Ruger Mini 14 ?????????

[Killzone]

This rifle has always intrigued me. I would like to pick one up but all the horror stories of frustrating inaccuracy scare me.

Is there a model or year of production that is better or worse? Is there a difference between the mini 14 and ranch rifle? Is there a "mini 14 lovers" website I can checkout somewhere?

[targshooter]

I own two of the new 580 Series Mini-14s. The stainless synthetic version is on a par for accuracy with the standard AR M4 carbine until the barrel heats up; it then opens its groups up more than the hot AR rifles do in my experience. My stainless wood stocked Mini-14 is less prone to this and is more accurate than most AR M4 rifles I've seen shot at the club. It does open its groups when the barrel gets hot, but to group sizes no more  than my AR15 M4 gives when warm.
I consider the little Mini-14 much easier and quicker handling than any of my AR15s. I own no AR with a barrel shorter than 16 inches. For 100-150 yards and under, I find the Mini-14 the better of the two rifles for being able to put the shot on target first from the offhand. However, beyond 150-200 yards I like the sights on the AR15 and get better results from it than from the Mini-14. At 300 meters I find the Ruger peep sights at a distinct disadvantage against the AR sights. The Ruger sights should have had the front sight blade/protective ears physical dimensions and blade height relationships held to approximate those on US military rifles; such would have provided a better long distance picture IMO. 

[Hairtrigger]

There is a forum that has plenty of Mini fans. Do a search for Perfectunion forums

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Yup---Perfectunion is where the Mini gurus hang out.

[ECV Slick]

FWIW, I had an older Mini-14 (purchased in 1981) and it wasn't much fun to shoot due to a lack of accuracy.  I wound up installing an "Eagle" flash-hider ring-sight combo and couldn't believe the improvement.  It was originally a 4-5 MOA rifle and went down to 2 MOA.  That said, I started fooling with handloads and could get 1-1.5 MOA for my efforts.

This tells me that adding weight to the end of the barrel (as Ruger now has a version with a barrel dampener) is something that can reliably improve accuracy.

[ihuntbucks]

I have one of the newer Minis (ser# 580+) w/ a Bushnell Sportsman 4 x 32 mounted.I can stay in a 3" circle at 100 yrds.Any finer than that will take a much better shot than me.I cut the front sight off and replaced it with a "birdcage"I really enjoy shooting mine.I burn a lot of ammo when I take it out.Iam very glad I reload.I think you would really enjoy one or two............Rick

[44 Man]

I'm in the same dilemma.  I have always wanted an AR type rifle, but I wanted a more substantial caliber than .223 that I could use for fun, plinking, and defense.  I know the .223 is fine for the former two, (and varmit hunting) but I really don't trust it for the latter.  I had not considered the Mini 14 as I had heard the stories about the lack of accuracy.  I had finially given up and put an AR on layaway when I read an article about the new ranch rifle in 6.8 and it was very accurate.  The author also said that the newer Rugers were more accurate than the older ones.  That has picked up my interest.  Seems I can pick up a Ruger for just a little more than what a 6.8 rem top end would cost me for an AR.  Now it just comes down to large capacity magazines.  I understand that Ruger only sells the 5 rounders to civiliams and that you must be LE to obtain more capacity.  So the dilemma continues.  44 Man

[roger460xvr]

I;m in the same dilemma 44man, I've been researching the ruger mini-14 in the 6.8spc caliber i will be using it for deer hunting here in florida sounds like the ticket. I hope they dont discontiue it before i save up the 700-800 dollars for it.  They aiiready got rid of the 99-44 mag and this year the 96-44 mag lever action......ROGER460xvr

[ECV Slick]

Now it just comes down to large capacity magazines.  I understand that Ruger only sells the 5 rounders to civiliams and that you must be LE to obtain more capacity.

Not a problem anymore...  As long as you live in a "free state" (that doesn't restrict magazine capacity to 10-rounds) you can freely and openly purchase the Ruger FACTORY 20-round magazines!  They aren't cheap at $40-$45 a pop, but Ruger no longer restricts sale to LE only.  Either way the Mini-14 has never been "magazine sensitive" in my experience.  I live in CA (where mags are limited to 10-rounds).  I used to own a Mini-14 in the 1980's and have about a dozen 20-round mags left over - but I had sold the original rifle.  Just recently I picked up one to replace it since I still have all my old magazines (that worked just fine).  My new rifle is stainless and my old mags are blued - but it actually looks OK and besides, there's not much I could do about it (unless I want to get the darn things nickle-plated)  .

