I would love to be able to love the Mini-14 as I cut my teeth on an M-14. However, accurate they are not (or at least not in days of yore). So, stick with what I know best the AR............

__________________
USMC 69-93 Combat Pistol Inst.

I had always admire the looks and concept of the Mini-14 but never enough to lay down my hard earned cash while the reports of mediocre accuracy were common enough that I knew it wasn't just isolated examples. But when ammo was $5/20 I kept thinking if i found one cheap enough it would be worth adding an Accu-Strut which supposedly would bring it down to a 2-3 MOA rifle.

And then, around 2007 they got some major improvements finally. Still, having a 5.56/.223 rifle seemed like a good idea but owning an AR15 rifle here in Commiefornia meant that it had to be so *******ized to be legal that it hardly resembled the guns sold in free states. On the other hand, other than being restricted to maximum 10 round magazine, the Mini-14 has stayed under the anti's radar.

I finally broke down and bought one last year. A blue steel, hardwood stocked Ranch Rifle. I added a sling and a Leupold VX Freedom 1.5x4x20mm straight tube scope. I can't see adding a heavy, bulky high magnification scope to one. The Leupold only weighs 9.6 ounces and doesn't need higher rings so it sits down low and at the lowest setting is very fast for close in targets. A few minutes with a fine ceramic stone smoothed out the trigger and it breaks a little over 4 lbs. Good enough for me.

The other benefit to the Mini-14 is that it has a chamber cut to the "Wylde" dimensions which means that it will safely shoot either 5.56 NATO or .223 ammo. The rate of twist isn't optimized for the longer, heavier bullets that are in vogue these days but is fine with 55 to 68 grain bullets. Too bad Ruger didn't make the changes back in the 1980's.

I think you have to get to the recently made Mini 14s for that supposed greater accuracy. The series through (IIRC) 195 all use the pencil barrel profile.

Maybe it's because of the heavier barrel profile or using different machinery but I've not heard about the 30 having such accuracy problems. Mine has done OK.

Re CA and the AR reconfiguring - I bought a Fightlite rifle as sort of a mix & match between AR and Mini. Mini type lower using AR mags, AR 15 uppers.

in a X39 -

IMG_0929.jpg

IMG_0930.jpg

Lousy trigger in the original and maybe not the best for fast magazine changes, but all in all a pretty good rifle on its own.

You can't polish a ****! Sorry

I bought a like-new blued 580 series with several extra mags for $700 a few months ago. I put a 3-9x Burris I had laying around on it. Only one range trip so far, but it showed some promise - 2 - 2.5" groups with just some random ammo I had in my bag. I plan to do some work with it and see whats possible. I don't intend to spend any significant amount of money on it - I already have two good ARs, a Colt 6920 and a M&P Sport II. We'll see if it's capable of anything less than teacup size groups.

We got the Minis in 1992, they were as accurate as everyone says. Over the years, ten I believe, we had two that sheared the lug off the bolt. Ruger did make it good.
I went to a select fire course in the mid 1990's.Everyone but two guys had M16's or HK MP5's, the two exceptions had full auto Mini14's. Both broke the first day.
I have owned a Mini14 and a 30. Neither shot particularity well.
I have no interest in owning another. I am also not a huge fan of the AR platform, but there is no denying the superiority of them.

How’s the mini compare with the AK for accuracy?

__________________
213th FBINA

I bought my Mini back when ARs were twice the price of a Mini. Around 1997 a poor college student could come up with $400, but couldn't swing $800+ for an AR then. Funny, ARs are half the price of the Mini now. 1.5-2" is the group at 100 when I have tested it.

Rosewood

[QUOTE=SnidelyWhiplash;141943230]

A colleague went to rifle instructor school back in the early ‘90s. He said students in the class had either a Mini-14 or an AR-15. He said by the end of the week all the AR-15s were still shooting and everyone with a Mini wanted to wrap them around a post due to malfunctions. They simply weren’t made for such heavy use.


That's funny. Some years ago my brother attended a patrol rifle instructor course with an iron sighted Mini 14. He was the only one there with such a rifle in a sea of AR-15s with optics and every add on imaginable. They all laughed at him. First order of business was to actually shoot the qualification course. He shot a perfect score and half of his detractors failed. Maybe by the end of the week they had learned to hit what they were shooting at?

Seeing one of the above posts, it is possible the modified more accurate guns were in the 580 (not 180) SN prefixes. Still worth a range trip I think.

