Target Mini-14 vs. AR-15?

[2ndAmendmentNut]

I have seen new Target Mini-14s in the $700~$800, so how does an AR in the same price range compare to a Ruger Mini-14? I am mainly looking for a comparison on accuracy and reliability. I understand that the ARs are more adaptable and whatnot, but that is not really a major selling point for me, besides I like the look and more traditional feel of the 14s. Oh, and which one is a better boolit shooter? Thanks for your input.

[pdawg_shooter]

Unless Ruger has come a looooong way the accuracy will still be better with the ar. For reliability, the Ruger gets the nod. I have never liked plastic and pot metal myself.

[2ndAmendmentNut]

Unless Ruger has come a looooong way the accuracy will still be better with the ar.

Well supposedly Ruger's Target Mini-14 has come a long way, or at least according to the reviews I have read.

Most claim they shoot one inch groups at 100yards, but how do they do at 200 and 300yards? Oh, and could someone explaining the “harmonic” dampening system to me?

[wiljen]

I'd go for the AR. They are generally more accurate and easier to make accurate should you want too. Parts, Accessories and magazines in a greater number of configurations are all more readily available for the AR than for the Mini not to mention cheaper.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

A thought, AR's are made on CNC machinery and can be held to three decimal places or less by companies like Les Baer. His varmint/target model claims under an inch at 200 with a scope.
I have one home built by a local AR armorer. An honest 1" at 300yds with match prep ammunition. Ruggers are clunkers by comparison, and NOBODY!! makes accessories for them.
Rugger has figured out for accuracy and longevity just copy the basic AR platform.

Rich

[machinisttx]

I have an AR(I built mine and my wife's myself, takes maybe two hours tops from nothing but parts). The AR is pretty much superior to a Mini(and I have a Mini 30 too) in every way. If you want a more accurate AR, you install a free float handguard and/or a higher quality barrel...possibly a better bolt and bolt carrier. You can do all that yourself with about $100 worth of tools. If you want a more accurate mini...you bed it, have a better/heavier barrel installed, and get an adjustable gas block. You may be able to do the bedding and gas block yourself, but probably not the barrel.

Better trigger on an AR = $120 or so drop in trigger group. Ruger = PITA(I've worked on mine).

[Gee_Wizz01]

I had an early Mini 14 and it was Minute of Pie Plate at 100yds, 4" at 100 yds with match ammo was the best I ever got. I sold it many years ago. I now have a Rock River AR that will shoot true 1" groups. The only thing I did to it was put a Jard trigger in it. A gentleman at the range last month had one of the new "Target" Mini 14s, and the best he could get was 2" groups at 100yds. He was shooting the same ammo in his Savage 110 varmint barrel and was shooting 3/4" groups. It looks like Ruger made some improvements, but it appears that the AR can still outshoot them. I love the looks of the Mini 14 and would love to have one that shoots accurately. As far as reliability goes, my AR's are every bit as reliable as my Mini 14 was. Magazines for the AR are a lot less expensive and are easier to find.

G

[nicholst55]

Here's my take on the AR-15 vs Mini-14 debate. It's been about 45 years since the Army adopted the basic AR-15/M16 platform, and product improvement and R&D on the platform has been pretty much constant since then. Iron-sighted rifles that shoot under or right at 1" at 100 yards are common.

Ruger began marketing the Mini in the mid-late '70s, or about 10 years after the AR-15 went mainstream. It was reliable, but accuracy was dismal. And there things sat for 30 years - at least, as far as Ruger was concerned. There was some independent accuracy improvement going on, but nothing compared to what was happening with the AR-15.

Finally, someone at Ruger woke up and applied some of the techniques that other people had developed to make their rifle shoot. With great fanfare Ruger announced the 'new and improved' "Target Model." And then a couple of years later they announce their very own version of the AR-15. Is that a coincidence? Or did they just tacitly admit that they screwed up 40 years ago?

Kinda makes you wonder.

As stated above, the AR-15 is the tinker toy (or Barbie doll) of rifles. If you don't like it the way it comes from the factory, you can easily change every single aspect of it, to include the caliber. Everybody makes accessories for it (to include wooden furniture), and it has, some would argue, become 'the American rifle.' There are probably an even dozen aftermarket triggers available, just to name that one item. Don't like .223? How does .50 BMG grab you? Can your Mini do that?

How many caliber conversions are ther for the Mini-14? One, to .22 LR. Who makes accessories? One company, that I'm aware of. IMHO, the Mini-14 was not one of Bill Ruger's better ideas.

We're told that Bill Ruger decided not to market the .308 XGI because of unacceptable accuracy. If we consider that Mini-14s of the era had acceptable accuracy, what does that tell us? Did this rifle print Modified or Improved Cylinder size patterns? :kidding:

To me, there is no choice; buy the AR-15.

[yondering]

Not all the Mini-14's have poor accuracy. I must have got lucky and got a good one. Of course, I bedded the action, torqued the barrel block correctly, and worked the trigger. It doesn't shoot as well as a good bolt gun, but can still plunk sage rats at 200-300 yards.
Personally I much prefer the style of the Mini-14 over the AR. I don't like the pistol grip, or iron sights 2 inches above line of sight. To me, AR's are just plain awkward.
It really comes down to price. A Mini-14 isn't even in the same ballpark for price as a Les Baer AR, so that's kind of a silly comparison. In price, Mini's are somewhere between the AK and SKS variants, and an AR. Their accuracy is in line with that. Their reliability is at the top of the pile.

[Uncle R.]

There was a time in the late 70s or maybe early 80s when I would have chosen the mini-14 too. In those days I thought ARs were awkward and ugly and their owners were all Rambo wanna-bes. I MUCH preferred the mini-14's ergonomics - it looked and felt like a rifle and not a Mattel toy.
<
It was competing in dozens of 200 yard pin matches through the 80s that eventually helped me to understand that beauty IS as beauty DOES and if you're trying to actually hit something an AR starts looking pretty good - and those Mini-14s lose their appeal fast.
<
I've read that SOME Mini-14s actually shoot well from no less an authority than C.E. Harris so I guess it's true but they must be pretty rare. Danged if I've ever actually seen one myself that would do MOA or even come close. I have seen a LOT of 'em that would shoot three or even four MOA and yes, with GOOD ammo - and I've known some frustrated Mini-14 owners too.
<
Maybe the new target models ARE better. It wouldn't surprise me - there's certainly a lot of room for improvement! Even so, after Ruger's long track record of settling for crummy accuracy they won't be selling a Mini-14 to ME any time soon.
Uncle R.

[stubshaft]

Not all the Mini-14's have poor accuracy. I must have got lucky and got a good one. Of course, I bedded the action, torqued the barrel block correctly, and worked the trigger. It doesn't shoot as well as a good bolt gun, but can still plunk sage rats at 200-300 yards.
Personally I much prefer the style of the Mini-14 over the AR. I don't like the pistol grip, or iron sights 2 inches above line of sight. To me, AR's are just plain awkward.
It really comes down to price. A Mini-14 isn't even in the same ballpark for price as a Les Baer AR, so that's kind of a silly comparison. In price, Mini's are somewhere between the AK and SKS variants, and an AR. Their accuracy is in line with that. Their reliability is at the top of the pile.


Like most Rugers, sometimes you get a gem that shoots great. I don't thinkk a valid comparison can be made because of the basic price difference. I had a Mini and it was a fun gun to plink with the one thing I really didn't like was the way the magazine was retained. If you didn't get the pin lined up with the front of the mag and forced it it would bend the mag.

It really depends on exactly what you intend to do with it. For light paper punching and plinking/ varmint hunting it is a good gun. Other than that I have never seen anyone campaign a "match grade" Mini at a high power shoot.

[August]

I like your comment about the more traditional feel of the mini-14.

The AR has been the longest duration rifle issued to U.S. service men and women. So, it really wins on "tradition."

ARs are absolutely amazing in terms of accuracy, durability, and mission adaptability. Be warned, however, you simply cannot eat just one.

[mike in co]

A thought, AR's are made on CNC machinery and can be held to three decimal places or less by companies like Les Baer. His varmint/target model claims under an inch at 200 with a scope.
I have one home built by a local AR armorer. An honest 1" at 300yds with match prep ammunition. Ruggers are clunkers by comparison, and NOBODY!! makes accessories for them.
Rugger has figured out for accuracy and longevity just copy the basic AR platform.

Rich


look at every ar thread....ar's sellers DO NOT MAKE THIER AR PARTS.....THEY BUY THEM.

yes the guns/parts are built to spec, which makes them easy to assemble. le's may chamber thier own bbls, but that is probably all, and even that may be a sub contract job.

[mike in co]

Well supposedly Ruger's Target Mini-14 has come a long way, or at least according to the reviews I have read.

Most claim they shoot one inch groups at 100yards, but how do they do at 200 and 300yards? Oh, and could someone explaining the “harmonic” dampening system to me?


having done full blown accuracy work on m14/m1a's......they do not stand a chance against the ar platform.
too expensive to do, too expensive to maintain, lack of parts..........

run of the mill ar's are not great, but are good. chrome lined bbls are not for accuracy. and stick with rock river, armalite, bushmaster, stag.


buy a good ar, put a good trigger in it, put an excellent bbl in it and have fun.

an armalite bbl is not expensive, and while a krieger is it will last a lonnnnngggg time.

mike in co
aka
ar10ar15man

[PatMarlin]

Not all the Mini-14's have poor accuracy. I must have got lucky and got a good one. Of course, I bedded the action, torqued the barrel block correctly, and worked the trigger. It doesn't shoot as well as a good bolt gun, but can still plunk sage rats at 200-300 yards.
Personally I much prefer the style of the Mini-14 over the AR. I don't like the pistol grip, or iron sights 2 inches above line of sight. To me, AR's are just plain awkward.
It really comes down to price. A Mini-14 isn't even in the same ballpark for price as a Les Baer AR, so that's kind of a silly comparison. In price, Mini's are somewhere between the AK and SKS variants, and an AR. Their accuracy is in line with that. Their reliability is at the top of the pile.


Ditto to all my thoughts. Mine shoots pretty well stock 2-3". Trigger creeps from here to new york, but I think with a trigger job it would be a 1"moa repeater.

I just like the feel of the mini, and never liked the feel of the AR, so never throught to put the money into one.

I think it's all like pie. What flavor do you like? The mini's a darn fun rifle.

Back in 96' my buddy and I were at a Sacramento gunshow. We both wanted a .223 and I bought the Mini, and he bought a Colt AR match rifle. Of course through the years we both have registered pre-ban rifles.

