Ruger Mini-14 vs. AR-15 - Which one and why?

Mini-14 or AR?

  • Mini-14

    Votes: 10 18.2%

  • AR

    Votes: 45 81.8%
  • Total voters
    55
Status
Not open for further replies.
A Mini moment. Many years ago, I was driving up I-35 between San Antonio and Austin in a farm-ish area. There was scores of police vehicles with tens of officers bailing out and running into the fields. Quite a few were carrying Minis - I forget the agencies, it's been awhile.

A deranged murder had run into the fields after chase and it was a Code Holy Moly turnout. Didn't know that and happily kept on driving a little faster.

BTW, mine runs with Ruger mags, the after market were jammers. Got an LVPO on it.

Leupold VX-R Patrol Riflescope​


It works. It's legal here. Amazing how states parrot old AWBs and avoid the standard Minis for years. Unfortunately, after some massacres with them (ex. Canada, Norway) the more knowledgeable antis are picking this up and going for total semi bans. Wake up, Thomas and Alito - before you age out.
 
There are a few points I'd like to make based on some of the comments left so far.

#1: The Mini14 is a piston gas system and most AR15s are direct impingement. The Mini14 will run longer, cleaner, and cooler than a milspec AR15.

#2: Price: Most basic factory AR15s (not Frankensteins or 2nd tier manufacturer peice togethers) run between $850-$1100 +/-. A piston driven AR will typically cost much more. The Mini14 sells between $800-$1400 retail depending on what bells and whistles are added. Comparing apples to apples, the Mini14 is priced comparable to most factory AR15s.

#3: The AR15 is under the threat of being banned or have features banned in many states. It is already banned in some states. The Mini14 is legal in all 50 states, so you legal can travel with it in most states.

#4: Accuracy: The Mini14 had accuracy issues in the early days. To this very day, those early issues and reputation haves stuck and is regurgitate ad nauseam. Ruger has long since made upgrade and updates to the barrel and rifle to address the accuracy issue. It's more than accrate enough to complete the role it was designed to fulfill.
 
Last edited:
Styx said:
#1: The Mini14 is a piston gas system and most AR15s are direct impingement. The Mini14 will run longer, cleaner, and cooler than a milspec AR15.
Click to expand...

Sounds great in theory - but they don't.

Styx said:
#2: Price: Most basic factory AR15s (not Frankensteins or 2nd tier manufacturer peice togethers) run between $850-$1100 +/-. A piston driven AR will typically cost much more. The Mini14 sells between $800-$1400 retail depending on what bells and whistles are added. Comparing apples to apples, the Mini14 is priced comparable to most factory AR15s.
Click to expand...

Bad pricing across the board. Upgraded AR's still cost less than upgraded Mini's, and shoot smaller down range - aka, longer effective range for the weapons system. Comparing Apples to Apples and ignoring the red herring of an improper requirement of piston operation, a better performing AR costs less than a lesser performing Mini.

Styx said:
#3: The AR15 is under the threat of being banned or have features banned in many states. It is already banned in some states. The Mini14 is legal in all 50 states, so you legal can travel with it in most states.
Click to expand...

The Mini is also under threat of AWB's, and not all Mini's are "legal in all 50 states." Only the "featureless" standard models, akin to Cali-Compliant AR's, and the featured Tactical models are all prohibited in the existing ban states.

Styx said:
#4: Accuracy: The Mini14 had accuracy issues in the early days. To this very day, those early issues and reputation haves stuck and is regurgitate ad nauseam. Ruger has long since made upgrade and updates to the barrel and rifle to address the accuracy issue. It's more than accrate enough to complete the role it was designed to fulfill.
Click to expand...

It's NOT an accurate rifle. More accurate than abysmal, but still relatively terrible compared to the rest of the market is still terrible compared to the rest of the market. That's NOT just a carry over of 180 series reputation to current production, it remains a reality for their product line. Were it released today, no other model of firearm by any other manufacturer would receive such forgiveness from the market for such poor performance.
 