I’ve told this story here before but I had a Mini-14 Ranch rifle. Terrible accuracy from a solid rest, with every load I tried. Made me look worse than the mediocre marksman I was at the time.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Depends on the AK manufacturer, but 3"-4" is acceptable for the AK. I like the reliability and the caliber of AK-47 variants, but not the accuracy nor the mag insertion.

It strikes me as odd that dealers still sell Mini-14's for $1000 and it's such a terrible rifle. I have one I purchased new about 5 years ago for $750. Price seems to have gone up about 25% in that time. That's just plain weird.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

Have you checked prices on Ruger M77s in 357? And mine was not impressive at all.

Many issues with Ruger firearms...as well built as they might be...can be traced to Bill Ruger himself. He wanted to build firearms to a certain MSRP and that was that. His barrel maker told him for what he wanted to pay they could provide barrels of a certain, mediocre accuracy potential or he could pay more for barrels that could be much more accurate. He chose the cheaper way to go...and that more or less was the rule until after he passed.

Bill Ruger...for all his business acumen and design ability...wasn't all that good a friend to the gun community. He supported gun control...at least those laws that wouldn't affect his business. The Brady law...even though it sunsetted after ten years...may not have passed to begin with without Bill Ruger's influence.

Hindsight is 20/20. When the Mini-14 was introduced in 1973, there was only one AR-15 which was Colt and it wasn't that popular so the magazines weren't that big of a deal. However, if they had addressed the Mini-14's problems early on, the AR platform might have not gotten as popular as it is today and news anchors would be talking about the evil Mini-14.

Many accuracy problems with rifles shooting the 7.62x39 round can be traced to issues with the ammo, or the rifle bore not being the correct size for the ammo. Many make the mistake of reading "7.62" as .308", making the ammo or the bore that size. Guess again. The nominal bullet diameter is .310", and throwing a .308" bullet down a .310 (or larger) bore is a guaranteed recipe for large groups. We've been down this rabbit hole before with undersized US made ammo in Carcano rifles. Allegedly, at least one US ammo manufacturer turned out a bunch of ammo marked 7.62x39 using .308" bullets.

I have read that putting .310" bullets down a .308" bore affects accuracy less. This comes from those who have used a 7.62x39 chamber insert on Spanish 1916 rifles rebuilt to 7.62 CETME.

With regard to the Mini 30, I found this gem quoting from the Brownells website some years ago.

More digging might reveal accuracy comparisons of the early Mini 30s to the later ones.

__________________
Release the Kraken

The most accurate standard rifle I've owned was a '79 Ruger M77 in 270 Winchester. The M77 in 357 really disappointed me, but my current Ruger/Marlin in 357 is very accurate. I always had good luck with Security Six and Speed Six revolvers as well.

Many years ago I read an article in Shooting Times magazine comparing a Mini 30 and an SKS. At 100 yds the Mini
30 groups were more than double the size of the SKS groups. Lost all interest in ever owning a Mini 14 or 30 after that.

I had a Mini in the '90s that at a hundred yards could barely hold "minute of Monte Carlo." I had a Monte Carlo hood that I had replaced, and set it out at 100 yards with a 6" white aiming point painted on it. I sent 100 deliberate rounds down range and got 87 hits. The next week I bought a new $86 Russian SKS and dumped the Mini. Best investment I ever made, as the SKS turned out to be an Izzy and it's still in new condition.

One of the best things that happened to the Mini-14 was the tv show The A-Team. It gave the rifle a lot of exposure…even if no one hit what they were shooting at.

The current iterations are 2 MOA rifles out of the box.

The original 180 series mini 14s were also 2 MOA rifles (before Ruger developed the AC-556 and modified the Mini 14 to match that rifle).

The skinny barrel mini 14s from the 181 series to the 580 series can all be made to shoot 1.5 MOA with some work, including a muzzle device to add some weight, an accu strut and a smaller gas port bushing in the .045” range, particularly the rifles with the original 1-10” twist rifling or the final 1-9” twist rifling. The mid production 1-7” barrel rifles can be a bit picky on ammo.

—-

Shotgun type patterns are also common in many M4gery style AR-15s and yet people don’t seem to have an issue with it.

Ruger used three different barrel makers over the years:

Douglas from '67-'73
Wilson from '73-'91
Ruger hammer-forged from '91-Current

Douglas barrels were superb. The Wilson barrels were hit or miss and what you got was luck of the draw. That’s the era when the M77 developed a reputation for inconsistent accuracy.

That led to Ruger making its own hammer forged barrels. Once they got the bugs worked out of the hammer forging and stress relief processes they were and continue to be excellent barrels.

Yeah, ever notice that those guys would dump mag after mag, but never hit even one bad guy?

