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

[NG VI]

Yeah Ben I see that S&W 9mm in the foto.

Ben I see that 3913 cringeing under the horrible mostrosity above it!


I've got to say I've wanted a Mini for a while, I was thinking -30, because I feel like it's basically a slightly beefier M1 Carbine in practice, even though it's a scaled-down M14 in reality. Get an M1-like rifle shooting one of the cheapest cartridges around, that also puts out a little more bullet weight and velocity? A win to me.

So I like the Minis, I just don't think as a rifle they are the equal of the AR platform in many ways. Oh and when I wanted the Mini-30, I already had a CMMG. I'm not an either-or kind of gun owner, unless I can't afford both.

 

[1stmarine]

NG VI,
No doubt the Russian is a much better Cartrige than the M1 for any purposes and affordable too with surplus/Russian ammo. Some metal cases might not be the most accurate and could be corrosive.

That is a great point because regarding the choosing of a carbine/rifle over another one should start by choosing the best bullet needed for the desired purpose and then choosing a system that can deliver that bullet accurately and reliable with the proper chamber spec, barrel length and rate of twist.

The Russian round on average could do an awesome job up to 200 yards. The .223 rounds are superior at longer range due to the ballistics but might not be needed depending on purpose. The Mini-30 and many AK platforms are great options to deliver the .310 bullets

The mini-14 can can also be very good delivering the .224 bullets. The AR is king here and gives many more options for long distance although there are some Match grade Minis that can achieve amazing results. I think that the AR gives more options due to its modularity.

Cheers,
E.

 

[benEzra]

Do keep in mind that Ruger now makes a mini-14 in 6.8mm, so 5.56x45mm and 7.62x39mm are no longer the only two choices on the shelf for Ruger mini aficionados.

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/models.html

 

[1stmarine]

That's right, yet another awesome choice for short-mid range shooting.

Cheers,
E.

 

[Tirod]

"Tight tolerances" is another internet myth.

What most people describe as tight tolerances don't exist in the way that is accurately used in manufacture or design. The "tight tolerances" of the AR are the blueprint specifications that the industry uses to get parts made that work together without hand fitting - or even being made in the same country. I have an lower machined in Arizona, an upper from Utah, and they accept parts from many other states. Yet, they all fit and the gun works, without one adjustment. It's the precise reason the Winchester 70 was redesigned, to eliminate hand labor.

Clearances are something else entirely, the working space deliberately left between parts to allow motion, like the .0035 clearance on engine bearing and the crankshaft journals. M16 clearances are NOT exceptionally tighter than other guns. If anything, military rifles tend to have more space between working parts, and are designed to tolerate it more, because they have to operate with more debris and contaminants in them.

Compare a Remington 700 bolt in it's guideways in the receiver, and an AR15 bolt in it's upper. The AR is far looser and literally can rattle if the action spring is removed, and the buffer does, regardless. The Remington bolt is much more tightly controlled. Same for the upper and lower, a well used M16 will literally wobble between them, the pins unable to prevent literal shaking of the upper. But, it can and will shoot just as accurately as ever.

A civilian gun would be scheduled for a trip to the gunsmith, or left hanging on the wall as economically unrepairable. The reason military guns tolerate it is in the design - the exceptional looseness has nothing to do with it's integrity.

AR's AREN'T victims to tight tolerances, they benefit from them, and so do those who assemble them from parts made all over the US. The clearances are something else entirely different - and keep it running with just a little lube through literally tens of thousands of rounds.

Shake, rattle, and roll, the AR15 isn't all that tight, but shoots that way, which confounds a lot of people unfamiliar with military weapons or their purpose.

 

[NG VI]

Tirod, when I went to Basic I was confounded by the amount of rattle I could get out my rifle, it was ridiculous to me at the time. I abused that rifle so much, something about being told to hit front leaning rest for the hundredth time while still holding the rifle made it take the brunt of the fall.

Never failed on me though, I don't count blanks because there is no legitimate reason to expect them to function properly, and they dirty up the rifle with no hit on target, they suck all the way around. And I still shot high sharpshooter, expert in AIT. we only got to shoot once in AIT, but I got all hits. They could only find 39 truly distinct holes though. Weak. Or great shooting.

 

[1stmarine]

You have to analyze the system as a whole. Nobody said tight tolerances. Loose/Tight "fit" concept was mentioned nothing else.
Once, when I was overseas with NATO we got a tour to the Oberndorf H&K plant and a chief engineer (Stefan Bondar I believe it was his name) explained this tight fit / loose fit concept to us and how they got some ideas from loose fit systems as the AK to implement in their AR based system.
The engineer seemed very knowledgeable in all these areas as well as other group of army and navy infantry man and some had been shooting and inspecting small arms training and maintenance for over 25 years.
The tolerances are very similar but there are fundamental changes. Also the bolt is allowed to float and a small spring allows proper alignment for positive locking.
The modified carrier group and integration with the receiver and tube is redesigned to allow proper bleeding of water and foreign particles.

Something that also "magically" happens with a Mini14 and M1A designs. These are considered by firearm experts and historians as loose fits and nobody is thinking about any specific part but the system as a whole. Same concept with the AK action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGwkHktkTxU

I have several ARs with the inpigment for long range target and hunting and they are the most accurate auto loader systems I have. I would not change that for anything. But I also have four M4 carbines with piston systems that I would not change neither. The purpose is different in both.

Cheers,
E.

