Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 9/26/2001 2:02:35 PM EST
How dependable is a mini 14? What are there faults and how much do mags cost? Are they considered an assault rifle (at least by government standards)?
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 2:18:25 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 4:29:51 PM EST
After discovering that Ruger aided in the drafting of the Crime bill on the Sig Forum I have decided that my money can be better spent elsewhere. Does anyone know anything more about the part they played in that whole fiasco?
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 4:39:03 PM EST
I'm as loyal to the support of the 2cd amendment as anyone but if you never bought a single thing from every company that ever aided in non support of gun owners you would be naked living in a cave with no computer or anything else for that matter! At least it seems that way! John
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 6:37:48 PM EST
Mine shot great out of the box, feeds well, even with USA mags. I've been very happy with it and get great groups. Will admit I don't shoot it alot though.
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 6:42:13 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 6:44:54 PM EST
I've had one since about 87-88. It is a great all around rifle. It wasn't designed to be overly accurate, but is good enough though. It has the M1 action I think. Very reliable with good ammo and mags. Although I think its two main contributers to its popularity was price and introduction while the population still had a lot of doubt about the AR-15s record. Lots of people bought it cause it was .223 and perceived as very reliable.
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 6:52:41 PM EST
Geez!!! What has happened to this forum? In the good 'ol days if you even mentioned the mini-14 you would be drawn, quartered, spit on, called a bloomin' idiot, and otherwise insulted, the chased off the boards and banned for life. You guys are getting way to touchey-feely. Seriously, the Mini is a decent cheap semi-auto. Reliability is almost a non-issue if you stick with above mentioned Ruger or PMI mags. factory Rugers can be quite pricey and PMIs are priced about $25-$30 apiece. Accuracy is pretty good for the first 4 or 5 shots then the barrel heats up and the groups go to caca. Stay away from the ranch variant. I would advise spending an extra couple hundred and just getting an AR but some people just have to have a Mini.
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 7:30:16 PM EST
I used to own a Mini 14 and they were ok. They are not very accurate and I really don't think they are that dependable unless you buy the good mags. Stay away from USA mags the always jam up. If you are going for a shooter that you don't care what you put through it I would buy one but if you want a quality rifle I would go with a AR-15 they are by far superior rifles to the Mini 14.
Link Posted: 9/26/2001 7:38:42 PM EST
Originally Posted By HighCaliber: How dependable is a mini 14? What are there faults and how much do mags cost? Are they considered an assault rifle (at least by government standards)?
View Quote
If you are interested in a LNIB Mini 14 with the peep sights (not ranch) let me know. I have one for sale. Contact me off the forum schapman@sisna.com
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:02:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/27/2001 8:08:07 AM EST by LARRYG]
Originally Posted By HighCaliber: After discovering that Ruger aided in the drafting of the Crime bill on the Sig Forum I have decided that my money can be better spent elsewhere. Does anyone know anything more about the part they played in that whole fiasco?
View Quote
This is BS. He voluntarily reduced the capacity of his mags to try to appease the assholes and found out it did not work. Since then he has contributed millions in defense of the Second. How about some documentation that aided in the drafting of this bill. Others make remarks similar, but where is the proof? Then, after making a statement of fact, you ask for information on something you have stated as fact. Apparently, you don't have the facts, just someone's opinion. There always has to be one to throw this crap into a thread. The Mini is the best alternative for Kali, I think. I would rather have it than the bastardized AR's being made for Kali. As for the magazines, the Ramline combo mags work great in the Mini, but not worth a damn in an AR.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:12:43 AM EST
Originally Posted By 455SD: Geez!!! What has happened to this forum? In the good 'ol days if you even mentioned the mini-14 you would be drawn, quartered, spit on, called a bloomin' idiot, and otherwise insulted, the chased off the boards and banned for life. You guys are getting way to touchey-feely. Seriously, the Mini is a decent cheap semi-auto. Reliability is almost a non-issue if you stick with above mentioned Ruger or PMI mags. factory Rugers can be quite pricey and PMIs are priced about $25-$30 apiece. Accuracy is pretty good for the first 4 or 5 shots then the barrel heats up and the groups go to caca. Stay away from the ranch variant. I would advise spending an extra couple hundred and just getting an AR but some people just have to have a Mini.
