I think those are pretty fair videos with some valid points. I have not seen a jamming problem on any of the Mini-14's in fact in the early 90's I would have said the Mini 14 was more reliable than all other AR15's other than Colt.

I guess the Mini-14 is what it is and isn't what it isn't.

They are still in service today and often put to good use.

As for accuracy, I but these two fellows wished it was a little bit more inaccurate:

CA Prison Guards Use Mini-14 to stop stabbing

me neither.  Have two GB's (blue and stainless) which have never missed a beat since new in 83

maybe they made them better back then?

I do always use only original Ruger 20 and 30rd magazines though and was told even back then when they were nearly impossible to get, it was worth the hunt to find original Ruger magazines and most all problems came from aftermarket mags.

Watched both vids.  First was fine.  I had some problems with second vid and supposed "reliability"/"accuracy" issues.  Author (LuckyGunnner) did not mention 100% thorough cleaning of the Mini in order to remove sticky preservative spray that Ruger applies everywhere, nor did he mention properly lubing it before testing.  Trying a number of different mags might have been useful.  His "accuracy" issues could have been ammo-related, and/or simply resolved by gluing thin shims inside the stock to improve stock-to-receiver fit.

LG went to the trouble and expense of mounting a Scout rail on his Mini but did not mention how much care was taken to properly mount it, especially to the gas block.  Hint: The  gas block screws require the proper torque value to be used as well as proper torquing procedure, and ideal torque value is considerably below that specified by Ruger.  The lower gas block torque value has been shown to enhance accuracy.

I posted a comment on his second vid about all this, and more.  

In an "ideal" world most of these "tweaks" should not be necessary, but real world is seldom "ideal".

I'm willing to bet that if LG went to a decent Mini-focused forum, and followed advice of experienced users given there, his Mini experience would have been different, and likely considerably better.  Seen such improvement many times in the past.

In sum, take LG's results with a grain of salt.  I've seen many Minis improve considerably after a few simple and no/low cost user-tweaks.

A very informative post about mini accurizing, thank you! I haven't thought about those guns in forever, and now I wonder.

Would it be possible to start a new thread that gathers all of the most up to date "best practices" for mini reliability and accuracy?

I personally wonder if there are differences between the 7.62x39, 5.45x45, and .300 BLK guns, in terms of user experience.

I could write such a thread, and so could some others.  It would take some time and effort.  Why re-invent the wheel when one can go to RugerTalk forum  and get the benefit of a number of experienced users?

I watched the videos when they came out and they were kind of entertaining.  He doesn’t get it and I couldn’t care any less.  My mini feels great in the hands and makes me smile when I shoot it. And I’m pretty sure I’ve never had a single malfunction even with aftermarket mags. Maybe I’m just lucky.

Everyone says all "Pencil-Barreled" Mini-14s are inherently inaccurate.  Not a one of them has shot my 186 series "Pencil-Barreled" Mini-14.

I made a fair amount of money shooting my Mini against shorty AR owners who were long on gear, but short on skill.

I admit "throwing" some shots in order to sucker them into a significant bet.  After winning their money, I shot their shorty ARs better than they did.

Fools and their money are soon parted.

Is my 16" Pencil-Barreled Mini-14 as accurate as my 20" barreled Colt Match HBAR?  NOPE.

Is my 16" Pencil-Barreled Mini-14 more accurate than some folks believe?  YES.

Ruger was its own worst enemy on the accuracy issue.

I own a 180 series as well as a 184 and 187 series.  The 180 series shot 2 MOA 5 shot groups with Hornady 55 gr FMJs as it came from the factory.  


The 184 series was a 5 MOA pattern shooter, but now shoots 1.5 MOA 5 shot groups with the same ammo after the following changes:

- a Browning style Choate flash hider and front sight combination muzzle device.  Adding some muzzle weight has long been known to improve accuracy by improving the barrel harmonics;

- a .045” gas port bushing. The standard was .052” on the 180 series but Ruger went with .080” on the 181 and later series up to the 580 series where they finally went back to a smaller bushing.  They made the change too .080” based on their development of the select fire AC556 - more on this later.

- A SOCOM length AccuStrut.  Accu Strut claims more improvement with the longer two clamp model, but I haven’t seen it.  On the other hand, I also take a great deal of care in the installation and mill  divots in the gas block to ensure the set screws have a firm bite on the gas block.  Either way, it stiffens the barrel and improves harmonics.

-  Tech sights rear sight, which is a much better design than the original Ruger sight. That, along with the thinner blade on the Choate front sight helps maximize accuracy potential.