[Graybeard]

I saw a review of them recently by Brian Pearce I believe most likely in either Rifle or Handloader magazine. He was bragging on the greatly inproved accuracy of them. Most 100 yard groups he reported were in the 2" to 4" range as I recall. I think his best was about 1.75" with four of the five shots actually making a pretty decent group but with one flyer. If there was another under 2" I've forgotten it.

To me that's pretty deplorable accuracy yet again as is the norm for all magazine writers it seems he was actually bragging on how accurate it was. They strike me more as plinkers where the main objective is more along the lines of making noise than actually hitting the target. I suppose they would do OK for self defense of home at shorter ranges should that be a desired use. Ruger really needs to get their act together on this gun if they want to keep it in the line up.

I've really never had much interest in the Mini 14 but have considered the purchase of a Mini 30 or the never one in 6.8 and likely would get one if they'd clean up their act and get them shooting half way decent groups. With either of those two chamberings I could live with groups in the 1.5" to 2.25" range at 100 yards I think but if it can't do that then to me it's pretty much useless.

[44 Man]

My thoughts exactly, Graybeard.  I would be happy with either of those two calibers with 1 1/2 to 2" groups at 100 yds.  Who was it that said 'only accurate rifles are interesting'?  I don't need tiny 'varmit hunting' groups of 1/2" (although I would never turn down a rifle that would do that!).  But I do expect decent 'hunting accuracy' from a firearm or it goes down the road.  I have to laugh when writers say a gun shoots 'pretty good for it's intended purpose', which usually means a defensive handgun that will not hardly stay on a peice of paper at 10 yds.  The 'intended purpose' of any gun is to hit what it is aimed at!  44 Man

[DCRthe3rd]

The mini's seem to be popular with prison guards , what does that mean , I don't know , maybe it means they don't have to shoot far , or maybe it's politics or something else.
That new mini they came out with awhile back I guess is supposed to be a shooter , but I can not bare the looks.
My problem with the minis was I could always do just as good for less money or do better for almost the same money.
But they were good looking guns I thought , and seemed to be the weapon of choice for the A-team , come to think of it , the A-team never could seem to hit much either with them.

[338mag]

My mini-30 went from 4.5" groups to 1.8" groups by adding a flash suppressor (weight) and putting it in a Butler Creek folding stock, very tight bedding.

[myronman3]

the ar's have them beat all to hell.  2-4 inch groups suck.  and if that is better than the old ones, i would hate to see what they would (or should i say 'wouldnt') do. 

my first bushmaster, a varminter, i could put bullets through the same hole.   my second,  a patrolmans carbine, shoots 1 inch groups @ 100 with iron sights.  it seems to me that the ruger mini 14's have some catching up to do.

[Dixie Dude]

I read an article somewhere, where the owner cut the original barrel off to 16-1/2" length and he was grouping about 7/8" of an inch.  He said the barrel is too thin to make good groups, shortening the barrel made it more accurate.  He also tightened the screws holding the gas system to the barrel.  He said that alone decreased his MOA by about a half inch.  I don't remember if he added weight or not.  I had one and liked the ease of take-down and cleaning.  I have an AR, but like the Mini for actual hunting and woods carry, easier to move through brush and such. 

[SHOOTALL]

I have owned 4 mini 14's and 3 mini-30's . i went thru. that many to get one of each that would hold under 3 inches at 100 yards . I don't expect better with the rifle . Yes on occasion they have done better but I would not place bets on it doing so . On this forum i inquired on FIXES and received some good advice . That said when the cost factored in it was more cost effective to buy a M1-A .

[LCR]

Folks bashing the mini 14 and 30 really should try the new 580(14) and 581(30) series rifles, then start talking. I took my mini 30 to the range yesterday with a cheap,beat up Bushnell 3-9 on it(for load development) and the second load I tried, 25 grains H4198 under Hornady 123gr. SP went into 3/4" for 4 shots, the fifth shot (my fault- I knew it as soon as the trigger broke) opened it up to 1 1/8". The load before this one was with 24.5grns. H4198 and printed 1 1/4". At 25grns. I'm still .7grns from max load(Hornady manual), so the groups may tighten more yet but I stopped at 25. All shots were one after the other with no time for barrel to cool off. All these AR waddies running around shooting their mouths off about how great their guns shoot, what, a quarter or half inch better than a new mini? WOW! Unless you're an armchair expert sitting at a bench with a 24 power scope taking slow, deliberate shots, controlling your breathing and heart rate....etc. no one would ever know the difference in field conditions. These are fun combat-oriented rifles, take it for what it is. If I want to shoot 1/4" groups from a bench I'll grab one of my Rem. 700's. The rest of this "match grade combat rifle" talk is vomit at best.

