M-1 carbine vs. Ruger mini 14.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Ignition Override

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
9,392
Location
The Mid-South.
With the M-1 carbine versus the Ruger Mini-14 (5.56), which will be the most reliable after firing (i.e.) 100 rounds through each, assuming that both guns are brand-new? This is based on both being basically brand-new, or the equivalent. For those preferring the M-1 C., which manufacturer would you avoid, if any?

If each uses hollow-point bullets, is there much difference in stopping power against a solid (live) target 20-50 feet away?

Also, an article on the Internet tonight-quoted from some gun magazine-claimed that (advising a guy how to arm his daughters' residence with a carbine etc...) the M-1 does very well with fmj bullets but not good with either soft lead or hollow-point.

Looking forward to your comments. Maybe I've worn out this topic on 'HighRoad'.
I've only owned a .22 single-shot and rarely shoot but want to upgrade to a lower-cost carbine, due to cost 'justification-imitations'. Some target shooting would be a good bit less for ammo. The Belgian FN FAL would be fun but requires too much dough for gun and ammo, and as for the AR-15/clones, like old fashioned wooden stocks.

My wife (a music major through graduate level...;)) said "OK-just go buy it, but spare me the (boring) comparisons".
 
M-1 carbine. Fun to shoot. The Mini-14 is a nice concept, but I truely could throw the gun more accurately than shooting the thing. I love Ruger guns, but that is one that I have absolutely no use for.
 
There probably isn't much difference in reliability. Maybe you could argue that reliable magazines are easier to find for the M1.

The .223 is more powerful. 1100 ft/lb energy vs 950 ft/lbs or so.

Probably the most significant point is the range of ammo available in .223. Everything from frangible home defense ammo to long distance match ammo is available off the shelf.
 
ok alot of people are going to come in and say that the mini 14 is so inaccurate, which in my experience is complete crap. no they are not on average as accurate as an AR or many other guns, but in my experience it is alot more accurate than the average sks and even most AK variants that I have shot. Both the M1 carbine and the mini-14 will be good guns, but if price is a concern you might want to consider an SKS. Out of the 3 I like the M1 cabine the best but the SKS would be the most versitile with the mini-14 being close behind. Also on ammo the SKS ammo is the least expensive then the mini-14 ammo with the M1 carbine ammo being considerably more expensive than the other option and with less availability.
 
If each uses hollow-point bullets, is there much difference in stopping power against a solid (live) target 20-50 feet away?
Click to expand...

You'll likely here opinions from both 5.56mm-fragmentation schools of thought as well as bigger-is-better fans of 0.3" holes in things.

At the kind of range you are talking about, however, either one will do the job pretty reliably with a torso hit. Think in terms of controlled pairs with either one, however -- if one does not suffice a second one right after it will almost always settle the discussion.
 
With the M-1 carbine versus the Ruger Mini-14 (5.56), which will be the most reliable after firing (i.e.) 100 rounds through each, assuming that both guns are brand-new?
Click to expand...

Finding a "brand new" M-1 carbine might be a trick. Let me know what you turn up. They will be about the same in regards to reliabilty after 100 rounds although I would give a slight edge to the mini. I have shot maybe 2000 rounds through my mini and it has never jammed, not even once. The M1 may allow a higher sustained rate of fire than the mini (if you care about such things).

This is based on both being basically brand-new, or the equivalent. For those preferring the M-1 C., which manufacturer would you avoid, if any?
Click to expand...

I avoid Rugers and won't buy any new ones. This is more for poor customer service and bad politics than defects in the guns themselves (although some have issues).

If each uses hollow-point bullets, is there much difference in stopping power against a solid (live) target 20-50 feet away?
Click to expand...

Wider, slower and heavier vs. slimmer, faster and lighter. There have only been about 5400 threads that debate this point. Generally the edge is given to the .223 round, especially if it is in the heavier loading. But you can argue it either way.

The Mini worst case will be at least as accurate and cheaper to shoot with more flexibility in ammunition choice if you don't reload or even if you do.
Click to expand...

Let us go ahead and say much cheaper... by half or a third as much. Keep in mind guns are like dogs... it isn't the cost of the dog... it is the care and feeding. It alos hard to find much except 110 gr ball in .30 Carbine.
 
