What will an AR do that a Mini-14 won't?

[jim in Anchorage]

I wondered how long this thread would take before it really heated up into a Mini vs AR thread, these always do.

Not shocking given the thread title.

 

[dnthmn]

The AR won't crap it's trigger group into you hand every shot or two if the trigger guard gets slightly bent. Ask me how I know......

The Mini-14 is more compact and easier to tote if you use the 5 or 10 rd mags. It's sleek lines will allow it to slide into a scabbard better than an AR.

 

[WardenWolf]

What will an AR do that a Mini-14 won't? Hit the broad side of a barn, for one. The DPMS Sportical starts around $700, and is, by all accounts, a very good entry-level AR. And entry-level or not, it's still going to shoot better than any Mini-14. And since it's an AR, you can customize it and upgrade it. The Mini-14 has a well-deserved reputation for not working right with aftermarket mags, as well, which is somewhere the AR also excels.

Me, I'm an AK man, myself. I'd buy a Saiga rifle over a Mini-14 any day. That's actually the most comparable comparison. The Saiga is half the price, is more accurate, and is pretty darn customizable, particularly if you decide to convert it back to standard AK pattern. Good aftermarket mags are also available. The Mini-14 just doesn't make financial or logistical sense anymore no matter how you look at it. It's a "yesterday's rifle": its performance and price were acceptable several years ago, but it has since been completely eclipsed by newer options. You can now get a better rifle in the Saiga for $350 versus $700 for the Mini-14.

 

[Wishoot]

Holy cow! Not a lot of love for the Mini-14 (for good reason). Now I just need to figure out what AR to get. Too many choices.

 

[BADUNAME37]

I had a stainless Mini back in the 80's that I put around 20,000 rounds through over the course of several years. That gun shot everything and anything I put through it. I always kept it clean, and when I sold it, it still looked as good as new.

IMO, there is nothing the AR will do that the Mini won't do. I have an AR, so I can speak from experience. If there are any comments about a damaged gun, any gun will cause problems if damaged a certain way!

 

[Double Vision]

I prefer my new model Mini-14 (AND THIRTY!) to my AR-15. I'm a major fan of Garand-style rifle actions.

The Mini is plenty accurate for what I need, fun to shoot, easy to clean and was cheaper than my Colt AR by a long shot.

Whatever you decide, enjoy and have fun.

 

[Double Vision]

PS, over the winter I brought a friend to the range who had never touched a firearm before.

With the first shot from the Mini-14, she hit the bullseye, and continued to shoot it with great accuracy.

 

[greyeyezz]

Can't believe no one has mentioned that the Mini is 223 and most all AR's are 5.56/223. Try loading IMI 62gr AP ammo in a Mini mag, I will save you the time, it won't work. Ammo is longer than the mag opening, haven't tried to load any other ammo in it.

1) Mini's have a 5.56 chamber.
2) IMI 62gr is not AP.
3) The above ammo works fine and always has.

You've struck out completely.

 

[Bernie Lomax]

Holy cow! Not a lot of love for the Mini-14 (for good reason). Now I just need to figure out what AR to get. Too many choices.

The Ruger AR has a gas piston and is probably a lot more reliable because of it. (Strictly speaking, since it has a gas piston, it's not really an AR, but that's another subject for another day.)

Anyway, the Mini and AR are not the only 5.56 NATO black rifles on the market. You know this, right? You might want to take a look at some of the AKs chambered for 5.56. That might be more what you're looking for.

 

[jmr40]

Almost everyone who now owns AR's started on Mini's Most of the Mini guys will eventually see the light and change.

When I bought my first Mini-14 I paid $250 used for it. At the time AR's were selling for $700-$1,000. At that price difference the Mini made sense. With today's prices buying a new Mini-14 makes no sense at all.

I know the new ones are better, but they are still a Mini-14. No matter how cheap you find one, once you buy just one 30 round magazine for it and you will have more money invested in a lesser quality gun.