Colt AR-15's without a doubt. A few years after the Mini 14 came out I saw a guy shooting one on the range and I was hot to get one. A Friend told me his Son had one and I was welcome to try it out before I bought one. I asked him what he thought of it and he said you shoot it first. That was a big favor. At 100 yards I was barely on the paper. Nothing could be called a group. No thanks. AR-15's Large.jpg
 
Varminterror said:
Sounds great in theory - but they don't.
Click to expand...
It's not a "theory." It's a fact that most will acknowledge when comparing piston and direct impingement gas systems.

Varminterror said:
Bad pricing across the board. Upgraded AR's still cost less than upgraded Mini's, and shoot smaller down range - aka, longer effective range for the weapons system. Comparing Apples to Apples and ignoring the red herring of an improper requirement of piston operation, a better performing AR costs less than a lesser performing Mini.
Click to expand...
What upgrades? I'm comparing apples to apples. Factory Mini14s to factory AR15s. Neither needs upgrades, and that just goes back to my point that most people like AR15s because they like to play Legos and added a bunch of expensive extras.

It's a piston driven heavy CHF barrel rifles that can be had from the factory for less than an AR15 with the same features. While I will agree that it will cost more to have a bunch of tacticool stuff hanging off the Mini14 vs an AR15, but that stuff is not needed or required on either platform for it to be fully functional and useful.

Varminterror said:
The Mini is also under threat of AWB's, and not all Mini's are "legal in all 50 states." Only the "featureless" standard models, akin to Cali-Compliant AR's, and the featured Tactical models are all prohibited in the existing ban states.
Click to expand...
What AWB has included the Mini14? The AWB I've seen may have banned features, but they have also banned guns by name. The Mini14 is legal to own in all 50 states (whether some features or prohibited or not), but the AR15 is in fact not.

Varminterror said:
It's NOT an accurate rifle. More accurate than abysmal, but still relatively terrible compared to the rest of the market is still terrible compared to the rest of the market. That's NOT just a carry over of 180 series reputation to current production, it remains a reality for their product line. Were it released today, no other model of firearm by any other manufacturer would receive such forgiveness from the market for such poor performance.
Click to expand...
It's is an accurate rifle, and it's NOT terrible at all. Like an AK47, it's NOT a target or a sniper rifle. It's a ranch and/or self-defense rifle chambered in .223/5.56. It's not designed to kill at several hundred yards. It's more than accurate enough for what it's meant to do, and I've seen what it's capable of firsthand. I'd have no qualms about hitting my target or using a Mini14 for home or self-defense.
 
Varminterror said:
A mini-14 is only an accurate rifle to someone who does not actually understand what is an accurate rifle. Calling a Mini an accurate rifle is fanboi drivel...
Click to expand...
It's only inaccurate to people who don't really know what they're talking about, don't own a modern one, and have little knowledge and experience with what's currently being sold. Those who do have current experience will say the same.

You seem to take offense and want to argue about any and all positive points, no matter what it is, that I bring up about the Mini14. In case you missed it, I own A LOT more AR15s and have much more experience with AR15s, AKs, G3 variants, Brent, and several other platforms, so I'm far from a "fanboi" of any platform. I like them all. I own them all with an exception of a Fal, but that's on my list. So you seem to be projecting with your "fanboi" comment. Whether it bothers you or not, the Mini14 does have some things in common and pros over the AR15 and vis versa.
 
I voted AR. 60 some odd years of use and refinement, easy to configure, after market support is nigh unrivaled.
 
AR's have an image problem. It's more than just the problem of hoplophobes that want to ban "scary black" military "weapons of war" and "assault rifles."
Even among gun-owners, there are stereotypes associated with the AR. Those stereotypes aren't actually deplorable or even deserving of derision, but not everybody identifies with them or has a corresponding or compatible self-image. There's certainly no requirement to conform to a stereotype just to own a gun, but how many people can regularly use a S&W Model 29 without being plagued by the Dirty Harry thing? Like it or not, whether you fit the image or otherwise, it sticks to the gun.
Another problem with the AR's image is coming from the sick, twisted individuals whose wicked imaginations are apparently captivated by them and who have made them notorious. The Mini is not exempt (there was Brevik and Platt), but being lesser-known, those things have had less cultural impact. I'm reluctant to ascribe to those perpetrators of evil any ability to characterize the rifle itself by their deeds, but I can't ignore the fact that the gun's image is tainted in our culture not because of its color or features, but because of those people's actions.
 
