Armory Sponsor
Rail for Mini14 (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 9/27/2022 7:59:58 AM EDT
|
After waiting for a while, I was finally able to order the 16 inch Mini Tactical with the wood stock. I think I would like to try the Primary Arms 3x micro prism on it. The specs say the rifle has integral scope mount points. What would I need to mount some scope rail to these points? What is the cleanest looking top rail out there? Thank you. |
I don't know how this works, but I nominate Joker and Fluffy for arfcom sainthood.
|
The Ultimak is the most versatile rail for the Mini. Pricey but works. http://www.ultimak.com/M4-S.htm |
GunPowder and Pu$$y, Live by one Die by the other, Love the smell of both!
|
Originally Posted By hollowhandle: After waiting for a while, I was finally able to order the 16 inch Mini Tactical with the wood stock. I think I would like to try the Primary Arms 3x micro prism on it. The specs say the rifle has integral scope mount points. What would I need to mount some scope rail to these points? What is the cleanest looking top rail out there? Thank you. Concur that the Ultimak rail is the optimal solution, along with a suitable forward-mounted optic. Your Mini >>should<< come with a couple of 1" dia scope rings; there are other diameter and other height rings available. However, the rifle can have a rail mounted over the action which uses the mounting points milled into the stock. Something like this Generally speaking, the lower the height of the rail, the better, and a see-over rail is preferable to a see-through rail. YMMV. ITC makes a decent cheek rest/riser which you will likely need if using a receiver rail and a conventional optic. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
A Man's Home Trailer is his White Castle!
Joined:
Oct 2006
Posts:
28915
EE: 100% (160)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By BillyDBerger: Check out the Samson rail. The Samson rail looks great and is very functional for MRDS, but the PA 3x prism has 2.7" of eye relief. I don't know that it will even work with the factory rail. You may want to consider some different optics. The rifle will come with a short section of picatinny rail that mounts to the receiver. Like this-But it puts the optic pretty high in relation to the cheek weld.  The Samson rail is great for any non-magnified optics, whether you're mounting a mini-RDS on the "footprint" for lowest possible sight height, or anything larger on the picatinny section. https://www.samson-mfg.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=Hannibal |
|
I have only seen pix of the Samson rail, but I have used the Ultimak rail. It appears the Samson rail is about as "low" as the Ultimak, and this "lowness" is extremely important when mounting optics, especially forward optics. One point to consider is how easy/quick is it to remove the optic should it fail for some reason. The "footpad" on the Samson rail may allow mounting of some very small and low optics, but quickly dismounting such "footpad" attached optics might be problematic. Depending on the optic chosen, the rail chosen, the iron sights on the rifle, and the position of the optic on the rifle, it may, or may not be possible to obtain iron sight co-witness through the optic on the Mini-14/30 platform., hence the concern about quickly and easily dismounting the optic should the need arise. Many experienced users seem to have gravitated, by dint of much experimentation, to use of the Ultimak rail and some sort of RDS using a QD mount. Your preferences may differ, of course. Some points of concern about using an over-the-action rail and a conventional optic are that: 1) There may be problems with ctg ejection, and 2) The over-the-action rail precludes the possibility of installing a receiver-mounted stripper clip guide (Cogburn Arsenal Stripper Clip Guides), and 3) The over-the-action rail and optic almost always require the use of a cheek-riser, which should also be Quick-Detach in case of reverting to iron sights, and 4) The over-the-action rail makes removal of the bolt for cleaning/servicing significantly more difficult. You may not share these concerns, and after all, it's your rifle. Just mentioning some points in the event they are of interest to you. Plenty of folks have used conventional rails and optics on their Minis, so it certainly can be done. Just for eye candy, a Trio of Mini-30s With Ultimak Rail and RDSs All best wishes! |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
| I started with a TRS25 on the factory pic rail, that worked fine but tried a few scopes I had and found a lot of em just wouldn't mount right for my eye. Currently running a Bushnell 1-4 but after finding the Cogburn stripper guide I'm really debating going with a red dot on an Ultimak so I can use my stripper clips. |
