I found a series 184 Mini-14 in a local gun shop. The stock had been stripped and refinished and while it was nicely refinished it was very birch looking.  The barrel had however been cut to 16 1/4" and was very nicely crowned and it had a Tech Sights RR200 rear sight on it.  The bore was excellent, the blue was better than 95%, and I had the impression it had been shot very little.   Given that it had 2 of the more common accuracy mods for a pre-580 series Mini 14 and it was priced very nice I took it home.

I added a 4" Accu Strut and found it shot quite well with the Accu Strut reducing the group size to around 2.75-3.0 MOA with M193 clone hand loads using 55 gr Hornady FMJ BTs and BLC-2.  Vertical stringing was the primary accuracy issue as the horizontal dispersion wasn't bad at all.



I tried a slip over flash hider as the early Mini 14s often have reduced barrel harmonics with some weight a the muzzle.  I found that while it did reduce the group size my almost half by reducing the vertical dispersion, it also lowered the point of aim about 14 MOA, and moved it further to the left to the extreme range of adjustment for the rear sight. It also looked bad.   Consequently I took it back off and re-installed the shorter sight pin - and then discovered the rear sight now moved side to side a bit if pushed hard - about 8 MOA worth.  That explained the greenish crud that came out with the cross pin.

Whoever drilled the shortened barrel for the rear sight both got it slightly over clocked and drilled it with an 1/8" bit rather than using one size smaller and then up drilling to the final dimension, with the result that the channel for the pin in the barrel was over sized.  They apparently used some 620 lock tight to eliminate the play.   That may have explained why the former owner turned it into money.  One thing about pre-580 series Mini-14s, if they shoot well people rarely sell them, so if you see one for sale, accuracy is instantly suspect.  In any event it was an incentive to add a Choate M14 style flash hider and front sight, to both fix the loose front sight issue and to keep chasing the vertical stringing problem.

I still had the birch stock to refinish to something closer to walnut stained birch, and I wanted a wood handguard as I liked the look of the 180 and early 181 series Mini-14s.  In the process of looking at wood handguard options, I discovered a Revolution walnut stock and handguard on the Accuracy Systems site.  I ordered it, but also ordered a Choate ventilated handguard as well, partly due to concerns for heat retention with the wood handguard, and partly because with the Accu Strut and M14 style sight and flash hider it was starting to look distinctly M14ish anyway.   I discovered Tech Sight sold a 1" version of the GI cotton web sling so it came my way as well.

I also added a .045" gas port bushing to correct the over gassed nature of the Mini-14, and I added a shock buffer, both intended to improve the potential for the parts to come back to rest more consistently after each shot.

It all led to this:



Moving onward to the range, my plan was to adjust the flash hider fore and aft over about a half inch range, between full aft, and the point where the channel for the old front sight pin was exposed in order to use the mass of the flash hider to tune the barrel harmonics.

I started with the flash hider as far forward as it would go while still covering the old sight pin channel.  It shot about 6" low, which was consistent with the effects of the extra weight from the former slip over flash hider I had tried before, but less extreme.  I started adjusting the elevation after the first group, however, accuracy was actually slightly worse than without the flash suppressor installed, so I didn't bother with the 4th group.  The three groups I did shoot measured:

1.43"
1.59"
1.80"

That's a 1.61" average at 50 yards, which works out to 3.0 MOA.  Not horrible, but not quite as good as the 2 3/4 MOA I got with the Accu Strut and without the flash hider installed.

Next, I moved the flash suppressor all the way back to see how it did at the other extreme.  I shot all four groups and after the first group I decided to finish adjusting the elevation and then start adjusting/rotating the flash suppressor and front sight to center the group on target with the rear sight windage mechanically centered.  The four groups measured:

.705"
.669"
.578"
.639"

That's an average of .648" at 50 yards, which works out to 1.24 MOA.  At that point I heard Doug Marcaida in my head saying "IT WILL SHOOT".

That 1 1/4 MOA accuracy is doubly impressive given that I developed this particular 55 gr FMJ load to shoot well in my 20" 1-12 twist Colt SP1 and my M16A1 clone using a 20" 1-12 twist police take-off M16A1 upper half. It only shoots 1.5 MOA in both those rifles.  Apparently, it's a great match for the faster 1-10 rifling twist, combined with the lower 16" barrel velocity.

Now, I only shot 3 round groups, out of consideration for keeping the barrel from getting hot given that I only had an hour or so of usable light for the range session. But it's still much better accuracy than I expected and they were all decently round groups with no vertical stringing, which was the issue before I installed the flash suppressor.   IMHO the Choate flash suppressor was money well spent.

