I had in the range of 50,000 rds. from my AR-15 before the barrel was replaced. Literally the only time it jammed was when I tried Wolf ammo. True story. Myself and a friend were shooting 3/8 in. steel plate from roughly 50 yrds. We were shooting from the same can of ammo Mil-spec 55 gr. FMJ. My AR-15 punched holes like a paper punch. The rds. from the mini14 bounced off. Thanks but no thanks. You can keep the mini pooch.
M-1 carbine vs. Ruger mini 14.
- Thread starter Ignition Override
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, they can. There is a company called Accuracy Systems Inc. that builds sub-MOA Mini-14's all the time. It adds anywhere from $400 to $750 to the cost of the rifle based upon particular bells and whistles. I paid $450 for my Ranch, which does 2" right out of the box. For $300 more I can get a harmonic stabilizer that will cut that down to 1". Wow, plenty of accuracy for less than $800.
Gee, that's about what a Bushmaster AR-15 retails for, plus I get superior reliability. Now, if you really want to convice the rest of us that your rifle went for 50K rounds without a malfunction, well, good luck.
I call BS on the penetration claim of yours. The velocity of a 55-grain bullet out of a Mini runs between 3100 and 3200 fps, depending upon factory brand. The mil-spec requirement for 55-grain ammo out of an M-16 is 3250 fps. That's with a 20" barrel versus an 18" barrel like the one on the Mini. Hardly enough to write home about. I'd say your anecdote has more to do with the quality of the ammo than the quality of the rifle.
Now, I will admit that the Mini-14's trigger leaves a bit to be desired and the permanently mounted sling attachment on the gas block drives me nuts. But that's what is reasonable to expect for a $500 rifle.
I can buy a factory Target model for less than the cost of an AR-15 that will shoot 5/8 inch groups all day long without a malfunction. A "pooch" it ain't.
Gee, that's about what a Bushmaster AR-15 retails for, plus I get superior reliability. Now, if you really want to convice the rest of us that your rifle went for 50K rounds without a malfunction, well, good luck.
I call BS on the penetration claim of yours. The velocity of a 55-grain bullet out of a Mini runs between 3100 and 3200 fps, depending upon factory brand. The mil-spec requirement for 55-grain ammo out of an M-16 is 3250 fps. That's with a 20" barrel versus an 18" barrel like the one on the Mini. Hardly enough to write home about. I'd say your anecdote has more to do with the quality of the ammo than the quality of the rifle.
Now, I will admit that the Mini-14's trigger leaves a bit to be desired and the permanently mounted sling attachment on the gas block drives me nuts. But that's what is reasonable to expect for a $500 rifle.
I can buy a factory Target model for less than the cost of an AR-15 that will shoot 5/8 inch groups all day long without a malfunction. A "pooch" it ain't.
Well still the same. True story, like it or not. The ammo was from the SAME can, not boxed. I fell off the truck one nite, but not last nite. I have played with, shot and inspected the mini-pooch. Still a piece of junk. Why military no use? No comparision. Oh, real AR-15s are made by Colt, not Bushmaster or whoever. Colt AR-15, standard model, right out of the box with match grade ammo, 1 MOA or less. But if you like your mini-pooch, that's ok, you can have it.
Hank Dodge
Member
In places like California where "evil black rifles" are a no-no, the Mini-14 has a strong following. True that some are not that great out of the box, but they do clean up alright.
As far a choosing between an M-1 carbine and a Mini-14, it would depend on my intended usage. The carbine would be my first choice as a "house gun" where the range is relatively short and maneuverability is required. The .30 carbine round is fine for close in confrontations. The Mini-14 would win out if the distances were to open up to becoming a "ranch gun". The .223 is a light round, but it is good out to a few hundred yards with decent effect. The Mini can also be scoped if that lends itself well to your purposes.
As far a choosing between an M-1 carbine and a Mini-14, it would depend on my intended usage. The carbine would be my first choice as a "house gun" where the range is relatively short and maneuverability is required. The .30 carbine round is fine for close in confrontations. The Mini-14 would win out if the distances were to open up to becoming a "ranch gun". The .223 is a light round, but it is good out to a few hundred yards with decent effect. The Mini can also be scoped if that lends itself well to your purposes.
