Armory Sponsor
Posted: 5/14/2023 9:31:24 AM EDT
|
Let's set this old myth to bed once and for all. I went to Ruger.com yesterday and located the Customer Service section. There, I scrolled down to the "FAQ" section, and clicked on "Rifles" in the drop-down Menu. The first question asked was about Mini-14 ammo. Ruger.com Customer Service It reads as follows (direct quote): "Q. Can I shoot 5.56 NATO ammunition in my Mini-14® or Ranch Rifle? With the exception of the Mini-14® Target Rifle, which accepts only .223 Rem. ammunition, .223 Rem. and 5.56 NATO can be used in all Mini-14® rifles and Ranch Rifles. Please note that "Military Surplus" 5.56mm NATO can vary greatly in its quality and consistency." I understand that there are Mini-14s chambered for ctgs different from .223/5.56 (.222, .300BO, etc.) but these are clearly marked for the intended ctg, and using incorrect ammo in such cases is neglect/abuse. Let's put this persistent rumor to rest. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
The Ruger Mini 14 was designed to fire 5.56 or 223 Remington. Perfect Union is the go to forum for all things Mini 14. The receiver is marked 223 but the chamber is fine with 5.56. I had an early Stainless 181 series and was around several early GB (government barrel) models shot with M-193 and they were gtg. Just figure out what twist your mini 14 barrel is equipped. My early 181 series had 1:10 twist. Ruger has sold Mini 14’s with 1:10, 1:7 and 1:9 twist. https://www.perfectunion.com/forums/tips-and-tricks.165/ Here is a link to an old post from perfect union forum asking the same question. https://www.perfectunion.com/threads/can-i-shoot-5-56-in-my-mini-14-580-series.93464/ I have an interesting magazine article from Soldier of Fortune all about the Mini 14 which was published in December 1980. I can remember going into a gun store in the late 70’s and they had an SP-1 Colt AR-15. The price was $800 for the Colt which was a very good price at the time and the SP-1 were not common in my area at that time. The Mini 14 was readily available for a much more affordable $350-$400. I have this article saved as a PDF. I could email it to you or can find it online if so inclined. The article was written by H. C. Davis and has several pictures. You can PM if interested. |
|
TYVM for offering the article. You can probably IM me with a link or the whole article. In any event, I hope the seemingly never-ending question about Mini-14 ammo suitability is FINALLY laid to rest by comments directly from Ruger., quoted above. I encourage folks who encounter this question on various forums to maintain a "mental note" about the definitive info/answer from Ruger.com, and where it came from--Ruger itself. Forget about me or this forum; I suggest showing folks the linked Ruger.com pages for the definitive answer, straight from Ruger. Let's put this ongoing issue to rest. Please. All best wishes! |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
Well........ I do have a couple of boxes of IIRC PMC TAC-X 75 grain bullets marked clearly on the box NOT FOR USE IN MINI 14 RIFLES. I'll try to get a pic of them and post them up  
|
One well at a time, Drill Baby Drill!
If you need more than 8 rounds in a 1911 to solve your problem, you need friends with rifles.
I don't need your PERMISSION in order to voice my OPINION
If you need more than 8 rounds in a 1911 to solve your problem, you need friends with rifles.
I don't need your PERMISSION in order to voice my OPINION
|
Originally Posted By 44-40pro: Well........ I do have a couple of boxes of IIRC PMC TAC-X 75 grain bullets marked clearly on the box NOT FOR USE IN MINI 14 RIFLES. I'll try to get a pic of them and post them up I suspect this ammo was marked that way because of the Mini 14 barrel twist. Very few Mini 14’s have 1:7 twist, most have 1:10 or 1:9. |
|
Originally Posted By raf: TYVM for offering the article. You can probably IM me with a link or the whole article. In any event, I hope the seemingly never-ending question about Mini-14 ammo suitability is FINALLY laid to rest by comments directly from Ruger., quoted above. I encourage folks who encounter this question on various forums to maintain a "mental note" about the definitive info/answer from Ruger.com, and where it came from--Ruger itself. Forget about me or this forum; I suggest showing folks the linked Ruger.com pages for the definitive answer, straight from Ruger. Let's put this ongoing issue to rest. Please. All best wishes! I sent you an IM plus an email with the Soldier of Fortune Article PDF. |
|
Originally Posted By VASCAR2: I suspect this ammo was marked that way because of the Mini 14 barrel twist. Very few Mini 14’s have 1:7 twist, most have 1:10 or 1:9. Without doing any research into it, I figured it was a matter of the 75 grain bullets perhaps being a bit too long to play nice with the original 223 Rem freebore/leade dimension. Down the rabbit hole............ |
One well at a time, Drill Baby Drill!
