Armory Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Mini in 300 BO (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/22/2015 11:12:02 AM EDT
Looks interesting;
|
|
Hey Ruger, how about a 300 BO upper for the SR556 instead? You might have heard of these, all the cool kids are doing it (and .270, and 6.8 (again), and .458 SOCOM, etc., etc.)
So now we have another 30 caliber mini? The Mini 30 wasn't doing it? And let me guess, more $60 proprietary magazines to buy. Sure glad we stalled out on the one platform you offer that is actually the easiest to offer upgrades (and runs off standard USGI mags). Yeah, it looks like an interesting rifle, but the mini's aren't known for outstanding accuracy and the design limits a lot of popular options for optics setups. Where are you gonna mount the NV and/or illumination on that stock? You know, some of the things folks that hunt with 300 BO kinda have a thing for? I like Ruger, but this waiting for shit is getting old. And getting raped on magazines is getting really, really old. |
|
Quoted:
more $60 proprietary magazines to buy. Where are you buying your mags for $60? CDNN has the Factory .223 20 and 30 round Mini-14 mags reasonably priced. Theoretically you should be able to use the .223 mags with the 300 BO cartridge, at least that was one of it's advantages in the AR platform. You could build a nice 300 BO upper cheaper than a complete one from Ruger. |
|
Quoted:
Where are you buying your mags for $60? CDNN has the Factory .223 20 and 30 round Mini-14 mags reasonably priced. Theoretically you should be able to use the .223 mags with the 300 BO cartridge, at least that was one of it's advantages in the AR platform. You could build a nice 300 BO upper cheaper than a complete one from Ruger. Quoted:
Quoted:
more $60 proprietary magazines to buy. Where are you buying your mags for $60? CDNN has the Factory .223 20 and 30 round Mini-14 mags reasonably priced. Theoretically you should be able to use the .223 mags with the 300 BO cartridge, at least that was one of it's advantages in the AR platform. You could build a nice 300 BO upper cheaper than a complete one from Ruger. I'm basing it off their proprietary magazines on some of their other rifles such as this one in .5.56 and this one in .308. In hindsight, this may be an unfair comparison, but it is a new caliber and their new mags are typically overpriced. Yes, one would think that the standard Mini-14 223 mags would work in this rifle, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see if they actually do. And Yes, I agree that CDNN has them much more "reasonably" priced, but they're still overpriced IMO. The Mini-14 has been around forever, those mags should be as dirt cheap as the USGI mags, or at least closer to it. During that time, Ruger has had decades to switch the Mini-14 over to the USGI platform magazines as well, but have not done so. Truly, how big a change would it have been to do so when they revamped the lineup? I get it, it's an additional revenue source for them; but it seems like just about every platform they introduce has it's own proprietary magazine. Most of the time the magazines can't even be shared among other Ruger rifles in the same caliber...Mini-14, Gunsite, SR556, American. To me, a detachable box mag doesn't seem like that big of an issue to standardize across product lines within the same company, especially when you're catering to the military calibers and all of the variants that can use the same magazine. To me, it would be much more enticing to purchase a Ruger product knowing that I don't have to spend additional $$$'s to build up a decent supply of magazines. If I could buy one proprietary Ruger 5.56 box magazine to fit all my Ruger rifles, that would be worth the extra price (or at least take the sting out of it). Don't get me wrong, I like Ruger; they have a fine product and great customer service. I have pistols, rimfire rifles, and centerfire rifles of theirs. But damn, buying all those "extras" after the sale gets old. |
|
Quoted:
I'll take an Ares SCR instead, thanks... http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P1060538-900x600.jpg Oh heck no!!!! Doc |
|
Pfft... Back in the late 80's and 90's when an AR cost $1000, and a Mini-14 cost $4-500, they made economic sense.