- a Mini 14 shock buffer.  It, along with the smaller gas port bushing helps reduce the vibration from the high reciprocating mass on the 181 and later series.  


As noted in the first line, Ruger created the accuracy issues with the Mini 14.  The first issue was deciding to use the heavier slide and bolt developed for the AC556 on the Mini 14, and then over gassing it with a .080” gas port bushing also from the AC556 in the 181 and subsequent series.  Jeff Cooper liked the original 180 series and as noted they were solid 2 MOA rifles.





In addition to adversely impacting accuracy they also made it heavier and bulkier due to the increased depth required in the fore end.






Second, Ruger started with a very suitable 1-10” rifling twist, but then followed the herd going with a 1-7” twist barrel consistent with the “mil spec” 1-7” twist that the military adopted to allow full stabilization of the very long M856 tracer round.  To be fair it also allows heavier and longer 69-77 gr bullets to be used, but no one actually uses those in a Mini 14 and very few people actually use them in an M4gery or non match AR-15.

Ruger eventually came to its senses and adopted a pretty much industry standard 1-9” twist.  It’s ideal for the SS109:projectile used in M855 and gives up very little with surplus grade M193  55 gr FMJ ammo.

But the existence of 1-10”, 1-7” and 1-9” twist barrels has not helped the accuracy reputation, especially when shooters use cheap 55 gr ammo in a 1-7” barrel where the excessive spin rate creates yaw and precession issues with low quality 55 gr FMJs where the center of gravity and center of form are often not in the same axis.


Third Ruger made a bunch of them and as the tooling wore the tolerances got worse and accuracy became even more spotty.


With the 580 series Ruger retooled the Mini 14, and in the middle of the 580 series they switched to a heavier tapered barrel.  Those and the later 58X series Mini 14s all shoot 2 MOA out of the box, with decent quality ammo.


Ruger also went back to a smaller gas port (.055” IIRC).  That’s a plus for accuracy and it doesn’t degrade reliability provided you use decent ammo and clean the rifle before you first use it and then periodically there after.  If you want to do one of those stupid 2000 round torture tests, use an older Mini 14 or put an .080” gas port back in it.


I like all three of mine, and each is configured for a different purpose.  




One of the major complaints is the much more limited third party aftermarket support for the Mini 14, but that’s a relative statement.  There are certainly more ways to do the same things with an AR-15, but none the less there are still sufficient options for stocks, hand guards, rails,  muzzle devices,  optic mounts and sling mounts to allow you to do what you need to do, even if you don’t have 20 different choices for each item.

I think DakotaFAL's comments are well-stated, and what he says above almost completely comports with my experience, and, I believe, the experiences of experienced Mini users who have taken the time to learn about the Mini and tweak it a little.

The aftermarket support for the Mini grows all the time, and some interesting Mini-specific products are now available.  For instance, there is the Cogburn Arsenal Stripper Clip Guide which allows top-feeding the Mini, just like an M-14/M1A--or an SKS.

In the event that one is Legally required to transform one's Mini into a "Fixed-Magazine" firearm, being able to top-load it (via stripper clips) becomes a requirement.  As an aside, if one believes that the Antis in your State aren't eventually going to propose this sort of thing, you are sadly mistaken.

It's unarguable that the AR platform has far greater modularity, and far more accessories available.

That said, the Mini generally can benefit from some simple, inexpensive user-made tweaks.  It needs very few accessories in order for it to remain a light, handy carbine; the role for which it was (and is) intended.

If one goes to the smaller gas port, might you shave off some weight from the op-rod?

I note you have both straight & curved mags in your pic - looks like you're using the straight one for M-14 appearance?  Why the curved mags?

The first question is an interesting one.  One could "reasonably" expect that reducing the Mass of the "heavier" Op-rods might be beneficial in conjunction with a suitably reduced I.D. of the user-replaceable Gas Port, or possibly an adjustable gas block; the latter being my choice, but YMMV.

This experimentation requires an expensive Op-rod (if obtainable), a milling machine, and some tinkering with gas port I.D., possibly including an adjustable gas block.  I don't know of anyone who has milled-down a later/heavier Op-rod and also tinkered with gas port I.D..  When reducing mass of Op-rod assy, one also needs to reduce gas induced to operate the Op-rod and to counteract existing Op-rod spring, hence smaller gas ports, or perhaps an adjustable gas block.

An interesting area of investigation.  I suspect that most "experienced" Mini owners who have "adjusted" things in order for their Minis to shoot 2MOA or less might be reluctant to spend the money and skull-sweat on further mods.  Just a guess.