That's good. After you buy it go see what it's worth. Apples to oranges. To compare the Mini-pooch to the AR is like comparing a Geo Metro to a Beemer. There is no comparision. It's like comparing the Oregon Ducks to The NE Patriots. You get the mini-pooch and I'll get my old extemely used AR and get your butt out here and let's start shooting things at 300, 400, 500, yrds. Then tell me how wonderful the pooch is. I know what the results will be.
308win
Member
Somebody is off their meds.
Oohrah
Member
Functioning either one should go that distance without a hicup!
Neither caliber in it's military form would be my choice. Close up
and personal, I would choose the .30 with an expanding 100 or 110,
at about 2000 fps. As a HD not an over penetrator, but probably
just as effective or more so, than a lt. bullet .357 Mag out of a
handgun!
Neither caliber in it's military form would be my choice. Close up
and personal, I would choose the .30 with an expanding 100 or 110,
at about 2000 fps. As a HD not an over penetrator, but probably
just as effective or more so, than a lt. bullet .357 Mag out of a
handgun!
OK, OK, enough said. I just don't like Rugers. I don't think they are a quality firearm. You get what you pay for. Would I stand in front of one ...... heck no! But I'll take my Colt AR over the Ruger, any time, any where, under any circumstances
Tarvis
Member
Ahem
Hey lencac:
If you think the mini is crap because your ar-15 is better, good for you. High five. You deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. Unfortunately, you tooting your own whistle has nothing to do with what this post is about, which is the m1 carbine in comparison to the mini 14. Personally, I have no experience with the AR-15, shot one once. However, I have heard they have problems with the gas impingement system. And yes, Colt did design the original AR-15, that doesnt mean that Bushmaster or Wilson Combat or DPMS do not make an equally excelent weapon. How would you know Colt makes the only good AR unless you had shot ALL models of ALL the other manufacturers weapons. Apparently you haven't discerned the difference between reality and your opinion.
As for no military use, Um, hello, does the ar-15 see military use? NO, the m16 does however. The AR is based off of the M16, the mini 14 is based off the M14. while the difference between the m14 and mini 14 is greater than the diff between the M16 and AR15, the fact remains that ruger designed the mini to be an economical autoloader. It's not a target rifle, nor is it a $1000 gun.
I have shot wolf ammo through my rifle without a single hiccup (minus magazine failure, dont buy cheapies) or accuracy problem. If you serisously think that the mini has reduced fps shooting the same ammo, i suggest you do a test and post your results in a subjective manner, as opposed to your objective opinions. Take 2 rifles with the same barrel twist (yes twist plays a huge roll) and the same barrel length on 2 standard rifles and put them through a chrony. It may be true that the AR15 has a higher fps all else the same, but I doubt it until i see the proof. I don't see how any one could believe your comments without a little proof to back it up. The mini doesnt stabalize wolf ammo you say? The ruger website states 1:9 on new rifles, I'm sure this is hasnt changed. Tell me, what do you know about rifle twist? I know that 1:9, even up to 1:12 is suficient to stabilize a 55gr bullet. Maybe the bullets you were shooting were too heavy or too light for the twist, which wouldnt make the rifle crap, just suited for a different size bullet. Its rather ignorant to call a rifle junk just because you were using the wrong ammo.
If you still think the mini is junk (im sure you do), read what a knowledgeable proffesional thinks instead of assuming your opinion is the end all to debate.
http://www.ar15.com/content/swat/200203-AR-15_vs_Mini-14.pdf
If you still think all mini 14's should be taken out of the hands of thousands of americans, placed in a rocket, shot into space, then blown to bits by seven nuclear bombs, good for you. Go cuddle with your AR while my ranch rifle and I slaughter rabbits with my mini shooting wolf ammo
Happy Hunting
Mini 14's are used by police departments, mine came from a local PD so dont assume Mini 14s have no place in the work environment. In addition, If fps were higher (how would you know without a chronograph), its probably because mini 14's have a 16.5" barrel, while your AR may have a longer barrel which would produce a higher fps.
