Is the Mini 14 / Mini 30 that bad?

[hickok45]

Thanks for the input. So, the target model is supposed to be more accurate. Since I don't have one, maybe I should consider that model if I decide I just have to have a Mini 14, although MOA accuracy is not a deal killer necessarily.

I'm primarily a handgunner, and I find myself usually laughing at the arguments about which polymer pistol is more accurate than another. For practical shooting offhand, there might be a couple of nerdy paper punchers on Planet Earth who could ever tell the difference. The rest of us don't come even close to getting the limit of accuracy out of a pistol unless we're bench resting.

To some extent, the way I use rifles is about the same. I just stand and shoot, hunting zombies, plinking steel targets, knocking bowling pins around, etc.

Thanks,
Hickok45

 

[Gav-n-Tn]

Alot of people get really hung up on sub moa which is fine if you're a range shooter. Like I said, you can build you an AR pretty cheap. I love my Mini-14s though. www.southernoutdoorlife.com

 

[Gav-n-Tn]

I was trying to figure out why my site didn't show up in my signature like some of these other's do. I guess it works in posts but not in your sig line. Good luck on your choice I grew up in Hendersonville just right up the road from you.

 

[Nowhere Man]

The Mini 30, as I understand, doesn't fire the less expensive surplus ammo without damaging the barrel. The barrel is smaller diameter, I think.

Or, could it be the Mini's don't have a chrome lined barrel so, shooting corrosive surplus ammo without proper cleanup would ruin the barrel?


Dave

 

[MosinM38]

People like working themselves into a tizzy over Mini-14's being awesome or being trash

In MY...experiance, I think Mini's are good.

Mine groups 1.5", my dads groups 1.5", my UNCLES groups 1.5".

I will say this, and no one believes it, but loosen the gas block screws (Proper name?) some, not enough to make it wobble, but they are putting to much pressure on the barrel.

Sometimes that hasn't worked, but the clamp-on barrel acurizers (Sorry, I'm tired this morning and can't think of the name)< usually improve it somewhat as well.

I am sure there are Mini's that won't even work. But in my opinion they are not the majority.


I guess I have to gripes with AR-15 uber-fans. They cite "under 1" accuracy". Yeah with heavy barreled ones and a fair number of average barrels.

Build an AR15 that weighs under 7 pounds and see how accurate it is then. The carbines with non-bull barrels,etc. group larger than that. 1.5", some 2"......

 

[ritepath]

I like my little pos mini fwiw, I haven't found any ammo that it won't shoot yet. It does require a good factory mag, but ruger now sells the 20's and 30's to civilians so prices aren't as crazy as before. There's no doubt the older minis won't shoot groups, and the newer one are much better.


Who wastes time shooting groups with a semi-auto anyway? You're never gonna beat a bottom of the line Sako in a match...

That being said, I'd love to get rid of my mini and pickup a M&P AR...but since you don't get rid of a gun that works, I'll just have to pay full price this spring.

 

[VTRich]

"Seems like I have read that Ruger has gone to a .311 bore on recent Mini's but I cannot support that w/ reference or my own observation."

This is true. I believe they switched from .308 to .311 around 1990. Actually, if you ask Ruger, they will tell you the bores are .310 to .3115. I imagine that allows for manufacturing tolerances.

 

[Come and take it.]

I have an older mini14 law enforcement model that is more accurate than a newer 580 series I recently owned. So long as you shoot 62 grain or bigger bullets.

They traded off a good solid receiver for a more lightly constructed, skinny one to keep the weight down so they could add steel to the barrel. This makes the newer guns more muzzle heavy than the 180 plus series.

 

[Sarge]

Also FWIW, I have been running four, 20 round Mini 14 ProMags for about a year now and they have been 100% whether I was using ball or softpoints, factory ammo or reloads. They've been left loaded unless I was using them, then reloaded right back, but the springs are still healthy & they continue to feed well.

Seems like I gave about half the price of the factory mags.

 

[2rugers]

Like my Mini alot.

Factory folder, 16" barrel, Threaded flash hider.

The rifle is compact, dare I say accurate, and very reliable with it's factory mags.

The only issue I ever had was with non-oem mags unreliability, now that problem is nonexisten.

