Ruger AC 556

[Willie Lowman]

Now that's funny right there.

[TylerD45ACP]

Are they that bad accuracy wise really. I mean I head they weren't the greatest but come on they can be that bad.

[Raven Armament]

The Mini14/AC556 is really bad for accuracy. I'm told they have improved somewhat by trying to compete with the AR industry but I still wouldn't buy one.

[Crosshair]

Are they that bad accuracy wise really. I mean I head they weren't the greatest but come on they can be that bad.

They aren't as bad as some people make them out to be. The newer tapered barrels are better than the older ones.

When you take them off the bench and start doing field shooting those AR's suddenly get a lot less accurate. Feed them the same ammo you feed a Mini and they lose that mythical accuracy.

They can be greatly improved with a few simple mods. Extra power recoil spring. recoil buffer, and a gas bushing. Add a barrel stabilizer like an Accu-Strut or a Mo-rod and the older mini's can see their groups get cut in half.

The Mini's never were meant to be match guns and they work just fine. For a SHTF gun even 4 MOA will work just fine.

[NavyEngineer]

The Ciener 22 conversion works well in my AC-556 - cheap, and I expect it places much less stress on the barrel. I have been using black dog magazines. You can easily remove it to restore it to .223 if desired.

[Jo6pak]

Originally Posted by Edward429451

One can double the rate of fire of a semi-auto Mini legally for about 3 cents. It's just a little L shaped pc of metal. It makes the rifle fire an additional shot upon releasing the trigger, after you fire a shot by pulling the trigger. The law reads...by a single function of the trigger...and pulling the trigger is a single function, and releasing the trigger is a single function, so it is legal. It's not conducive to accuracy but it works well. Very easy to make from staples

Are you willing to bet you're entire collection on that assumption?

[PTK]

I am, and I have done just such a conversion to all the Mini-14s I have previously owned. Legally. With a BATFE letter right next to me.

[Skans]

What is the differance?

There are a lot of differences between the AC556 and the Mini-14. The receivers are different - AC556 is slightly wider and configured differently. You've got the full-auto and tri-burst parts as well as the selector. The cut-outs on the stock are different - AC556 receiver will not fit into a Mini-14 stock (but the reverse is possible). Next time you watch the A-Team, you will notice that there is no selector switch on the rear right-hand side of their rifles.

[Skans]

Anyone who wants a super-accurate AC556 can have one if they want to invest about $800 to have a target barrel / gas blocks fitted to it. I've been giving more consideration to this lately, as Ruger has "officially" said they no longer support the rifle. But, for now, my little 13" barrel is still great shape, no need to replace it any time soon.

I just wanted to mention something about the supposed "thin" barrel of the Mini-14. It's no thinner than the barrel of any of the older M16's/AR15's or the FNC. I have a Colt CAR SP1 and an FNC, and the barrels are all about the same diameter. There's way too much BS out there about Mini-14's having thin barrels. But, if that is a problem, then just buy and aftermarket-"bull" barrel and have it mounted onto the receiver.

[Jo6pak]

Originally Posted by PTK

I am, and I have done just such a conversion to all the Mini-14s I have previously owned. Legally. With a BATFE letter right next to me.

Fair enough.

[flusher]

a 1980's Ruger 556K
Semi Auto, 3 shot burst, full Auto

$850.00 with case in 1984

[Lincoln_Arms]

The AC556 is a pretty good gun for the money. However, you have to look at ammo costs and things like that these days as well. They are not an AR15 and the barrels heat up rather quickly. The 3 round burst doesn't always work like it's supposed to and you can't directly change the stocks on the AC556 and the mini 14. If parts are going to be a problem, you may want to look at the FNC or Colt SP1. These are sear guns and about the cheapest late model auto rifle out these. I wouldn't recommend anyone going with a MAC, UZI, or Sten. You can buy UZI's brand new these days for a reason. They are $3,500 guns because the demand isn't there. They are bullet hoses and that's about it. They make a lot of noise and sound cool, but won't hit anything. If you want a cheap auto rifle. Look at a Reising M50 that is .45ACP. If you keep them clean, they will fire nicely and the cycle rate is a little slower, which allows for better accuracy. Also remember that anything firing full auto isn't going to be "that" accurate. That's why the military went to 3 round burst in the first place.

