User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 10:20:34 AM EDT
[#1]
I read it. It was kind of a cop out ending.
Regardless, I'll take the AR15, I know what my AR15 can and can't do, the AR15 is my choice. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 10:39:27 AM EDT
[#2]
The primary goal of the average gun magazine is not to publish valid data, rather it is to sell copies and ad space.
So, if I want to see and read ads I'll buy a gunrag. There's nothing wrong with making money. However, if I'm looking for good data, I'll take what I read in the rags with a BIG grain of salt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 11:43:54 AM EDT
[#3]
What a joke. I was going to buy the magazine until I scanned through that article. I've owned both Mini's and ARs. Only a complete fool would rate them even close. Watch-Six
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 11:52:50 AM EDT
[#4]
The Mini's not nearly as bad as many make it out to be. Given certain choice parameters, a Stainless Mini might come out ahead.
Given my druthers, though, I'd pick the AR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 11:58:33 AM EDT
[#5]
Correct me if I am wrong..but doesn't www.TheFiringLine.com have a huge financial interest along with contributing editors involved with "SWAT" magazine??
Sgtar15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 12:00:15 PM EDT
[#6]
They do have a point though when dirty the mini is more reliable.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 12:04:19 PM EDT
[#7]
yup... just went to TFL for the first time and they do own the mag... is that a bad thing? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2002 12:04:37 PM EDT
[#8]
Yep.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 6:45:36 AM EDT
[#9]
Man that author doesn't know dick about guns; I'd sure be EMBARASSED if I wrote an article that was that shitty. There is NO WAY that you can compare a shout-out AR 11.5 inch barrel that was used for full auto fire - hence the description "thousand of rounds through it" - with a 16 inch new barrel. A thoroughly shot-out AR shoots about 4-6 inch groups at 100 yrds. A brand new Mini-shit-teen shoots about 6-8 inch groups at a hundred yards. A thoroughly shot-out 11.5 inch AR would be expected to therefoore shoot about 6-8 inch groups at 100 yrds.
Ruger states that the "suggested retail" price of a new Mini-suck-teen is $725 dollars. About the price for a new Bushy (less at one of those really big DFW gun shows). SWAT magazine really sold out to Ruger to print this trash. We should all dump our subscriptions to SWAT and get subscriptions to Gun Test (yes, more $$ but you definately get what you pay for). The Mini-14 is such a shitty gun that it should only be used as a pry bar. Factory specs call for 6-8inch groups at 100 yrds. Ruger spends a wopping $15.00 per barrel. ***** RUGER SHOULD BE EMBARASSED AND ASHAMED TO ATTEMPT TO SELL SUCH UTTER GARBAGE TO THE AMERICAN SHOOTER. EMBARASSED AND ASHAMED ***** |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 7:00:11 AM EDT
[#10]
Must agree the article was shitty, and the "testing" was far from being scientific.
"OK, today we are going to see if a new gun can perform alomst as well as one that has the barrel shot out if it!" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 9:02:27 AM EDT
[#11]
I just sent in for a subscription to S.W.A.T. and dumped Gun Test!!!
Tired of Gun Test and the overly finicky testing/reporting results. I sent them a letter that said as much and gave the subscription renewal a "Don't Buy" rating, telling them that "while you're the best at what you do, in our opinion, you could do better"... I glanced through the article in S.W.A.T. at the store as I haven't started getting the magazine at the house yet and thought it was an apples/oranges test from what I gathered. Gun Test has fallen from the perch when they compare guns and give ratings based on tenths of an inch at 25yds. accuracy differences. They also don't make a lot of sense saying a Beretta 8045 Cougar in .45ACP at 32oz. has too much recoil - don't buy it VS. a GLOCK that weighs 20oz. in the same caliber handles well and it's a buy... I had to deny them a renewal. I'll take an AR over a Mini-14. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 9:23:19 AM EDT
[#12]
I suppose for law enforcement situations (resd,close) the Mini is all right. If I am going to use a rifle that patterns instead of groups, why not stay with a shotgun. If a guy wants a hosemaster buy an SKS or AK and they will be cheaper and more accurate.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 9:50:43 AM EDT
[#13]
I have seen a few issues of Gun Test mag and while the idea behind it is good, the people doing it were really something else. Some of the reviews were just too much to read. When they gave the ASA AR a buy it, I just couldnt bring myself to look at another issue. Reviews in mags like SWAT arent worth much, reviews I have seen in Gun Tests are just as bad for different reasons... No thanks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 10:51:44 AM EDT
[#14]
Having shot both of these weapons for many years, I do agree that the Mini is not as accurate as the current crop of AR's. The Mini shoots with about the same accuracy as the old light M16A1 barrel. The A2 and HBar type are much better.