It will never be bolt action accurate but it is certainly accurate enough to carry in the pickup for yotes and such vermin.

 

[JohnH1963]

If your purpose is home defense, then the Mini cannot be beat. The mini can hit a coffee can at 50 yards and that is all the accuracy you need in a self defensive fire-arm in my opinion.

It is more acccurate, more deadly and has longer range then any pistol out there. It also has more capacity with a 30 round magazine.

Would you get much more out of an AR15 for home defense? I dont think so.

 

[Sarge]

I generally don't waste time on stuff like this but its raining today, so here goes:

Posted by Skyyr-

That was only ONE group out of countless others (and I'll guarantee you it wasn't the worst). Factor in the average of all groups and you have even less of an argument for a Mini-14's accuracy (that in itself should be an oxymoron). 3 7/8" is roughly (slightly better) than 2 MOA at 210yds. That is pretty poor compared to the ability of a decent AR. Any intermediate shooter with an AR can do 2" @ 200yds pretty easily. Even a Marlin .22 will shoot better groups than the 2 MOA the Mini was shooting.

The irony is that the author of that article was using a 4x scope. I'm sorry, but I can shoot better than that using iron sights at 200yds with my Noveske. Seriously, if 2MOA is the best you can do WITH A SCOPE, that alone should speak of the accuracy issues the rifle has.

You've certainly come a long way since you posted this on September 15th:

Hello! =)

First off, I'm from Tennessee, Murfreesboro to be exact. I've always considered myself a decent marksman - whether or not that's true, I'd like to find out. After getting my Noveske recently, I have a rifle that can shoot better than I can. I'd like to get involved into competition shooting to have goals to compete against and to simply have fun.

I have no idea where to start whatsoever, what rules are involved, etc. That being said, can anyone point me in the right direction?

Do you even still have that rifle? Because through 8/6/09 you were posting a classified at AR15.com which reads-

For sale is a new, unmounted, unused TA01 ACOG.

I purchased the ACOG 2 weeks ago and was waiting for a LaRue mount to come in the mail before I used it. Unfortunately, I had to sell the rifle it was going to be mounted on before the mount arrived, so I'm now selling the scope.

Either way that Noveske you have, or had, looks to have the better grade barrel with a match chamber, etc. My comment regarding the 580 being comparable to M4's assumes rack grade guns in both cases. Based on zeroing a number the latter, I'm just not seeing a huge accuracy advantage for the M4. Purpose-built, match grade AR's are another matter entirely and may be expected to rival a good bolt action. I haven't had a Target Mini in my hands yet so I can't comment on whether they'll run with a Match AR.

On the matter of 4X vs irons, best groups/worst groups- folks who can shoot can also call a flier. Is it fair to attribute occasional bad shooting to the gun?

Unlike you, Bwana Skyyr, some of us pull a shot occasionally. Assuming corrective lenses & good light I generally, but not always, shoot about as well with aperture sights as with a 4X scope. You may well have held your 1MOA to 500 with the Noveske. We have an old Savage 110 in .223 which has proven capable of it to about 400, on those rare dead-calm days here.

Either way, I congratulate you on your climb from novice to expert (and marksmanship consultant) in such a short period.

 

[Art Eatman]

As long as I was just sighting in or load testing, I regularly got three-shot groups of 1.5 MOA from each of the four Minis I've owned. For my old eyes, a Weaver K4 solved the "see both the sights and the target" problem.

I did in a fair number of coyotes and jackrabbits.

Where a Mini works well is for hunting: The first shot reliably goes to the same point of aim, today, as it did last week or last month or whenever.

Odd about this magazine problem: I never had any operational problems with magazines I bought in the 1970s and early 1980s. Must be something in the manufacturing, nowadays. However, odds are it's something with the feed-lips, and that's usually curable with needle-nose pliers and a bit of patience. (Works for 1911 mags, anyway.)

 

[4sixteen]

Check out these beauties. Distributor exclusives, available in circassian and laminate.