If you are paying more for an AR than a Mini, you need someone who knows how to gun shop to get you pointed in the right direction.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Ar's are probably a better teaching tool, and certainly offer more versatility. Adjustable stocks can be fit for shooters of various builds. My 10 year old can comfortably shoot my AR with the stock fully collapsed. I also have the option of switching to a variety of larger calibers for hunting larger game.
AR's look cool, and new shooters get a kick out of shooting cool looking rifles, it certrainly adds to their enjoyment of shooting, and thats my goal.

The Ruger AR has a gas piston and is probably a lot more reliable because of it.

Yeah, you might want to re-think that.

 

[benEzra]

What will an AR do that a Mini-14 won't?

I'm pretty new to .223 and I'm looking for a little education. I like the simplicity of the Mini-14 and the price too. AR's just look complicated and come with far too many options (kind of like a 1911).

What are the real advantages of an AR over a Mini-14?

Thanks for your help.

As someone who sold a 188-series Ranch Rifle and used the proceeds to buy an AR, here are the thoughts that prompted my decision.

(1) Accuracy. My mini was an accuracy lemon (5.5" at 100 yards with match ammo, from a rest and rear bag), and the newer 580+ series mini's are better, but the AR is still a more accurate platform out of the box. To get a 1 MOA mini, you will generally pay a good bit more than you would for a 1 MOA AR. And at the high end, you can free-float an AR barrel; you can't free-float a mini, and the mini will always have more barrel harmonics due to the heavy piston assembly launching off the cantilevered gas block.

(2) Ergonomics and modularity. There are good stocks available for the mini, but it is cheaper and much easier to set an AR up to fit you than it is to set up a mini similarly. The AR has a bolt release, the magazine release is easier to use, and the AR's straight-in magwell is somwhat easier to reload than the mini's rock-and-lock design.

(3) Ease of mounting nontraditional optics. The mini-14 Ranch Rifle makes it very easy to mount traditional round-tube scopes on the receiver at the appropriate height, but mounting an Eotech/Trijicon/Aimpoint so that it will cowitness with the iron sights is extremely difficult.

(4) Magazine availability and cost. Until recently, full-capacity factory magazines for the mini were exceedingly expensive and hard to come by. Now that Ruger is making them again, they are cheaper and easy to find, but they are still (a) proprietary and (b) much more expensive than quality AR magazines.

The two rifles are pretty much equivalent in terms of ballistics, capacity, and reliability.

The mini is a little simpler internally, is much slimmer (assuming you go with the straight stock), will accept a folding stock, and has a very traditional look compared to the AR's aluminum-and-polymer design.

They're both good rifles, so it basically boils down to personal preference and what your priorities are.

The Ruger AR has a gas piston and is probably a lot more reliable because of it. (Strictly speaking, since it has a gas piston, it's not really an AR, but that's another subject for another day.)

Doubtful. Properly assembled, a DI AR is as reliable as a piston AR; the most common cause of AR failures (other than improper assembly and lack of lubrication) are magazine failures and debris between the bolt carrier and receiver, neither of which a piston does anything about. Piston conversion can also have carrier tilt issues, which don't necessarily impact reliability but do impact durability.

Try loading IMI 62gr AP ammo in a Mini mag, I will save you the time, it won't work. Ammo is longer than the mag opening, haven't tried to load any other ammo in it.

That's either defective ammo or a defective magazine, not the fault of the mini design itself. My mini shot fine with M855 (62gr green tip, non-AP) and liked it as well as it liked premium match ammo.

 

[Tirod]

The entire point is, the M16 was preferred for combat, and M14 based guns aren't. So says the DOD.

It's more than putting a bullet downrange, but if that's all you need, a 10/22 can do the same. What weapons experts decided was to move away from the old design.

Wood stock? Subject to breakage at the wrist, accuracy requires carefully mounting the action, which a beater military gun cannot do. It must be easily dissassembled.