|
Originally Posted By wanderson: I started with a TRS25 on the factory pic rail, that worked fine but tried a few scopes I had and found a lot of em just wouldn't mount right for my eye. Currently running a Bushnell 1-4 but after finding the Cogburn stripper guide I'm really debating going with a red dot on an Ultimak so I can use my stripper clips. I say this as one who tried every damn possible Mini optics mounting platform and wasting a lot of money doing so. There may be room for future improvement, but existing technology suggests RDS mounted on an Ultimak rail. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By raf: I have only seen pix of the Samson rail, but I have used the Ultimak rail. It appears the Samson rail is about as "low" as the Ultimak, and this "lowness" is extremely important when mounting optics, especially forward optics. One point to consider is how easy/quick is it to remove the optic should it fail for some reason. The "footpad" on the Samson rail may allow mounting of some very small and low optics, but quickly dismounting such "footpad" attached optics might be problematic. Depending on the optic chosen, the rail chosen, the iron sights on the rifle, and the position of the optic on the rifle, it may, or may not be possible to obtain iron sight co-witness through the optic on the Mini-14/30 platform., hence the concern about quickly and easily dismounting the optic should the need arise. Many experienced users seem to have gravitated, by dint of much experimentation, to use of the Ultimak rail and some sort of RDS using a QD mount. Your preferences may differ, of course. Some points of concern about using an over-the-action rail and a conventional optic are that: 1) There may be problems with ctg ejection, and 2) The over-the-action rail precludes the possibility of installing a receiver-mounted stripper clip guide (Cogburn Arsenal Stripper Clip Guides), and 3) The over-the-action rail and optic almost always require the use of a cheek-riser, which should also be Quick-Detach in case of reverting to iron sights, and 4) The over-the-action rail makes removal of the bolt for cleaning/servicing significantly more difficult. You may not share these concerns, and after all, it's your rifle. Just mentioning some points in the event they are of interest to you. Plenty of folks have used conventional rails and optics on their Minis, so it certainly can be done. Just for eye candy, a Trio of Mini-30s With Ultimak Rail and RDSs All best wishes! Thank you for the Cogburn link. I knew there was a stripper clip guide for the Mini-14, but didn't realize they had one for the 30. With a 10 round mag, it becomes a viable alternative to the SKS, albeit you can still get two SKSs for the price of one Mini. |
Death to quislings.
|
Personally, having used OEM Ruger folders, I don't suggest them. IMHO, the discontinued Syn Stock Butler Creek folders are better, in my opinion, and having tried both. Rising costs of BC folders might be instructive. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By backbencher: Thank you for the Cogburn link. I knew there was a stripper clip guide for the Mini-14, but didn't realize they had one for the 30. With a 10 round mag, it becomes a viable alternative to the SKS, albeit you can still get two SKSs for the price of one Mini. Originally Posted By backbencher: Originally Posted By raf: I have only seen pix of the Samson rail, but I have used the Ultimak rail. It appears the Samson rail is about as "low" as the Ultimak, and this "lowness" is extremely important when mounting optics, especially forward optics. One point to consider is how easy/quick is it to remove the optic should it fail for some reason. The "footpad" on the Samson rail may allow mounting of some very small and low optics, but quickly dismounting such "footpad" attached optics might be problematic. Depending on the optic chosen, the rail chosen, the iron sights on the rifle, and the position of the optic on the rifle, it may, or may not be possible to obtain iron sight co-witness through the optic on the Mini-14/30 platform., hence the concern about quickly and easily dismounting the optic should the need arise. Many experienced users seem to have gravitated, by dint of much experimentation, to use of the Ultimak rail and some sort of RDS using a QD mount. Your preferences may differ, of course. Some points of concern about using an over-the-action rail and a conventional optic are that: 1) There may be problems with ctg ejection, and 2) The over-the-action rail precludes the possibility of installing a receiver-mounted stripper clip guide (Cogburn Arsenal Stripper Clip Guides), and 3) The over-the-action rail and optic almost always require the use of a cheek-riser, which should also be Quick-Detach in