As to curved/straight mags, some folks have their preferences.  Some folks like the "straight" mag look of the M-14.  A 20-rd mag will require less of a "curve" than a 30-rd mag.

USGI 5.56 ctg mags require far less a "curve" than do Soviet 7.62x39 ammo.

IMHO it ALL depends on how well the mag functions, IMHO.  Some style mags may be more common than others.  Function over form, IMHO, and YMMV.

I turn my own gas port bushings on my lathe, staring with 3/16” steel rod for stock. Somewhere in the .040-.050 range is what works for most skinny barrel Mini 14s.  I basically do what I do with an FAL, decrease the gas port bushing size until it chokes and then go up a few thousandths.


You could certainly reduce the slide weight band perhaps get a bit less vibration and certainly less reciprocating mass, but I’m happy with it the way it is.

The straight mags are made by OEM and they look a lot like the original magazines Ruger used with the 180 series.  I bought two to try as they were well recommended by a couple people over on Perfect Union.  One worked fine, the other I had to tweak a bit.    Personally, I prefer the Ruger magazines and as far as reliability goes, they are the only mags I recommend. Period.

The curve in the Ruger magazines accommodates the slight taper in the 5.56x45 case body.

I for one like the Mini 14.  I had one malfunction after over a thousand rounds - 1000 rounds Wolf ammo - without cleaning.  Then I cleaned it.

Accuracy is about 1.5-2.5 MOA with most good ammo.  3+ with Wolf, but that's about what my stock M4gery's do.  

I like the traditional rifle feel, the heft, and the recoil impulse.  For most non-tier 1 operator purposes I think it's plenty good enough.

One day I may write a book, "My shooting journey in California, or How I learned to love the Mini 14."

Have you seen my videos?

You are guaranteed to be ridiculed on Arfcom for saying that the Mini is a decent firearm.

As one of the few non-tier one operators, I'm used to it.  

So am I.

I have a full loadout of RamLine multi-mags that will fit, I just can't bring myself to pay for a Mini what I could build 3x ARs for.

Same reason I now appreciate the un-Tapcofucked SKS for what it is, but I can't bring myself to pay modern prices for one.

I fully understand your position.  Some "lucky" ones are in a different position.

Thought we could use some more pics.  

Bone stock except for brake, scope and rest.  Compared to the new 9mm carbine which I also like and is infact very accurate.

At the shooting matches in CA people marvled at the accuracy of my mini.  The mini is average,  but a little marksmanship goes a long way.

I shot my first tactical rifle match more or less on a whim because it was scheduled the morning before a service rifle match.  I figured I would use my M1A Supermatch in the battle rifle division but I needed an intermediate rifle or carbine for the “light rifle” division.  So the day before the match I bought an Inland M1 Carbine in excellent condition for $125, paid $10 each for three new in the wrap surplus 30 round magazines and two boxes of Lake City .30 M1 Ball ammo (all the shop had).

I used 10 rounds to confirm the zero on the carbine and loaded the remaining 90 rounds in the three 30 round magazines.

When I showed up to shoot the light rifle division had a mix of SKS rifles ($69 each pretty much everywhere, about the same cost as a crate (two tins) of 7.62x39 Chinese surplus ammo) and AR-15 carbines, with a few mini 14s, and an HK-93.  Most of the AR-15s were tarted up with muzzle brakes and optics.

Those AR-15 shooters also made snide comments about my “antique” M1 carbine and its range limitations and clearly didn’t regard me as a contender.  Maximum range during the light rifle stages of the match was 200 yards, so I didn’t see any issues with the M1 Carbine at that distance.


Fast forward to the end of the match, I won the battle rifle division and placed second in the light rifle division, losing to the math organizer and his HK-93, but won the overall.  I really enjoyed beating every AR-15 in the field.

Marksmanship does indeed make a difference.

I have three Minis (besides two ARs and an AK):  A 1978 181 Series Mini-14 GB model, a 583 Series 2016 vintage 5.56 Mini-14, and a 584 Series 2021 vintage Mini-30.  All three will break a clay pigeon on the 100 yard berm and whack the 200 yard 12" gong from a casual rest with every shot.  That certainly is "Practical Accuracy" to me. What more do I need?

I got my first Mini, a 180 Series, in about 1982ish.    For much of my 20 years as an LEO, I often carried the Mini-14 as a patrol carbine, and never had a problem qualifying with the Mini.  In all that time, I personally found that 99% of Mini feeding issues were caused by junk magazines.  I only use factory now.