View Quote
AWWW....we`re just a closer knit bunch nowdays!........I have my share of a-r rifles, but I enjoy my MINI-30...a lot...it runs all the time...it replaced a pretty decent sks..(still a pos) and there is no comparison.....ar`s are serious----mini is a lot of fun......[smoke]
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:18:11 AM EST
I owned a Stainless Mini and is was a really nice gun. Never had a problem with it ever. I dont know how accurate it was because I just shot up watermelons and stuff. Nice gun though...that being said, after much reading etc, I am looking to buying my first AR. But I'll have another mini one day.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:22:06 AM EST
I bought my mini 14 right before y2k. i love it. i have the stainless ranch model with a factory synthetic stock. i think the synthetic helps the accuracy a little. just for kicks, i had a 6-24 target scope on it for a while. it shot great: 1 inch 5 shot groups were common with good ammo! i may just be lucky though. reliabiltiy is great even w/ USA mags (once again, maybe I'm lucky). they are a nice alternative to an AK.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:43:14 AM EST
Why is it reccommended to stay away from the ranch model??
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 9:02:44 AM EST
I have a stainless ranch rifle in .223 and it is the biggest POS in my collection. Even my beat up old M-44 inspires more confidence of hitting the target. My Ruger is absolutely the least accurate weapon I've ever owned. The lousy little rear sight doesn't have enough range of movement to permit moving the group where it needs to be. My opinion about the gun is so negative that I consider shooting it to be a waste of ammunition. Other than the accuracy, it is very reliable when it comes to cycling rounds in and empties out.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 9:53:24 AM EST
Originally Posted By LARRYG: This is BS. He voluntarily reduced the capacity of his mags to try to appease the assholes and found out it did not work. Since then he has contributed millions in defense of the Second. How about some documentation that aided in the drafting of this bill. Others make remarks similar, but where is the proof?
View Quote
Ok, here's a link to some facts: [url]http://www.gunlinks.net/bbs/index.cgi?read=3285[/url] It's an article by neal knox, who many people respect as a gun writer and supporter of the 2nd. Some quotes: "Reasoning that the public was probably more concerned about the high volume of fire which Purdy was able to generate, than the speed at which he delivered same, Papa Bill proposed that Congress enact legislation limiting the capacity of magazines to fifteen³ (15!) rounds. " Something written by bill ruger himself: "The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining 'assault rifles' and 'semi-automatic rifles' is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives." So according to bill ruger, you wouldn't even have pre-ban high caps. If he had his way, you'd have to turn them in, or be a criminal. Little bill continued... "The possession of any 'extra capacity' magazine in combination with the possession of a semi-automatic firearm, other than .22 caliber Rimfire, should be regulated. 'Extra capacity magazines' are detachable magazines which hold in excess of 10(!) centerfire rifle cartridges or shotgun shells, or detachable pistol magazines which hold in excess of 15 centerfire cartridges." So rimfire wouldn't be affected. And what is the most popular rimfire rifle??? Why, the ruger 10/22 of course! And pistols would be limited to 15 rounds. Gee, who had a pistol that could hold more than 15 rounds in 1989? Why, bill's biggest threat at the time, Glock! How kind of bill to protect his ass while at the same time hampering his competitors. Back to Neal Knox's recount of the story: "What I know is that about 9 p.m. the night before Bill sent a letter to certain members of Congress calling for a ban on high-capacity magazines he called me, wanting me to push such a ban. His opening words, after citing the many federal, state and local bills to ban detachable magazine semi-autos, were 'I want to save our little gun' -- which he later defined as the Mini-14 and the Mini-30. I'm not ascribing Bill's motives as 'expedient from a business standpoint;' Bill did." And finally, something from the end of the article: "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun." "I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock." "I see nothing wrong with waiting periods." And, sadly, that too must be part of the Ruger legacy. So, larryG, your position is complete BS. Ruger is a sellout of the highest order.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 10:06:28 AM EST
Owned a Mini for a number of years. Eventually sold it to help finance my AR. Decent little rifle provided you realize its limits. Accuracy beyond 100 yards may be hit or miss. Remember its a really skinny little barrel. They can be fussy about magazines. Trigger pulls are adequate for a semi auto. For the money they are a worthwhile tool, tho with the price of AR's coming down they're not quite as competitive as they once were. And I tend to avoid politics in my choice fo firearms.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 10:22:35 AM EST