Open top steel receiver? Scopes won't mount over them as case ejection was given priority. The bolt locks into them, the barrel screws into it, making them a stressed part of the gun. The long, heavy construction is made flexible by mounting the stock directly to it. The operating rod is exposed and guided externally. The bolt is almost completely exposed to the elements.

The forward gas piston pushes on the operating rod, but that means the cylinder pushes on the barrel. If not coxial, it introduces barrel bending at just the point the bullet exits the barrel. Since combat guns are 2MOA, it's acceptable, but for precision shooting, who takes the top ten places in the last ten years? DI. No barrel bending.

The piston being separate from the bolt means cleaning it separately, taking longer to do so.

The sling is mounted to a barrel band, same for both Mini 14 or AR, the latter you can free float and add more rail as needed. Mini? Screw a threaded fastener into the stock, no rails or options, and you still need the band. Eliminating it seriously detracts from hard use.

The exposed operating rod and fixed charging handle reciprocates, which interferes with shooting next to cover or concealment. It's not ambidextrous, either.

Either will shoot a paper target or a bunny. The Mini 14 will not be as effective in combat, the entire genre of wood stocked open top exposed op rod guns was passed over decades ago for military use. No one issues them today for general use by all their soldiers, airmen, sailors, or Marines. It's a specialty weapon in the US, largely because we still had some, refitted them, and sent them to SWAsia, where they aren't being used much. It's a ratio of over 100,000 M16/M4's, vs. 5,000 refitted M14's with all sorts of AR enhancements.

The Mini? Ranch Rifle is exactly where it's best used, mount a rack in the tractor or farm truck, it's good enough to replace a lever action.

 

[Art Eatman]

I played around with four of the earlier Minis, and have messed with several ARs.

Personally, I'm so used to conventional setups that the AR is not "ergonomically superior" for me. But, that's me. I don't care about what others do, since I'm not them.

My "Skinny Minnies" all were around 1.5 to 2 MOA for five shots from the benchrest, with a K4 on top. 1.5 was the norm for the first three shots. As a hunter, I didn't need more than one or two shots, so the group-size deal was irrelevant to my needs.

Target shooting is a whole different deal. I once had a Bushie Match Target which would shoot 1/2 MOA all day long. But, at 9.5 pounds, it was no "walk-around-gun". If I'm gonna tote 9.5 pounds, I'll take an '06, thank you.

Home defense and all that? A Mini is as good as an AR is as good as an AK is as good as an SKS is as good as...

But, living as I do in a permanent condition of sticker shock, the Mini is priced out of my interest range. Maybe a good used one, somewhere around $300 to $400 debased-currency dolllars.

FWIW, I have a Colt AR that's one MOA with irons (back-patting time). I got a CMMG LW20" upper on it for now, with a K4. More back-patting. It's a pretty good old truck gun, but not something I'd want to do any walking-hunting with.

 

[nathan]

I d prefer a norinco SKS to a mni anyday and anytime. Thats just me...

 

[Bernie Lomax]

the most common cause of AR failures (other than improper assembly and lack of lubrication) are magazine failures and debris between the bolt carrier and receiver, neither of which a piston does anything about.

No, the most common cause is the ARs close tolerances which are rapidly crudded up by its direct gas impingement system.

 

[Leaky Waders]

The AR is the grownup's lego...you can change caliber, barrel length, grips, stock, sites easily by owning a lower. You can purchase those items with no hassle.

Also, you can get lowers with very conventional markings to comic book like zombie references in logo and safety.

Scopes attach easier to all AR uppers as compared to the Ruger.

Also, due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - more Americans are familiar with the basic workings of the an AR variant than the Ruger.

Lastly, I think AR's will hold their value more - but that's speculation.

You can buy 20 and 30 round magazines for both now...but it took the designer to pass away before that became common place with Ruger.

All Ruger products have a better warning billboard plastered across them somewheres.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

No, the most common cause is the ARs close tolerances which are rapidly crudded up by its direct gas impingement system.

That's just nonsense.