As for reliability, in almost 40 years of owning/shooting Mini-14s and Mini-30s with brass cased ammo, I have never had a malfunction in a Ruger factory 5, 10, or 20 round magazine.  Factory 30s, have been 99+% reliable, only having one or two malfunctions in the same time.  The after-market mags in the 80s, 90s were generally junk, on the other hand.  

Shooting Wolf/Tula in a Mini-14 is OK for 100 rounds or so, but it is really dirty and more will gum it up if wet lubed.  I have had no problems with steel ammo in my Mini-30, even though the have deeper set hard primers.  When it was new, every once in a great while, a steel case that would would not go off, so I replaced the firing pin with an extended one from firing pins.com.  Now it is 100% with whatever I shoot.

Thank you very much for that resource.

Your welcome.  I had a Mini-30 that had a .039" protrusion from the factory, and never needed the longer one.  This one was .035", and would occasionally not fire.  I have it with a .046" protrusion, and it is 100%, even with copper washed, steel case Chinese ammo.  That has really hard primers.  My Mini-30 eats ANYTHING!

Looking at DakotaFAL'sL description of the differences between the 180 series and the 181s brought to mind my first Mini-14 I got in 1982.  It was a used Bicentennial 180 series "made in the 200th year of American Liberty."  It was, as Dakota and Jeff Cooper said, a "2 MOA" rifle. I easily qualified with it as a patrol carbine.  My next one was a 181 Series I got in about 1992.  While I still qualified to use it as a patrol carbine, the old 180 I had originally had, did shoot better.  

My current Mini-14 is a 1978 vintage 181 series GB Model, is a 2-3 MOA shooter. The flash hider and mid-span front sight/bayonet lug on the GB seem to attenuate barrel whip somewhat.  I would not mind picking up a 180 series for old times sake, though.

I have been shooting Minis for over 40 years.  In the early days before the 1994 magazine ban, crappy aftermarket magazines were the norm, rather than the exception.  McCoy and PMI being the exception. In my extensive personal experience, 99% of Mini-14 functioning problems are bad magazines.  I have had aftermarket mags that would not function with any amount of tweaking.  Most aftermarket mags have thin, flimsy steel, as opposed to Ruger factory that are hard like spring steel.

With the exception of a couple 30 round pre-ban Mini-30 USA Brand, all my Mini-14 and Mini30 mags are Ruger factory (5s, 10, 20s, and 30s for the Mini-14 and 5s, 10s, and 20s for the Mini-30.  I have zero feeding problems, and both are 100% reliable.

Col Jeff Cooper, USMC Ret, was a WW II and Korea combat vet.  In the 60, 70s, 80s, and 90s, he was a prolifiic gun writer and founder of Gunsight weapons training.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Cooper

Here is his 1971/2 evaluation of the new Ruger Mini-14.  Cooper said "It is a superior rural defense pioce - a "Ranch Gun".  Ruger built on that by naming the later scoped version "Ranch Rifle."





Eugene Stoner's AR-15 design team at Armalite was headed by a design engineer named L.James Sullivan.  He was tasked with down-scaling the existing AR10 .308 platform to fire the .222 Remington Special (later renamed .223 Remington). This was so Armalite could compete in the DOD's 1957 SCHV rifle trials (Small Caliber, High Velocity.). Winchester entered its .224 Winchester Lightweight Military Rifle.  It looked like an M1 Carbine on steroids.  The 224 Winchester was a 223 case with a stubby, short 52 grain bullet.  It can fir in .223 weapons, but not the other way around.

Some say Ruger was inspired by the Winchester .224 LMR to create the Mini-14 by down-scaling the M-14 .308. In the late 1960s, Bill Ruger hired L. James Sullivan away from Armalite to do what he had done with the AR10 to AR-15.  The Mini-14 was designed by the same guy that designed the AR15.

Ima, my friend from other Forums, is quite correct in everything he says.

Unfortunately, Arfcom has been traditionally and has automatically considered the Mini-14 and the Mini-30 to be inherently inferior to the AR platform.

Despite decades worth of countervailing responses, this mistaken attitude still exists. Different platforms, and different original designs and intentions.  Apples and oranges.

Also, different Laws affect the AR and Mini platforms; the AR being often banned, and the Mini allowed to be un-banned.  For now.  Make no mistake, all semiauto firearms are on the "List" of the Anti-gunners, they are just cutting the salami one slice at a time.

As I've said many times before, I've won significant money from shorty AR users who were long on gear, and short on personal skill when shooting my Mini-14 against them.