I like Mini-14 riles so much that at one time I owned like 6 of them. I still have 3 of them in my inventory. They are not perfect but still damn good rifles. Generally they are very reliable rifle and overall I would even dare to say they are more reliable than AR's IF you use good quality magazines. With factory and PMI mags they are very reliable but with Triple-K or USA mags they sometime don't work too well. As for accuracy, typically you get 4-5" at 100 yards. Some rifles will give you 2-3" but thats above average.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 11:00:57 AM EST
[b]Originally posted by Unrepentant_Sinner: Why is it reccommended to stay away from the ranch model??[/b] The reason I don't like the ranch model is the POS rear fold down sight. It does have the neat Ruger integral scope mounts but then again I've never expected my Mini-14's to be tack drivers. The standard iron sights are good enough for my purposes. (still POS but better than the ranch sights) For $400 or less (used)they can't be beat for knock around, work EVERY time weapons.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 12:30:38 PM EST
The whole point of the ranch rifle is the fact that it is designed for use of a scope. the litte crappy sights are just backups. As for accuracy, if the sights suck and you're not using a scope, how do you expect to shoot better than 5" groups at 100 yards? I'm not saying the ruger is a tackdriver by any means, but, for the money, it is very accurate. Just use a scope if you want the most from the mini. Last deer season, I took a head shot at a deer 75 yards away. I was using a 3x9x40 scope. the shot was dead on target and the deer dropped immidiatly from the cns shot. It was THE fastest kill I have ever made on a deer. If my rifle only shot 5moa, it would have not been able to do that.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 7:12:55 PM EST
I understand what Rugers intent was with the Ranch Rifle but IMHO it doesn't make too much sense to scope an inherently inaccurate weapon. If I want consistent accuracy I'll use an AR. If I want a very inexpensive rugged reliable little rifle I'll take a Mini every time. I keep mine around mostly for self defense and if I can put all my shots on a pie plate sized target at 100 yards I'm good to go.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 7:41:16 PM EST
mine is very reliable and fun to shoot its mot as accurate as my ar but is good for a mini 14 some just are more accurate than others.It goes along time between cleaning as it has mostly become my plinkin toy or bump fire gun.As far as mags go i have the pmi and factory these are the only way to go trust me(have heard good things about thermolds to but havent tried them myself.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 7:44:36 PM EST
The Ruger Mini-14 is kinda the [b]"Charlie Brown of .223 rifles..."[/b]
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:21:14 PM EST
I'll chime in here since I USED to own a mini14. I have little to no respect for this gun. I had mine scoped and it really wasn't accurate past 75yds. At 75yds i could put them all in the bull, but at 100yds they where just all on the paper. I shudder to think of anything past 100yds. My SAR 1 shoots ten times better than my mini could ever hope to shoot. Not to mention I dont have to pay 35+ for a decent mag. 10 mags for 60 bucks. Can't beat that. Now on to the looks. I wont get started on the looks. Having said that I sold mine for an AR and I never regretted it. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Flame on. -freinds don't let friends buy mini 14's Private Joker
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 8:47:58 PM EST
Come to think of I was way to nice with my last thread. To tell the truth I wish I never bought that rifle in the first place. If you think you can make this gun look as cool as a AR you are in denial because there is no way a mini 14 comes close to the looks of the AR. The mini 14 is a gun on PMS sometimes it shoots good most times it shots worse then a AK. The Mini 14 is about as reliable as a Fiero. By the time you get a mini 14 accurate you could have bought a AR that is still more accurate and it looks a lot cooler oh and did I mention that you can get GI AR mags for half the cost of a semi reliable mini 14 mag. In closing the Mini 14 is good for wasting ammo that could be used in a AR.
Link Posted: 9/27/2001 9:20:34 PM EST
Well, since everyone else has offered up an opinion, so will I. The Mini-14 is a great rifle, course, it's terribly inaccurate, but it works great as a bat....Nothing like beating the tar out of a giggling adversary with the buttstock of a Mini-14.[;)]
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 7:42:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2001 7:42:56 AM EST by LARRYG]
Originally Posted By schnacke: So, larryG, your position is complete BS. Ruger is a sellout of the highest order.
View Quote
Read the entire article. It backs up what I said
He and I have disagreed over gun laws many times for 31 years, but I'm thankful that in recent years he's taken the Second Amendment to heart, and has done much to support the strong legislative and political actions being taken by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (which this week sent out a huge mailing to hunters endorsing Bush and pro-gun candidates).
View Quote
and
Papa Bill Ruger speaks on gun control "A constant problem the industry has is that you can't compromise with gun prohibitionists."
View Quote
As I said, he tried to appease the assholes early on, but has realized the error of his ways. I did not attack you personally, so don't do the same to me Based on these assertions, Glock, Beretta, and others are sellouts as well if you apply the same reasoning to the recent Paris conference.
