Now this is a cool Ruger Mini-14

[Ugly Sauce]

Not sure why anyone would want full auto, unless you have a convoy of two ton trucks (or a dozen or so Hummers) bringing you ammo. ?? Prove me wrong. (yeah yeah, I'd love to have a MG42 for rural home defense...maybe that's why?)

 

[westernrover]

Nor does it have a weather station, flashlight, laser, or a dozen other can't live without doo-dads plastered all over it. One would be laughed right off the shooting range, or out of the tactical "contest" by all the expert posers. Just the lack of a rail would spell one's doom.

Seriously, I think the key items for the cool kids these days is an LPVO and a PEC-15 type module. That kind of setup avoids the goofy-looking overaccessorization that identifies poseurs while keeping the price of membership up to maintain exclusivity. Of course, the LPVO has to be at least 8X, preferably 10X, have a side-mount RMR, and the PEC is accompanied by NODs. That assures the price of entry is at least 5-figures just for the rifle and the NV doubles it again.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Seriously, I think the key items for the cool kids these days is an LPVO and a PEC-15 type module. That kind of setup avoids the goofy-looking overaccessorization that identifies poseurs while keeping the price of membership up to maintain exclusivity. Of course, the LPVO has to be at least 8X, preferably 10X, have a side-mount RMR, and the PEC is accompanied by NODs. That assures the price of entry is at least 5-figures just for the rifle and the NV doubles it again.

Oh yeah, I figured I left a dozen or so doo-dads out. Don't forget that one needs to pair that 10X LPVO with a 12" barrel. Just saying. And no offense to anyone, the cool kids would not even let me get out of my truck, with my M16A1 clone, (semi-auto, don't need to call you know who) and if I did, I'd be beaten severely about the head and shoulders and made to eat dirt. Also, nothing against the rifle in the OP, not my cup-o-tea, but kind of a neat weapon. I sure would not add doo-dads to it.

 

[westernrover]

Transferable full-auto firearms appear to be a decent investment or at least a fair store-of-value. Certainly, they're better than US dollars for storing value. I once heard a pastor/preacher ripping people that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on fully-automatic machine guns. He wasn't being anti-gun. He just thought it was a tremendous waste of money that could be used for more meaningful purposes. What he failed to understand was that a person could have purchased several M-16's for a hundred thousand dollars, and 10 years later they could be sold for a lot more dollars. Even adjusted for inflation, they would not have lost any value and most likely would have gained some. I can see the validity of criticism of a person who burns up many crates of ammunition without accomplishing anything. It's certainly possible to be wasteful. I'm not saying that anyone who shoots a lot is wasteful. Just that a person can waste ammo. Wasting a lot of it is foolish. If a person can afford machine guns, it's not necessarily foolish to buy them just because they cost a lot. Personally, I don't have enough conventional assets to consider it -- I don't think it makes sense for 50% of my portfolio to consist of an M-60.

 

[Rule3]

I remember years ago you could buy the folding stainless stock for less that $100 I sure wish I bought one

 

[Ugly Sauce]

He wasn't being anti-gun. He just thought it was a tremendous waste of money that could be used for more meaningful purposes.

To my mind, it's not a waste of money, it is a tremendous waste of ammo. For a range toy, I have no problem with full auto. For any survival or self defense purpose, certainly a tremendous was of ammo. (for us civilians, all out combat between opposing forces, yes, full auto has it's place) That's how I think about it.

 

[westernrover]

I remember years ago you could buy the folding stainless stock for less that $100 I sure wish I bought one

They're not more expensive today, and I would argue that the Samson-made stocks are far better quality. The fit and finish is very fine. The walnut wood they use is beautiful. They do everything right and nothing is cheap or flimsy. It's an outstanding product. It does have design weaknesses, like the weight I mentioned, but that is not Samson's call. They are reproducing an original Ruger design. I'm sure it could be done differently with carbon-fiber, titanium and polymer, but for the goal Samson set out with, to reproduce the original Rugers, they've done it impeccably and I have no doubt Samson's quality is better than the originals ever were.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

You know what I'd really like? A Mini-14 gussied up in M1 carbine replica furniture like they did with the 10/22.

 

[GEM]

While all this is fun, the raison d'etre (IMHO) is to get a rather plain jane Mini to beat the AWB in various states. Of course, when total semi bans are enacted (as some antis have figured this out, it won't make a difference). Mine is synthetic, normal stock with a LVPO. Works for me here.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Definitely has a cool factor, but they're priced out of selling me one by about $500

 

[Speedo66]

I wouldn’t mind a couple of those factory Ruger nickel magazines.

 

[Rule3]

They're not more expensive today, and I would argue that the Samson-made stocks are far better quality. The fit and finish is very fine. The walnut wood they use is beautiful. They do everything right and nothing is cheap or flimsy. It's an outstanding product. It does have design weaknesses, like the weight I mentioned, but that is not Samson's call. They are reproducing an original Ruger design. I'm sure it could be done differently with carbon-fiber, titanium and polymer, but for the goal Samson set out with, to reproduce the original Rugers, they've done it impeccably and I have no doubt Samson's quality is better than the originals ever were.

They are almost $300???

https://www.brownells.com/gun-parts/rifle-parts/rifle-stocks-parts/ruger-mini-14-a-tm-stock-folding/

 

[westernrover]

If they were $100 when you saw them on the A-Team in 1984, then $300 is the same price today.

 

[doubleh]

Never, ever, wanted a mini-14 and still don't---at any price.

 

[Crosshair]

Of course, the LPVO has to be at least 8X, preferably 10X, have a side-mount RMR, and the PEC is accompanied by NODs.

Tactical idiocy never goes away, it just changes form.

On the plus side, it means that 1-4x and 1-6x LPVOs are plentiful and inexpensive.

 

[Gordon]

You know all this "Mini 14 s are very inaccurate " that Ive heard since the mid 90s must be those after the first 180 model. My 180 (with bolt roller ect) was decent accurate , around 2moa with a 2 1/2 x scope at 100 yards and M193 ammo. I had it stolen from a group hunting camp locker while we were out deer hunting (they took all the booze and optics too) in the early 2000s . Others who bought those early ones thought they were decent accurate also , I believe the attempts at cheapening the first design may be responsible for that claim if it is true.