Yes, I certainly did "throw" some shots in "hooking" the fish (shooters), but that's part of the game, and takes two to play.  Like being a pool hustler, only different.

Afterwards, I shot their firearms much better than they did.  They shot my Mini poorly.

I believe my loser opponents failed because they lacked basic shooting skills, and because they failed under financial and subtle psychological pressure. Different things.

It's been many years since I used my Mini-14 as a money-maker.  Maybe I'll try it again, on a different shooting range. According to the "received wisdom" on Arfcom, might be worth trying.   There's no shortage of fools back then, and now.

RAF, so true.  A couple months ago, I was working as an RSO at the local sportsman's club.  Two guys showed up, one with a high end Daniel Defense AR15 with all the whistles and bells, the other with an Arsenal AK with a high end red dot and 3x". They put 10 clay pigeons on the 100 yard berm for their last hurrah.  Each had 20 rounds left.  Shooting from a sitting position with a rifle rest, they only succeeded in breaking 8 with their combined 40 rounds.  They left.

A bystander who was watching said "I'm not impressed!"  I said "Watch this!"  I went and grabbed my Mini-30, which I had been shooting before I started my shift.  It is a 584 series, stainless in a factory wood stock, with iron sights.  I loaded two rounds of Tulammo.  Standing, leaning against an upright, I vaporized the first clay pigeon 100 yards away.  The second one, which was turned on edge, disappeared with my second shot. The bystander was impressed!   I am 70, and am a rifleman of the old school.  I will also add that with my ban-era Colt 6400C M4 with its Match Target barrel and iron sights, I can break the clay pigeons at 100 too, then break the larger pieces with subsequent shots!

By the way, I think it is absolutely hysterical that the Mini, which is bashed by the AR15 and AK fanboys as junk, was actually designed by the same man that designed the AR-15.  Eugene Stoner was only the project head for Armalite, he did nothing towards designing it.  In over 20 years in law enforcement, most of the time my patrol carbine was a Mini-14 or Mini-30 (or occasional M1 Carbine).  I never had a problem with out 100 yard quals, and never felt under-gunned.

Great Articles about the Winchester .224 Light Military Rifle:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2016/2/19/the-contender-winchester-s-224-light-rifle/

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/02/20/bruce-canfield-on-the-winchester-lmr-at-american-rifleman/

https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/My-1957-Winchester-224-Tribute-rifle/123-722364/

I appreciate your comments!  As I am also an "elderly" shooter, possibly possessing some of the skills you have, I'm looking forward to shooting with my Mini-14, perhaps with some side-bets.  I can always use the money.

As always, choosing one's "Mark" is essential.

Indeed.



I haven't owned a Mini since the mid 1990s but I always enjoyed the one I had back then.  It was a good general purpose rifle.

I think one significant advantage the Mini has over the AR and most other modern military style rifles is the height over bore of the sights.  A new Mini owner doesn't need to have it repeated over and over to "clear the muzzle, not the sights" when taking shots with any sort of potential obstruction in the way. The Mini's low sights dramatically simplify things. Not that it isn't relatively easy to overcome with the AR but most AR owners don't take the time to understand their gun, sighting system and ballistics of the cartridges they're using and dope out where they need to aim to make a hit at distances beyond pistol range.  

True!  In fact most AR owners I see at the range are using the 25 yard berm.  If they are using the 100, they generally are less than impressive!  As I say, I am 70, and they eyes are not the best.  My limit is 200 yards.  If I can hit a clay pigeon on the 100 yard berm, and hit the 12" gong at 200 (both with iron sights), that is practical accuracy for me.  I can do that with mt Colt M4, Inland WW2 M1 Carbine, Mini-14 and Mini-30, and Romanian MD-63 AK.

I have not owned one in over thirty years now.........had one in .223 and two in 7.62x39............I'm def going to pick up a Tactical model in 300 blackout as soon as I can get some coin available.................

I like my stainless/synthetic stock ok.  It goes bang every time.  Problem is back when I bought mine finding 20-30 round mags was damn near impossible and cost a fucking fortune if you did.  Thank God that stupid ban shit finally ended!

Hawaiian sick of paying through the nose for factory Ruger mags files down a PMag to work in his Mini.

Sad to say, Mag Bans (and other foolishness) on the State level are increasing in number nowadays. Dems in FedGov would pass similar stuff on a National level if they could.

It's a certainty that there are folks in every State working and planning to legislate all sorts of Anti-2A crap.

I see the "smiley", but don't kid yourself that such Bans have "finally ended".