Now that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an AR of decent quality for $7-800 or less, not even counting the enormous ecosystem of mags and accessories for it, and Ruger wants $1000+ for a Mini-14? The Mini is now a niche product for the mix of people in ban states who can have a Mini but not an AR, and the handful of Fudds who've admitted to themselves a semi auto .223 with 20-30 round capacity is a needful thing, but their ego still won't let them get an AR. The ONLY way Ruger will ever move four-figure Mini-14's in quantity is if they start making stainless wood-stocked GB folders again, and cash in on A-Team 80's nostalgia. Making them in AR fad calibers (which are a much smaller investment in said AR's with interchangeable uppers) and Tapcofucking them is going to barely wiggle the needle. |
|
Quoted:
Pfft... Back in the late 80's and 90's when an AR cost $1000, and a Mini-14 cost $4-500, they made economic sense. Now that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an AR of decent quality for $7-800 or less, not even counting the enormous ecosystem of mags and accessories for it, and Ruger wants $1000+ for a Mini-14? The Mini is now a niche product for the mix of people in ban states who can have a Mini but not an AR, and the handful of Fudds who've admitted to themselves a semi auto .223 with 20-30 round capacity is a needful thing, but their ego still won't let them get an AR. The ONLY way Ruger will ever move four-figure Mini-14's in quantity is if they start making stainless wood-stocked GB folders again, and cash in on A-Team 80's nostalgia. Making them in AR fad calibers (which are a much smaller investment in said AR's with interchangeable uppers) and Tapcofucking them is going to barely wiggle the needle. While I don't currently have a mini, but have 1.5 ARs, I have owned minis before and would like to own one again. I think they're fun, they handle very well for me, and the current production models shoot as well as entry level ARs. |
|
I don't "hate" the Mini at all. And I too would get in line for a GB folder, it's one sexy carbine. And a plain stock blued Mini? I'd be pleased as punch to get one as a gift. No doubt about it. However, if it's not a GB stainless folder, I'd have to pass when the Mini is the same price or more expensive than an AR that will outperform it. But "hate the Mini"? No way. It's a fine rifle for what it is, and Ruger did indeed improve on it in the past few years with the new barrel profile and gas block.
I came of age when the Mini was 1/2 to no more than 2/3rds the price of an AR, and my value meter is pegged there permanently, just the psychology of it. But back then, the '94 ban was looming, so even GB folders were commanding 4 figures by that time, so I don't chafe at what those might cost if Ruger ever makes them again. |
|
The Mini is a fun little rifle that has been overshadowed by all the AR's out there. I'm glad to see it available in 300BLK. It will be interesting to see how quiet the gun is with its moving op rod, etc.
The introduction of the Mini is a smart move on Ruger's part. It gives them a semi-auto alternative to the Ruger American and also gives those who don't want or can't own an AR a design that's been well vetted over the last forty years. Yeah, Mini's aren't as cheap as they used to be but the design is basically 1930's technology and no doubt takes a bit more time and effort to build and assemble than an AR. Now if we can just get Ruger to reintroduce the 1980's factory folding stock.... |
|
Quoted:
I don't "hate" the Mini at all. And I too would get in line for a GB folder, it's one sexy carbine. And a plain stock blued Mini? I'd be pleased as punch to get one as a gift. No doubt about it. However, if it's not a GB stainless folder, I'd have to pass when the Mini is the same price or more expensive than an AR that will outperform it. But "hate the Mini"? No way. It's a fine rifle for what it is, and Ruger did indeed improve on it in the past few years with the new barrel profile and gas block. I came of age when the Mini was 1/2 to no more than 2/3rds the price of an AR, and my value meter is pegged there permanently, just the psychology of it. But back then, the '94 ban was looming, so even GB folders were commanding 4 figures by that time, so I don't chafe at what those might cost if Ruger ever makes them again. Ruger has stated that the old wood folder was very costly to make. Also, the tooling to make the stock was repurposed/sold off during the Clinton Ban. Still, I think Ruger should take a serious look at making some version of their folder again. I'd prefer an authentic wood version but maybe the stock could be made from molded plastic to keep the costs down. Maybe make it with a AR grip interface or something. Darn near anything would be better than the stocks from Tapco, etc. YUCK! |
|
Quoted:
Hey Ruger, how about a 300 BO upper for the SR556 instead? You might have heard of these, all the cool kids are doing it (and .270, and 6.8 (again), and .458 SOCOM, etc., etc.) So now we have another 30 caliber mini? The Mini 30 wasn't doing it? And let me guess, more $60 proprietary magazines to buy. Sure glad we stalled out on the one platform you offer that is actually the easiest to offer upgrades (and runs off standard USGI mags). Yeah, it looks like an interesting rifle, but the mini's aren't known for outstanding accuracy and the design limits a lot of popular options for optics setups. Where are you gonna mount the NV and/or illumination on that stock? You know, some of the things folks that hunt with 300 BO kinda have a thing for? I like Ruger, but this waiting for shit is getting old. And getting raped on magazines is getting really, really old. Its easy to put whatever size magpul rail anywhere you want. I agree though, the mini 30 is already there. And why have a 16" 300 on a semi auto carbine? |
|
Quoted:
I see a potential downside: those sights don't appear to be high enough to clear a suppressor...so will it have a rail on the top? I am told the latest rifles coming out of the factory include a small section of pic rail that clamps onto the integral scope ring bases. |
|
Let's try a grassroots effort to get Ruger to re-introduce the classic folder.
Use the link below to go to Ruger's homepage where you can email Mike Fifer, the CEO. Let him know you'd be interested in a 300BLK rifle with the A-Team folding stock. https://www.ruger.com/dataProcess/tellTheCEO.html |
|
Quoted:
Let's try a grassroots effort to get Ruger to re-introduce the classic folder. Use the link below to go to Ruger's homepage where you can email Mike Fifer, the CEO. Let him know you'd be interested in a 300BLK rifle with the A-Team folding stock. https://www.ruger.com/dataProcess/tellTheCEO.html I would do that but I won't buy one. The AR is just too prevalent, and cheap right now. Doc |
|
Quoted: The Mini is now a niche product for the mix of people in ban states who can have a Mini but not an AR, and the handful of Fudds who've admitted to themselves a semi auto .223 with 20-30 round capacity is a needful thing, but their ego still won't let them get an AR. Quoted: The Mini is now a niche product for the mix of people in ban states who can have a Mini but not an AR, and the handful of Fudds who've admitted to themselves a semi auto .223 with 20-30 round capacity is a needful thing, but their ego still won't let them get an AR. Try a platform that requires some old fashioned practice in the basics and learn to appreciate marksmanship. I got my Ranch Rifle because it takes work to shoot it well. I use irons on it at all ranges because it's hard to shoot long range with them. I enjoy shooting my M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, and M14 (M1a) with their irons. Why? Because they require one to concentrate on the basics to do well; i.e. they require work rather than just slapping it up there and shooting. Quoted: Quoted: I see a potential downside: those sights don't appear to be high enough to clear a suppressor...so will it have a rail on the top? picatinny rail that screws on to the top of the scope mount bases formed into the top of the receiver. |
|
As to the 300 Blackout Mini-300(?), I think it's a great idea, especially for the handloader and/or the owner who wants a compact truck gun in 30 caliber but isn't a fan of the 7.62x39. Nothing wrong with the Mini-30 but it's hampered by the Russki crap ammo (even though it's cheap, it's inconsistent igniting and not known for it's accuracy) and limited and expensive hunting ammo. In addition, handloading the brass, boxer version of 7.62x39 ammo is expensive due to the limited availability of brass cases and the fact that the 30 cal Russki bullets are .311 dia. vs the much more common 30 cal Western bullets which are .308 dia. Further, the tapered Russki ammo requires the more curved mag and feeding them can be more problematic; hence the issues feeding in an AR and the lacquered coating on the steel cases to avoid rusting can gum up the action. The difference between the .223/5.56 and 300 Blackout version is simply a different barrel chambered in 300 Blackout with a different sized gas bushing plus mags that have a slightly different follower and slightly shallower dimple in the mag body where the bullet rides because of the larger diameter bullet. Everything else is the same so there is no requirement for additional tooling and/or unique parts, i.e. all the aftermarket stuff that fits the Mini-14 will likely fit the new Mini-300(?). Add to that the much more compact size of the Ruger over the AR platform and I think it's a great addition. I'd love one to use as a hog gun, 'yote gun, or even a brush area deer rifle. |
|
I don't really know what they were thinking, but it definitely has Rugeritis.