[Skans]

My AC556 3 round burst works flawlessly - but I find that I can control the rate of fire and no longer use that feature as much. Parts availability is a problem, but barrels are not - there are good aftermarket barrels available for these guns. Some Mini-14 parts will interchange, but not the fire control parts. Stocks are not really a problem either - the SCAR stock needs no modification to fit the AC556 and can be configured just about any way you'd like - it ain't cheap, though.

The FNC has the same, if not a greater problem of parts availability....plus barrels are not readily available either. FNC barrels are about the same diameter as the AC556 barrles, but I'd agree, they appear to be better made. Furthermore, they cost about $1,000+ dollars more than the AC556.

The AR15 SP1's modified for an auto sear are way more expensive than the FNC or AC556 - I think they are over $12,000, but I haven't priced them lately. Same goes for registered DIAS's. I'm not a big fan of the lightning links, but I think even they go for about $7,000+.

The AC556 works just fine on wolf ammo, which is cheap - I haven't broken any parts or gummed up any barrels using wolf ammo.

The AC556 was a bargain when Ruger supported this rifle. Lack of support does make it less of a bargain and this will keep prices down somewhat on these guns in the long run.

[David Hineline]

The AC556 is a pretty good gun for the money. However, you have to look at ammo costs and things like that these days as well. They are not an AR15 and the barrels heat up rather quickly. The 3 round burst doesn't always work like it's supposed to and you can't directly change the stocks on the AC556 and the mini 14. If parts are going to be a problem, you may want to look at the FNC or Colt SP1. These are sear guns and about the cheapest late model auto rifle out these. I wouldn't recommend anyone going with a MAC, UZI, or Sten. You can buy UZI's brand new these days for a reason. They are $3,500 guns because the demand isn't there. They are bullet hoses and that's about it. They make a lot of noise and sound cool, but won't hit anything. If you want a cheap auto rifle. Look at a Reising M50 that is .45ACP. If you keep them clean, they will fire nicely and the cycle rate is a little slower, which allows for better accuracy. Also remember that anything firing full auto isn't going to be "that" accurate. That's why the military went to 3 round burst in the first place.


Almost everything you said is wrong.

[Skans]

If parts are going to be a problem, you may want to look at the FNC

I'd like to know a good source of spare parts for the FNC. I have a semi-auto FNC and have been looking for spare parts for it for years. At best, I've found folks selling the following:

one used barrel for $350+ that might or might not work.
used plastic forestock pop up now and then
scope mount that runs about $80+ pops up now and then
firing pins can be found if you know where to look
semi-auto hammer - first one I saw just spotted on gunbroker.

Finding parts for the FNC is miserable, and if you happen to find a part you are looking for, you will pay dearly for it. You can't just buy a semi-auto FNC for spares either because that'll run you about $2.5K. The good news is that the FNC is a good gun that doesn't usually break.

The AC556 is a good full-auto .223 for the money. Yes, the barrels will heat up after heavy use - but they are far more durable than folks who have never owned and shot one would have you believe - at least the 13" barrels are. In semi-auto my 13" AC556 is fairly accurate out to 75-100 yards. Beyond that, I don't know because I don't have any use for trying to hit targets at 200 yards with a 13" carbine. And, unlike the FNC, I can have an excellent quality heavy barrel installed on my AC556 for the same price it will cost to install a used barrel on an FNC if you are lucky enough to find one.

[LFOD1776]

I had an AC556 (actually I still have it, but I have a Form 4 in to the ATF to transfer it to the dealer to whom I sold it). It was my very first machine gun. Seemed like a great deal at the time, for all the reasons previously stated. Sure, it is a fun toy. Nevertheless, in the end, I sold it and bought an M16 (although selling the AC556 and buying the M16 happened in unrelated transactions, and not in that order ). Once I heard that Ruger was equivocating on servicing them I figured that was the last nail in the coffin.