Year ago he and his wife stopped in the wrong area in L.A .to sleep the night in his fifth wheel. The next morning, while warming up his rig and doing a walk around check- a gangbanger came by on a bike, jumped in the rig and took off with wife inside the trailer. Left my buddy standing with his coffee and cell phone.

New Duramax dually and 35' rig. She's tumling around back there, and the idiot's trying to break the trailer free, crashing the rig into anything he could. Darn near broke her back. Finnally he stops, and tries to get in the trailer and she's waiting with the AR cocked and ready and let him know if he came in he was gonna die, but the thief decided it all wasn't worth anymore of his time. Could not get the fifth hitch unhooked.

Moral of the story is, when the cops finally found the rig and brought my buddy to it, the local cops had a fit over the AR and hand cuffed my buddy because it was a Colt. THe CHP however, looked up the record and ordered the cops to let him go. The local LEO's had a real problem with that rifle.

[Mumblypeg]

No brainer, AR. People that say they don't like the AR because they don't like plastic or this or that, just don't like them. They never say they're not good firearms, they just don't like them. Kinda like I don't like Browning A Bolts. They shoot good, are good firearms, I just don't like them. Now a Remington 700, that's a bolt gun! Get an AR, you will never regret it. One other thing... yea I do own 4 AR's. Any Questions?

[Lloyd Smale]

buddys gun shop got a mini target in right after they came out. Another buddy bought it and did a bunch of load developement for it and never got it to shoot under 2 inches at a 100 yards. He traded it off. Another problem i see with the target model is its to heavy and akward to be considered a decent battle rifle. Ive got 7 ars in various calibers .223, 308 762x39 and 50 beowulf and any of them will shoot under 2 inch with about any load and with loads they like some will do 3/4 of an inch.

[45 2.1]

A neighbor got one of the target Mini-14s and had the 69 gr. or so bullets for it. First group ran 3" at 100 yds. I moved the adjustable weight on the barrel out 1/16" or so. The next and all following groups since have been in the 1/2" range. That boss/weight dealie really works.

[Mack Heath]

If you go over to this site you will find an after-action report on a CQB class that had two Mini's in attendance. It may help you make up your mind. Even if not, you might find it interesting.

http://www.perfectunion.com/vb/showthread.php?t=73563

Also, if you back up on the pages a bit at Perfect Union, you will find a whole section on the Mini-14s. There are some very simple mods that make a world of difference with the Minis. I was just at a club function and was told by one of the guys in attendance that he made one of the recommened Mini-14 mods to his U.S. M1 Carbine and saw a major improvement in his rifle. And those things are not known for being tack drivers.

[StarMetal]

If you go over to this site you will find an after-action report on a CQB class that had two Mini's in attendance. It may help you make up your mind. Even if not, you might find it interesting.

http://www.perfectunion.com/vb/showthread.php?t=73563

Also, if you back up on the pages a bit at Perfect Union, you will find a whole section on the Mini-14s. There are some very simple mods that make a world of difference with the Minis. I was just at a club function and was told by one of the guys in attendance that he made one of the recommened Mini-14 mods to his U.S. M1 Carbine and saw a major improvement in his rifle. And those things are not known for being tack drivers.


One that was good out of how many million? The AR still beats the Mini's. Fact of life.

Let's see a Mini do this:
http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x160/308sako/DSCN0023.jpg
The above target was shot at 410 yards with a factory Colt barrel as seen below. Model CR 6724, the Accurized rifle version. 24" 1 in 9 twist. Load was 75 Hornady A-Max single seating length. The rifle has a Jewel trigger and Tubb Chrome Silicon springs and a carrier weight system. GG&G riser block and Leupold 16X-Mark4 in Leupold QRW 30mm rings. Round count is close to 4,000 as this was fired. 1/2 MOA is easy, and if I ever learn to hold for wind... better yet.

Joe

[RU shooter]

I've never seen a Ruger anything on the line in a Highpower match ! Lots of AR's though........

Tim

[2ndAmendmentNut]

I like your comment about the more traditional feel of the mini-14.

The AR has been the longest duration rifle issued to U.S. service men and women. So, it really wins on "tradition."

ARs are absolutely amazing in terms of accuracy, durability, and mission adaptability. Be warned, however, you simply cannot eat just one.

You got me there.[smilie=l:

Thanks guys. It now looks like I am going to have to learn how to build an AR!

[snowwolfe]

After owning both and having bought my first Mini 14 in 1979 if memory serves me correctly I'll pass along my comments.
What to buy depends.......depends on what you will be using it for. If I were looking for a "truck" rifle or something to carry in the woods it would be the Mini 14 since most rifles of this nature will be shot from field positions and 99% of rifles built today are more accurate than the shooters.
If it were going to be used in formal matches then the AR wins hands down. Used to own a Les Baer AR that was a work of art and would easily shoot under .5 moa all day long.
So, for hunting or carrying, the Mini 14. For other stuff, AR.

Also, stay away from Wolf ammo if you get the Mini 14. Know of several people a couple of years back who experiened broken firing pins when shooting this stuff. Seems the primers are pretty hard.

[BruceB]

All you fellers who are busily posting stats about AR-15 accuracy etc. are welcome to the beasts.