[kevthebassman]

My mini-30 shot 5 inch "patterns" at 50 yards that predictably opened up to 10 inches at 100 with a scope that I still use on different rifles.  It wouldn't shoot Wolf ammo, primers too hard. (or should I say, firing pin strike too weak!) 

I got rid of the rifle.... if it could have shot the Wolf stuff I would have excused it and used it similar to an AK or SKS... but it couldn't.  If I could have gotten 2 inch groups with it, I would have used the UMC ammo at $10 a box and called it a brush gun deer-getter...... but it couldn't do that either.

All in all, I think Ruger is stupid for putting together a rifle that has none of the endearing qualities of the AK/SKS, and none of the accuracy of a lever action carbine.  I'm glad I got rid of the rifle, and it will take more than rumors of improvement read on the internet or in a gunrag to get me to buy another mini instead of an AR or an AK.  I'm not saying that it will never happen, but I'm from the "Show Me" state.... I'll have to see it with my own eyes.

[Graybeard]

Folks bashing the mini 14 and 30 really should try the new 580(14) and 581(30) series rifles, then start talking. I took my mini 30 to the range yesterday with a cheap,beat up Bushnell 3-9 on it(for load development) and the second load I tried, 25 grains H4198 under Hornady 123gr. SP went into 3/4" for 4 shots, the fifth shot (my fault- I knew it as soon as the trigger broke) opened it up to 1 1/8". The load before this one was with 24.5grns. H4198 and printed 1 1/4". At 25grns. I'm still .7grns from max load(Hornady manual), so the groups may tighten more yet but I stopped at 25. All shots were one after the other with no time for barrel to cool off. All these AR waddies running around shooting their mouths off about how great their guns shoot, what, a quarter or half inch better than a new mini? WOW! Unless you're an armchair expert sitting at a bench with a 24 power scope taking slow, deliberate shots, controlling your breathing and heart rate....etc. no one would ever know the difference in field conditions. These are fun combat-oriented rifles, take it for what it is. If I want to shoot 1/4" groups from a bench I'll grab one of my Rem. 700's. The rest of this "match grade combat rifle" talk is vomit at best.

While I won't question the honesty of your report I will say I think it's grossly untypical of what the guns are doing for most folks. The magazine review I reported on above was of the new supposedly improved versions and the writer touted the improvement yet groups were still running more in the 3" to 4" range and he too claimed many were ruined by his poor shooting that caused them to open to 5" or 6" on that last shot.

I've never owned one and likely never will until I start hearing folks who do own them saying they work properly. I'd really like to get one but if it can't keep shots inside 2" pretty much every time then it would not serve my purposes and you are the first and only person I've heard from so far who says they have one that will do that. Maybe when such reports are common I'll try one out myself.

[LCR]

GB,

        If you're referring to Brian Pierces article in, I believe it was Rifle Shooter magazine, he was using the old 580 without the heavier barrel. I don't mind people questioning my credibility, but until a man goes out, buys his own, works up a load for it and sees for himself firsthand, everything he says is hearsay. As for the gentleman who posted before you, I never said the old minis aren't junk.

[kevthebassman]

Mine sure was.  I got took on that rifle.  Ruger: 1  Me: 0

[SHOOTALL]

I have the new Mini's and like them on some days they shot 2 inch groups then they would go to larger the next time . And sure alot of things could cause it . I can live with it the way it shoots , but will not try to make it more than it is .

[Graybeard]

GB,

        If you're referring to Brian Pierces article in, I believe it was Rifle Shooter magazine, he was using the old 580 without the heavier barrel. I don't mind people questioning my credibility, but until a man goes out, buys his own, works up a load for it and sees for himself firsthand, everything he says is hearsay. As for the gentleman who posted before you, I never said the old minis aren't junk.

The article I mentioned was by Brian but I doubt I read it in Rifle Shooter as I don't get that magazine. If it was in that magazine it would have had to be an older article as I did try a one year subscription when it first came out but decided it wasn't worth the price so didn't renew. I'm pretty sure the article I remember was in either Rifle or Hand Loader magazine. I don't recall which issue or where I've laid it aside at this date. He did specify in the one I read that the rifle he was testing was the newer not older Mini 14. I do not recall if he mentioned a heavier barrel but do recall mention of a new design of the gas chamber which he mentioned as being a large part of the problem with the older ones.

He really bragged up the improved accuracy of it even tho for my personal standards the groups he was getting would not be good enough for me to keep the gun.