We're going to give you most of what you want, but add some off-the-wall crap at the last minute that makes you go  .
Heavy-barreled tactical Mini? I'm down for that. .300BLK? WTF, actual. What they need to do, is make the Mini 14 with the heavier profile barrel. And make a frickin' blued Mini-30 with a wood stock, so I don't have to spend another $175 after I buy one, plus an afternoon or three, putting it in a right proper stock. |
|
Quoted:
I don't really know what they were thinking, but it definitely has Rugeritis. We're going to give you most of what you want, but add some off-the-wall crap at the last minute that makes you go .
Heavy-barreled tactical Mini? I'm down for that. .300BLK? WTF, actual. What they need to do, is make the Mini 14 with the heavier profile barrel. And make a frickin' blued Mini-30 with a wood stock, so I don't have to spend another $175 after I buy one, plus an afternoon or three, putting it in a right proper stock. I'd rather see a chrome lined barrel and gas nozzle so I can shoot various brands of surplus ammo without as much worry. |
|
Quoted:
Now for a 308 version. Ruger tried that in '84 with the XGI. Ruger XGI Type Semi-automatic Rifle Place of origin  United States Production history Manufacturer Sturm, Ruger & Co. Unit cost $425 Produced 1984-1985 Number built Unknown Specifications Weight 3,600 g (7.94 lb) empty, w/ magazine Length 101.3 cm (39.88 in) Barrel length 50.8 cm (20.00 in) Cartridge .308 Winchester .243 Winchester Action Gas-operated, rotating bolt Feed system 5-round detachable box magazine Sights Iron sights |
|
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg Yes bring it back. 
|
|
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg + 5000 |
|
Quoted:
Hey Ruger, how about a 300 BO upper for the SR556 instead? You might have heard of these, all the cool kids are doing it (and .270, and 6.8 (again), and .458 SOCOM, etc., etc.) So now we have another 30 caliber mini? The Mini 30 wasn't doing it? And let me guess, more $60 proprietary magazines to buy. Sure glad we stalled out on the one platform you offer that is actually the easiest to offer upgrades (and runs off standard USGI mags). Yeah, it looks like an interesting rifle, but the mini's aren't known for outstanding accuracy and the design limits a lot of popular options for optics setups. Where are you gonna mount the NV and/or illumination on that stock? You know, some of the things folks that hunt with 300 BO kinda have a thing for? I like Ruger, but this waiting for shit is getting old. And getting raped on magazines is getting really, really old. Nailed it |
|
Quoted:
Now for a 308 version. There was a 308 version. It was called the Ruger XG1. The rifle was a introduced back in the 80's if I remember correctly. I think only 50 were ever made. Then Bill Ruger himself ceased production because the XG1 had extreme accuracy problems. So instead of spending money to solve the accuracy problems they put the time and money into something else. I just cant remember what that something was. Then a again the XG1 was a 2 steps backwards kind of gun. The whole point of the Mini 14 was to have a scaled down M14 in 223. So way scale it backup. Now you have a wannabe M14 that has worst accuracy than a real M14. Now I wish Ruger would just teach Springfield armory how to cast a receiver. Because we know ruger is the king when it comes to casting guns and gun parts. And when if you ever had to deal with an out of spec M1a you know what I mean. ETA: For some reason my tablet stopped letting me type and post posted without me finishing. |
|
Quoted:
I'll take an Ares SCR instead, thanks... http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/P1060538-900x600.jpg I would actually prefer one of these as well. Ruger mini-14's while I like them, aren't the most accurate guns, and it takes a to make them so. But even then a common rack grade AR15 could probably beat it. With good ammo and the right shooter of course. I wonder if you can put a wooden buttstock on the Ares SCR? On anothet note, RDTCU, do you still have that Loki rifle in your avatar? And how did you like it? |
