mini 14 I owned as one of the biggest disappointments of all.

[Art Eatman]

Enough anecdotes for one thread. :) Have no fear: This will come up again; it always has.

[IZZY]

Who you callin MINI?
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/5239/michaeljaiwhite3.jpg

[Jim243]

I count the mini 14 I owned as one of the biggest disappointments of all.

Well 91 posts in 18 days, is this a new record?? Art I am supprised you did not lock this thread. But I can see there is a lot of interest in everyone expressing their opinion. Me too.

I have to agree with the OP that there is just too much bashing of one brand or another. Now if we were taking about wifes or girlfiends that would be another matter. But just like our choice in females each has a different set of standards that meet their own needs.

The Mini-14 is neither a good gun or a bad gun, but one that meets the needs of the owner (and sometimes very well). I am not a fan of the .223 for a self defense round, but it does work, just not my choice. Before you all jump on me, I do own three .223 rifles and shoot them often.

Those of you that are/were disapointed in your purchase of the Mini-14 bought the rifle for the wrong reason or expectation and did not do your homework on it's traits before your purchased and just let your glands takeover your brain. (A-Team hype).

My best friend loves his, but he is a handloader as am I and ofter we can correct slight problems in the firearms we purchase. Accuracy being one of them.

Like I said I am not a fan of the .223 for self defense, but I did like the idea of a reliable short barreled rifle with a high capascity magazine. But my choice was the 7.62X39 cartrage. No I do not like AK47s or their inaccuracy, so the choice was a Mini-30 and yes I do own a SKS but it is too large for home/self defense.

The Mini-14 and Mini-30s do what the were designed to do no more and no less. I would highly recommend that anyone purchasing a new firearm check them out first to see if this is what they really want and will do what they think it should do and stop complaining about what their expectations or misconceptions tell them what it should be.

Second from the top, that is a Mini-30 not a Mini-14.

Jim

http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/tt284/bigjim_02/IMG_1901.jpg

[BlueTrain]

I was just thinking about this the other day, only I wasn't thinking about the Mini-14. But that's where the story ended, so to speak.

Easily the best semi-automatic rifle of WWII was the M1 and perhaps even the best rifle. I don't think I've ever read a bad word about it except from Elmer Keith. However, it was developed into the M14, an excellent rifle, and the Italians used some similiar modified M1s that amounted to the same thing. Yet was there never any work towards developing a 5.56mm version?

None of the other semi-automatic rifles used during the war had anywhere near the reputation the M1 had. Why is that? Poor design, probably. Understand they were all working basically from scratch initially with little knowledge of what was going on elsewhere or of what would happen in five years time. There was also the M1 carbine, which looks superfically similiar to an M1 rifle but frankly I'm not familiar enough with it or the M1 rifle to make a comparison.

Oddly enough, the FN F.A.L. started life in the 1940s chambered for the 7.92mm short but was developed into the 7.62 NATO version. But the reverse never happened with the M1/M14 (or for that matter, the M1A). Of course, the AR-10 and AR-15 were not developed with government help, either as assistance or interference, although the cartridge that was used was, because somebody didn't want a rifle chambered in a varmit cartridge, the .222. In any event by the time anything else happened, it was too late. The M16 was the thing.

At this point I think I should mention that at the time, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, we were a lot more progressive with things than we appreciate today, in a way. Plastic was in face being used on commercial rifles, at least in the Remington Nylon 66. I wonder what ever became of that rifle?

Well, then came Ruger and the Mini-14, well after the M16 had been basically adopted by the army. I read so many bad things about it I wonder what is wrong with it. Someone here says overpriced. I wonder what an M14 cost the army? Cost is always important to a military rifle, no matter what you think, yet what the cost actually is, is not generally well known. At least I don't know what those things cost the army.

Actually Ruger is known for value to the consumer, meaning they aren't expensive. But they do that by cost saving methods that the old M1 and M14 (and I assume the M1 carbine) didn't have to live with. But it's just as likely such methods didn't exist in WWII. Does the Mini-14 suffer for it? And why did the .308 version fail?

[Art Eatman]

:D Wuz gonna lock it, but got distracted by the BossLady.

Now remedied.