case of reverting to iron sights, and 4) The over-the-action rail makes removal of the bolt for cleaning/servicing significantly more difficult. You may not share these concerns, and after all, it's your rifle. Just mentioning some points in the event they are of interest to you. Plenty of folks have used conventional rails and optics on their Minis, so it certainly can be done. Just for eye candy, a Trio of Mini-30s With Ultimak Rail and RDSs All best wishes! Thank you for the Cogburn link. I knew there was a stripper clip guide for the Mini-14, but didn't realize they had one for the 30. With a 10 round mag, it becomes a viable alternative to the SKS, albeit you can still get two SKSs for the price of one Mini. It's nice to have options. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Attached File Attached File I have the Samson rail (1st gen) and the Samson stock. No cheek riser needed for a comfortable cheek weld. The irons do not co-witness with the dot. The dot is just a little too high for that. (At least with the Vortex that I have) I also tried a MRO on a low mount on the picatinny and it was a little higher even- due to the mount required. I've put a few rounds through the rifle with the dot and even though it's a mini-rds, it provides a really clear heads-up sight picture. If this rifle were to be my one and only semi-auto, I don't think I'd trust the fragility of the mini-rds, and I'd certainly want a way to QD the sight since it obscures the irons. But, for me a mini-14 is a fun toy, and an AR is for serious work. |
| http://www.amegamounts.com/ |
I know I'll never go home.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
|
Originally Posted By TNC: http://www.amegamounts.com/ Since getting the optic as low as possible is required in order to obtain a decent cheek weld without using a cheek riser, IMHO the Amega unit is not as desirable as the Ultimak unit. The new Samson rail >>appears<< to be as low/nearly as low as the Ultimak, but I have not measured the Samson unit. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
| I running Ultimak rail on my mini 14 and 30. The Mini 14 has a Burris 1.75 scout scope that work well for 0 to 200 yards that it's been run. The mini 30 has the vortex Strikefire II and it is also a great combo especially when running "Redneck match" rounds at 100 yards. |
|
Originally Posted By coldblue: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/19411/Ruger_Mini_14_scout_jpg-2559295.JPG it does not get any better than this... Other reasonable alternatives exist, and no offense. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
this would make it better Attached File . . . . when I was 18, I bought a mini we took it camping shot it into a hillside after dark, we were all blinded by the massive muzzle flash later, I added one of these and on the next camping trip, we tried it again we were all amazed that with the same 55gr ball, it now had almost zero flash sadly, I sold that mini when I joined the army, I wish I still had it |
|
Originally Posted By Colt653: this would make it better https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2275/C80D2FEB-88CB-4A2A-80F8-DDEA62E8CF78_jpe-2577078.JPG . . . . when I was 18, I bought a mini we took it camping shot it into a hillside after dark, we were all blinded by the massive muzzle flash later, I added one of these and on the next camping trip, we tried it again we were all amazed that with the same 55gr ball, it now had almost zero flash sadly, I sold that mini when I joined the army, I wish I still had it |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By PRYDE: Get the samson, the Ultimak is garbage. The clearances below the top picatinny edge are out of spec and there is not enough room to mount an offset light at 90 degrees. The Samson was made about 10 years after the out of date ultimak design. Disclaimer: no financial interest. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By BPR: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/44835/Mini_14_15_jpg-2551452.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/44835/Mini_14_16_jpg-2551456.JPG I have the Samson rail (1st gen) and the Samson stock. No cheek riser needed for a comfortable cheek weld. The irons do not co-witness with the dot. The dot is just a little too high for that. (At least with the Vortex that I have) I also tried a MRO on a low mount on the picatinny and it was a little higher even- due to the mount required. I've put a few rounds through the rifle with the dot and even though it's a mini-rds, it provides a really clear heads-up sight picture. If this rifle were to be my one and only semi-auto, I don't think I'd trust the fragility of the mini-rds, and I'd certainly want a way to QD the sight since it obscures the irons. But, for me a mini-14 is a fun toy, and an AR is for serious work. Originally Posted By PRYDE: Get the samson, the Ultimak is garbage. The clearances below the top picatinny edge are out of spec and there is not enough room to mount an offset light at 90 degrees. The Samson was made about 10 years after the out of date ultimak design. |