Guess now we know why.

__________________
Send lawyers, guns & money...

I bought a Mini-30 right before the Assault Weapons ban went into effect. A year or so out of law school and not making much more than enough to pay rent and a truck payment. It was a stainless ranch with wood stock. Think I paid $400 then, way cheaper than any AR option at that time that I knew about. At the time, Chinese 7.62x39 was about $60 per 1k. I picked up a thousand rounds and took it to the bench. Scoped with a cheap Simmons scope, it would hold that ammo about 2.5" at 100. Likewise with the Winchester soft points, which were the only hunting ammo available around here and very hard to obtain. My Dad liked it and killed a couple of deer with it. I killed one. After the ban on importing Chinese ammo, I tried the Russian stuff. The rifle wouldn't hold five rounds on a paper plate at 100. I wasn't handloading that round at the time and sent it down the road. Wish I'd kept it as I'm now loading the round for a Palmetto KS-47 which will easily keep groups under an inch at 100 and is a great little hog rifle. It would be interesting to see how the old Mini would do with my handloads.

There’s lots of AR/M4 clones out there…factory assembled from good and mediocre companies that buy excess or even out of spec parts to cash in on panic sales…plus homebuilt guns ranging from tack drivers to unreliable minute of barn door accuracy.

There’s only one company making Mini-14s so any attributes and flaws fall on them.

I learn something useful here nearly every day.

Two months ago a widow gave me an unfired 1985 Mini . 184 prefix. Haven’t fired it yet and don’t really want it . Was thinking about making it a behind the seat truck gun . If I do I’ll for sure take it out and test it first .

Mine is currently a wall hanger

Attached Images

109FD8E6-EB40-4782-8BE1-F7A85171CB77.jpg (53.6 KB, 23 views)

__________________
213th FBINA

I have a couple of them, a 14 Ranch in SS that was $500 OTD new, and a Poly/SS 30 that was free. I like them both just fine for what I expect out of them and they are perfectly welcome to stay here forever.

Attached Images

DCP_4654.JPG (201.2 KB, 14 views)

I bought a bedraggled Mini-14 at a reservation trading post about 15 years ago for 300 bucks. I had an old stock that I refinished and I replaced the busted rear sight with a Williams peep. I traded a bag full of M1 Garand clips for eight 30 round mags - four factory and four aftermarket. They all worked fine.

I sighted it in for 50 yards with some 55 grain ball and Loctited the sight down. It has never malfunctioned, and is my “worst case scenario” gun. If I can hit a fat guy in the chest at 50 yards all my needs are covered.

It had been leaning in the corner of my bedroom for about five years when I decided to see if it still worked. I took it to the range, chambered a round from the in-place magazine, and started shooting. 30 rounds later the bolt locked back. Its back in the corner.

Attached Images

IMG_5288.jpg (71.4 KB, 23 views)

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

I have had a couple.

One of the first, back in 1974 when I was in High School. I actually had a "show and tell" in the student parking lot with the Assistant Principal (my, times have changed). I used it to shoot West Texas Coyotes to pay for college.

I had another one, but sold it during the Clinton semi-auto ban, and used the funds to buy a Bushmaster Dissipator, just 'cause I could. (Ban? What a joke. Even though it doesn't have the evil bayonet lug, I did have the barrel threaded for a flash suppressor after the sunset.)

Both of these carbines were OK. Not stellar, but OK, and they did what I needed them to do.

__________________
Only a cold warrior

I guess, now we know why..

I have been handloading 7.62X39 for quite a few years now for various AK and SKS rifles and also a CZ 527 bolt action. The claim that .308" bullets are not accurate is not true. Every rifle I have tried will produce decent accuracy with some version of .308" bullet. They don't all like the same thing but the results are better than most would expect.

The claim upstream that the newer 580 series is 2 MOA is true. Mine is 2-3 MOA depending on barrel heat. The only work done to it was a trigger job and a replaced gas port bushing. Total about 100 bucks.

I'm not sure I would pay $1000 for a new one but I can't really see why people still insist it isn't as good as an AR.

One thing that hasn't been noted here is a mini isn't a direct gas impingement system directing dirty gases onto the bolt. Mini is a gas piston driven system much like an AK-47, AK-12, M1 or M-14. The DGIS isn't the greatest and the military is in the process of returning to a gas piston system in the XM-7 rifle. Back to the future.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

Way back in the last century, I picked up a 181 series for a couple hundred bucks slightly (42 rounds) used. Back then, new new Minis were about 1/3 the cost of an AR. Test firing showed that 1. The previous owner didn't know what the rear sight was for. 2. The bipod did nasty things to barrel harmonics. Apparently, anything hard under the fore end causes the massive operating rod to bounce up & down and send bullets in strange directions. From prone, with properly adjusted sights, it grouped OK. Bought it sans bipod.

