Ruger discontinuing the Mini 14 ????

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

kpk

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
950
Reaction score
60
Location
Elk City
Not saying the mini is bad. I think it's a pretty sweet gun, but sounds like to me you got a lemon ar. I've got 4 now and all run like a top. I have had a problem with one mag, but changed the mag and all is well...something to consider???
 

Peace_Maker

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
1,285
Reaction score
3
Location
Moore
It usually comes from people who've had no experience from owning one. My AR jams up on me all the dang time. My mini always goes bang. So, my AR is a POS to me. I trust my Mini over my AR. And it only cost me half the price of the base model AR. Now after all the "performance enhancing options" of my AR, it cost me around $1600 whereas my Mini I've only got about $450 into.

I invite anybody out to shoot my Mini if they think its a piece of crap. I'll prove them wrong. All they gotta do is bring some ammo. And by they way, the Mini will shoot whatever ammo you stick in it unlike the spoiled little rich b***h my AR is. Stupid AR only shoots magic fairy dust bullets.

The Mini doesn't care if its dirty, clean, dry, wet, hot, cold or whatever it just shoots. My AR has got to be cleaned every hundred rounds or so, god forbid if you run it too dry or too wet. And don't expect the bloody thing to shoot more than 3 or 4 rounds before jamming due to the temp being below 75 or above 76 or the humidity is anything other than 42.38% and barometric pressure is above 29.92 in/Hg.

Granted my Mini keeps about a 2" shot group at 100yards where as my AR can do 1" groups. But the difference is my Mini will do those same groups no matter the weather or conditions (see Paragraph above). The AR will shoot 1" groups if you can get it to run more than 3 round groups and depending on the conditions (once again refer to paragraph above). Either way, the Mini will still kill the evil target for all 30 rounds consecutively. AR... not so much. At the range my Mini = sanity, my AR = pissed off, wondering why I spent $1600 on a gun that I gotta constantly baby sit.

So, in summary, I will get flamed for this post because "Oh my God! He said the Awesome Omnipotent Perfection of weaponry that is the AR is a POS! He must be stopped at all cost!" Bring it on hippies! :lmfao:

I am probably one of the biggest proponents of the Garand system on this board. I think Garand should be a saint. I own a M1 and two M14's, they are my favorite rifles and I feel the M14 is the best battle rifle ever. I am not a fan of the AR's especially the 16" carbines that everyone thinks are battle rifles.

That being said I still believe the mini-14 is a POS. Why can my 66 year old M1 shoot 1.5" groups at 100 yards with 30 year old Greek surplus ammo, while the mini I owned shot 5" groups at 100 with Black hills ammo? They have similar systems the Garand has no accuracy enhancements (other than the barrel was re-crowned).

I know my Garand shoots a little better than average, but most shoot way under 3" and were talking 60+ year old rifles that have seen combat, corrosive ammo, and 40 years of hard use by GI's of several countries. Why can't a Ruger .223 version come close in terms of accuracy? My opinion is because it is a piece of ****! Crappy, materiel, crappy rendition of Garand's design, crappy manufacturing, and crappy Q/A. The only reason it is reliable is because it is a copy of Garand's design. Instead of building a .223 Garand or M14, Ruger built a $700 .223 SKS.

I have owned a mini-14, I traded it for a Remington 700, (second best trade I ever made, best was a 22/45 for a 700). It shot 5" 100 yard groups when I was lucky. I also hated that quality hi-caps cost around $50.

I am no big fan of the AR but in this case it beats the hell out of the mini-14, which is sad because there needs to be a quality .223 based on the Garand operating system. I seriously hope Ruger's piston AR is not the joke the mini is.
 

Kid Glock

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
1,968
Reaction score
697
Location
NE Okla.
I have no idea what Ruger plans to do but imo the mini fills a niche gunwise and it would be a mistake to discontinue. If you're satisfied with the mini, life is good. I like minis but haven't found one (factory gun) yet that shoots very well accuracy wise but they seem reliable. Of course I haven't tried a newer series or the NRA model, etc. A downside is the price of quality (factory) hi-cap mags. A friend had a good shooting mini but had app. $1200 in it (after market barrel, etc)
Minis are what they are, certainly not AR's but AR's have their drawbacks too.
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,926
Reaction score
62,778
Location
Ponca City Ok
I've owned a mini-14 stainless ranch rifle in the past. Accuracy was not good, as the barrel is tied to the stock, not floated. First shot was to point of aim, but all suceeding shots wandered off due to heat warping the barrel. A friend has a mini and he sent it off to get the barrel floated, and it shoots like a tack driver now.
 

jbarnett

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
13,138
Reaction score
592
Location
Tecumseh
I am probably one of the biggest proponents of the Garand system on this board. I think Garand should be a saint. I own a M1 and two M14's, they are my favorite rifles and I feel the M14 is the best battle rifle ever. I am not a fan of the AR's especially the 16" carbines that everyone thinks are battle rifles.