<**Me:**> I just spent 95% of my paycheck on LaRue stuff, within 30 minutes of getting paid. < **mfingar:**> For what it's worth, Dillo Dust is great on Ramen. </**mfingar:**></**me:**>
|
Originally Posted By Seven-Shooter: That is indeed a neat setup. Getting suitably mounted WML on non-AR rifles is always a bit of a challenge, due to differences in clearances between rail and barrel/handguard/etc. My Ultimak equipped rifles have all been fine thus far for their intended purposes, but all have required some creative, unusual mounts for WML. I do not view that as a failing of the Ultimak, but just a compromise for fitting a forward mounting solution onto rifles designed before such things were common. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By raf: No offense, but this is the first time I've heard this complaint about the Ultimak. I have yet to handle a Samson unit, so I can't comment on it, except to say that mounting an optic on the "pad" seems to mean that removing the optic for any reason will be "problematic". Disclaimer: no financial interest. No offense, but it appears that you are not very well versed in modern mounting platforms for mini RDS optics. The "pad" to which you refer is just holes for screws and posts. Mounting an RMR or similar optic to it involves 2 screws and 2 posts, they can be literally be removed and attached in under 2 minute, what to your understanding makes this "problematic"? I get that you are a fan of the platform and you are set in your ways for what was best over the past few decades. Technology has improved since. You should be grateful that a reputable manufacturer like Samson is taking interest in the platform and offering new and better solutions, instead of poo-pooing anything that is what you are not used to without any firsthand experience with the product. |
|
Originally Posted By raf: I have yet to handle a Samson unit, so I can't comment on it, except to say that mounting an optic on the "pad" seems to mean that removing the optic for any reason will be "problematic”. Originally Posted By raf: I have yet to handle a Samson unit, so I can't comment on it, except to say that mounting an optic on the "pad" seems to mean that removing the optic for any reason will be "problematic”. That statement conflicts quite a bit with your previous one: I say this as one who tried every damn possible Mini optics mounting platform and wasting a lot of money doing so. And what exactly is problematic about installing or removing an optic to/from a mount that was 100% designed and machined specifically for it?  |
|
Originally Posted By TREETOP: That statement conflicts quite a bit with your previous one: And what exactly is problematic about installing or removing an optic to/from a mount that was 100% designed and machined specifically for it? I was wrong in that the Samson "pad" holes are tapped, indicating that the optic is mounted from the top. This Youtube vid received by virtue of a request from me to Samson was received a few minutes ago: Samson Youtube Vid So, I was wrong about needing to detach the Samson mount entirely in order to attach/detach the optic. However, instead of a fairly fast QD mount, the user will need to use a specific Allen head wrench to remove the optic in order to use the OEM iron sights "comfortably" as Samson puts it in their video. I call that "problematic" compared to using a QD mount on the Pic rail surface. Pictures seem to confirm this, at least with some optics: Samson Scout Rail with Optic Attached If I'm wrong. please let me know. FWIW, I have a question submitted to Samson about this subject and will report about their answer if I hear back from them. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By raf: That statement was true before the recently introduced Samson mount appeared. I've made clear in a number of recent posts that I've not yet had a chance to handle a Samson mount. As far as I can see, the screws attaching at least some optics to the "pad" have their screw heads on the underside of the pad. That means to attach an optic to the pad, or to detach it, the Samson rail must be detached from the rifle in order to gain access to the screw-heads. I call that problematic compared to using a QD mount on the Pic rail surface. Pictures seem to confirm this, at least with some optics: Samson Scout Rail with Optic Attached If I'm wrong. please let me know. Assuming your correct, do you think that liability of the extra step to remove the optic outweighs the advantages of the lower mount profile offered by the Sampson? The big push for QD optics mounts for paid users fifteen years ago seemed to fizzle out when those users realized the advantages of QD weren’t really useful at all. |