If you need more than 8 rounds in a 1911 to solve your problem, you need friends with rifles.
I don't need your PERMISSION in order to voice my OPINION
If you need more than 8 rounds in a 1911 to solve your problem, you need friends with rifles.
I don't need your PERMISSION in order to voice my OPINION
|
Originally Posted By 44-40pro: Without doing any research into it, I figured it was a matter of the 75 grain bullets perhaps being a bit too long to play nice with the original 223 Rem freebore/leade dimension. Down the rabbit hole............ Originally Posted By 44-40pro: Originally Posted By VASCAR2: I suspect this ammo was marked that way because of the Mini 14 barrel twist. Very few Mini 14's have 1:7 twist, most have 1:10 or 1:9. Without doing any research into it, I figured it was a matter of the 75 grain bullets perhaps being a bit too long to play nice with the original 223 Rem freebore/leade dimension. Down the rabbit hole............ Some background info about the Wylde chamber and bullets suitable for it: Link |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By Gunner226: The owners manual that came with my mini 14 clearly stated that 5.56 is safe to use. They've said that for decades. This should never have even been debatable. Just another example of gun-counter "wisdom." Having RTFM, I (and many others, such as yourself) were satisfied that shooting 5.56 NATO in the Mini-14 was acceptable. It may be that others not having done so were confused. Hopefully the direct link to Ruger.com FAQ above will help dispel this persistent myth. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
The simple answer to this recurring question is to consider that Ruger has put in writing that their Minis, except the discontinued target model, are safe to shoot higher pressure, 5.56 NATO ammo. Further, Ruger has a team of lawyers who's primary job is to keep Ruger and it's employees from doing or saying something that will get them sued. Finally, Ruger CS has repeatedly stated that 5.56 NATO ammo is safe to shoot in their Minis, except for their discontinued target model, but that they don't have a Wylde chamber. I talked to Ruger's Tech Support in 2015 and asked if their chamber spec was a Wylde chamber and they said it wasn't but that the lead of their chamber is longer than spec for a .223 which allows one to shoot 5.56 NATO level ammo. It sounds to me that this is simply a variation of the Wylde chamber, enough so that Ruger doesn't have to call it a Wylde chamber and therefore pay royalties to Wylde for their design and nothing more. |
|
Originally Posted By COSteve: The simple answer to this recurring question is to consider that Ruger has put in writing that their Minis, except the discontinued target model, are safe to shoot higher pressure, 5.56 NATO ammo. Further, Ruger has a team of lawyers who's primary job is to keep Ruger and it's employees from doing or saying something that will get them sued. Finally, Ruger CS has repeatedly stated that 5.56 NATO ammo is safe to shoot in their Minis, except for their discontinued target model, but that they don't have a Wylde chamber. I talked to Ruger's Tech Support in 2015 and asked if their chamber spec was a Wylde chamber and they said it wasn't but that the lead of their chamber is longer than spec for a .223 which allows one to shoot 5.56 NATO level ammo. It sounds to me that this is simply a variation of the Wylde chamber, enough so that Ruger doesn't have to call it a Wylde chamber and therefore pay royalties to Wylde for their design and nothing more. I can't see any major manufacture making a .223 rifle for the masses that would be unsafe to shoot with 5.56. |
|
That bit from Ruger has been out for several years now. This topic STILL comes up all the time. Quite frankly I think the “confusion” largely comes from the typical internet nonsense-self proclaimed “experts” making a big to-do over nothing. So unfortunately, this issue probably isn’t going to be “put to bed” in our lifetime. |
|
Originally Posted By VASCAR2: I suspect this ammo was marked that way because of the Mini 14 barrel twist. Very few Mini 14’s have 1:7 twist, most have 1:10 or 1:9. Ruger used 1-7 twist in the Mini 14 from mid 1987 through mid 1996. That’s about 1/3rd of the combined Mini 14 and Mini 14 Ranch Rifle production. http://sunflowerammo.blogspot.com/2012/11/ruger-mini-1430-barrel-twist-rates.html |
Armory Sponsor