I-DON'T- LIKE-THEM. The "feel" and handling, the appearance, the weight now evident on what once was a lightweight rifle... I dislike all of it. There is no desire for an AR-15 type rifle on this side of the ballpark. I gave it an honest try many years ago with an original (Artillerie Inrichtingen) AR-10, and that's as close as I ever intend to get to an AR-15.

Au contraire, I DO like the Ruger, especially in its latest incarnation. I have a new "Deluxe" version and even with VERY limited load development, it's shooting TEN-round groups at 100 yards that average under two inches. I expect it to do better as I develop the loads a bit more.

I'm not a match shooter, and I have a good varminter or two to fill the role of long-range gnat-shooter. The "Mini"-14 (Lord, but I hate that name) does everything that I want a semi-auto .223 to do for me, and it's better with the availability of Ruger 20-round magazines. The Target Mini is following the steps of the AR.....too much weight and awkwardness for this ol' boy.

[NVcurmudgeon]

Zxcvb

[StarMetal]

That's why the U.S. military has had the AR family or rifles for what, over 40 years, for a special purpose.....a military rifle for all circumstances which it has filled pretty darn good I'll say. It's only now that they cut it down to a pretty small carbine then expect it to perform at longer distances then the carbine's intention resulting in cries from certain factors for more cartridge.

Some folks can't move ahead who are stuck in the wood stock rifle era and post their distaste for the "black rifle". I can't think of many military rifles in use today that don't have a pistol grip. Apparently there must be something to it. Some of the military rifles have even been promoted as ergonomically designed. Now isn't that sometime. Would the Thompson and MP40 been better with straight stocks? Get use to the new wave of the future.

Joe

[chaos]

I really tried to like the mini 14.
Have had no less than four of them pass through my hands over the years. No matter what I did, just could not make those guns shoot. 2 inches at 100 yards on a good day and mags were so expensive.

I purchased an Ar sometime back for giggles and grins. Absolutely hated the thought of an aluminum and plastic gun.
Have since assembled ( hate to use the term Built as they are truly tinker toys) three more. Every single one of them will do 1 moa on a bad day. Usually much better. Mag price and availability is a non issue.

Just a handful of companies used to produce parts for Ar rifles and then they are branded. Kind of like Air conditioner compressors.

I really like Stag parts as they are/ were very reasonably priced.
CMT makes thier parts as well as parts for Rock River, S&W, Wilson, etc.

Here is a good read:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=318113

There just AINT NO COMPARISON fellas.

Chaos

[StarMetal]

Zxcvb

Bill,

I found your post very interesting and quite honest.

Joe

[9.3X62AL]

This again. OY VEY!

I carried both as duty guns for a LONG TIME. The Ruger is one of the most deputy-proof tools I've ever seen--on par with the Rem 870 and the Crown Vic.

The AR-15 is NOT deputy-proof. It may be 'all that and a bag of chips' in military venues having forward area armorers and rear echelon ordnance depots, but they aren't very sturdy. I will grant that deputies should take better care of their war toys than they sometimes do, but harping on the ideal is easier music than reality's more complex chords.

I LIKE both, can use both capably. I OWN a Ruger Mini-14, and it is the fourth such rifle I've had. The AR-15 in California is like kabuki theater--lots of extraneous movement and gesturing to get to the heart of the matter, and not really worth the time spent in interpretation. Most of the reason I would like to have one is because Der Governator and The Fools In River City detest them, and that's a dumb reason to spend $1000. And the fact that I can buy two VERY accurate bolt rifles for the price of one similarly-accurate AR-15 is a factor, also.

No two ways about it........the AR system is more accurate than that of the Mini-14, and is refined or upgraded far more easily. Well, DUH........it's the issued rifle of our using services, and benefits from the constant R&D mentioned by a poster above. My Mini-14s haven't shot 4" groups, unless I used surplus open-base M-193 projectiles. I dare say that tuned or stock--any AR-15 won't do their best work with those same projectiles, either. Optimize the ammunition by using GOOD BULLETS, and either system gets a chance to do better work.

With bullets they like, my Mini-14s have done 2"-2.5" ten-shot groups at 100 yards. Not spectacular in this day and age, but at the ranges I will engage targets within--250 to 300 yards--that is coyote-capable, whether on 2 or 4 legs. (Both kinds occupy areas I like to hunt in). So, call it "accurate enough".

Both systems are utterly reliable if good magazines are used. The Department ARs would get balky after 200 rounds or so, so my drill was to pivot the critters open--pull the bolt carrier assembly--clean the boltway and the carrier assembly--and run a couple wet patches through the chamber and bore, then patch them dry. 2 minutes' work, and the ARs rattled right along. The Minis would run as long as you fed them, much like an AK-47 in that regard.

A lot of this hot-stove league discussion is kind of a Ford/Chevy/Mopar argument. Familarity can breed both comfort and contempt, but long-term usage allows for some of that to recede into the background and objectivity to come to the fore. Short answer--I wouldn't feel deprived if issued one or the other, and woe to the predator (2- or 4-legged) that wants to push the envelope if I have either one ready at hand.

[StarMetal]

Good post Al. You're right about those 193 projectiles, but wow you see what they do to prairie dogs and groundhogs from a 1-7 twist AR. A friend of mine was selling reloaded 223 using the bulk buy 193 bullets ($27 for 5000 back then, how about that Al?) and specifically sold them at the gunshow as fodder for the AR's and Mini's. Well some fellow bought some and he shot them from a heavy barrel varminter Rem 700 and complained they would only do 1/2 inch at 100 yards. He took them back and my friend gave him a refund. Told him they were for AR's and Mini's. Really though he done well with them.