|
Originally Posted By raf: That statement was true before the recently introduced Samson mount appeared. I've made clear in a number of recent posts that I've not yet had a chance to handle a Samson mount. As far as I can see, the screws attaching at least some optics to the "pad" have their screw heads on the underside of the pad. That means to attach an optic to the pad, or to detach it, the Samson rail must be detached from the rifle in order to gain access to the screw-heads. I call that problematic compared to using a QD mount on the Pic rail surface. Pictures seem to confirm this, at least with some optics: Samson Scout Rail with Optic Attached If I'm wrong. please let me know. Are you just making stuff up out of nowhere? You’re completely incorrect here, and anyone with a tiny familiarity with any of the compatible optics would know that all of these mount from the top. These are the same optics that people are mounting to Glock slides, do you think they have screws from underneath as well? https://www.samson-mfg.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=Hannibal You’re coming across as someone who knows a product, and you’re steering people away from it, but you obviously don’t have any understanding of how it works. It’s a bad look, man. |
|
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish: Assuming your correct, do you think that liability of the extra step to remove the optic outweighs the advantages of the lower mount profile offered by the Sampson? The big push for QD optics mounts for paid users fifteen years ago seemed to fizzle out when those users realized the advantages of QD weren't really useful at all. I have a question into Samson about this, and will report back. Answer just received: Samson YouTube Vid |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish: Assuming your correct, do you think that liability of the extra step to remove the optic outweighs the advantages of the lower mount profile offered by the Sampson? The big push for QD optics mounts for paid users fifteen years ago seemed to fizzle out when those users realized the advantages of QD weren't really useful at all. Originally Posted By FightingHellfish: Originally Posted By raf: That statement was true before the recently introduced Samson mount appeared. I've made clear in a number of recent posts that I've not yet had a chance to handle a Samson mount. As far as I can see, the screws attaching at least some optics to the "pad" have their screw heads on the underside of the pad. That means to attach an optic to the pad, or to detach it, the Samson rail must be detached from the rifle in order to gain access to the screw-heads. I call that problematic compared to using a QD mount on the Pic rail surface. Pictures seem to confirm this, at least with some optics: Samson Scout Rail with Optic Attached If I'm wrong. please let me know. Assuming your correct, do you think that liability of the extra step to remove the optic outweighs the advantages of the lower mount profile offered by the Sampson? The big push for QD optics mounts for paid users fifteen years ago seemed to fizzle out when those users realized the advantages of QD weren't really useful at all. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By raf: If I'm correct, and I might be wrong, it depends on whether the user can easily use the iron sights through their chosen optic. If so, not a huge deal; if not, and the optic blocks the iron sights, then suggest it's a potential problem. I have a question into Samson about this, and will report back. Oh man. There are tons of “potential problems” associated with QD mounts and they are more likely than the RDS failing, followed by the immediate need for well aimed shots. Plus, if you are parsing a system based on that level of “potential problems vs immediate emergency need” than you probably already ruled out the Mini-14 before the mount conversation ever arose. Finally, if your optic fails and you need to fire RIGHT NOW, you aren’t going to have time to pry off a QD mount either, your going to point shoot, or aim over the top of the rifle, or engage in some optimistic suppressive fire. The tactical case for QD mounts is mostly conversational. |
|