Hey lencac:
If you think the mini is crap because your ar-15 is better, good for you. High five. You deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. Unfortunately, you tooting your own whistle has nothing to do with what this post is about, which is the m1 carbine in comparison to the mini 14. Personally, I have no experience with the AR-15, shot one once. However, I have heard they have problems with the gas impingement system. And yes, Colt did design the original AR-15, that doesnt mean that Bushmaster or Wilson Combat or DPMS do not make an equally excelent weapon. How would you know Colt makes the only good AR unless you had shot ALL models of ALL the other manufacturers weapons. Apparently you haven't discerned the difference between reality and your opinion.
As for no military use, Um, hello, does the ar-15 see military use? NO, the m16 does however. The AR is based off of the M16, the mini 14 is based off the M14. while the difference between the m14 and mini 14 is greater than the diff between the M16 and AR15, the fact remains that ruger designed the mini to be an economical autoloader. It's not a target rifle, nor is it a $1000 gun.
I have shot wolf ammo through my rifle without a single hiccup (minus magazine failure, dont buy cheapies) or accuracy problem. If you serisously think that the mini has reduced fps shooting the same ammo, i suggest you do a test and post your results in a subjective manner, as opposed to your objective opinions. Take 2 rifles with the same barrel twist (yes twist plays a huge roll) and the same barrel length on 2 standard rifles and put them through a chrony. It may be true that the AR15 has a higher fps all else the same, but I doubt it until i see the proof. I don't see how any one could believe your comments without a little proof to back it up. The mini doesnt stabalize wolf ammo you say? The ruger website states 1:9 on new rifles, I'm sure this is hasnt changed. Tell me, what do you know about rifle twist? I know that 1:9, even up to 1:12 is suficient to stabilize a 55gr bullet. Maybe the bullets you were shooting were too heavy or too light for the twist, which wouldnt make the rifle crap, just suited for a different size bullet. Its rather ignorant to call a rifle junk just because you were using the wrong ammo.
If you still think the mini is junk (im sure you do), read what a knowledgeable proffesional thinks instead of assuming your opinion is the end all to debate.
http://www.ar15.com/content/swat/200203-AR-15_vs_Mini-14.pdf
If you still think all mini 14's should be taken out of the hands of thousands of americans, placed in a rocket, shot into space, then blown to bits by seven nuclear bombs, good for you. Go cuddle with your AR while my ranch rifle and I slaughter rabbits with my mini shooting wolf ammo
Happy Hunting
Mini 14's are used by police departments, mine came from a local PD so dont assume Mini 14s have no place in the work environment. In addition, If fps were higher (how would you know without a chronograph), its probably because mini 14's have a 16.5" barrel, while your AR may have a longer barrel which would produce a higher fps.
Last edited:
308win
Member
5....4....3....
SSN Vet
Member
and at this point, I think they failed
Marshall
Member
M1 Carbine gets you a piece of history too. The Ruger just gets you a piece.
I have two m1 carbines, from the CMP. They are both accurate enough for me. However one of them has trouble feeding the rounds out of the magazine. I don't know what the problem is, because the same magazine in the other m1 seems to feed fine.
I am wondering if there is a problem in the way the magazine is being locked into the receiver.
I guess the answer is that you need to use the rifle enough to make sure it is reliable. Accuracy is an issue to worry about after that.
I am wondering if there is a problem in the way the magazine is being locked into the receiver.
I guess the answer is that you need to use the rifle enough to make sure it is reliable. Accuracy is an issue to worry about after that.
Comparing a Mini-14 to a standard AR-15 is not comparing apples to oranges. The 20" AR-15 is more accurate than a standard Mini-14 (although the post 2005 models have narrowed the gap considerably). I admit that. But lots of folks seem to think that the Mini-14 is not capable of decent accuracy. That's just not true. If fed quality ammo it can shoot groups that are more than good enough (2-3 inches at 100 yards) for the use for which they are intended. The rifles can also be economically accurized if further accuracy is desired.