Yeah there's not much to the Mini's, whereas the AR's a little more complicated, especially to clean. Other then that as far as shootabilty I think they are about equal. The AR's are a little harder to get good head position with a scope unless you have one the great Magpul buttstocks. All in all the flattops aren't as bad for that as the standard A2's and previous AR's.

Remember they scaled up the AR to AR10 in 308 and it's a dynamite rifle. Bill Ruger tried to upscale the Mini to 308 and it was a money losing disaster. Says something for the AR system in my opinion.

I would like to try a Mini 30.

Joe

[Uncle R.]

I would like to try a Mini 30.
Joe

Joe:
I had a Mini-30.
Had.
You'd think after seeing so much frustration from so many people over so many Mini-14s I would have known better...
Sigh.
It was a gun show find. A stainless Mini-30 in beautiful condition - pretty much like new. I couldn't resist - after all it would make such a cute deer drive rifle.
I mounted a 4x scope on it and initial testing gave Minute-Of-Paper-Plate groups @ 100 yards. After considerable load development I got it to where it would shoot almost as well as my Chinese SKS. Almost - like around 5 MOA. Cheez... It was no better than most of the Mini-14s I've seen and in fact worse than a lot of 'em. In a moment of good sense I traded it off for something that might prove useful.
<
If I EVER buy another Ruger centerfire rifle somebody just slap me. I've owned several over the years and they've ranged from mildly disappointing to downright awful. I've known a few other people who've had similar experiences. Yeah, yeah - I know. My gunschmidt buddy tells me too that there ARE some Rugers that shoot great - and I suppose I believe him. It must be pretty long odds trying to get one if my own experiences are any guide.
<
ARs? I've owned three and shot many more. The worst of 'em did better than any mini-14 I've known and the best of 'em were phenomonally accurate. They'll often beat out a bolt gun. (And not just a Ruger, but a good bolt gun!)
<Insert Evil Grin Here!>
Uncle R.

[StarMetal]

Joe:
I had a Mini-30.
Had.
You'd think after seeing so much frustration from so many people over so many Mini-14s I would have known better...
Sigh.
It was a gun show find. A stainless Mini-30 in beautiful condition - pretty much like new. I couldn't resist - after all it would make such a cute deer drive rifle.
I mounted a 4x scope on it and initial testing gave Minute-Of-Paper-Plate groups @ 100 yards. After considerable load development I got it to where it would shoot almost as well as my Chinese SKS. Almost - like around 5 MOA. Cheez... It was no better than most of the Mini-14s I've seen and in fact worse than a lot of 'em. In a moment of good sense I traded it off for something that might prove useful.
<
If I EVER buy another Ruger centerfire rifle somebody just slap me. I've owned several over the years and they've ranged from mildly disappointing to downright awful. I've known a few other people who've had similar experiences. Yeah, yeah - I know. My gunschmidt buddy tells me too that there ARE some Rugers that shoot great - and I suppose I believe him. It must be pretty long odds trying to get one if my own experiences are any guide.
<
ARs? I've owned three and shot many more. The worst of 'em did better than any mini-14 I've known and the best of 'em were phenomonally accurate. They'll often beat out a bolt gun. (And not just a Ruger, but a good bolt gun!)
<Insert Evil Grin Here!>
Uncle R.

Uncle R,

In all fairness there are lemons from all manufacturers. Now years ago we know that Ruger had barrel quality problems. As of today I can't really answer that. I've had quite a few different friends that had barrel problems with them. I'll just name one. A friend in Ok bought a brand new Ruger 77 heavy barrel match in 308. With a T16 Weaver neither of us could shoot a better group then 1 inch. Took it to the shop cleaned the bore good and slugged it. It was .3095. He sent it back to Ruger and they sent it back to him saying it was within tolerances. He sold it and bought a standard model that shot well. I've only had one friend that had a Ruger that would drill holes and it was an older 220 Swift.

Now guys, like I said, I don't know about them today and would assume they have their act together.

I'm not saying a Mini 14 is a ***. Just saying most AR's shoot circles around them. I've had AR's for many years and never have had a problem with them.

Joe

[BruceB]

"Remember they scaled up the AR to AR10 in 308 and it's a dynamite rifle. Bill Ruger tried to upscale the Mini to 308 and it was a money losing disaster. Says something for the AR system in my opinion".

Joe, it was actually just the opposite. The AR-10 was scaled DOWN to create the AR-15/M-16. The AR-10 in 7.62 NATO, at an early stage of its development, was entered in the US trials against the M-14 and the FN-FAL rifles during the 1950s. It didn't fare well in the trials, but matured into a fairly decent rifle later on.

Ruger's woes with the .308 autoloader are certainly a story of futility.

[StarMetal]

"Remember they scaled up the AR to AR10 in 308 and it's a dynamite rifle. Bill Ruger tried to upscale the Mini to 308 and it was a money losing disaster. Says something for the AR system in my opinion".

Joe, it was actually just the opposite. The AR-10 was scaled DOWN to create the AR-15/M-16. The AR-10 in 7.62 NATO, at an early stage of its development, was entered in the US trials against the M-14 and the FN-FAL rifles during the 1950s. It didn't fare well in the trials, but matured into a fairly decent rifle later on.

