Ruger Mini-14

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bill T

Moderator
"It's not the most accurate rifle out of the box that's for sure and Ruger could fix this but for some reason they choose not to. I paid 459.00 brand new for mine so I know that by puttting even 250 or 300 dollars into it, it is still cheaper than an AR and shoots just as good."

I hear this kind of logic all the time from Mini 14 owners, and I still have a difficult time digesting it. The cheapest your going to find a blue, wood Mini 14 is around $500.00 and change. If you want a Stainless Synthetic your talking $600.00+. Thats todays new prices, not what your cousins, girlfriends, brothers, friend sold you his for. As was said if you want it to shoot worth a crap your going to have to pour another $300.00+ into it, and that is a conservative estimate. That is easily going to put you into the $900.00+ range. I can buy Bushmaster AR-15's from Davidsons thru my local dealer all day long with a lifetime guarantee for $800.00 and change. Most any out of the box AR-15 will give accuracy and functionability beyond what a Mini 14 owner can only dream of. Excellent 30 round magazines can be had for $10.00 a piece. Buying Mini 14 magazines has always been a hit or miss proposition because Ruger refuses to sell their 30 round magazines to citizens who buy their product. As was also said Ruger refuses to fix this problem because they don't give a damn. They won't produce an accurate rifle, but will charge you what an accurate one should cost. Then to frost the cake they won't sell you 30 round magazines unless you are law enforcement who doesn't want the Mini 14 to begin with. Why go thru all that screwing around with a company that doesn't give a rats a$$??? I think the Mini 14 is a nice looking, well made rifle that simply doesn't shoot worth a crap for the money they charge for it. Until Ruger gets their head out of their a$$ and does something about it, I'll stick with what the millitary and law enforcement stake their lives on. The AR-15. With the cost difference amounting to a tankful of gas it simply isn't worth my time messing with a gun that I know is only going to disappoint me. Bill T.
 

Bill T

Moderator


Try getting a Mini 14 to shoot like this out of the box. Good luck.

"Both rifles, fired by teen-agers, will shoot up CD discs at 100 yards."

That group was fired by my wife. Half the rounds would go thru the hole in the center of a CD. Bill T.
 

rugmar

New member
If you like the AR then that's fine. The only thing wrong with an AR is that it looks like a big plastic squirt gun. I find myself wondering where to put the water in. But that is just my opinion. Your opinion of the Mini-14 hasn't slowed Ruger's sales of it one bit. My opinion of the AR hasn't hurt it sales either. So what's the deal, how about to each his own.

Like others have said here already, the accuracy of the Mini-14 is only a problem for those that want to try to make it into a benchrest rifle. It was not designed for that. I'm very happy with mine and that's what really matters. I also don't think I could have even a low end AR for what I have invested in my Ruger. I've never seen a used one for less than about 700 dollars but I've not really shopped them because I don't want one.
 
An option to the mini might be an AR-180B. Same gas piston design used AR mags for around 700$. stormwerks has all kinds of stock adapters and handguards for it so customization isnt a problem. Mine shoots MOA at 200 meters and is a fun plinker for under a grand

SW
 

rugmar

New member
Sorry - I see now where Big-Foot posted this same link that I posted above early on in this thread.

Oh well, never too many links to a good article I guess.
 

JIH

New member
Mini-14s are good truck/ranch rifles. Good for scaring coyotes, busting bottles, popping cans, taking appropriately sized game and the like.

If you already have a match AR-15, though, you do have the option of a carbine upper. It's like a whole new rifle. You can put all sorts of Mall Ninja toys on it and order it right through the mail... no muss, no fuss.
 

fsmitka

New member
We use mini-14's as a squad weapon along with rem. 870's in a large mid-west Corrections dept. I can tell you from experience that they are not the most accurate weapon at 100 yards from a bench. We use them with 30 round mags. for short range defense l under 100 yards. I believe Ruger designed this weapon as a short-range defensive weapon for police and security units. For this purpose, they work great. I remember in the early 1980's you could buy a ss ranch model for around $300. Our local Wal-Mart has the base model for $525. Despite the shortcommings of the Mini, they are well-built and reliable, to describe them as "junk" is nonsense.
 