M4 Carbine stripped of all lubrication and fired 2,440 rounds with no cleaning or lube
Filthy 14 - now over 40,000 rounds downrange. Cleaned twice.
15,000 rounds through an M4 - least amount of rounds between cleaning - 960 rounds
15,000 rounds of lacquered Wolf through a Bushmaster/Model 1 Frankengun with no cleaning

In my own personal shooting, I have 14,338 rounds logged on AR15s from 2003-2008. During that time, I've logged 124 stoppages. The break down goes like this:

64 stoppages due to improper installation of MGI Hydraulic Buffer (operator error)
31 stoppages due to XM193PD squib loads
20 stoppages due to bad magazines
8 stoppages due to insufficient lubrication
1 stoppage due to bullet being rammed into case upon feeding (Remington UMC)

So once we rule out user error in installing "reliability enhancements", the source of problems breaks down as:

1. Bad ammo
2. Bad magazines
3. Not enough lube

I'd also note that I haven't had a magazine or lubrication related stoppage since 2005. This is due to two main factors:

1. In 2004, I stopped worrying about trying to rebuild old/damaged magazines and just threw them away and bought new ones.

2. Around 2004, I also figured out that the "don't use too much lubrication on an AR because it will attract dirt" was actually causing me more problems than it was solving in my use and started liberally wetting that sucker down.

My current strategy is to wet the bolt throughly and just let it sling off the excess lube in the first couple of shots.

 

[rodregier]

Much easier to clean the barrel from the breech end of AR15 than Mini-14.

 

[68wj]

I think a mini-14 patterns just fine.

As for DI crudding an AR to the point of stoppage...that's silly talk.

 

[NG VI]

to turn the question around, what will a mini 14 do that an ar15 won't? the only thing i can think of is wear a folding stock.

A hideous folding stock. You have to seriously ugly it up for a folding stock.

and I hear the Promags for the Mini 14 are damn good at 14 bucks a pop.

I've never heard anything good about Promags, except the USC mags.

Other great advantage of the mini is it will eat up any ammo you feed it.

The AR won't? Mine did. All the ones I used in the service were flawless except for blanks. Oh I did have a single round not feed properly at a State Marksmanship practice I went to, but it was literally a two-three second fix.

Well the Mini does have a longer sight radius.

Twenty inch rifle or 16" carbine? Both?

I like the simplicity of the Mini-14 and the price too. AR's just look complicated and come with far too many options (kind of like a 1911).

They aren't nearly as complicated as you might think. Pretty much every control an AR has a Mini-14 has too, just in a less user-friendly form. That little paddle on the left side of the rifle over the trigger? Bolt release, so you can easily lock back the bolt or release the bolt. The oddly shaped thing at the top of the receiver at the bottom of the carry handle or back of the rail? Charging handle. Ruger has one too, only their's is attached directly to the bolt. I think it reciprocates too. Other than that you have a safety where your shooting thumb can use it, instead of in the trigger guard, and a magazine release where your trigger finger can use it instead of where your magazine handling hand has to use it.


They only look complicated because everything is so accessible and user-friendly.

If it's your first one I would go with a 20" rifle, either a fixed-sight version or a flat top and then get a carry handle. Learn to shoot it with the irons, they are fun and work very well, and you can add optics later if you want, easiest if you get a flat top.

 

[BrocLuno]

I agree with Art Eatmam on this - well said. But, out here in the Kollective, Mini's are much easier to get at the local hardware store gun rack or the mall, etc. You want an AR - you gotta find a dedicated dealer who can walk the fine line and it won't be cheaper.

So, depending on jurisdiction - the Mini may be the most readily available rifle.

 

[WNTFW]

For me it comes down to you could shoot a High Power match with 20" AR out to 600yds. Granted not any & every 20" AR.

Other than that I would tend to favor the AR.

If for no other reason - you can't put an accuwedge in a Mini14

 

[M1key]

Wife can shoot the ARs fine. Ask her to clear a stoppage?

Mini-14 for her...


M

 

[HGUNHNTR]

^ See Bartholomew's post to clear up your issues with the AR.