Ruger's woes with the .308 autoloader are certainly a story of futility.


Bruce,

You are correct. I meant it to mean a larger AR, but I'm going to give you credit for it, you got me. The one failure of Mr Ruger's 308 that was interesting to me was the one where the stock caught on fire. To tell you the truth it would have been nice if he succeeded, but wouldn't that have been close to an M14 type rifle then?

Joe

[mooman76]

Just my 2 cents but I'd go for the AR. I'm not a big fan of them but I do own one and a mini-14 too. My mini is a plinker and you can do so much more with the AR platform and it will retain it's value better too.
Another thing I don't think was mentioned is it so easy to field strip the AR and without tools.

[mike in co]

al and joe.........and just where did the sr25 come from ??


mike in co
aka
ar10ar15man

[StarMetal]

al and joe.........and just where did the sr25 come from ??


mike in co
aka
ar10ar15man

The SR 25 rifle (Stoner Rifle, model 25) was developed by Reed Knight (owner of Knights Armament Co) and Eugene Stoner (designer of M16 (http://world.guns.ru/assault/as18-e.htm) and Stoner 63 (http://world.guns.ru/assault/as76-e.htm) rifles among other things) during early 1990s. In essence, the SR 25 was the AR-15 rifle scaled up to shoot 7,62x51 / .308 Win ammunition, with up to 60% of parts of new rifle being interchangeable with standard AR-15 (http://world.guns.ru/assault/as18-e.htm) components. This rifle sold well among civilian shooters who needed an accurate semi-automatic rifle in 7,62 / .308 caliber for hunting or target shooting. This rifle also found a favor among US Military - during early 1990s it was adopted by US Navy SEAL groups, as Mark 11 Model 0 sniper rifle system; use of Mk.11 Mod.0 rifle was later extended to US Marine Corps. Mark 11 Model 0 rifle system included the semi-automatic SR-25 rifle, a quick-detachable sound suppressor, also developed by Knights Armament Co, Leupold Vari-X Mil-dot telescope sight, Harris bipod, 20-round magazines and other necessary accessories. In 2005, a modified version of the SR-25 / Mk.11 rifle won US Army Semi-Automatic Sniper Rifle (XM110 SASR) competition, and today it is being issued to US Army snipers, in attempt to replace venerable M24 Sniper Weapon System (http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn11-e.htm). A certain controversy exists about this replacement, as some experts doubt that Knight's semi-automatic XM110 rifle could equal long-range accuracy of the bolt-action M24 (http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn11-e.htm). However, Knights Armament Co claims that SR-25 is capable of 0.5 MOA accuracy with match ammo, and in the field Mk.11 or XM110 rifle can proved accurate and rapid fire out to 600 meters or even more, depending on particular circumstances and proficiency of operator. Use of quick-detachable silencer / sound moderator also has several benefits, the most obvious being concealment of the operator's position, as silencer decreases the sound of gunshot and completely eliminates muzzle flash. Another, less obvious benefit is that silencer also acts as an effective muzzle brake, decreasing recoil and thus permitting faster follow-up shots.
All rifles built on SR-25 platform share same basic action, which is based on AR-15 / M16 (file:///assault/as18-e.htm) system. This is a gas-operated system with direct-impingement gas drive, which has no gas piston. Instead, powder gases are fed from the barrel and through a stainless-steel tube back into the receiver, and then into the cavity inside bolt carrier through the gas key. Inside the bolt carrier, powder gases push it back against the bolt, thus first causing the bolt to rotate and unlock from the barrel, and then to cycle the action. The rotary bolt has 7 radial lugs and improved extractor. Both upper and lower receiver halves are made from aircraft grade aluminum alloy, and connected by cross-pins. There is no "forward assist" button on the SR-25 rifles; the brass defelector is present. Barrels are of match class quality, and enclosed into free-floated forearm, fitted with Knights-made and designed Picatiny rails system. Because of AR-15 (file:///assault/as18-e.htm)-style recoil buffer, which extends rearwards fro the receiver, SR-15 cannot be fitted with folding buttstock; most rifles are fitted with fixed butt, while SR-25 carbines are fitted with telescoping buttstock. Trigger is also of match grade, fully adjustable.
Military versions of the SR-25, known as Mk.11 Mod.0 (USN / USMC) and XM110 (US Army) have some differences from civilian rifles. First of all, these rifles are fitted with proprietary sound moderator / silencer quick mount, located on the barrel just in front of the gas block. These rifles also finished to military specifications, and equipped with back-up iron sights (marked up to 600 meters and installed on folding bases). XM110 rifle also features a different buttstock, which is adjustable for length of pull, as well as different style forend rail system and a flash hider on the barrel. Military rifles are usually issued along with Harris bipod, Leupold variable-power 3,5-10X sniper scope, and a number of other accessories, including soft and hard carrying cases.




Joe

[9.3X62AL]

al and joe.........and just where did the sr25 come from ??


mike in co
aka
ar10ar15man

No idea, here. VERY little time with the AR-10 variants of any type.

The Mini-14 can be built into a VERY accurate rifle, but not cheaply. I had some time with a borrowed Accuracy Systems Ranch Rifle in 222 Remington, and that critter was an all-day sub-MOA rifle. Hot, cold, clean, dirty--boringly, repeatably accurate as all get-out. It can be done, but not as easily as an AR can be accurized.