The Mini-14 is not the equivalent of a Geo Metro. I used to own both a Metro and a Lumina and I can say that the Mini-14 is a solid Chevy Lumina. But anyone that thinks an AR-15 is a Beemer has never shot a Blaser or even an AR-10. The AR-15 is at best a Lincoln Continental. It looks pretty but it needs a lot of work to keep it running.
The Mini-14 is not the equivalent of a Geo Metro. I used to own both a Metro and a Lumina and I can say that the Mini-14 is a solid Chevy Lumina. But anyone that thinks an AR-15 is a Beemer has never shot a Blaser or even an AR-10. The AR-15 is at best a Lincoln Continental. It looks pretty but it needs a lot of work to keep it running.
mnw42
Member
An AR can be more like an old Jaguar. Don't forget that Ford actually improved the QC.
tinroad37e
Member
I have a mini-30 that will shoot groups less than 2" at 100 yards. A couple thousand rounds and no malfunctions. It's far from a piece of crap. My dislikes are quality aftermarket mags and prices that keep getting higher. I am waiting for my local gunshop to get a mini-ranch chambered in 6.8. Problem is they're nearly as exspensive as a Bushmaster in 6.8. As far as reliability, I will have to claim I find the mini more reliable. Not by much, but a little. I have 14 years experience with the M16, so I'm not speaking out of my butt and trying to make my opinions fact, like some do on here and other websites. And once again, a thread has wondered off in a different direction.
Tarvis
Member
In what regards? I'm not disagreeing with your position, just curious where you think they went wrong. I agree that it will never be prominent in any competition shooting, even the Mini14 target rifle. I do think that for the price i paid ($400), i got a good truck gun that shoots strait and does everything i need it to. I guess I got lucky and bought a gun that doesn't have problems due to excessive wear or manufacturing defects, as it seems others have more problems.
Or maybe I'm an idiot, hell I don't know.
silverlance
Member
I have 2 AR, 2 M1 Carbine, 2 Mini14, 3 sks, 1 Ruger PC9.
The AR is very accurate. cleaning the gas rings and the bolt can be a real bi*** when carbon gets all caked up. eventually I just decided that whatever I could get off with a CLP'ed rag I'd simply ignore until it got bad enough that I'd need to scrape it off. the Pistol grip is nice to have but runs into all sorts of complications if you live in Ban states. sabre defense lower, dpms 14.5 upper with perm attached muzzle brake. $650 base price new, with a U15 beechwood stock $165.
the M1 is tons of fun to shoot and is beautiful. I like sleeping curled up with guns sometimes. the m1 is like a sleek petite woman; the ar15 is a chain smoking goth who has more metal in her face than a fistful of nails. $575 inland 90% condition, used
the mini14 is very nice to shoot and handy and accurate enough for anything but benchresters and benchresters are a silly bunch of ducks anyway (phbttt!!!!!). like the m1, no pistol grip and sights are very good (mine are 580 series, ghost rings). my favorite mini14 has been shot a lot but in terms of cleanign ive only done the barrel and the action. I dont disassemble at all. i will eventually but not worried about it. $450 used. the mini14 most closely resembles an american housewife. too much money is spent on making them pretty and for the most part it makes absolutely no difference in their performance anyway. just love her for her nice brownies and quit dreaming about having foie gras for dinner.
the chinese paratrooper sks is a real fun gun to shoot, is decently accurate but the sights aren't so hot, magazine is not detachable, and now that it is worth $400 I don't really want to damage it too much. the yugo M59 sks is probably the best cheap sks, at $250 for a 90% condition gun I cant complain. haven't had a chance to shoot for accuracy but the sks very reliable although to be honest the supposed "100% reliable" isn't. they jam just like everything else and yes Ive done it before. as a matter of fact jams in sks are worse - if they jam you drop the entire magazine, and then you ahve to reload it. you cant use "STOP" (i forget what it stands for now, its the army's menomic device for dealing with stoppages). the real appeal of an sks is that the damn thing is built like a tank and doesn't mind being slapped around. my 90% m59 and para stay in the safe though since they are quite pretty. however, i just bought a non-matching, rusted over, buggered up rear sight ugly arse M59. that one im going to repark, then put inside a tapco t6 stock with the appropriate replacement parts. why? just because, its fun. oh, and in keeping with the metaphorical trend - the sks is like a russian peasant woman. muscular, worn from years of work, and expecting to work many more. makeup is wasted on her but then she isn't very critical of your looks either.