 

[Candiru]

When it comes to comparing Minis and ARs, I see the following two statements a lot:

1. For the price of a Mini-14, you can get an AR-15.
2. AR-15s are more accurate than Mini-14s and/or will shoot MOA.

Both of these statements are true, but I haven't seen any published data suggesting they both hold true simultaneously for the same guns. High-end ARs, even ones designed as carbines, generally produce sub-MOA groups in the tests I've read. But most reviews of AR carbines selling for less than $1,000 show groups from 1.5 to over 2 MOA. The rejection threshold for FN-made M16s is 4 MOA, which seems a little high for a rifle that, to hear people talk about it, shoots MOA as a matter of course.

 

[olyinaz]

Both of these statements are true, but I haven't seen any published data suggesting they both hold true simultaneously for the same guns. High-end ARs, even ones designed as carbines, generally produce sub-MOA groups in the tests I've read. But most reviews of AR carbines selling for less than $1,000 show groups from 1.5 to over 2 MOA. The rejection threshold for FN-made M16s is 4 MOA, which seems a little high for a rifle that, to hear people talk about it, shoots MOA as a matter of course.

Bingo. People like to compare the old pencil-barrel Mini to a new free floated AR. It's apples to oranges.

Oly

 

[2rugers]

Sarge.

 

[olyinaz]

And by the way, I love that distributor exclusive wood stocked Mini with the short barrel!

Regarding the Mini 30: I get pretty enthused thinking about one of those in that new Remington .30-AR round! Imagine that.

Best,
Oly

 

[Skyyr]

@ Sarge

Please point out ANYWHERE in ANY of my posts where I've stated I was an "expert" Marksman. However, like most things that I do, when I get started into them, I go into them full throttle. Some would call me obsessive or extremely driven. I'm simply an enthusiast and I put my all into whatever interests me. Since my first post in March, I've purchased 3 AR-15's (and a Sig 226 - and I also sold one of the AR's) and put THOUSANDS of rounds downrange.

Doing a bit of a search, you'll find that about 2-3 weeks ago, I was shooting just over MOA at 150 and 200yd ranges. In fact, I posted that here. And that was with irons. Moreover, I'm the type of person that doesn't judge the ability of a firearm by my abilities. I knew from the day I got it that my Colt would do roughly 1.5" @ 100yds and the Noveske would do about 3/4". In fact, my posts reflect that. I think my quote was, "My rifle can shoot better than me." Then again, 2 1/2 years ago, I was a simple college student with almost no official background in aviation. According to you, I should still be a novice, yet the FAA thinks I'm now competent enough to fly, train, and endorse people to become pilots and to carry passengers for hire. Between the two, shooting pales in comparison. My pistol shooting skills on the other hand, those could use severe improvement.

Now, to turn the tables on you, you should have done better research, because the AR I sold was a Sabre Defence - not the Noveske. I also purchased a Colt LE6920, which is my "bang-around" gun and the gun I put the majority of my rounds down. Once I feel like I've improved an aspect of shooting, I then switch to the Noveske and see just how much I have improved, usually throwing a 5-shot group down-range, measuring any improvement, and then switch back to the Colt. I still have the Noveske and have been shooting irons rigorously for the last several weeks, where I've gotten my best 5-group sizes down to about 1.55" @ 200yds, roughly. A bit more research on arfcom would show that I'm now looking for an optic and I'm awaiting my Meopta KDot to come in sometime next week.

Now, I could go on and explain that, unlike AR's, I've been shooting traditional rifles since the ripe age of 15. As anyone who's familiar with rifles knows that there's little training time involved transferring from a bolt-gun to an AR. I CAN (and I will, should you request me to) take a Remington .270 bolt action out and do 1/3 MOA groups @200 yds all day long with a 3-9x scope. In fact, I've made mention of this on the boards as well.

That said, I feel flattered someone is that impressed with me to feel the need to go through my post history (seeing as anyone and everyone can). You could have saved yourself some time and simply asked me to link the posts directly to you. Either way, thanks for complimenting me on my shooting abilities. I guess after being able to shoot sub-MOA with an AR15 with irons after only... ~4-5 months is pretty good, considering your self-professed best group with a Mini is 2'ish inches. I'd go as far to assert that those "wide" groupings are the result of the rifle and not you, the shooter, which was the entire point of my original post, which you took out of context.

Thanks.

 

[GaryM&P]

I wasn't pleased with the accuracy of any of the Mini's that I owned. Besides that, the cost of reliable magazines is outrageous compared to the cost of reliable AR mags.