[StarMetal]

No idea, here. VERY little time with the AR-10 variants of any type.

The Mini-14 can be built into a VERY accurate rifle, but not cheaply. I had some time with a borrowed Accuracy Systems Ranch Rifle in 222 Remington, and that critter was an all-day sub-MOA rifle. Hot, cold, clean, dirty--boringly, repeatably accurate as all get-out. It can be done, but not as easily as an AR can be accurized.

Al,
Did you know that Colt made a run of AR15's in 222 Rem? Yup.
I should have bought a few and stuck them away.

Joe

[mike in co]

Al,
Did you know that Colt made a run of AR15's in 222 Rem? Yup.
I should have bought a few and stuck them away.

Joe


did you know i had some of the original 222 20 rd mags(new un fired).......i sold them when i took my stand against colt.

and i plan on making a 222 target ar15.......just cause....

mike in co

[mike in co]

al and joe.........and just where did the sr25 come from ??


mike in co
aka
ar10ar15man

joe...was that a cut and paste from thier site ???




( they took the best of the ar15 and the ar10,,,and came up with a 25.....sr25)

the orginal ar10 from armalite was used by two countries...the sudan and portugal.....the current ar10(b) is more like a 15 than the original ar10. rumors that the air force may have used some for guard duty.


the SEALs actually use both the 308 and 223 versions of stoners rifles......i'd post a pic. but would have to shoot ya.....lol.

sr25 and sr12 are the models i believe.

mike in co

[StarMetal]

did you know i had some of the original 222 20 rd mags(new un fired).......i sold them when i took my stand against colt.

and i plan on making a 222 target ar15.......just cause....

mike in co

Mike, yes, I have surveillance going on with you. NOT just kidding.
You should put your hatred aside for Colt.

Interesting your 222 idea. Here's what I think Mike. We know the problem with the 5.56 in the AR/M16 is magazine space, thus bullets are loaded into the powder capacity of the case. I honestly think that by using the 222 case, being shorter then the 5.56, that you can load the bullet out of the powder capacity thus utilizing the entire case volume. With that said I therefore think the 222 can just about equal the 5.56.

Let me know how that rifle works out.

What was the difference in those 222 magazine...just the stamping saying they were Colt 222?

Joe

[9.3X62AL]

What was the difference in those 222 magazine...just the stamping saying they were Colt 222?

Joe

Interesting........the Ranch Rifle ran the 222 Rem ammo just fine from the 223 mags I used. 5-round, 20-round, or 30-round, Ruger or aftermarket, all fed and functioned without a snag.

I've pondered the utility of a self-loading varmint strafer, and if you'll do the CA Two-Step during the build an AR-15-based rifle is possible here in The Carjacker's Themepark. Cost runs neck-and-neck with one of the Accuracy Sytems Mini-14s, so.........I usually conclude that two bolt rifles can be had for roughly the same tariff, and go find something else to do.

[Slogg76]

I love the feel and balance of a mini-14 and I owned one for a very short time years ago. I was also good friends (and frequent customer) of a couple local gun shop owners that would let me try out used guns at the local range before I bought them. They had MANY used Mini-14's and Mini-30's go through their shops and I shot many of them looking for an accurate one. I never could find one. 3" to 5" groups at 100 yards was the norm, even with good, quality ammo and hand loads. That may be good enough for some, but I was looking for better accuracy since I was looking to hit tiny varmints at ranges out to a couple hundred yards. After all that is one role I think a "ranch rifle" is for. I was never fond of girly, plastic AR-15's but I caved in to peer pressure and fired some. I was impressed and put together my own carbine out of Stag Arm marked parts. My Stag is a very standard 16" carbine with a standard chrome lined barrel, 5.56 chamber, 1:9 twist, and standard hand guards. It will shoot an honest 5-shot, 1" group with just about any 55 grain bullet all day long if I do my part. Since I ordered all the lower parts and upper assembly seperately, and put them together myself, I have only about $700 in my Stag and I wouldn't dare part with it. I like many Ruger firearms and have owned many Rugers, but I would pass on a Mini. In my experience cheap SKS carbines will hold as tight a group as any Mini I have shot. I have only shot one of the new target Minis and it did slightly better. We did tweak out some groups that hovered around 2" at 100 yards. This is just my experience and 2 cents.

[StarMetal]

Interesting........the Ranch Rifle ran the 222 Rem ammo just fine from the 223 mags I used. 5-round, 20-round, or 30-round, Ruger or aftermarket, all fed and functioned without a snag.

I've pondered the utility of a self-loading varmint strafer, and if you'll do the CA Two-Step during the build an AR-15-based rifle is possible here in The Carjacker's Themepark. Cost runs neck-and-neck with one of the Accuracy Sytems Mini-14s, so.........I usually conclude that two bolt rifles can be had for roughly the same tariff, and go find something else to do.

Right Al, I can't see why the mag would be different for a 222 other then the stampings, they are so close, only the length is different.

Joe

[mike in co]

.

What was the difference in those 222 magazine...just the stamping saying they were Colt 222?

Joe


i just owned them....did not measure...but i'd be suprised if they were diff other than the flooplate.


mike in co

[PatMarlin]

Is there a Colt AR3?

I have a friend who has a Colt that looks like an AR-15 to me, and he keeps insisting it's an AR3?

