Picked one of these up a few years back and I was thinking (and hoping) that a range report may be interesting.

[img]https://www.okshooters.com/data/MetaMirrorCache/www****ger_firearms.com_products_mini14TacticalRifle_images_5819.jpg[/img]

C&P from the Oklahoma forum

I didn't do well with it as I simply couldn't get a good group even from 25 yards or so shooting from a rest. The shots were well-oriented elevation-wise, but they were scattered all over the target laterally. I couldn't figure this out as I usually do well with peep sights, then I noticed that the rear sight was moving sideways as I was shooting. I didn't have the right wrench to fix it but I will take the Allen wrench with me next time I shoot it. What probably happened was the techie at the factory did not tighten one screw and this allowed the lateral movement.

About 110 223 rounds went downrange and I used some old South African 5.56 mm surplus and some Norinco from my old dealer's stock. I had some old USA brand 30-round mags and a couple of old 30-round Ramline polymers and the two 20-round factory mags that came with the rifle. Functioning was flawless with all of the mags except there was a few cases when the bolt was slow to return. Perhaps a good idea would be to stick with the factory mags until the rifle is more broken in.

Bump-firing was tried, but no joy. I couldn't get it to function that way. Still, despite the issue with the rear sight it seems to be a robust, well-made rifle.

So, next time I take her out, I take the Allen wrench and a few orange sticky-dots, some of the old Norinco and just the two 20-round factory mags.

BTW, is the propellent powder ammonia based? It sure smells like it. It stinks.

All-in-all, I think it will be a good rifle once I get that rear sight problem taken care of. And it is a lot of fun.

__________________
Let's be careful out there

I owned the same model for a short period of time. Got it as part of a trade and ended up selling it after two range visits. For a 223 it was just really heavy. Even with the polymer stock I was surprised how much heft these Mini-14's have. I remember accuracy was so-so. Not great, but honestly not that bad either. I wanted to love it because I am also a Ruger fan, but there are so many better options out there now for a rifle of this caliber.

__________________
Ephesians 6 (Armor of God)

You didn't say if it was a 180 series or 580 series. 580 has the better barrel. Accuracy was never anything notable with any Mini-14.

I have a 580 that's had the trigger tuned and the gas bushing replaced. 4X Leupold on top. It's about 3 MOA with a cold barrel. 20 rounds and the groups start to open up. It doesn't like a warm barrel. They are also extremely reliable.

They aren't as accurate as your $750 AR out of the box and the new Mini's are more expensive. Not sure why anyone would want one but somebody keeps buying them. Lots of them. Must be the M-14 nostalgia.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

A newer model in the 580 series it runs just fine and with the right ammo it is fairly accurate. No beefs to date.

Yeah, it's a sight better than an AK-47, that's for sure.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

I had one of the old ones in stainless for years. Used it as a truck gun. Back when they were $300 and an AR was $900, they made sense.

Sort of. Except:

1. Accuracy was poor and couldn't be improved without inordinate work.

2. Sights were abysmal.

3. The only magazines that would work were the factory 20s, and they were scarce and expensive until 2004.

4. If anything broke, it was back to Ruger.


Now you can (pre-panic) get a Smith AR for $499 that's better in every way.

Talking to my shooting buddy a couple of days ago and we both like them. Never had one but for some reason I really want one.
I might be showing my age but maybe it’s the whole A Team thing!
At the current prices I will probably not ever buy one but I like them.

Anyone who has ever watched the original A-Team television series knows you can't hit anything with these rifles.

__________________
- Change it back -

I had 5 of the old Mini-14's two blue, three stainless. One each factory folders. Most of the accuracy was 5" at 50 yards! The 3 MOA idea would have probably kept me happy.

In the Mid-90's I bought a Bushmaster A4 (20" 1-9 Milspec barrel, ridged butt stock & removable carry handle) That shoots 1/4 MOA with WW white box & a 6.5-20x40 Veri-X scope! Never really looked at another Mini! The AR works on stationary ground hogs to 500 and running coyotes to 250!

Ivan

Sounds like the same logic that was used in the ditch-the-revolvers-for-SD thread you started.

I know this sounds hard to believe but not everyone wants an AR.

I can ring an 18" plate at 220 yds every shot with my Mini-14. How much accuracy does one need for a SD carbine? Mags aren't that expensive anymore. I just purchased some from CDNN for $20 each.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

Minor clarification. The 180 series was the original Mini 14 and it was significantly different than the 181 and later series. Beginning with the 181 series Ruger made a number of changes, apparently for commonality with their full auto AC-556, including a much heavier slide and an oversized gas port. The changes made have improved full auto relatability and durability, but they really ruined the accuracy turning a 2 MOA carbine into a 4-5 MOA carbine.

I’ve posted previously on getting the post 180-pre580 Mini 14s and ranch rifles to shoot accurately and when done they’ll shoot 5 shots into 1.5” at 100 yards. But it’s a fair bit of work.

The 580 series was the result of Ruger finally replacing its worn out tooling, and all but the earliest of the 580 carbines have a heavier tapered barrel. Those later 580s through what ever the current 58x series is up to now all shoot 2 MOA out of the box with good quality ammo.

This.

I have a 180 series. A joy to shoot.

I have a 186(?) series GB model. Looks cool, just like the A-Team. Accurate, not so much.

I have the newer 581, again, a joy to shoot.

JMHO YMMV .

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

I've owned three Mini-14s; two in .223/5.56 and one in .300 BLK. While they were 100% reliable with Ruger magazines, the accuracy, as described by others, was dismal, even with decent optics mounted on them. The only thing going for them are the classic looks.

There appear to be some conflicting reports here regarding accuracy of Mini-14s. I've liked the looks since they came out in the 70s but never owned because of the alleged inaccuracy. Don't the newer ones shoot better? I'd like to try at least one, but I have not yet researched this in any way. Who all has fired the newer guns from a benchrest at 100 or 200 yards with good ammo (not bulk FMJ junk) or good handloads?

I’ve owned two, there won’t be a third.

__________________
I’m your Boogie Man, uh huh.

If you live in a ban state, like me, the Mini 14 is the only 5.56 rifle NOT on the assault weapons list. Thats why Ruger can sell so many. I happen to like mine

__________________
S&W BG380, S&W 915 9mm

Bill Ruger took a lot of heat for decisions like not selling the Mini 14 30 round magazines to civilians. He also discontinued the folding stock version for more or less the same reason and didn’t toe down the muzzle device rabbit hole

But on the plus side he kept the Mini 14 off virtually every ban list while he was alive, including all the proposed federal bans. Part of that was the Mini 14 looking less militant with a wood stock and without muzzle devices, folding stocks, etc. but a large part of it was also that Bill Ruger was a pretty good negotiator when it came to gun legislation and pretty good at keeping Ruger from getting tarred with the mass shooting brush.

It’s also ironic as the Mini 14 has a higher cyclic rate than an AR-15, can be modified to function with a binary trigger with just an office staple, and as of 2011 had been used in at least 6 mass shootings in the US - and one in Norway where it was the most military style rifle available.

The shooting in Norway prompted an article that called it the “poor man’s assault rifle”. I recall in the late 1970s and early 1980s you could get a Mini 14 for around $300 while an AR-15 would cost you about $450, so there was some truth to it back in the day. However once SGW (Olympic Arms) started making AR-15s when the Colt patents expired and a whole host of companies jumped on board that bandwagon, AR-15s became much less expensive than Mini 14s. Today, you’ll pay $1200 for the basic wood and blued steel Mini 14 and around $1350 for the
composite stocked stainless version - if you can find one. A good used mini 14 will still run $700-$800. You can get an entry level AR-15 for under $500.

Since Bill Ruger’s death in 2002 and as more of the administrative and marketing staff he cultivated retire or move on, Ruger has been slipping in the direction of other semi auto makers with “tactical” variants, composite stocks, and muzzle devices and of course they sell the 30 round magazine to civilians.

That *might* cost it it’s immune status on future proposed federal bans and put it on more state ban lists. It’s just a might because the high cost of Mini 14s will keep the numbers out there limited compared to AR-15s and AKs, and it probably won’t be the first choice for someone looking to buy a weapon for that purpose given the heavier media coverage of those other weapons. No one seems to want to look at the role media coverage plays in mass shootings in the US, where the press coverage guarantees 15 minutes of fame as they sensationalize the crime to sell papers and score ratings and in the process sew the seeds for future copycats.

I posted a comparison of the Mini 14 180 series with the 181 and later series a year or so ago, and discussed the difference in accuracy on the box stock rifles. The 181 and later rifles gained a lot of reciprocating mass in the slide and that along with being badly over gassed (.080” gas bushing rather than .045”) really aggravated the barrel harmonics and killed the accuracy.


I’ve also posted about the changes made to my 184 and 187 series to improve accuracy (SOCOM length AccuStrut, Browning style Choate flash hider and front sight, .045” gas port bushing, Tech Sights rear sight, and a shock buffer) from 4-5 MOA to 1.5” 5 shot groups at 100 yards.

I’ve also covered the changes Ruger made in barrel twist starting with the original 1-10” twist, switching to the way over hyped and over rated 1-7 twist and finally switching back to the 1-9 twist.

The 1-7 twist barrels didn’t help accuracy at all. The 1-9 twist was actually idea, for the military M855 ball round and the 1-7 twist was only adopted for the M-16A2 and later M16 and M4 variants as it was needed to stabilize the much longer M856 tracer round. Do you shoot much M856 in your AR-15 or Mini 14? Neither do I or 99.9% of the other civilian shooters out there. However civilian shooters are more likely to shoot fairly low quality 55 and 62 gr FMJ bullets.

That’s a problem as most of the bulk FMJ bullets in that low cost category are not precisely made and as such the center of form and the center of gravity are not on the same axis. That means the bullet rotates around the center of form in the bore and then transitions to rotating around the center of gravity after it exits. That causes the bullet to wobble and the resulting yaw creates precession, and the faster the bullet is spinning the worse that precession will be. That causes the bullet to travel in a spiral pattern before settling down in some random and slightly different direction. Consequently accuracy with those bullets is worse in a 1-7 twist barrel than it is in a 1-12, 1-10 or 1-9 twist barrel. More twist isn’t better unless you are shooting very long match bullets.

One of the accuracy problems when with the Mini 14 is that it’s often unclear what barrel twist is used and shooters with the 1-7” barrels often shoot low cost low quality 55 gr FMJ in them with worse than average results.

This site is useful in terms in more or less what twist a given Mini 14 or Ranch rifle may have. It’s not exact as Ruger didn’t do clean transitions at a specific serial number, and Ruger had a very good policy of completely rebuilding law enforcement Mini 14s returned to the factory, and they used the barrels that were being put on new mini 14s at the time. But it’s a good general reference.

Sunflower Ammo.com: Ruger Mini-14/30 Barrel Twist Rates

As noted above in a prior post, the 580 and later series came off new tooling and not long after the retooling, Ruger started using a heavier tapered barrel. The two changes together improved accuracy and Ruger now expects 2 MOA accuracy on its new Mini 14s.

The accuracy issues can be fixed on the old ones and the new ones (580 and later) are 2 MOA accurate and shoot with the average AR-15 clone.

The Mini 14s reliability however is a huge advantage compared to an AR-15. I was issued M16A1s way back in the day and none of the three I was issued was even remotely reliable if you got any dirt or sand in the upper receiver. Don’t get me wrong, I actually liked how it handled and shot - it would consistently hit a torso sized target out to 400m in the field if the shooter did his part, and it had superb handling (far better than the heavier, poorly balanced, and fat hand guarded M16A2). But everytime I stopped or had a spare 30 seconds I pushed the rear pin out, opened the upper receiver and wiped down the bolt carrier and the inside of the upper receiver. It was the only way to ensure it would fire after crawling around in the mud, dirt, sand, or even leaf litter on a forest floor. Reliability wise it was a total *** in dirty conditions even when you ran it dripping with oil.

In contrast, my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, BM-59, M1A and all three of my Mini 14s shrug off dirt and don’t seem to even notice it.

The Mini 14 looks a bit like an M14 and shares the same basic rotating bolt and receiver design as the M1 Garand, as well as a slide and short tappet gas system that is very similar to the system found on the M1 Carbine. It’s not a surprise that it is similarly reliable with dirt in the action.

Part of that are the loose tolerances between moving parts compared to the AR-15. There is no doubt some accuracy cost to that. A well tuned Match grade AR-15 will be sub MOA accurate. The fairly rare Mini 14 Target wasn’t that accurate and never will be given the looser tolerances. But it was way more reliable than any AR-15.

I also own an AR-180 and AR-180B as well as a Galil in 5.56. None of them are as accurate as a high quality AR-15, and that’s because all of them share similarly loose tolerances. But all of them are very reliable even when sand or dirt finds its way into the action.

As many have noted, the accuracy or any thought of accuracy just is not there. I have owned a couple of the AC-556 models also with the same results - although the 3 shot burst was pretty cool… and in full auto it was just a waste of ammo.

__________________
S&W factory revolver armorer

Good and useful response. 2 MOA is fine for anything I'd use a Mini-14 for. I wouldn't use a scope except for load development and never shoot past 200 yards.

As for cheap ammo... when I became interested in ARs several years ago, I bought three Colts and put scopes on two. The two with scopes were capable of 1" and smaller five-shot 100 yard groups straight out-of-the-box, unmolested and not modified, but only with expensive Federal or Winchester match ammo or handloads using Sierra bullets which actually did a little better than the factory match stuff.

For comparison, I bought eight or ten cheap commercial ammos. Functioning and reliability were fine, but accuracy was not. Complete waste of money, but apparently many are satisfied with this second-rate stuff. However, it's always best to try a few accurate ammos, commercial or handloads before pronouncing a gun as inaccurate.

I don't live in a restricted state but I know which way the wind blows. I'll be swimming upstream soon enough.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

I agree. People buy some very ****** ammo and then blame the rifle.

I like apples to apples testing. I buy Hornady 55 gr FMJ bullets in bulk 6000 at a time and then load them to 3250 fps with BLC(2). That’s about 30 fps less than M193 velocity, but the BC is better on the Hornady bullet and the 400 yard trajectory is identical with the same 300 yard zero. They are also well made and are 1 MOA capable in my Varmint AR.


It makes a good load for comparative testing with the AR-15 and Mini 14. Both my Colt SP1 and my Colt manufactured M16A1 upper on an NDS 601 lower will shoot 1.5 MOA 5 shot groups with that ammo. So will my AccuStrut, Choate flash hider, .045” gas port equipped Mini 14s.



With the same reasonable quality but still inexpensive ammo in a similar configuration, they have near identical accuracy.

I am a hand gunner at heart, but I like the Ruger Mini-14 for casual shooting. Just an enjoyable gun to shoot.

Attached Images

thumbnail (1)5.56 Ruger Mimi 14 E.jpg (34.0 KB, 15 views)

When I went to Germany in '69, a newly minted 2nd LT out of ROTC at Nebraska, to the 3d ID as a mech platoon leader, my issue weapon was an M14. We had two E2 versions per squad. Thinking back now, I wonder why as an officer, I wasn't issued the usual 1911. I don't know, all I recall was that I liked my wooden stocked M14. We shot a lot at the ranges.

To this day, I still think about acquiring a M1A, the civilian version of my M14. Just something I haven't done yet. A year ago, was with a shooting buddy when he bought a used Mini14, I don't know which version, and I know he likes shooting it. A Mini14 would be a reasonable substitute for an M14, at least in appearance and "action."

But there is another alternative.. About five or six years ago, bought this '44 Inland at a gun show, $600. I think it was a DCM rifle from long ago, bought by some Vet, because I don't think it had been shot since its post war rebuild. Although mine doesn't have a bayonet lug, nor the switch safety, mine has the push button safety. I like it a lot, I reload for it, and it is just a svelte gun to shoot. I don't shoot it for accuracy, just for fun.

By the way Bugsy Segal, the Vegas mobster, was killed with a M1 Carbine, sitting in his chair.

So if one is considering a Mini14, but for some reason just can't make that jump, a M1 carbine might just be the ticket. Besides, I had an M2 full auto version in Vietnam.

All the best... SF VET
[IMG][/IMG]

With regard to 5.56 ammo and accuracy, there is a very instructive test on the Box o' Truth website. Even in a match grade AR the standard military surplus fodder was 3-4 MOA at best.

__________________
Release the Kraken

I bought a used mini 14 years ago, it shoots bug holes as good as any AR-15.
however it has a lot of work done to it, new Krieger barrel new gas port ect, so I guess this one don't count as it cost the original owner about $600 when he bought it and had over $600 worth of work done to it.
The sweet part is I paid $600 for it.

True, the military issue grade ammo is made to go "bang" when the trigger is pulled, but it is produced in massive quantities, so its quality control is not up to that of target or hunting grade ammo.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

The accuracy requirements for M193 in MIL-C-9963F required an average mean radius of not greater than 2.0” at 200 yards. That doesn’t mean a 4” group at 200 yards, it just means the average distance from the mean point of impact must be 2.0” or less. Accuracy testing normally involved two 30 round groups, with a third group allowed if one of the two groups failed (essentially the best 2 out of 3 counted). The “average” meant you could have fliers outside that 4” group, they just had to be made up for with other rounds proportionately closer to center. Realistically a 6” to 8” (roughly 3-4 MOA) center to center measured 200 yard 30 round group can easily still meet the 2” mean radius standard.

——

M855 ball ammo is even worse. M855 had different requirements specified in MIL-C-63989A. It included both accuracy and matching requirements at 600 yards. The accuracy requirement specified that the standard deviation at 600 yards could not exceed 7.8”. Again that isn’t a 7.8” diameter circle (1.24 MOA) or even a 7.8” radius circle (2.48 MOA). Instead it uses a normal distribution curve where 67% of the rounds must fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean point of impact, where 1 SD is no more than 7.8”.

In other words, 68% of the rounds must fall within 7.8” of the mean point of impact, and it also means that on average 27% of the rounds will fall between 7.8” and 15.6” of the mean point of impact and 5% of the rounds will fall between 15.6” and 23.4” of the mean point of impact.

From a center to center group perspective, it means 68% of the rounds will fall within a 15.6” circle (2.48 MOA), 27% of the rounds will fall within a 23.4” circle (3.72 MOA) and 5% will fall within a 31.2” circle (4.97 MOA).

In other words, you’ll only get 2.48 MOA accuracy if you are lucky enough to have each shot in a five round group be one of those 68% 1 SD rounds. That will only happen about 15% of the time. You’ll get 3.72 MOA accuracy if each of the five rounds fired is a 1st or 2nd SD round. That will happen about 77% of the time, so it’s reasonable for all of just a few groups fired to reflect that level of accuracy. But if you shoot a lot groups you’ll need to expect about 8% of those groups to be on the order of 5 MOA.

Once again the testing of each ammunition lot is normally two 30 round groups, with the same best 2 out of 3 loophole if one of the first two groups fails.

The accuracy matching requirement just means the mean point of impact can’t be more than 7.8” horizontally or 10.8” vertically from the point of impact of a reference cartridge.

——

The mediocre 3-4 MOA accuracy with M193 in the box of truth article isn’t a surprise. That’s an artifact of using mass produced FMJ projectiles that have an exploded lead base. Base consistency is critical to accuracy as any inconsistency shows up as either:
- gas exiting asymmetrically around the base of the bullet at the muzzle, causing the bullet to yaw and precess on exit; and or
- a difference between the center of form and center of gravity that causes the bullet to wobble and precess after it leaves the muzzle and transitions from rotation around one axis to the other until it settles down a 100 or so yards down range.

The old .30 caliber 173 gr match bullet used in M72 and M110 match and special ball ammo was also an FMJ. It was however made with much greater care and was 1 MOA capable in match ammo. That was the case until the tooling got old and the bullets started to vary a lot. Then it was more often 2-3 MOA ammo.

The roughly 5 MOA accuracy with M855 ammo is also not a surprise. Its SS109 projectile suffers not only from an exposed lead base, but also a steel penetrator. Consequently, with another component in the mix, you have issues with making the heavy gilding metal jacket concentric as well as the steel penetrator and the lead core under the penetrator. It’s very difficult to get all of them to line up perfectly when the bullet is swaged, so the SS109 suffers from differences between the respective axis of the center of form and center of gravity to a much greater degree than just a plain FMJ bullet.

When you add in the excessive spin rate and chrome lining of a current 1-7” twist mil spec barrel, rather than a carbon steel or stainless 1-9” twist barrel with the imperfections in the projectiles used in M193 or M855 ball ammo, the accuracy gets even worse.

——

All of that is why I make my “inexpensive” M193 clone ammo using Hornady 55 gr FMJs as they not only have a better BC than the Remington designed military Type A projectile in M193 ball, but are also 1 MOA capable in a 1-12 twist heavy varmint barrel and 1.5 MOA accurate in a Colt 1-12” M16A1 barrel or a good quality 1-10 or 1-9” barrel.

All that stats is giving me flashbacks to my days in high end metrology.

__________________
Release the Kraken

Took the words right outta my mouth! Couldn’t agree more!

__________________
Take it easy. Chris

I bought this one in december 2019
(just a few months before covid hit the US) $889

Attached Images

Screenshot 2019-12-05 at 7.31.40 PM.jpg (24.3 KB, 10 views)

__________________
S&W BG380, S&W 915 9mm

I've admired the Mini 14 for at least 30 years. I've shot two owned by friends, but always talked myself out of buying one because I had no use for it. Last year, with civil unrest spreading, I decided to buy one. "Get an AR", said my shooting buddy repeatedly. I don't want an AR. I bought a new Ruger stainless ranch rifle at my LGS for $930. Bought 4 Ruger magazines, 2 20's and 2 30's. "Ought to put a scope on it", said the same buddy. Don't want a scope. It hits the center of torso targets from 100 yards. That's what I wanted. I tested all four mags, and the mags and guns had zero malfunctions. The gun will rarely be shot, but it's here if needed. And....I just always liked them.