the ruger pc9 is a very very nice gun. bang, ding! bang, ding! a very nice home defense gun for cityslickers. the pc9 is like a teenage girlfriend. she's cheap to take out and what a thrill. you dont expect 100 yard MOA out of her but that's okay because she's totally impressed because you have car.
which one to get? oh, heck. buy all of them. that is, unless you are one of those ar15 guys who had the rotten luck of their first loves being goth metalheads and then being forever scarred. =P
The AR is very accurate. cleaning the gas rings and the bolt can be a real bi*** when carbon gets all caked up. eventually I just decided that whatever I could get off with a CLP'ed rag I'd simply ignore until it got bad enough that I'd need to scrape it off. the Pistol grip is nice to have but runs into all sorts of complications if you live in Ban states. sabre defense lower, dpms 14.5 upper with perm attached muzzle brake. $650 base price new, with a U15 beechwood stock $165.
the M1 is tons of fun to shoot and is beautiful. I like sleeping curled up with guns sometimes. the m1 is like a sleek petite woman; the ar15 is a chain smoking goth who has more metal in her face than a fistful of nails. $575 inland 90% condition, used
the mini14 is very nice to shoot and handy and accurate enough for anything but benchresters and benchresters are a silly bunch of ducks anyway (phbttt!!!!!). like the m1, no pistol grip and sights are very good (mine are 580 series, ghost rings). my favorite mini14 has been shot a lot but in terms of cleanign ive only done the barrel and the action. I dont disassemble at all. i will eventually but not worried about it. $450 used. the mini14 most closely resembles an american housewife. too much money is spent on making them pretty and for the most part it makes absolutely no difference in their performance anyway. just love her for her nice brownies and quit dreaming about having foie gras for dinner.
the chinese paratrooper sks is a real fun gun to shoot, is decently accurate but the sights aren't so hot, magazine is not detachable, and now that it is worth $400 I don't really want to damage it too much. the yugo M59 sks is probably the best cheap sks, at $250 for a 90% condition gun I cant complain. haven't had a chance to shoot for accuracy but the sks very reliable although to be honest the supposed "100% reliable" isn't. they jam just like everything else and yes Ive done it before. as a matter of fact jams in sks are worse - if they jam you drop the entire magazine, and then you ahve to reload it. you cant use "STOP" (i forget what it stands for now, its the army's menomic device for dealing with stoppages). the real appeal of an sks is that the damn thing is built like a tank and doesn't mind being slapped around. my 90% m59 and para stay in the safe though since they are quite pretty. however, i just bought a non-matching, rusted over, buggered up rear sight ugly arse M59. that one im going to repark, then put inside a tapco t6 stock with the appropriate replacement parts. why? just because, its fun. oh, and in keeping with the metaphorical trend - the sks is like a russian peasant woman. muscular, worn from years of work, and expecting to work many more. makeup is wasted on her but then she isn't very critical of your looks either.
the ruger pc9 is a very very nice gun. bang, ding! bang, ding! a very nice home defense gun for cityslickers. the pc9 is like a teenage girlfriend. she's cheap to take out and what a thrill. you dont expect 100 yard MOA out of her but that's okay because she's totally impressed because you have car.
which one to get? oh, heck. buy all of them. that is, unless you are one of those ar15 guys who had the rotten luck of their first loves being goth metalheads and then being forever scarred. =P
Keith Wheeler
Member
(....wish I could get broadband out here!)
Last edited:
Keith Wheeler
Member
Tarvis said:
No, start making claims about the "efficiency" of a rifle (as an engineer, this is a term I've never heard with regards to a firearm), then perhaps you can be in the running for one.
Bottom line, from someone who owns both. (And a whole lotta other guns, ARs, FALs, bolt-actions, stamp collections, belt feds).
Both are great, fun rifles. The question you have to ask? Do you want history, or a "poor man's AR"? I doubt any honest man with such a budget would feel bad about either purchase, unless it was to want both.
- Status
