Originally Posted By AZJeff:

I find the people who use the phrase "needlessly complex" when they describe the Mini-14 to be ignorant of the mechanical construction of the rifle.

The total number of parts in the Mini-14 probably is lower than that of an AR-15.  Better yet, the number of parts the user must handle during normal maintenance is lower than that of an AR-15.

That said, the Mini-14 is a rifle that was designed BEFORE the AR-15 became popular with civilian shooters.  Judging the Mini-14 against rifles designed and introduced to the commercial market 30 years after the Mini-14 is a bit unfair.   It would be like judging a Model 1898 Krag rifle against an M1 Garand.

Yes, there are rifles that are more accurate and more reliable in adverse conditions than the Mini-14, but one can still appreciate the Mini-14 for what it is through the prism of when it was designed/introduced.

And yeah, the old ones, with a cold barrel, are probably only a 2-3MOA gun.  Once they heat up, that opens up to 6MOA.  That's still good enough for minute of criminal self-defense.

Originally Posted By Boomer:


He’s still not wrong about most of that.

Allow me to go back 35 years. I had been using a Colt M16A2 as a National Guardsman for a few years and developed a fondness for it, having got past all of the SUBSTANTIAL negativity surrounding the M16/AR15 platform at the time. I wanted to buy a commercial model for myself. But it’s 1989, and some crazy retard just shot up a school playground in CA. So the military pattern semi-auto pickings are getting pretty slim. Colt ARs in particular. Olympic Arms ARs and Mini-14s are occasionally found, but I wanted the real deal. In the spring of 1990 Colt ARs start trickling out into distribution again and I finally find one on a dealers shelf, a R6550k, and couldn’t get my wallet out fast enough. For $800 + tax, it was mine. And what a joy it was and continues to be. Adjusted for inflation, that would be about $2,000 today. Holy shit. But I never once questioned or regretted that purchase.

That summer a friend who was a bit more budget minded bought a Mini-14. They cost about $400 back then, so it seemed like a pretty good deal at half the cost of a Colt AR. I got to handle it and shoot it. It wasn’t a total POS or anything, but it was obviously far less accurate than the AR, it didn’t have the feel, handling or performance of more modern designs and the magazines, higher capacity ones in particular, were far less common and much more expensive. I had given them a little  consideration, but after that experience I never had any desire for one again.

People were customizing and accessorizing their guns back then, but nowhere near to the extent that they do now, so the aftermarket was kind of a wash between what was available between the two platforms. But there is absolutely no question about which one went on to dominate thanks to a modern, modular design that lends itself to modifications incredibly well.

Probably the biggest things in favor of the Mini are the classic design, traditional non-threatening appearance and retro factor. But these days with the Fightlite SCR and similar designs available that combine AR performance and modularity with classic design and materials, it makes more sense to go that route. Which, in fact, I did scratch that itch.

The AR market adjusted for the AWB, so after a short time the better option continued to be available. And I wouldn’t count on the Mini-14 not being included in another AWB.

Originally Posted By AZJeff:

Yes, the AR-15 was offered commercially by Colt in 1963.....and virtually NOBODY bought them.

I am old enough to remember both of them being for sale in the 1970's.  I bought one of each, and I was the only guy I knew for YEARS that had the Colt.  It was considered an oddity, and also it was the "rifle that jammed in Viet Nam" which no doubt delayed their acceptance by the American consumer.

I suspect Ruger chose to design an autoloading .223 rifle that mimicked the appearance/function of the M1 carbine, which WAS immensely popular with the civilian market in the 1960's.   In other words, I don't think Ruger was trying to go "toe to toe" with Colt at the time.

Originally Posted By backbencher:


Canada has in fact banned the Mini-14, but not the Chinese Type 81 nor the SKS.  Clinton banned the Type 81, & Washington state banned the SKS.  

Interestingly, the Mini has a lot of similarity to the Winchester entry in the SCHV trials of the late 1950's, and was designed by Bill Sullivan, who worked under Stoner (PBUH) downsizing the AR-10 to the AR-15.

It's not a particularly complex rifle, intuitive to new shooters w/ the open action, familiar field stripping to shooters of other US exposed op-rod guns, and the 180 series is reportedly more accurate than the AC-556 & 181 series that followed it.  The new models are reportedly decent w/ the heavier barrel.

1) Ban state ownership or travel to ban states, particularly w/ the new charger clip guides available;
2) LARP as the A-Team w/ a stainless and the new Samson reproduction folding stock;
3) Introduce new shooters to centerfire rifle shooting w/ a low-recoiling intuitive action (M1 carbine has the same advantage);
4) Traditional stock easy to carry w/ one hand on the pistol grip when hunting;
5) Excessive ejection velocity easily corrected w/ aftermarket adjustable gas block 181 series & later;
6) Accuracy issues can generally be improved w/ any number of aftermarket barrel clamps, not generally necessary on 581(?) series
7) Ruger has made the Mini in .222, .223/5.56, 6.8 SPC, .300 Blackout, & 7.62x39mm.  Aftermarket barrels are available in various chamberings;
8) Ruger's rather high fixed price at the distributor level means new Minis are expensive compared to their historic cost vs an AR, and the new price has inflated the used market as well - which is why I don't own one yet.

Originally Posted By Cajunkraut:
Prices have gone up long with the improvements, but you're either nostalgic enough to buy one or you aren't.

Originally Posted By Boomer:


Reading WA law, the Mini-14 might not be banned by name, but I don’t think it passes the features part unless there is a model that does not have a heat shield/barrel shroud.

Originally Posted By ramairthree:


Mine are about 3 MOA guns, that I shoot with like 4 MOA ammo.
That somehow has me putting paper plate sized groups per mag or usually hitting 8 inch steel at 100m.

But for some reason, everyone’s 500 dollar PSA AR that’s a 2 MOA off the shelf gun with a 2 MOA red dot and e MOA ammo gets sub MOA groups when they talk about them.

Originally Posted By DH243:


Yep, most people think every m4 service rifle shoots as good as their woa or larue/gucci barreled personal ar.  In reality, most acog equipped m4 with average grunt and m855/855a1 is 2.5-4moa gun and they get barrel replaced when they hit 7moa+.  But there's no way a 4moa mini14 can be "combat effective", lol.

Originally Posted By Boomer:


If you were shooting Coke cans or trying to hit a standard size container of Tannerite at 100-200 yards, which would you choose? Mini-14 or 20” AR15A2?

Originally Posted By DH243:


Yep, most people think every m4 service rifle shoots as good as their woa or larue/gucci barreled personal ar.  In reality, most acog equipped m4 with average grunt and m855/855a1 is 2.5-4moa gun and they get barrel replaced when they hit 7moa+.  But there's no way a 4moa mini14 can be "combat effective", lol.

Originally Posted By Colt653:


@pilatuspilot

Roller lock ?