 

[BobPickard]

I bought the Tactical Mini-14, ordered a GG&G rail system and mounted a Sightmark Reflex Optic on top. I'm a happy shooter out to about 150 yards... I have an AR-15 that easily makes hits farther than I can reliably shoot any more. For me, it comes down to using tactics appropriate to the weapon I carry. I recently ordered several 20 round magazines for my Mini from LGoutdoors I believe. They work great.

 

[sarduy]

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.

hehehe... that's another thing it can do. the AR can come with a folding stock.

they are out there.

http://www.impactguns.com/store/770752235264.html

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/10/02/st15-22-lr-short-barreled-rifle/

http://www.tacticalgearmag.com/page/tactical-gear-today

 

[68wj]

Keep in mind that the chamber & twist that Ruger uses for their 6.8 SPC rifles strictly limits what ammo you can use.

You can still fire all factory ammo except SSA's tactical loads and Wilson Combat's ammo. It is a step in the right direction and the chamber can be reamed. I will agree that it was a poor choice by Ruger and especially for their NEW SR556/6.8 using an old chamber.

edit: Not sure why this time stamp lists the post before the post below that I was responding too

 

[fredthecat]

Do keep in mind that Ruger now makes a mini-14 in 6.8mm, so 5.56x45mm and 7.62x39mm are no longer the only two choices on the shelf for Ruger mini aficionados.

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/models.html

Keep in mind that the chamber & twist that Ruger uses for their 6.8 SPC rifles strictly limits what ammo you can use.

I think it was a poor choice on Ruger's part. That said, the Mini 14 is a damn fine gun & I'm sure there are thousands all around the US in use every day. As for the Mini 30 - why not just get an SKS (jurisdiction allowing)? Though, I guess Ruger's do have a warranty, whereas most/all SKSs do not.

ARs work better for me simply because of the ergonomics, plus I have dozens of hours training with ARs under my belt, & just a handful hours plinking with Minis.

 

[Skyshot]

Actually you can by the mini with a folding stock. In the 581 series tac model

 

[kalashnikov74]

Provide a 1 moa.

 

[Skyshot]

The target mini is Capable of sub MOA.

 

[Wishoot]

Now I'm even more confused....

$400 for a Saiga .223 or $800++ for an AR.

And I thought buying a handgun was a difficult decision.

 

[sarduy]

what do you want the rifle for?

 

[Wishoot]

what do you want the rifle for?

Good question.

A little bit of everything quite frankly. Targets, deer hunting (rarely) and worst case SHTF/TEOTWAWKI stuff.

 

[S.W.G.]

The Mini-14:

- Is simpler.

- Has a sturdier magazine design.

- Feels solid and robust, not 'plasticy'.

For an all-purpose carbine I would take the Mini. I just don't trust direct gas impingment. To complicated, too many small parts to lose, etc.

Personally I think people place way to much importance on long range accuracy for these guns. If I wanted to shoot a coyote at 300 yards I would get a bolt action 22-250, not a semi-auto carbine.

The Mini-14 has a role. You shouldn't criticize it because it isn't a sub-moa tack-driver. It was never meant to do that. Thats like criticizing the UZI because you can't go big-game hunting with it in Africa.

 

[68wj]

It doesn't really answer the OPs Q, but the response made me think.

The Mini-14:

- Is simpler. How so?

- Has a sturdier magazine design.How so and which mags are being compared?

- Feels solid and robust, not 'plasticy'.Subjective. I read, heavy for its size

For an all-purpose carbine I would take the Mini. I just don't trust direct gas impingment. To complicated, too many small parts to lose, etc.In the mini, gas pushes a piston that pushes an op rod that cams and cycles a bolt, right? In a DI AR, gas pushes a bolt/piston in a carrier that cams and cycles a bolt. I wouldn't call either complicated.

 

[BigBore]

"The AR will hit what you're aiming at"

Ha Ha thats true..I like the Mini 14 ranch rifle I have but for accuracy of the two my AR's just kill the Minis..Sad fact..And the early Mini's (180 series) were even poorer accuracy wise..

 

[HGUNHNTR]

The mini 14 was kind of the blue collar guys answer to the AR, ironically they now cost more than a decent quality AR, and offer less in terms of generic accuracy and modularity. The mini's stock also feels like it was designed both for, and by an 11 year old.

I just don't trust direct gas impingment. To complicated, too many small parts to lose, etc.

I wouldn't either, they are only good for a few tens of thousands of rounds, and mine spew out small compicated parts all over the firing line.

 

[BigBore]

Skyshot

"Actually you can by the mini with a folding stock. In the 581 series tac model"

They had Falcon folders as well as GB models too..Folding stocks have been around for the Mini's for a long time..Butler creek makes them as well.

 

[Ignition Override]

My '90 vintage Mini 14, with the factory Ruger 20-rd. magazine fed rounds as reliably or better than some WW2 bolt-action rifles with fairly weak magazine springs: the last round in one of my Enfields, now and then a round in the Yugo Mauser.

If people can destroy a target with a Mini 14 and AR (iron sights) out to 100 feet, what is the difference, other than price?

How often do urban/suburban etc Self-Defense situations involve any longer distance?
Apparently offensive and defensive distances must be the same criteria, in previous threads on various websites (M-1A, FAL...).

 

[snake284]

Accuracy. The mini 14 is a nice truck gun, but the AR is accurate.

 

[Mags]

Cost less. The mini is no longer the poor man's 5.56 rifle. ARs can be found for sub 600 dollars I have yet to see even a used mini go for that around here.