So I quit while I was ahead and decided any further farting around with using the flash suppressor to tune the barrel would be a waste of time, as it was already shooting 3/4 MOA better than I hoped. Could it do better at some intermediate positon?  I doubt it, and I don't care enough to try.

The gas bushing seems to help the accuracy, and in particular the vertical stringing, but I noted when I added the shock buffer, the brass ejection changed from a nice pile at about 1:30 to more of a scattering from 2:00 to 6:00.  I suspect it's an artifact of the reduced slide over run and less consistency in bolt velocity when the ejector kicks the case out of the bolt face.  I may do some comparative testing with and without the buffer.

This target gives a good comparison of the groups sizes with the flash suppressor in the "fore" (taped) versus "aft" (non-taped) position on the barrel.  Huge difference.  I liked the looks with a 1/2" more barrel behind the flash suppressor, but I can't argue with the superiority of the aft position in terms of group sizes.



The end result is that with about $800 into this project (I should have just found a 12 step program instead), I now have a series 184 Mini 14 that shoots 1 1/4 MOA 3 shot groups, and will probably stay under 2 MOA with 5 shot groups (more testing to come), and it looks a lot more like a Mini-M14 than the Mini-14 ever did.  It gained .6 pounds and the barrel and flash hider are 19" long in total,  but the extra weight and more weight forward balance improve it's off hand shooting.  It is all in all a very fun little carbine, especially on steel plates at 200-250 yards.

You know they make 20rd straight mags

That's what the Mini-14 should always have been.  

I have one on the way.

Nice project, I have something very similar up my sleeve I hope to start working on one day soon. I have always loved mini-14s.

They look like this:

Where are you guys getting the 20 round straight mags?

I like a Mini 14. Never owned one. Only ever fired one. Id like to have one but don't know which series would be better to purchase or how much to pay. Occasionally one will pop up for sale locally. If I were to sell my WASR and 2 SKSs I may look a little harder at them.

I want this in my life.

From Ruger?

I think CDNN is a primary source for the straight mags. I have an AR and a mini.   I love both, but every time I pick up my mini, I feel like I've been cheating on it with my AR.  It just feels better in my hands than my AR.

Nice job, OP.  I'm off to look at mini accessories now....

Yes, the company that makes them is called "Original Equipment".  They look almost exactly like the original straight 20 round magazines that Ruger made for the 180 series Mini-14 and the popular rumor is that these are done on the same tooling.

I have a 10 round magazine from Original Equipment, and it is well made but....

1) the right hand feed lip needed some tweaking as it was bent too much; and
2) the follower is a bit weak and the rounds tend to nose dive.

So...they might need to tweaking of the feed lips and they benefit from a Ruger magazine follower.

Here's a quick and dirty run down of the major changes.

The 180 series was the first and was introduced in 1973 (but I don't think any actually were delivered until 1974) and was in production into 1977.  The 180 series used a roller on the bolt, like the M-14, while the 181 series and all subsequent Mini-14s have the M1 Garand style roller-less bolt.  The 180 series also had an external bolt stop, and used a wood handguard with a spring steel clip across the top, like the M1 Garand.

The 181 series was in fact a major redesign that deleted the roller on the bolt, changed the design of the receiver and bolt stop, and made a number of other detail changes, such as different sling swivels.  The early 181 series had a wooden handguard, but it no longer had the Garand style retaining clip, but instead used a U shaped clip on the underside of the handguard. Ruger switched to a larger plastic handguard with a metal heat shield that also covered the operating rod in the middle of 181 series production.  The 181 series also saw the introduction of stainless steel Mini-14s.

The next major change was with the 187 series, which Ruger called the Ranch Rifle.  It was introduced in 1982 to address demand for an easier means to mount a scope.   In addition to integral Ruger bases for Ruger rings, the rear sight was reduced to a simple flip up aperture, which is mostly a regular 10/22 barrel mounted rear sight with a stamped steel aperture on it and placed on the rear of the receiver.   It's not much of a sight.   The changes also included a redesigned bolt stop that also served as the ejector, replacing the plunger style ejector in the bolt that had been used previously.  Given the Ruger's normal over gassed condition, these newer rifles throw brass about 20 feet, but also throw it out more to the side so it won't hit a scope.   You can however install a smaller gas bushing to slow the slide down and reduce the ejection distance.  Production of the Ranch Rifle continued along side the Mini-14 through 2004 and ended with the 197 series.