Would that be and AR15-A3?

[StarMetal]

Is there a Colt AR3?

I have a friend who has a Colt that looks like an AR-15 to me, and he keeps insisting it's an AR3?

Would that be and AR15-A3?

There sure is, take a look at it here:

http://www.colt.com/law/ar15a3.asp

Joe

[mike in co]

Is there a Colt AR3?

I have a friend who has a Colt that looks like an AR-15 to me, and he keeps insisting it's an AR3?

Would that be and AR15-A3?


yep an -a3
not an ar3

mike in co

[PatMarlin]

OK thanks,.

That's what I thought- it's a variation of an AR15. There is no AR3 correct?

[mike in co]

Is there a Colt AR3?

I have a friend who has a Colt that looks like an AR-15 to me, and he keeps insisting it's an AR3?

Would that be and AR15-A3?


he probably shoots bullet HEADS in it........no ar3 that i know of...

an ar7...take town 22 floating buttstock.
ar10
sr11
ar15(a1,a2,a3,a4....plus tons of variations) "ar" is OWNED by armalite, so lots of varirations in the markett place.
m16(a1,a2,a3,a4)
sr25

while there were national match versions of several mil rifles...garand and m14, there has never been an official spec for ANY m16 national match rifle nor parts. yes they shoot match rifles, but it all came from the civilian side of the market, not the mil.

mike in co

[NickSS]

I have owned at least a dozen Mini 14s looking for one that shot well. I finally gave up and got a Model 70 carbine in 223. It shot slower but into less than an inch. Today I got the cheapest AR I could find. It is an Olympic arms Plinker plus model that comes with an A2 Lower and an A1 upper and a 16 inch bull barrel. I got it at the factory and they built it while I waited (45 minutes). This carbine gives me 1 inch groups, has never jamed and shoots 22 rf well with an Olympic conversion Unit I bought at the same time.

[Lloyd Smale]

I too have owned a number of minis through the years. Was down to one till yesterday. Today i ipick up my new bushmaster ar in 762x39 so i about knew my mini 30 would collect dust so i gave it to my buddy who owns a guns shop to pay down my credit line there. I really doubt if ill ever try another one. Maybe if they were half the price of an ar but at the same price i know what id take every time.

[redneckdan]

Which shop might that be? I might have to go take a look.... :p

[machinisttx]

This again. OY VEY!


I LIKE both, can use both capably. I OWN a Ruger Mini-14, and it is the fourth such rifle I've had. The AR-15 in California is like kabuki theater--lots of extraneous movement and gesturing to get to the heart of the matter, and not really worth the time spent in interpretation. Most of the reason I would like to have one is because Der Governator and The Fools In River City detest them, and that's a dumb reason to spend $1000. And the fact that I can buy two VERY accurate bolt rifles for the price of one similarly-accurate AR-15 is a factor, also.



Um, wut? I have around $750 in my 6.8 with a match grade stainless barrel from E.R. Shaw and the best bolt on the market. A 5.56 rifle could be built for less, and my 6.8 could have been built for less too.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

People keep trying to put Bill Ruger on a pedestal, and his clay feet keep crumbling and he falls off. His 22 pistol and rifle are nice toys, and the single actions are durable if brick-like in comparison with a Colt SAA. None of his autoloaders are very desirable, and neither are his double action revolvers with the exception of the (surprise) cinder block dimensioned Redhawk and Super Redhawk. The single shots are the only rifles worth owning. The design committee that replaced him are all refugees from MicroSoft. The cute little 380 is on its' second recall, and the new plastic snubnose will be more of the same.
The AR platform is ten times as stable a platform as a Mini, and has a solid track record in a lot of serious shooting wars.


Rich

[9.3X62AL]

Um, wut? I have around $750 in my 6.8 with a match grade stainless barrel from E.R. Shaw and the best bolt on the market. A 5.56 rifle could be built for less, and my 6.8 could have been built for less too.

In California, I meant. That's new/new or used/used.

[Highland Drifter]

It's unfair to throw California shooters into this mix. They can't own "real" AR-15's! They can't load or remove the limited 10 round magazines without tools or taking the gun apart. If the 10 round magazine does remove the "NORMAL" way you can't have a "real" pistol grip. No threaded muzzles either. An AR-15 is naked without a muzzle device. If California shooters could own "REAL" AR-15's they might like them more. If I had to deal with their limitations, I wouldn't want any part of an AR-15. I would rather have a nice bolt action or as far as Rugers go, a Ruger #1 in 45-70.

:kidding: :kidding: :kidding:

[2ndAmendmentNut]

The following is a PM from Bcarver, I found it very informative so I asked his permission to post it hear.

Harmonics are the vibrations that make the barrel move.
this movement changes the point of impact since the bullet goes exactly where it barrel is pointed at the time of exit. less oscillation means less change which means tighter groups.
The Dampener works kind of like the weight on a metronome. adjusting the weight will change the vibration(oscillation) of the barrel. Turn it one way the groups get bigger. Turn it the other way the groups get smaller.
To a point and then they will start to get longer again.

Many things done to a rifle are attempts to eliminate or control these vibrations. (bedding ,free floating, cryogenetic treatment, boltlug lapping, recoil lug trueing,
even reducing the weight of the firing pin and lapping the bore.

Thicker stiffer shorter fluted barrels are suppose to help also.
__________________