If you can afford to buy something as utterly impractical as an AC556 you can probably also afford to spend a little less than twice as much and get an M16 lower receiver. You will be happy you did. There are simply so many more things you can do with an M16 -- so many high-quality uppers and accessories that are just made for it. Why get a conversion kit when you can just have a whole dedicated .22LR upper? Heck, there are even belt-fed uppers (the mythical Shrike, for instance -- I'm sure some day supply will catch up to demand). The ergonomics are great. And even though there is an element of absurdity when talking about the accuracy of a machine gun, you can still shoot it accurately in semi-auto.

You will just be much happier with an M16 in the end.

[Skans]

Everyone would buy a registered lower M16 lower receiver over an AC556, if they were priced comparably. But they are not anywhere near comparable!! That's an extra $6,000+ Just so you can play with extra do-dads. Yes, an M16 will be more accurate at long distances than my 13" AC556 in semi-auto....if that means anything to you, or you could just buy an $800 AR.

From a practical standpoint, there isn't $6,000 (or even $2,000) worth of differences between an M16 and an AC556. Both will appreciate, and it may be that the M16 lower will appreciate more over time than the AC556. So, for purely investment purposes, I'd consider buying the M16 lower wrap it up and put it in the safe. But, I could tell you there is no way in heck I'd trade my AC556 (which I like to shoot) + $5,000+ for an M16 lower receiver.....but then again, that's just me. And, if I were to ever even consider it, it would have to be for a converted lower, probably not a registered DIAS and definitely not for lightning link.

[David Hineline]

The M16 is a better weapon than the AC556 but only by $300 or so.

The reason the M16 is so much more is due to legislation.

The AC556 is what it is, it might be a .22lr gun.

The M16 is long, short, .22lr, most handgun calibers, .223 300whisper, 6.8mm 7.62X39 and beltfed all for one registered machinegun. It is that alone that makes it thousands more in the civilian market.

[Jr.samples]

ruger product service department must have changed their policy regarding this firearm. for I had a ac556 repaired and refinished by ruger with a 2 week turnaround for $160.00. Service was done in the last 10 weeks

[Skans]

ruger product service department must have changed their policy regarding this firearm. for I had a ac556 repaired and refinished by ruger with a 2 week turnaround for $160.00. Service was done in the last 10 weeks

Well, that's good news! I know that when I checked about 6 months ago, they said they weren't doing anymore refurbs, but would consider repairs, if they had the parts. My thought is that they don't want to manufacture any new stocks, or refinish stocks or reblue rifles. Hopefully they will still replace worn and broken parts.

[MG34_Dan]

Here are a few pictures of a 100% factory original KAC556-F along with her cousin, a 100% factory original Mini-14 KGB-F. Both shoot very well. An AC556-F along with a Gemtech Halo suppressor make a nice suppressed machine gun package.





Let's not forget the "Happy Switch".



Side front sling swivels are correct for factory folders and both firearms have my inventory tags attached. For Mini's and AC's, I prefer original Ruger folding stocks over anything else. They just look right together.

[Skans]

Very nice guns!! Please notice the difference of the "older" stainless steel finish on these two Rugers as opposed to the newer dark-gray stainless finish on present-day Mini-14's. I really wish Ruger would go back to this old, brighter finish. The newer stainless steel finish looks rough and takes some of the refinement away from what I consider to be an excelent gun.

[flusher]

In 1984 I bought this 191 series AC556K for $800.00
In this case the "K" was folding stock, not stainless

[John Paty]

The last time I went to the range, the guy beside me was bench-resting a short-barreled AC556 @ 100 yard. I didn't see what kind of groups he shot, but I developed a case of rifle envy.

[4V50 Gary]

So long as Ruger will work on them and especially rebarrel them, then I wouldn't mind owning one myself. However, with the AR system, you can work on it yourself and rebarrel it yourself. The AR is the LEGO of the gun world. You need a bunch of specialized tools to work on the AC-556 and the Mini-14.