In 2005 Ruger re-tooled and made some significant changes to the design in the process.  These new 580 series rifles had tighter tolerances  and a winged rear peep sight along with a winged (3-blade) front sight on the end of the barrel.  The early 580 series have pencil barrels but at some point in the 580 series production Ruger introduced a heavier tapered barrel.  The initial results were spotty but by 2007 or 2008 Ruger had them de-bugged and they have been pretty consistently producing 2 MOA accuracy out of the box, which is good for a stock Mini-14 or Ranch Rifle.  The heavier barrel has helped reduce the heat sensitivity which tends to cause vertical stringing in a Mini-14 or Ranch Rifle.

Rifling twist was also changed over the years:

The first 10,000 or so 180 series rifles have 1-12" twist.
The rest of the 180 series through the 184 series, and the early to mid production 185 series all have 1-10" twist
The late 185 series and low 186 series rifles have 1-7" twist; and
The rest of the 186 series and everything after the 186 series have 1-9" twist.

There have been some variations over the years as well:
- The "GB" model was an early offering intended to target the law enforcement and military markets and it used a front sight and bayonet lug mounted in the middle of the barrel, and had a flash suppressor that supported the ring in the bayonet.

- The AC-556 was a similar selective fire model for police and military use.
- The Target Model was introduced in 2007 and was chambered in .223 rather than 5.56mm and had a heavier barrel with a barrel tuner.  These tend to be one MOA rifles out of the box, but they didn't stay in production long.
- The Tactical model came out in 2009 with a 16" heavy barrel.

You can look here to see the various dates when the series numbers changed as well as what series numbers applied to what models (Mini-14, Mini-30, etc). It will also let you place the delivery date within a year or two in most cases.

http://ruger.com/service/productHistory.html

------

In terms of desirability, it depends on what you want.

The first 1000 or so 180 series Mini -14s were produced in Southport Connecticut and they are desirable because they are rare.  The problem is that Ruger no longer supports the 180 series, given that there isn't a high degree of parts compatibility with the rest of the Mini -14s, so if you have one and break something, you've got major problems.  Consequently the non-Southport 180s tend to sell for less than the 181-186 series.

The "standard" Mini-14s - the 181-186 series (and later but identically configured 196-197 series rifles) are popular with Mini-14 fans who like the earlier look with the sort of Garand/M14 looking rear sight, and the non scope based receiver.

The 187-188 and 195-197 series Ranch Rifles are more popular with people who want to put a scope on one.

The 580-583 series with the heavier tapered barrels are regarded as being more accurate out of the box.   But as noted in the previous post, you can get the pencil barrel Mini 14s and Ranch Rifles to shoot in the 1.5-2.0 MOA with a few modifications.

Fair market value for one in excellent condition will range from $500 to $650.  You'll find a few bargains for down into the $450 range now and then, but I would not pay more than $650 for a used Mini 14, given that you can get a new one starting for around $730, and you can still find some old stock Target models for around $700.  The exception here of course is if you really like the early 181-186 Mini 14s, then it's worth what ever you think it's worth to you.  The new Tactical models seem to sell for around $800.

I have a photo folder into which I save pics of exceptionally cool guns. That pic of your Mini-M14 is now copied and saved!

That is a neat looking rifle.  I've got an old blue one that would definitely benefit from the same mods.  Good job!

Always got a kick out of the Ruger full page ad "World's Most Expensive Plinker".
My first one was like $150 bucks plus part of the shipping and $5 dealer fee.  The
home based dealer bought 6 of them and spread the cost out.  This was back when you could find 10/22's
for $59.  Remington 788's with 4X Tasco Scope for less than a C note!

It would shoot about 3 MOA some Sierra 55gr HPBT handloads with open sights.  With PMC ball, it was worse.  Then got an SK scope mount
that was sort of an abortion.  Finally had receiver drilled and tapped and made it a solid proposition.
Then the gun would do about 2 MOA with 4X Leupold.  It would chuck the brass!  The range had tall grass around
benches!

Ah the good old days!

I finally shortened my walnut buttstock by 1" like I did with the birch one when I set up my 583 Series Mini about 2 1/2 years ago to reduce the Heel to Aperture distance from the Ruger produced 15" to the 14" that is common for Garands, M1 Carbines, M14/M1As and M16/AR15s.  Why Ruger makes the buttstock over length compared to other mil rifles is a mystery to me as the extra length makes using the peep sights they way they were intended a pain in the neck, literally.  Anyway, as you can see below, it's now consistent with my M1A's length and a great way to use the irons.



I'm still on the fence on a flash hider for it.   I've got a Choate front sight/FH combo that I've thinned the front blade to .050" wide like I have on mine now but I'm just not sure whether I want it or not.  I mocked up a picture of what my rifle would look like with the Choate on when I still had the birch stock on it but I'm just not settled on it yet.