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 7:59:04 AM EST
Only gun that I would sell.
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 8:54:48 AM EST
I have a Mini-30 and 4 AR variants. I've been trying to sell the Mini for about 4 years (although not very hard) and I'm starting to wonder what my next AR variant's going to be (LEGP?). My mini used to disassemble itself when firing from the bench. Want to imagine how accurate you can shoot a gun when you're wondering if the trigger group is going to come out the bottom when you fire it? Then when you get that fixed, spend a bunch of money on a scope and mount, carefully install it, get the best match-type ammo you can make and then go to the range and squeak out maybe 3" at 100 yards, that so-called "cheap" rifle starts to look like a total waste of money. Thank God I never got serious about buying mags for it, though. There's no question in my mind that Bill Ruger mis-used his position as CEO of Ruger to seriously damage my 2nd Amendment rights trying to protect his company. I don't mind him trying to protect his company, which he should, but to try to appease the anti-gunners was very ill-considered. Ever since then, I will not buy any Ruger products, even though that new .44 Deer Rifle is really really tempting. As someone else said above, this is a very negative part of his otherwise stellar legacy. My .02. Merlin
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 9:11:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By LARRYG: Read the entire article. It backs up what I said As I said, he tried to appease the assholes early on, but has realized the error of his ways. I did not attack you personally, so don't do the same to me Based on these assertions, Glock, Beretta, and others are sellouts as well if you apply the same reasoning to the recent Paris conference.
View Quote
And what you did say previously:
This is BS. He voluntarily reduced the capacity of his mags to try to appease the assholes and found out it did not work. Since then he has contributed millions in defense of the Second. How about some documentation that aided in the drafting of this bill. Others make remarks similar, but where is the proof?
View Quote
Aparently you and I aren't reading the same article. He delivered proposed legislation to members of congress to outlaw magazines over 15 rounds. Not just limit the sale, but MAKE THEM ILLEGAL TO POSSESS. While doing this, he tried to exempt rimfire guns, which would have benefited him greatly, since the 10/22 is the most popular rimfire rifle. At the time this was happening, ruger was losing ground to glock in the pistol market. One of the features of the glock was the magazine capacity of their pistols. By artificially limiting pistol magazines to 15 rounds, bill ruger would cut down on his new competitor without having to spend one dime on R&D for his own pistols. So ruger push for legislation to accomplish the following: 1. Outlaw all magazines in excess of 15 rounds, making millions of us criminals, unless we voluntarily turned in our high-caps. 2. Exempt his precious 10/22 from the high cap ban 3. Cripple his competitor, glock, in the process. Legislation modeled on his proposal was introduced, but did not pass in 1989. We all know similar, but even more restrictive legislation was passed in 1994. Bill probably was pissed that they didn't exempt his favorite child, the .22, from the ban. Maybe getting screwed made him see the light. Unfortunately, he didn't care about other gun makers or gun owners getting screwed at the time. He didn't just make a little error in judgement. He helped the other side in a big way. He did it to save his own ass and hurt his competitors. Too bad for me I'm not a cheap whore who can feel placated by a few million being given to the NRA after the fact. I didn't attack you, I attacked your position. Unfortunately, you where the one who attacked highcaliber, a new member:
Then, after making a statement of fact, you ask for information on something you have stated as fact. Apparently, you don't have the facts, just someone's opinion. There always has to be one to throw this crap into a thread.
View Quote
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 12:51:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2001 12:51:35 PM EST by LARRYG]
Do you own any Colt's or S&W's? Who you calling a cheap whore? I'm an expensive whore.[:D]
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 1:59:08 PM EST
Larry, I'm not calling you a whore, cheap or otherwise. I'm just saying that bill ruger giving several million dollars doesn't buy my support. And I don't own any S&W or colts. I might be a pre-sellout used s&w, but I like the look of taurus revolvers better. If I ever get into cowboy action shooting, I'm going to have to find an alternative to colt. However, in my safe there is a ruger MK1 .22 pistol. It's my dad's that I'm borrowing for a while. I dont' feel guilty about using it, since I believe it's even older than me, and was made before the sellout of 89 (although I'd have to look up ruger's role in the 68 GCA before I make up my mind about that).
Link Posted: 9/28/2001 2:06:58 PM EST
I don't buy rugers anymore for the reasons that have been pointed out. I don't buy S&W either.
Top Top