Adapting the M14 accurizing methods to the Mini produced a 1 1/4 inch rifle. Then I mounted an Aimpoint. Over decades whipped quite a bit of AR butt in 3 gun matches. Last time I fired it (maybe-6-7 years ago), we were a 2 inch combination at 100 yards.

Later went to work for an entity that issued the same series Mini in industrial quantities. Never saw one that grouped as bad as some have claimed. However, the pencil type barrel could stand some meat. They took care of that with the 580 series but the front sight location prevents installing a flash suppressor/compensator without some serious metal work.

BTW, Ruger will rebarrel the earlier series guns with new production barrels for what seemed to be a reasonable charge when I checked maybe 15 years ago. Turned out the grouping problem was my astigmatism. New specs cured the lousy groups.

I don’t know what possessed me to buy another Mini-14 in 223.

I had a 181- series back in 1980ish. It still had the wood hand guard. It shot great. I foolishly sold it. Over the years, I tried a couple of stainless Minis. They were awful; 4 to 6 MOA.

I’d been keeping my eye out on Gunbroker and found this one. This new one is off to a good start. It took me 3 shots to zero it. Three shots under 3 inches at 100 with some of my old prarie dog loads. 3 under 3 at 100 is about as good as I can shoot iron sights. Then I just banged some steel with it.

Ruger made some stinkers. Maybe a lot. I had 2 stinkers. But still I often wondered if lack of accuracy in the some of Mini-14 wasn’t because of cheap ammo or poor marksmanship.

Attached Images

0BC8AD74-37A6-4DEB-931A-2C238D439380.jpg (88.3 KB, 22 views)

My old Mini has always been a good, reliable and reasonably accurate rifle. I have shot many other ones. Never did find one that shot as bad as most folks here are posting. Might just be group think, not real life.

__________________
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset

Many years ago my dad purchased a rancher version with my recommendation. I put a scope on it and he took it with him when he fed the cattle. Not very accurate, but he was okay with it.

What saddens me though, is that about 25 years ago, give or take some, I had the chance to buy several stainless mini 14's. About $1200-1500 each if I recall correctly. They were law enforcement sell-offs after the department went to AR's. The price? They were all select fire semi/full autos. Just didn't have the money. Still regret not buying at least one.

I have one of the first production run that have the fully-adjustable M14 style rear sight and 10/22 front sight. These were essentially hand built guns at the time, and only 500 or so made it to the public before the simpler rear sight and shark fin front took hold with the mass production units. Mine shoots 1-2 MOA if you keep the barrel reasonably cool.

I like the Mini and I like the AR, and recognize the positive attributes of both. It's entirely possible to like Ford AND Chevy at the same time.

You would have been a hit at an "A-Team" convention!

Bill Ruger has never been held responsible for his betrayal of his customer base. He was an active proponent of restricting magazines to no more than 10 rounds.

I have a cousin who is a lifelong Ruger fan. When I ask him about this, he just shruggs.

Bill Ruger is dead and gone . Let it go .

Dead and gone, but his legacy to ban magazines continues. Nope, I won't let it go. This guy needs to be exposed for the greedy traitor that he was.

So is Benedict Arnold, your point would be...?

__________________
Send lawyers, guns & money...

I have a 181 series that I bought new around 1980, seems like it was $180. Colt ARs, at the time were about 200 more than that. The mini has what I call Ruger accuracy. Go to precision or bench matches, and you don't see many Rugers. My friend, who has been a competition shooter for years, bought a heavy barrel 10-22, with the swirl looking finish. After a few trips to the range he got rid of it. His Ruger Competition pistol would out shoot it at 50 yds.

__________________
Wayne
Torn & Frayed

Mini 14’s are pretty popular in NY. With all the ARrifle restrictions people are just buying the mini 14 to keep detachable mag option. Most probably think semi auto 223. What’s the difference. I’ve only owned one. An early model ( not a ranch rifle). I didn’t have it long and my son decided he needed it so off to Colorado it went. I recall shooting beer cans at 50-100 yds with open sights. That’s plenty accurate for me.

My point is that holding a grudge against a dead guy that did actually build some nice guns is kind of pointless in the grand scheme of things . Exposing him as a " Greedy traitor " won't impact your life or anyone else's for that matter . I'm not defending him by any stretch , I just don't see a reason for the post drama .