Bill T

Moderator
"Despite the shortcommings of the Mini, they are well-built and reliable, to describe them as "junk" is nonsense."

They are only reliable if Ruger factory magazines are used. Aftermarket magazines tend to cause functioning problems. This is Rugers fault because they will not sell their Hi-Cap mags to customers who buy their rifles, forcing many to purchase inferior magazines. This is nonsense. Making the gun as inaccurate as it is tends to be bad enough. Not selling magazines to their customers is stupid. Especially because of some whacked out policy old man Ruger is still administering from the grave. Bill T.
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
If the zero "wanders", something is wrong with the sights.
Anytime the POI departs from the POA without sight adjustment, the zero is wandering. It can be a result of faulty sights or it can be the result of a barrel heating up and warping.

I've got a FAL with a wandering zero. It shoots to point of aim at first and then the bullets start walking down and to the right as the barrel heats. After a couple of mags without giving the barrel a chance to cool, it will be shooting about 6" low and 6" left. If that's not a wandering zero, I don't know what is. ;)
This is Rugers fault because they will not sell their Hi-Cap mags to customers who buy their rifles... Making the gun as inaccurate as it is tends to be bad enough...
I'll say it again. If you want a Mini-14, buy a Mini-14. If you want something else, buy something else.

If you want a rifle that will hold zero even with a hot barrel--buy something else.
If you want a rifle with cheap, easily available and reliable hi-cap mags--buy something else.
If you want a rifle that will shoot MOA or better--buy something else.

It is what it is--if you want it to be something else you're bound to become disappointed and bitter and live out your days flaming the Mini-14 on gun forums. :D
 

fsmitka

New member
Bill T
If used propely, the Mini-14 has enough accuracy FOR IT'S INTENDED PURPOSE: A short-range, security and patrol weapon. I am not familar with the mag. question you brought up. I just sold my own personal mini-14 whch I owned for over 20 years. I used plastic ram-line, ruger factory and one 20 rounder with no stamp. All were reliable. At work, we use factory mags. I would rather use AR-15's at work instead of the Mini-14 but the dept. issues what they can afford, not what the officers want. As a squad rifle for riots and distrubances, the Mini-14 serves very well. Again, in my experience, the Mini-14 is not very accurate off a bench. But off-hand in a defensive role at short range, it is as good as any other rifle in it's catagory.
 

P-990

New member
If you already have a match AR-15, though, you do have the option of a carbine upper. It's like a whole new rifle. You can put all sorts of Mall Ninja toys on it and order it right through the mail... no muss, no fuss.

I'd be the only kid on the block with a 4.5-lb two-stage match trigger on a carbine, as my dad has said before.

Maybe that's my best bet: Get a shorty AR upper for now and then build a lower to go with it later on. Cost me less in the long run, because I know what I'll be getting.

Now: Where to get 6.8 SPC loading gear? :D
 

TimboKhan

New member
I used to scare off a neighbor's goat herd by burning through one or two 30-round mag's worth. Never, ever, had any failure to feed or fire.

In between fits of laughing in which I imagine you standing in your underwear firing off strings of shots while shouting "Damn Goats!!! I'll get you yet!!!" I realized that.... oh, hell... who am I kidding.. all I am doing is laughing...
 

Art Eatman

Staff in Memoriam
John KSa, we got a minor terminology problem. Sure, a long string of fire will make a group open up and the point of impact won't be the same as the point of aim. However, the imaginary point which is the center of the group won't change. It's just that the group has become larger.

Say you're zeroed at 100 yards. Your point of aim and the point of impact of the first shot should be very closely the same. But that point of aim will always be the center of the overall group, no matter how bad the group.

"Zero wander", to me, means that you would have to re-zero every time you take the rifle out to shoot--and that's some sort of sight problem.

The after-market mags made before the Ban were quite reliable, generally. I used to have a bunch of 20-, 30- and even a 40-rounder. No problems. The gripes began with the hurry-up stuff made between the passage of the Ban law and the effective date. Bad quality control.

I never had any of the bad mags. I'd bet that some tweaking with the feed lips could solve a lot of the feed problem. That's always worked for me with 1911 mags that sometimes got a bit bent when dropped during reloading in an IPSC match.