I think some of the accuracy thing here all depends on what era Mini you have experience with to compare. If its the early guns, I would agree, they arent all that great, and there could be a good deal of frustration mixed in there too, and that was where the bulk of my experience with them comes from.

After shooting a couple of my buddy's more current Minis, 16" barreled NRA specials, they were a different critter. They had better sights on them and shot pretty decent.

Still, when you get down to it, I don't think either are truly comparable to a more or less basic AR, and one that will these days, likely cost you less. Even my cheap PSA AR's put together from parts shoot very well and better than I was doing with my buddy newer Mini's.

I think you need to be realistic too in your comparisons and how you shoot them. This alone, even just in AR vs AR comparisons is often a part of the problem when people start arguing about things. You need to do the comparison on the same day, with at least somewhat equivalent guns, using the same ammo, and shot the same way.

Back in the 80's, I tried doing just that in a local side match at a DCM shoot. For Gits's & Shiggle's, I was using one of my Minis, shooting the basic 50 round course of fire (DCM/NRA-HP) on a reduced 100 range, and had a terrible time against a couple of buddies shooting AR's and M1's. All I can say is this, I was on the paper (not saying much if you know how big the bulls on the targets are. :)). Its bad enough that the gun didn't shoot as well, but not having the ability to readily make sight corrections, and adjust my sights to deal with changing bulls and position shifts, was a big deal. ;)
 
For me, the ergonomics of the Mini are superior to the AR.

Safety: the safety is ultimatly fine on each and is a matter of preference between the two. The Mini makes it effectively impossible to try to take a shot with the safety on and is easy to safety check by feel even with a gloved hand.

Charging handle: Nobody likes the charging handle on the AR, they meerly tolerate it. There is a massive market in making this last minute design change ~60 years ago somewhat tolerable. Even complete side-charging uppers so people can have a gun designed to be used by humans.

Magazines: Straight in is faster, rock-n-lock is more secure. A Mini magazine is either correctly inserted or it's not. No over inserted and bent feed lips, no firing one shot and having the magazine fall out. There are no solutions, only trade-offs.

Folding Stocks: enough said.

Other thoughts,

Today, the primary reason the AR is popular is because it is cheap in the US. Full stop. Same reason the AK is popular elsewhere in the world. If ARs still cost $2,000, nobody would care in the slightest about the other claimed attributes. It's cheap and people are willing to tolerate it's quirks.

In the late 90s and early 2000s it was SKSs and 91/30s.
In the 1980 and early 90s it was Mini-14s.
In the 1970s is was Garands and M1 Carbines.

If you like the AR because it's a cheap way to get an autoloader 223. Fine, just say so.
 
Crosshair said:
Today, the primary reason the AR is popular is because it is cheap in the US. Full stop.
Click to expand...

No need to stop, I'll just keep moving on from this insight.

Yeah, because nobody would pay $1,600+ for an AR right?

Knights Armament, LaRue, Noveske, Daniel Defense, Lewis Machine & Tool, Giessele, JP Enterprises, Radian, Q, Cobalt Kinetics, etc. All of these are barely keeping the lights on with their lack of consumer market for expensive AR's. Many of these aforementioned companies have a hard time keeping up with demand, odd since the only reason AR's are popular is due to them being cheap...:uhoh:
 
Styx said:
There are a few points I'd like to make based on some of the comments left so far.

#1: The Mini14 is a piston gas system and most AR15s are direct impingement. The Mini14 will run longer, cleaner, and cooler than a milspec AR15.

#2: Price: Most basic factory AR15s (not Frankensteins or 2nd tier manufacturer peice togethers) run between $850-$1100 +/-. A piston driven AR will typically cost much more. The Mini14 sells between $800-$1400 retail depending on what bells and whistles are added. Comparing apples to apples, the Mini14 is priced comparable to most factory AR15s.

#3: The AR15 is under the threat of being banned or have features banned in many states. It is already banned in some states. The Mini14 is legal in all 50 states, so you legal can travel with it in most states.

#4: Accuracy: The Mini14 had accuracy issues in the early days. To this very day, those early issues and reputation haves stuck and is regurgitate ad nauseam. Ruger has long since made upgrade and updates to the barrel and rifle to address the accuracy issue. It's more than accrate enough to complete the role it was designed to fulfill.
Click to expand...
🙄 …… Puuleeeze.

#1: Wrong. No Mini today has the durability of an AR today.

#2: Aspirational at best …. because “street” pricing for a basic but Tier 1 AR (Colt/LMT/BCM/etc) will beat “street” pricing for a basic Mini.

#3: True about actual or possible state-level AR bans, but you’re relying on Clinton-era AWB definitions of what an “assault weapon” is. Across many states the Left is moving to ban ALL semi-autos, whether rifles or pistols, which would include the Mini.

So this is still an evolving legal/constitutional issue that’s not logically relevant to the other comparison criteria that matter to a buyer seeking a quality weapon for the long term - i.e., durability/reliability, accuracy, cost, and parts availability (plus the cost of those. Does the bolt for a .223 Mini cost more or less than a bolt for a 5.56 AR? )

#4: You said “accuracy” and “Mini” ….

IMG_0230.gif
 
S.Crockett said:
🙄 …… Puuleeeze.

#1: Wrong. No Mini today has the durability of an AR today.
Click to expand...
No, it's not as far as the gas system is concerned. It's fact and simple physics.

S.Crockett said:
#2: Aspirational at best …. because “street” pricing for a basic but Tier 1 AR (Colt/LMT/BCM/etc) will beat “street” pricing for a basic Mini.
Click to expand...
I don't know what Colt’s are going for nowadays, but LMT, BCM, and the like do not go for $900 NIB. You definitely aren't going to get a LMT piston AR for anywhere around that price. I own BCM AR15s, and I can guarantee you what you claim isn't true.

When we compare manufacturer piston AR15s to the piston Mini14, the price goes up exponentially.

S.Crockett said:
#3: True about actual or possible state-level AR bans, but you’re relying on Clinton-era AWB definitions of what an “assault weapon” is. Across many states the Left is moving to ban ALL semi-autos, whether rifles or pistols, which would include the Mini.

So this is still an evolving legal/constitutional issue that’s not logically relevant to the other comparison criteria that matter to a buyer seeking a quality weapon for the long term - i.e., durability/reliability, accuracy, cost, and parts availability (plus the cost of those.
Click to expand...
Yes, features are banned as a catch all, but in most AWB legislation and bills, the AR15 is banned by name.

S.Crockett said:
#4: You said “accuracy” and “Mini” ….
Click to expand...
Yes, the current offering are accrate.
 
I prefer the side charging handle and the ability to put a folding stock on the Mini14. I have 2 friends that sold their Mini14's because they weren't happy with the accuracy (pre-580). I trust their opinions enough that I have never purchased one.

My only 5.56/.223 semi-auto is a Sig Spear LT. It has the obnoxious rear charging handle but at least it has a real folding stock and is quite accurate.

IMHO the AR-15 design leaves a lot to be desired these days.
 
Why does it always turn into a pissing contest. I have and like both AR's and Mini's. I bought my first Mini-14 in 1989 because it was a lot cheaper than an AR. I still own it and like it. This is pre ranch model. I also have a Mini-30, and a Ranch Rifle. If I'm shooting off of a bench the AR wins everytime. If I'm shooting field positions I actually prefer the mini. Making snap shots I'm quicker with the mini.

For a new shooter looking for a semi-auto rifle in todays age the AR makes a lot more sense dollar wise. Cheaper magazines and parts galore.
 
Side charger w folding stock....

Makasi Rifle

Makasi Rifle Billet Receiver 5.56 16" Barrel MLOk Rail and Folding Stock 12" Quad Rail, MBUS Sights, SI Furniture
brigadefirearms.com brigadefirearms.com
 
Hookeye said:
Side charger w folding stock....

Makasi Rifle

Makasi Rifle Billet Receiver 5.56 16" Barrel MLOk Rail and Folding Stock 12" Quad Rail, MBUS Sights, SI Furniture
brigadefirearms.com brigadefirearms.com
Click to expand...

Those are nice looking rifles... they aren't really AR-15's though... they look like a big improvement in my opinion!
 
ditmo said:
Why does it always turn into a pissing contest. I have and like both AR's and Mini's. I bought my first Mini-14 in 1989 because it was a lot cheaper than an AR. I still own it and like it. This is pre ranch model. I also have a Mini-30, and a Ranch Rifle. If I'm shooting off of a bench the AR wins everytime. If I'm shooting field positions I actually prefer the mini. Making snap shots I'm quicker with the mini.