I own an M1 carbine, and like it a bunch. Ammo is fairly easy to come by, at least has been easy to find lately, which has not always been the case.

My buddy has a Ruger Ranch version of the Mini 14. Shoots ok iron sighted, but can't get it to work woth a crap with a scope. He's tried, I've tried, different rings, scopes, etc. Just won't work for some stupid reason or other, can't hit squat!

My buddy and I must fall into the "full of crap" catagory!

I was going to buy his Ranch rifle off him, but after two attempts myself to get it scoped and shooting, gave it back to him.

I like the Mini 14 concept, others have had great luck with them, but this one ain't going in my arsenal!
 
All 3 guns mentioned are reliable and accurate. They will all take out the bad guy at those ranges listed. The SKS is much heavier than the M-1 or the Mini unless you have the carbine version. Forget stories about Mini-14s being inaccurate,most of the time that is only hearsay. I have found them to be sufficient for the job that they were designed for. For the purposes that you have described,all will give satisfactory results. I think personal tastes and availability/price of ammo to be the bigger factor here.
 
Mini for practical reasons of ammo supply and varriety. Only buy one if you get a good deal--they are overpriced for what they are. That said, they are pretty reliable and will eat most ammo (with widely varrying accuracy).

Yes, Ruger has the new tuned-up one (for some $$$) and ran an ad a few months back that actually disparaged and mocked those of us who had bought one of their 'old' minis. Yeh, it made me feel warm and fuzzy about Ruger and their $%^& attitude.

Buy a second hand mini if you can.
 
I have had a couple of minis, my latest being a new 580 series model. Neither of my minis have ever jammed, ever. This includes using the factory 5 round mags, 20 factory mags, and a variety of after market mags. Maybe I have just been lucky. I use my mini for a truck gun (incidental coyotes). It is not as accurate as my real varmint gun, but plenty accurate for any reasonable farm/defense purposes. The newer minis have great front and rear sights. Plus, when you get the stainless/synthetic model rust/maintanence issues are reduced.
 
I love my ranch rifle. It has the stainless steel barrel which supposedly is more accurate. I have also shot an M1-C. I like both. I would choose the Mini just for the fact that I am biased because I own one and due to the fact that when I shot my buddy's M1, it kept misfiring which made me dislike the gun. The truth is that the ammo were were using was reloaded by my buddy in the late 60s but I still havent had a chance to shoot it with good ammo. Over all, I like the look of both and I think you wouldnt be wrong with either.
 
I have a couple each M1 Carbines and Mini-14s. After 100 rounds there should be no meaningful difference in reliability, assuming the use of good quality magazines and decent ammo.

WRT to Carbines not liking JSPs or JHPs, this is untrue as a blanket statement. Some Carbines don't function well with anything other than Ball (FMJ), while others run fine with expanding ammo. For example, Remington 110 grain JSP runs just as well as Ball in my Underwood and Rock Ola M1s.

According to posts by Dr. Gary K. Roberts on Tactical Forums, the Remington 110 grain JSP does just as good as the best 5.56mm rounds in gelatin testing. Winchester .30 Carbine JHSP is almost as good, while Federal 110 grain JSP did not expand. Performance and real tissue may or may not match these results, though according to Jim Cirrillo, .30 Carbine JSPs dropped criminals as good as anything else.
 
I've put a lot of thought into the concept of a lightweight carbine that could be pressed into taking deer. I was very impressed with how incredibly lightweight the M1 carbine is. In fact, at 5.2 lbs, it is lighter than an ultralight SU-16 (5.5 lbs). The mini 14 is also pretty light at 6.3 lbs. I have an SKS, which weighs in at a beastly 8.5 lbs.

In the final analysis, I'd prefer the M1 Carbine for its ultra lightweight and history.... but I'd still feel more confident in the modern Mini-14s reliability, warranty, and ammo availability.
 
SKS isn't exactly a carbine though, is it?

unless you're talking about one of the paratrooper models....but their not exaclty $200 mil. surps are they?

So....

If our friends gonna drop $600, all I can say is ...

I know exactly what I'd get....