I do wish Ruger would get their act together on the rifle as I'd like to have one in either the newer 6.8 or a Mini 30. I have no interest in one in .223 as I do expect SUB MOA groups and some 1/2 MOA groups from any rifle so chambered. If a rifle chambered to that round will not do that level of accuracy it has no place at my house. Due to the uses I would make of the 6.8 or the 7.62x39 versus what I'd use the .223 for my accuracy requirements for the larger bores would be less than for the smaller bore.

[44 Man]

Graybeard.  I read the same article in a Dr's office and it was not in a magazine I usually get.  But Brian was talking about the improved accuracy of the 'newer' series Ranch rifles and this one was in 6.8 rem.  And he stated that when he started his test it was shooting 5" groups.  After putting 120 rounds through it, the gun would do 2" all the time, and occasionally 1.75" groups with Remington factory ammo.  I would be satisfied with that in either a 6.8 or a Mini 30 because I would be using either for coyotes and whitetails. I also have no interest in those kinds of groups in a .223 or owning that type of rifle in a varmit caliber.  So if the Ruger will do that, I'll be in line to buy one.  44 Man

[myronman3]

hey lcr, dont get mad at us for the reputation these rifles have.   they got them the old fashioned way...... they EARNED them.    i'll put my varminter up against those results any day.  that rifle puts them practically through the hole at 100 yards, right out of the box with no break in period at all; with a regular 3-9 power scope.   so yeah, i do think there is a difference there.   btw, bushmaster has earned it's rep the same way; it EARNED IT!!!!!!!!

[Graybeard]

Wow did my CRS ever come thru on this one guys. 

The article was NOT by Brian Pearce it was by Bart Skelton. Hey both of their first names start with a B at least. The article was in the Jan/Feb 2007 issue of Rifle Shooter magazine. I seem to recall that I picked this one up at the Handgun Hunt I went to at White Oak Plantation back in Dec. 2006 but only recently got around to reading it. So the article is kinda old really. It was so he reported a 580 series whatever that means. His best group was 1-7/8" and he blamed a "flyer" for that size. He also mentioned several just over 2". I assume since he was so quiet on the subject that all the rest were well over 2". His BEST group the first outing with it was 2-1/8" he reported. I wonder what the WORST was?

He conveniently forgot to mention. In fact the ONLY two groups specifically mentioned by size were the 1-7/8" and the 2-1/8" groups. I take it from that most were well over that size. This was by the way a .223 Remington chambered Mini 14 for which my personal standard would require pretty much all groups to be under an inch and at least half of them well under that mark. Had it been one of the larger bore guns and had it consistently run groups like his two best I could probably live with it.

Sorry for the poor recollection on this article but it has been a couple months or more since I read it and the old brain don't remember as well as it once did. 

[LCR]

  That's the article I was thinking of. The rifle he used was the early 580 series with the tighter receiver tolerances and new gas block, but the same old crappy pencil-thin barrel. In early 2008, Ruger started putting heavier barrels on the minis, I'm not refering to the target models, but the standard ranch rifle. It started with the introduction of the 6.8spc- they were the first ones to have the new barrel and the other calibers followed. They are identified by a fillet in front of the gas block and they're very good shooters. Ruger kept the 580/581 designation and never made a big deal about the change for reasons unknown. I know two people who have the 6.8 and they've been getting anywhere from 7/8" to 1 1/8" @ 100yds. with handloads and like I said before, my 7.62 soviet is no slouch.

[44 Man]

I hate to keep jumping back in here, but I'm close to buying SOMETHING!  The article I read WAS on the 6.8 and I do believe it was from one of the 'Handloader' crew.  Either Brian Pearce or Dave Scoville.  They are both favorite authors of mine because of their handgun stories.  I think I really would prefer a Mini but I think I would like the Mini 30 over the 6.8.... maybe.  I think about the cheap ammo for fun with the Mini 30, but I still suspect the 6.8 will easily out shoot it.  Looks like there's a 6.8 Ranch in my future.  44 Man.

[LCR]

  44Man,

           Those are both excellent calibers, I've been pondering a 6.8 myself, but wasn't sure if the cartridge would make it or not- I've heard mixed reports on it's military use. I think you're making a wise decision on the mini, though. Both of the gentlemen I referred to who bought the 6.8 work at a local sporting goods store, they said everybody they've talked to whose bought the new 580/581 taper barrel are very impressed. If I get some time I'll sit down and see if I can figure out how to post pictures on this damn computer and post rifle and targets. If you like one of a kind custom stuff check out Accuracy systems Inc.- He's in Colorado and specializes in Minis.

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

For an autoloader---I'd go with the .233/5.56 or the 7.62x39 just because anything else will cost ya an arm and a leg to shoot.

The 6.8 might be fun to play with in a bolt action--but unless the military picks it up--it will be cost prohibitive to shoot in a ammo gobbling auto.