For a new shooter looking for a semi-auto rifle in todays age the AR makes a lot more sense dollar wise. Cheaper magazines and parts galore.
Click to expand...
Good post. I had a 580 series Mini before I got my first AR. It was an LEO trade-in, black synthetic stock, blued steel and a flash hider; nicest looking Mini I have ever seen. Accuracy was miserable though, 6-8 MOA. Even so, I wish I still had it; unfortunately, I had to thin the herd :(
 
On the thread about Ruger's new Mini-14 SKU with the folding stock and bayonet lug, someone mentioned considering it if it were 2 MOA, and another person suggested 2 MOA would be the exception.

I know there are arguments from people whom I have no doubt understand accuracy and I am not going to convince them that the gun is more accurate than they believe. I don't doubt that there are AR-15's that will shoot tinier groups. On the other hand, I think there are widespread misconceptions about accuracy and that people who understand accuracy are the exception and not the rule. Here is some evidence:



Note that the video is about rifles in general and hunting rifles in particular. I don't think there is such widespread misconception among competitive benchrest shooters, F-class, PRS. I'm not educating any of those guys. On the other hand, I think there are guys who buy production AR-15's with a brand name or build one from brand-name components and believe they have a "sub-MOA" rifle.

I remember listening to Clint Smith one time griping about these guys -- I don't remember what he called them, but I would paraphrase and use the term "rifle snobs" -- and he said something like, "and they say stuff like, 'this one's sub-MOA,' but the problem is you can shoot sub-MOA." We're talking about the context of an Urban Rifle class -- that's what Clint is probably most famous for. I don't recall the Mini-14 being part of that conversation. You can hear Clint's opinion on the Mini-14 in the TFBTV episode with James Reeves. But the Mini-14 is valid in the context of Urban Rifle. It's not valid in PRS. And in the context of something like Urban Rifle, having a sub-MOA rifle just doesn't matter. It's like sorting primers by weight, or tuning seating depth, for a hunting rifle. Those things matter in a different context.

So, it's fair to ask, what kind of accuracy should a person expect from a rifle like the Mini-14 or a comparable M4 carbine? I think it's important to narrow down "the AR-15" to something that has a similar purpose to the Mini-14 because the AR can be built in to so many different types of guns. Maybe that's one of it's strengths as a category, but we can't compare a rifle like the Mini-14 to a category of rifles. To be fair, we'd have to compare it to a particular rifle. It wouldn't be fair say we're comparing the Sig P365 to hammer-fired handguns and pick a P365 to compare against a Shadow 2. So if we pick the M4 to compare, I think it's fair because similar to the Mini-14, the purpose isn't primarily to shoot small groups, nor is the purpose hunting, nor is it long-range shooting, or anything else that there are some rifles in the AR-15 category to do but which don't really compare to the Mini-14.

So is the M4 more accurate than the Mini-14?
 
My Mini-14 was the older series with a torn, silver 'State of KY" sticker on the butt stock (prison issue etc). 100% reliable--no exceptions--and still had the LEO-Only 20-rd. magazine.
Bought it in 2008.

The dislikes consisted of the Thick post sight and the tight trigger. Accuracy didn't matter with small drink bottles at 30-50 yards.
Because of the thick post and trigger I sold it (when Armslist was Good) to have ready cash because the "Enfield #5 "Jungle" bug bit me hard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Mini 14 vs Ar-15 .223
2 3
Replies
58
Views
5K
Art Eatman
A
dukefan70
  • Locked
AR-15 style in .223 vs. Mini-14 (.223)
Replies
9
Views
879
Leper Khan
L
stchman
  • Locked
Gotta get it off my chest AR-15 vs. Mini-14
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
202
Views
10K
Art Eatman
A
CPLofMARINES
  • Locked
Ruger Mini-14 or AR-15 (M-4)??
Replies
18
Views
884
Line Rider
Line Rider
C
  • Locked
Mini 14 vs. Mossberg MVP
Replies
3
Views
2K
BP Hunter
BP Hunter
Back
Top