Brand spankin' new Auto-Ord. (Karh Arms) M1 Carbine....and a stash of relatively cheap ($20) Hi Cap mags off of Gunbroker.com ... and quick, before the Dim-whit-o-crats ban them for good.

the Mini-30 would be my second choice....

but...

my money is tighter than others, so it was AK all the way for me.....which isn't a carbine, but it does go

bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, click!
 
My Mini 14 Ranch Rifle (generation just previous to this one) in stainless and plastic is the most truly practical gun I own. It's a great tool.

I don't have to worry about scratches, rust or dings. No babying it in the field, no oiling it all over as soon as I get home, even if I did sweat on it. And it keeps on shooting with minimal attention. It's about the right weight; it points well and shoots well offhand, but isn't hard to carry in the brush all day.

As a toy, the M1 Carbine is a great little gun. As a tool, the stainless/synthetic Mini is a better choice, at least for me. I like having ONE gun that I can treat like it's made to be used, not fussed over.

The .223/5.56 round is readily available and relatively cheap for practice. And for defensive rounds, you benefit from the knowledge brought by years of use by everyone from varmint hunters and the military to the police. There's a round for everything, and data to show how it works. It's been the primary US military issue rifle round through 4 wars and many more smaller military actions.

The .30 Carbine round, on the other hand, has not seen serious use like that since Korea, and there's been little to drive the sort of innovation and variety that .223 rounds have seen over the past 40 years.

Again, I like the M1 Carbine. It's neat. I'm speaking strictly about practical use, here.

The only bummer is the price of the Ruger in stainless/synthetic these days. It's improved since mine was made, but it's also notably more expensive.
 
I owned a mini-14 (188-series Ranch Rifle) until a few months ago. It was 100% reliable; the only failures I ever experienced (two) were a couple of ultra-hot reloads (supposedly "five grains over") that were accidentally given to me, and the overpressure locked up the action so tight that I had to kick the bolt handle to open the bolt. The rifle was completely unharmed, FWIW.

Accuracy-wise, my mini-14 shot around 5.5" at 100 yards, from a rest. Still, at 20 to 50 feet, you're talking sub-1" groups, which is entirely adequate. The new mini's are reportedly 3 MOA or better.

Regarding stopping power, I think either rifle loaded with JHP's would be plenty effective at the ranges you are speaking of. If the M1 carbine wouldn't feed JHP's reliably, though, I'd lean strongly toward the mini.

Otherwise, the rifles are very similar; the mini is arguably a closer cousin to the M1 carbine than to its namesake the M14.
 
My mom's M1 carbine was the first center fire rifle I ever shot; my stainless folder Mini-14 the first I ever owned.

Both work every time. Both are great plinkers, and provide the "minute of beer can" accuracy that's important to me.

Just for a great rifle to have around, it's a tough call. .223 is abundant; these days I've broken down to buying Aguila for the carbine. (Technically still "mom's", but has been in my possession for many years). More history in the carbine, more add-on "stuff" for the Mini-14. Carbine mags are more likely to be reliable, but aren't as cheap as they used to be!

One thing about that little M1 -- it's the gun that (to me at least) is the meaning of the cliche "sweet shooting". It fits right, a great point and click sort of thing. I was at a shoot earlier this year at a rather famous and fun Texas range and had a blast plinking "into the river" without the sites and still hitting things. Fun.

As far as reliability from "brand new"....well, 'my' carbine is a '43 Saginaw, and I'm guessing it's seen a few more than 100 rounds, and it still doesn't complain. Starting to think it might need a new recoil spring, which I'm sure I'll be needing more than that when I'm 64.

While I'll always love it when a plan comes together, holding that carbine, knowing what it did, imparts a certain sense of honor of duty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

2
  • Locked
Mini-14 vs .30 carbine?
2 3
Replies
71
Views
9K
kathya
K
1
  • Locked
M-1 Carbine HP or SP for HD?
Replies
14
Views
1K
molonlabe
M
A
  • Locked
Mini 14 Accuracy
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
BamBam-31
B
G
  • Locked
Battle of The Carbines : M-1 or High-Point ?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
4K
Cocked & Locked
Cocked & Locked
Y
  • Locked
Mini 14 vs m1 carbine for fun at the ranch and plinking
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
SharpsDressedMan
S
Back
Top