TimboKhan, my dope-smuggling neighbors had a herd of goats that they used to erase the burro tracks when they'd run a "trainload" of Marijuana through on moonlight weekends. The herd ran loose, with just the guard dogs as "herders". I'd walk out and see some forty goats somewhere out at 200 to 400 yards, and grab the Mini and drop bullets in the dirt behind them and head them toward home. Barking and baaaing and goats headed Hell-for-breakfast toward home. :)

Art
 

Joe Demko

New member
I owned two Minis. One of the early stainless steel ones back in 1980 and a blue Ranch Rifle in the mid-90's. I was never terribly happy with either rifle. Accuracy was lackluster in both, though I tried different types of factory ammo and handloading. The Ranch Rifle, in particular, fired dinner-plate sized groups depressingly often. A complicating factor with the Ranch Rifle was that the rear sight had a tendency to self-destruct from recoil. It fell apart, and fell off, twice. Ruger charged me both times for a replacement.
Another factor was that both displayed a level of fit and finish below what one would expect from rifles in their price range. What is acceptable in a mil-surp SKS one bought for $80 doesn't cut it with a NIB American-made factory rifle that costed five times as much. The Ranch Rifle had a distinct step about halfway down the length of the barrel. The wood stock was such a poor fit that I replaced it almost immediately with a Butler Creek synthetic. The stainless Mini wasn't very pretty, either. It looked like they did the final finish at the factory by having somebody rub the metal down with a Scotch-Brite pad.
I can't say why Ruger seems unable to do a better job with these. I've owned several 10/22's that were great. I still own a MkI and a MkII that have thousands of rounds through them and are still going strong. My dad has a Speed Six in .357 that's accurate and reasonably well finished. One of my uncle's owns a boat-load of their centerfire bolt actions in various calibers and loves them.
 

Bill T

Moderator
"I can't say why Ruger seems unable to do a better job with these. I've owned several 10/22's that were great. I still own a MkI and a MkII that have thousands of rounds through them and are still going strong. My dad has a Speed Six in .357 that's accurate and reasonably well finished."

Ruger does a fantastic job with their handguns, both rimfire automatics, as well as centerfire revolvers. It's their rifles that most always wind up to be a "hit or miss" proposition, (no pun intended). I laid out good money for one of their Stainless Model 77's in .30-06 with a brown laminated stock. I can't get it to shoot worth crap. It's scoped with a Leupold Vari-X II 3-9X 40MM in Ruger mounts. I have a Browning A-Bolt Medallion Grade and a Weatherby Vanguard in .30-06 as well equipped with similar glass and mounts and both of them will consistantly group MOA if I do my part. The Ruger, forget it. My #1 Tropical in .416 Rigby is the same way. Ruger charges as much or more as anyone else for their rifles. Accuracy shouldn't be a gamble. It is.





They should stick with handguns. Bill T.
 
Last edited:

TimboKhan

New member
Well, Bill T, not to be contrary, but I have a Model 77 MkII in 7mmRemMag that will group at an inch and a half at 300 yards. Now, I will admit that this isn't pin-point accuracy but it is more than suitable for hunting, and I think I could probably get that group a little bit smaller with a better scope. My roommates 77 in .300WinMag will beat that, and my .270 77 will also beat that. The main problem with my .270 is that it has the older style ruger Zytel stock and is a little punishing over the course of a box of rounds. It's just a matter of my personal experience, but if I were to buy another big-bore rifle for hunting, Ruger would be the first company I looked to, although I have had a long standing desire to own a Remington 700 in .308.
 

Bill T

Moderator
I have no doubt the three rifles you mention group as you say, in spite of the fact 1 1/2" at 300 yards translates to 1/2" groups at 100 yards. If that isn't "pinpoint accuracy", I don't know what is. Les Baer charges $2,000.00 minimum for a rifle with that kind of accuracy guarantee. The problem is for every 3 that do, 30 won't. Trust me, I'm not alone in the boat that is occupied by owners of lousy shooting Ruger rifles. What irritates me so damn much about it, is it doesn't have to be this way. Ruger is famous, or rather infamous for this. Their rifles are well made, and most are delivered with an acceptable degree of fit and finish. They just are inaccurate, pure and simple. If you have a good one count your blessings, many don't. Bill T.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top