The Mini-14 is a very rugged, reliable firearm. It will function with little or no cleaning or lubrication far beyond what you can expect from the AR-15/M16. For a "store away for a rainy day" or "behind the seat in my pickup" gun, a Mini-14 stainless with synthetic stock is a good choice. But, most AR's today, with the heavier barrels, really blow the old "bolt actions are more accurate than autos" BS. The thing that really tips the scales more that any other... Ruger is very tight with parts, insisting you ship them the rifle for factory replacement of many of the parts we would like to keep as spares. This is intolerable. The fantastic array of good quality parts, easily available, as well as magazines and other accessories, make the AR-15 the only serious choice here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 2:39:57 PM EDT
[#15]
Every review in a for profit forum is worth exactly the money advertisers paid for it...
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/16/2002 4:33:00 PM EDT
[#16]
What a bunch of crap, I taught a Police Rifle class and some people brought Mini-14s and by the end of the week they were all shooting Ar's because theres would not hold zero or just were not shooting good groups, Ruger has such high standards that the Mini must shoot 6 inch or better at 25 to leave the factory, what a joke.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2002 3:38:52 PM EDT
[#17]
Agree with above, that Gun Tests does do some really weird stuff. But it is still a good source of information if you use some of your own common sense when reading it. They blasted the Knight's AR-10 equivalent, they said it was reliable, shot well, was well made, but they didn't get the kiss-ass routine from the factory, so they trashed it. You gotta just ignore some of the illogical stuff that they print. It's really hard to get truly solid intel about firearms it you don't utilize Gun Tests. It's far from perfect, but it's about the best that we have for now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2002 4:40:24 PM EDT
[#18]
about a week ago thier was a similat thread, but about a rag giving the hi point carbine
 rave reveiws. same shit diffrent peice of shit |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2002 6:09:34 PM EDT
[#19]
I usually will buy the SWAT mag because I do like some of the articles in it. But I am glad to see that I am not the only one that thinks they sold out in that article.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2002 7:55:37 PM EDT
[#20]
That's like comparing appples and oranges. I own both and enjoy shooting both rifles, but the 14 cannot hold a candle to the AR15.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2002 9:01:24 PM EDT
[#21]
"The Mini-14 is such a shitty gun that it should only be used as a pry bar."
No, sorry, the Mini's barrel is not heafty enough to work as a good prybar. I really think the Mini is basically a good design, it just needs a heavier barrel. A heavy barreled version could and should be offered by the factory, and should not add more than $25-$30 to the cost of the rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2002 11:36:05 PM EDT
[#22]
I have to add my 2 cents here..i've read a few comments regarding the ar-15/m-16's reliability. Thats a bunch of crap, and its starting to piss me off. I've humped an m-16 a2, now an m-4 all over the planet..I've had them dirtier/dustier than sheeit, and compared to any other weapon i own its no worse. Actually better.. WTF?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2002 11:53:25 PM EDT
[#23]
I own an ASA AR. Is there something wrong with ASA AR's? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2002 12:37:46 AM EDT
[#24]
The magazine could not bash the mini-14 too bad. Magazines make a chunk of thier money from advertisers. What is the magazine suppose to say to Ruger " Would you like to place an ad in our magazine, Oh by the way our magazine just wrote and article bashing the Mini-14." They cant piss off the advertisers too much.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2002 4:13:04 AM EDT
[#25]
very spotty quality... many complaints on ASAs not to mention more complaints on their customer service (or lack thereof) |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2002 4:24:06 AM EDT
[#26]
i too thot the article sux !!!
i bought the mag. just for that article & it ended up saying shyt !! nothyng definitive !! as are most test comparisons, it all boils down to the same crap as politics..., no one wants to say the other "guy/gun" is crapy...... after reading the article, i am convinced i will stick wyth the AR15s, i got three & looking at another, a Colt NIB pre-ban...!! my next question is shud i take it out of the box & shoot it or keep it in the box ???????????? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2002 9:59:56 AM EDT
[#27]
I bought a Mini-30 several years ago. I had a beat-up, ugly Chinese SKS and wanted something a little more accurate and reliable in 7.62x39. Guess what, the nod still goes to the SKS. However, I don't hate the Mini. My biggest complaint is the 5rnd. factory mags are the only ones that work (in mine). It is a fun rifle and I let new shooters use it at the range. Beyond that, I would not want to depend my life on it!
I also recently let my sub. to GUN TESTS expire. While I've found it informative for the past 4 years, the evaluation criteria for their buy/don't buy recommendations is randomly applied and very subjective. The "one gun" examination is statistically meaningless as evidenced by the "Hi-Point" and "Carbon-15" reviews. I think that four years ago it was (for me) the best source for independent (if flawed) review of new firearms. Today, with the internet and sites such as AR-15.com there is a wealth of information and opinions to sort through. Gun Tests just doesn't rate a "Buy" at $40.00 per year anymore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2002 1:24:43 PM EDT
[#28]
I also had a mini14, now the rifle is not bad, its the stuff the gun is made of "Ivestment casting for the reciever, i think forged would be better" the barrel is WAYYYYY to thin needs to be hammer forged, and thicker /heavier. could tighten up the tolerences a bit around the bolt cam area. the sks's you get a screw in barrel plus a milled reciever you have a decent rifle. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