Originally Posted By TREETOP: Are you just making stuff up out of nowhere? You're completely incorrect here, and anyone with a tiny familiarity with any of the compatible optics would know that all of these mount from the top. These are the same optics that people are mounting to Glock slides, do you think they have screws from underneath as well? https://www.samson-mfg.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=Hannibal You're coming across as someone who knows a product, and you're steering people away from it, but you obviously don't have any understanding of how it works. It's a bad look, man. Originally Posted By TREETOP: Originally Posted By raf: That statement was true before the recently introduced Samson mount appeared. I've made clear in a number of recent posts that I've not yet had a chance to handle a Samson mount. As far as I can see, the screws attaching at least some optics to the "pad" have their screw heads on the underside of the pad. That means to attach an optic to the pad, or to detach it, the Samson rail must be detached from the rifle in order to gain access to the screw-heads. I call that problematic compared to using a QD mount on the Pic rail surface. Pictures seem to confirm this, at least with some optics: Samson Scout Rail with Optic Attached If I'm wrong. please let me know. Are you just making stuff up out of nowhere? You're completely incorrect here, and anyone with a tiny familiarity with any of the compatible optics would know that all of these mount from the top. These are the same optics that people are mounting to Glock slides, do you think they have screws from underneath as well? https://www.samson-mfg.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=Hannibal You're coming across as someone who knows a product, and you're steering people away from it, but you obviously don't have any understanding of how it works. It's a bad look, man. However, the user will need to unbolt the optic from the "pad" in the likely event that the iron sights cannot be used with optic in place, using a specific Allen wrench. While not nearly as bad as having to remove the entire rail to mount/dismount optics, manipulating a tiny Allen wrench to remove the optic is still a bit "Problematic' compared to a typical QD lever. Note also that Samson vid fails to mention the torque value that must be applied to the screws attaching the gas block to the front of the Samson rail. There is evidence that incorrect torque applied to these screws can affect the rifle's accuracy. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By FightingHellfish: Oh man. There are tons of "potential problems" associated with QD mounts and they are more likely than the RDS failing, followed by the immediate need for well aimed shots. Plus, if you are parsing a system based on that level of "potential problems vs immediate emergency need" than you probably already ruled out the Mini-14 before the mount conversation ever arose. Finally, if your optic fails and you need to fire RIGHT NOW, you aren't going to have time to pry off a QD mount either, your going to point shoot, or aim over the top of the rifle, or engage in some optimistic suppressive fire. The tactical case for QD mounts is mostly conversational. Originally Posted By FightingHellfish: Originally Posted By raf: If I'm correct, and I might be wrong, it depends on whether the user can easily use the iron sights through their chosen optic. If so, not a huge deal; if not, and the optic blocks the iron sights, then suggest it's a potential problem. I have a question into Samson about this, and will report back. Oh man. There are tons of "potential problems" associated with QD mounts and they are more likely than the RDS failing, followed by the immediate need for well aimed shots. Plus, if you are parsing a system based on that level of "potential problems vs immediate emergency need" than you probably already ruled out the Mini-14 before the mount conversation ever arose. Finally, if your optic fails and you need to fire RIGHT NOW, you aren't going to have time to pry off a QD mount either, your going to point shoot, or aim over the top of the rifle, or engage in some optimistic suppressive fire. The tactical case for QD mounts is mostly conversational. Many people mistakenly believe the Mini's accuracy is much worse than it really is, and this is not the thread for that discussion. That said, few people can reasonably claim that the Mini is unreliable, given good quality magazines and ammo. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
All this talk and arguing about extended eye relief rails and optics forward of the action are silly. the OP asked about the PA 3x prism, which will need to be mounted above the action, not forward of it. The aforementioned pic rail mount that bridges the two ruger ring slots milled in the the receiver is the best option, but the optic will sit rather high. |
Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
https://www.memoriapress.com/articles/the-four-causes-of-classical-education/
General education should not be mere job training, but training in how to be fully human.