The M14 style FH isn't an option as it's just made for the pencil barreled .560" barrels, not the thicker .625" ones like I have.  In addition, as the FH portion is a full 3" long like the M14/M1A's, I think on my full length barrel, it would be too long.  If they made it with a 2" FH, I think it would be perfect but no one does.

In a perfect world, I think this size would be a good fit but I don't have the means to make one so I have to use what's available.

I don't think the Browning / M14 style flash hider is too long for the Mini 14:




But between the longer length of pull of the newer Mini 14 stocks and the 18.5" barrel, my 18.5" Mini-14 looks a lot longer than my 16" Mini-14:

After seeing your rifle, I kinda want one. For some reason lately, I really dig the idea of an under the radar rifle. This looks like it should meet my requirement. Does it matter which series mini I use as a starting point?

Joe

The 581 series/the ones with the thicker taper barrel are the ones that shoot well.  The old ones....don't.

Full disclosure leads me to admit that most all the Ruger rifles I have laid hands on were disappointing performers and I am jaded .

I guess the OP is having fun and enjoying his project but it sure seems to be a whole lot of effort and likely some expense without great promise

It's a pretty gun, though.  Slap a 5 round flush-fit mag in there and the liberals don't even know it's a semi-auto.

As has been said above, while that was true, it's not now.  The newer 58X series with the thicker barrels and redesigned ejectors don't suffer from the ills of the past.  And, with a few tweaks that will cost you about what a decent trigger for your AR costs, you can have a Mini-14 set up that produces right at 1MOA performance with good ammo.  Much like a NM M1A, a set up Mini is a joy to shoot.  I use mine to shoot bowling pins at 200yds.  While they are tall at 15", only a small part of them 2MOA wide so they are deceptively difficult targets but a bunch of fun.  My Mini and my handloads do the job on them and now that it's finished, it's a joy.

You are correct that the pre-580 series needed some work to achieve accuracy comparable to their contemporaries like the Colt SP1, but as Steve notes, that's not the case today as Ruger put a bit of effort into re-tooling and improving the design to shoot at or below 2 MOA out of the box.

Still, I like the older Min-14s and whether it's a waste of money depends what you consider to be promising.

I have a bunch of AR-15s and a variety of other black rifles, and with the exception of my Varmint and Match AR-15s, my Mini-14s are more accurate.  My Colt SP1 and an M16A1 clone built with a department surplus M16A1 upper shoot 1.5 MOA with Hornady 55 gr FMJs, while these reworked mini 14s will shoot 1 1/4 MOA.

Now, that's not the 1/2 MOA accuracy I get with match bullets in my Varmint an Match ARs, but it's superb for a light, handy rifle or carbine intended for field use.

Plus, there's a subjective side to it - the Mini 14 has excellent balance, points very well and is just a joy to shoot.  And I prefer blued steel and walnut furniture.

I can choose between a number of semi-auto centerfire rifles and carbines (several AR-15s and AR-9s, an AR-180 and an AR-180B, a Galil, an SKS, an L1A1, a PSL, a Tantal, an M1 Garand, an M1 Carbine, an Uzi Carbine, and probably one or two others I've probably forgotten about), yet my Mini-14s get more range time.

Pretty much.  That's one reason they've been popular with some law enforcement agencies - even if its a full auto AC-556, it looks a lot less scary than an M4, M16 or even an AR-15.

I've had some of the average ignorant anti-gunner folks tell me that my Mini-14 is just fine for shooters to own, but not my Colt SP1, even though the have the same magazine capacity. And in fact the Mini-14 is on the exempt list in the current proposed ban legislation (HR 5087), provided it does not have a folding stock.   Bill Ruger had his faults but Ruger is still benefitting from his politics.

I wonder what the anti-gunners would say if I showed them that a Mini-14 can be converted to a binary trigger by inserting a normal household staple?

Lol.  I shot a Ruger Mini-14 compatible magazine in my AR today - an old Ram-Line that was supposed to fit - and feed AR-15s, Mini-14s, & the AR-180.  I can confirm it feeds the AR-15, albeit if the BCG is bone dry, you may have some jams @ the bottom of the mag.  

If anyone would like to try it in their Mini-14 or AR-180 and report back, shoot me a PM.

I had a mini 30 that was chopped to 14.5" and a choate flash hider front sight combo to bring it up to 16-1/8"  It looked like a mini M14 SOCOM. It shot really well, but the mags at the time were crap.  The only gun I ever regret selling off.