|
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg 900? Lol |
|
Quoted:
900? Lol Quoted:
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg 900? Lol A factory folder SBR isn't worth $900-ish? What's a realistic price for something like that? |
|
Quoted:
A factory folder SBR isn't worth $900-ish? What's a realistic price for something like that? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg 900? Lol A factory folder SBR isn't worth $900-ish? What's a realistic price for something like that? If you want it to sell, it should be less than 700 Not many people are willing to pay over 700 for the mini Even ruger knows this, hence their line of ar15's |
|
The standard guns are $600-$700 now. Add the cost to reengineer and tool up for the folding stock and we'll be well past the base model price. I guess this is exactly why Ruger isn't making a good folder now.
Still, I think it would be a way more worthwhile project than the Single Six or SP101 in 327 Magnum. Quoted:
If you want it to sell, it should be less than 700 Not many people are willing to pay over 700 for the mini Even ruger knows this, hence their line of ar15's Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg 900? Lol A factory folder SBR isn't worth $900-ish? What's a realistic price for something like that? If you want it to sell, it should be less than 700 Not many people are willing to pay over 700 for the mini Even ruger knows this, hence their line of ar15's Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
The standard guns are $600-$700 now. Add the cost to reengineer and tool up for the folding stock and we'll be well past the base model price. I guess this is exactly why Ruger isn't making a good folder now. Still, I think it would be a way more worthwhile project than the Single Six or SP101 in 327 Magnum. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quoted:
The standard guns are $600-$700 now. Add the cost to reengineer and tool up for the folding stock and we'll be well past the base model price. I guess this is exactly why Ruger isn't making a good folder now. Still, I think it would be a way more worthwhile project than the Single Six or SP101 in 327 Magnum. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here's what we need to see Ruger making again. I may be wrong but I think something like this in 300BLK would sell pretty well even if the price was $900-ish. http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/480854000/480854494/pix804189725.jpg 900? Lol A factory folder SBR isn't worth $900-ish? What's a realistic price for something like that? If you want it to sell, it should be less than 700 Not many people are willing to pay over 700 for the mini Even ruger knows this, hence their line of ar15's Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile And? Just because it takes a lot of money to tool up for parts, doesn't mean people will buy it. The only reason why the mini used to sell as well as it did was the AWB, and price. Take away both of those, and what do you have? An expensive rifle that is throughly outclassed by the ar. |
|
And? Just because it takes a lot of money to tool up for parts, doesn't mean people will buy it. The only reason why the mini used to sell as well as it did was the AWB, and price. Take away both of those, and what do you have? An expensive rifle that is throughly outclassed by the ar. You win. Ruger should just discontinue the Mini-14 completely. |
|
Quoted:
You win. Ruger should just discontinue the Mini-14 completely. Quoted:
And? Just because it takes a lot of money to tool up for parts, doesn't mean people will buy it. The only reason why the mini used to sell as well as it did was the AWB, and price. Take away both of those, and what do you have? An expensive rifle that is throughly outclassed by the ar. You win. Ruger should just discontinue the Mini-14 completely. Its not like there are other 5.56 semi autos to take its place |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Mini in 300 BO (Page 1 of 2)
Armory Sponsor