https://www.memoriapress.com/articles/the-four-causes-of-classical-education/
|
Originally Posted By MRW: All this talk and arguing about extended eye relief rails and optics forward of the action are silly. the OP asked about the PA 3x prism, which will need to be mounted above the action, not forward of it. The aforementioned pic rail mount that bridges the two ruger ring slots milled in the the receiver is the best option, but the optic will sit rather high. Yep that’s probably going to be the best available option, without something custom being made. I think the 3x prism comes with a rearward extending cantilever spacer so that should help too. |
|
Originally Posted By MRW: All this talk and arguing about extended eye relief rails and optics forward of the action are silly. the OP asked about the PA 3x prism, which will need to be mounted above the action, not forward of it. The aforementioned pic rail mount that bridges the two ruger ring slots milled in the the receiver is the best option, but the optic will sit rather high. OP was advised that the optic he mentioned, while fine for AR platforms, will likely require a cheek riser to use it comfortably on most Ruger Mini stocks--as correctly noted. Suggestions for other optics and rail platforms ensued. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By MRW: All this talk and arguing about extended eye relief rails and optics forward of the action are silly. the OP asked about the PA 3x prism, which will need to be mounted above the action, not forward of it. The aforementioned pic rail mount that bridges the two ruger ring slots milled in the the receiver is the best option, but the optic will sit rather high. The problem is "Raf" is that no matter what question you ask about the platform, he will always try to direct the OP towards what in his mind he believes is the "correct" setup based on him and others "trying out all other options and coming to the same conclusion". To him the ideal setup is an Ultimak rail with a QD mount mini red dot. (You can find all his previous posts and pretty much see how fervently he promotes this setup) There is no one-size solution to each individual user's need, just because you deem yourself to be an "expert" based on your history and post-count doesn't mean you can bully others into your same viewpoint. |
|
Originally Posted By PRYDE: The problem is "Raf" is that no matter what question you ask about the platform, he will always try to direct the OP towards what in his mind he believes is the "correct" setup based on him and others "trying out all other options and coming to the same conclusion". To him the ideal setup is an Ultimak rail with a QD mount mini red dot. (You can find all his previous posts and pretty much see how fervently he promotes this setup) There is no one-size solution to each individual user's need, just because you deem yourself to be an "expert" based on your history and post-count doesn't mean you can bully others into your same viewpoint. Originally Posted By PRYDE: Originally Posted By MRW: All this talk and arguing about extended eye relief rails and optics forward of the action are silly. the OP asked about the PA 3x prism, which will need to be mounted above the action, not forward of it. The aforementioned pic rail mount that bridges the two ruger ring slots milled in the the receiver is the best option, but the optic will sit rather high. The problem is "Raf" is that no matter what question you ask about the platform, he will always try to direct the OP towards what in his mind he believes is the "correct" setup based on him and others "trying out all other options and coming to the same conclusion". To him the ideal setup is an Ultimak rail with a QD mount mini red dot. (You can find all his previous posts and pretty much see how fervently he promotes this setup) There is no one-size solution to each individual user's need, just because you deem yourself to be an "expert" based on your history and post-count doesn't mean you can bully others into your same viewpoint. "My" reasons may not work for some other folks, that's understood. Not everyone's personal opinion will coincide, and everyone has the right to set up their rig as they see fit. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By JWinGa: All the Mini 14s I've seen built after about 2012 come with a rail that bolts on over the action in tapped holes on top of the integral scope mounting pads. FWIW, removing the bolt for periodical maintenance with rail installed is a sure-fire hassle. The short-barreled Mini has limited effective range, and a suitably mounted RDS makes the most of it. Seen some misguided folks mounting high magnification scopes on their Minis. Like mounting a high-power scope on an M-1 Carbine. Foolish, IMHO, and entirely contrary to the forearm's best use. Some folks have accused me of being "narrow-minded" despite my repeatedly saying that I've tried multiple optics on multiple mounting systems on the Mini. Just so I'm understood, allow me to say the following, which is based on personal experience, and the experience of others: IMHO, the Mini-14 and Mini-30 are both short to middle range carbines on account of their barrel length and their ctgs. These carbines can be quick-handling and quick shooting firearms if they are set up consonant with their capabilities. Mounting a good RDS on an Ultimak rail allows optimal sighting system and best use of both carbines. That's a blanket statement that I'm comfortable with. Exceptional shooters, and exceptional Minis exist. I'm speaking for the vast general number of Mini users. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Ultimak Want a light? Use a LaRue offset mount, and a Surefire mini scout or similar. Problem solved. Never any issue with the Ultimak mounted on a Mini. Never heard any complaints about Ultimaks mounted on Minis until this thread. ETA: It’s great that Samson is offering products for the Mini. I’d love to see a polymer stock side folder from them in the future. I mean good polymer though, akin to what Vltor uses on there M1A/M14 stocks (carbon fiber reinforced polymer) that don’t flex and are highly heat resistant. That would be wonderful. ETA 2: If Samson we’re to offer a non-specific optic version, ie-full pic rail handguard, I’d be the first to buy. Would love to see them offer one of those. |
|
Originally Posted By LIONHART: Ultimak Want a light? Use a LaRue offset mount, and a Surefire mini scout or similar. Problem solved. Never any issue with the Ultimak mounted on a Mini. Never heard any complaints about Ultimaks mounted on Minis until this thread. Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. |
|
Originally Posted By PRYDE: Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. Originally Posted By PRYDE: Originally Posted By LIONHART: Ultimak Want a light? Use a LaRue offset mount, and a Surefire mini scout or similar. Problem solved. Never any issue with the Ultimak mounted on a Mini. Never heard any complaints about Ultimaks mounted on Minis until this thread. Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. I have a Haley Strategic on my 1894 with a long top rail, because it extends forwards rather than sideways. That being said, offhand I don't recall the diagonal clearance. That LaRue mount is sweet, I have had it on ARs before, but with a regular quad rail. I fully agree that the Ultimak profile would be insufficient on the bottom. ETA: depending on optic of choice, I wonder if the LT606 would work? |
<**Me:**> I just spent 95% of my paycheck on LaRue stuff, within 30 minutes of getting paid. < **mfingar:**> For what it's worth, Dillo Dust is great on Ramen. </**mfingar:**></**me:**>
|
Originally Posted By PRYDE: Get the samson, the Ultimak is garbage. The clearances below the top picatinny edge are out of spec and there is not enough room to mount an offset light at 90 degrees. The Samson was made about 10 years after the out of date ultimak design. You might learning about "Winning friends and influencing people" by not using terms such as "Garbage" in your argument. All three scout mounting system are quality made and have their own advantages and disadvantages. Not everyone is going agree with you all the time, but people will begin to think your an "Ass" by your opening statement and then you lost. The Samson rail does not work as well if a "Scout scope" is use because the rail section is smaller and to far forward. Does it make it bad, no. It just not want I wanted in the product. |
|
Originally Posted By PRYDE: Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. Originally Posted By PRYDE: Originally Posted By LIONHART: Ultimak Want a light? Use a LaRue offset mount, and a Surefire mini scout or similar. Problem solved. Never any issue with the Ultimak mounted on a Mini. Never heard any complaints about Ultimaks mounted on Minis until this thread. Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. You could be right or wrong about the Larue mount, but irrelevant compared to how you present yourself. |
Promoted to Member by Ed, Sr.
|
Originally Posted By PRYDE: Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. Originally Posted By PRYDE: Originally Posted By LIONHART: Ultimak Want a light? Use a LaRue offset mount, and a Surefire mini scout or similar. Problem solved. Never any issue with the Ultimak mounted on a Mini. Never heard any complaints about Ultimaks mounted on Minis until this thread. Oh really? If you're referring to the larue 752 offset scout mount, then you're talking out your ass as it doesn't fit on the ultimak: the pic rail bottom clearance is insufficient. I can post a pic if you don't believe me. I no longer have a 752, and didn’t consider the clearance. Even so, there are many offset mounts, and surely, one would work just fine on the Ultimak. Perhaps one of the Haley versions? |
Rail for Mini14 (Page 1 of 2)
Armory Sponsor