That being said I still believe the mini-14 is a POS. Why can my 66 year old M1 shoot 1.5" groups at 100 yards with 30 year old Greek surplus ammo, while the mini I owned shot 5" groups at 100 with Black hills ammo? They have similar systems the Garand has no accuracy enhancements (other than the barrel was re-crowned).

I know my Garand shoots a little better than average, but most shoot way under 3" and were talking 60+ year old rifles that have seen combat, corrosive ammo, and 40 years of hard use by GI's of several countries. Why can't a Ruger .223 version come close in terms of accuracy? My opinion is because it is a piece of ****! Crappy, materiel, crappy rendition of Garand's design, crappy manufacturing, and crappy Q/A. The only reason it is reliable is because it is a copy of Garand's design. Instead of building a .223 Garand or M14, Ruger built a $700 .223 SKS.

I have owned a mini-14, I traded it for a Remington 700, (second best trade I ever made, best was a 22/45 for a 700). It shot 5" 100 yard groups when I was lucky. I also hated that quality hi-caps cost around $50.

I am no big fan of the AR but in this case it beats the hell out of the mini-14, which is sad because there needs to be a quality .223 based on the Garand operating system. I seriously hope Ruger's piston AR is not the joke the mini is.

If your basing your POS info on owning one mini14 rifle then rem700's are POS along with every gun made. I know they aren't but the first 700 I owned had something wrong and wouldnt shoot any kinda of groups. The two 700's I have now will shoot much better than I can. I realize the mini isn't a tack driver and I don't expect a gun I paid less than $400 to be but it always goes bang when I pull the trigger.
 

ldp4570

Sharpshooter
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
6,461
Reaction score
120
Location
McAlester
There again, I've gotta spend another $550 on the AR which brings the total up too $2150. Thats 1 mini 14, 1 remington 700 in .308, and scopes for both. If I want accuracy that can shoot the balls off a fly and 1000 yards, I'll stick with my bolt gun. If I want reliability and dependability I'll take my Mini.


I'll be there to back you up! Bolt gun 700DXLH in 30-06 nuff said there!! Mini 14 older LE model will shoot under 3" at 100yds with irons all day! I carried M16's/M4's my entire military service. I've owned on since, and got rid if it! I'm sorry the MatteMatel doesn't do it for me!!
 

Peace_Maker

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
1,285
Reaction score
3
Location
Moore
If your basing your POS info on owning one mini14 rifle then rem700's are POS along with every gun made. I know they aren't but the first 700 I owned had something wrong and wouldnt shoot any kinda of groups. The two 700's I have now will shoot much better than I can. I realize the mini isn't a tack driver and I don't expect a gun I paid less than $400 to be but it always goes bang when I pull the trigger.

Yeah I'm basing my statements on one mini-14. The one I owned was the only one that Ruger ever made that shot around 5 MOA. All the others were tack drivers, that is why they have such a stellar reputation for accuracy!

/sarcasm off

I realize that every make has their lemons, lemons aside Ruger mini-14's have a overwhelming reputation for not being accurate. I am not making that up or basing it off of one example.

I own a .223 Remington 700 that shoots .5 MOA easily with HSM ammo, so me calling Remington 700's accurate must be flawed and based on one example. Nope Remington 700's have a reputation for being accurate because most are just like most mini-14's cannot shoot even 3 MOA.

If your happy with mini-14's good for you. I am not, and I am not the only one who thinks they shoot like sh**.

The mini I owned had nothing wrong with it, it was just slightly below average in the accuracy department. To me 3-5 MOA is not acceptable for anything other than shotguns or pistols or maybe muzzle loaders.
 

jbarnett

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
13,138
Reaction score
592
Location
Tecumseh
Yeah I'm basing my statements on one mini-14. The one I owned was the only one that Ruger ever made that shot around 5 MOA. All the others were tack drivers, that is why they have such a stellar reputation for accuracy!

/sarcasm off

I realize that every make has their lemons, lemons aside Ruger mini-14's have a overwhelming reputation for not being accurate. I am not making that up or basing it off of one example.

I own a .223 Remington 700 that shoots .5 MOA easily with HSM ammo, so me calling Remington 700's accurate must be flawed and based on one example. Nope Remington 700's have a reputation for being accurate because most are just like most mini-14's cannot shoot even 3 MOA.

If your happy with mini-14's good for you. I am not, and I am not the only one who thinks they shoot like sh**.

The mini I owned had nothing wrong with it, it was just slightly below average in the accuracy department. To me 3-5 MOA is not acceptable for anything other than shotguns or pistols or maybe muzzle loaders.

I'm happy for you and I am not the only one that thinks they aren't a POS either.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom