[for_hire]

I have shot both and enjoy them both. I was wondering what opininons do you share about the Ar's and the Mini's..Im wanting to buy one. I just need some feed back on which to buy

[adaman04]

This is kind of beating a dead horse, but I have a Mini-14 Ranch Rifle. I originally looked at an AK and somehow got in to the Mini. I like the .223 a lot better, but if I had it to do again, I would probably buy and AR. Actually, I would probably buy the AK and used the extra money to buy some of the other toys I have acquired since.

The Mini shoots good enough, but an AR will give you better accuracy. Don't get me wrong, the Mini is getting sold or anything like that. They're gun little guns.

[30Cal]

The mini isn't even in the same league as far as accuracy. The AR is hands-down the better rifle.

Ty

[mmike87]

From what I understand the Mini14 is typically "hit or miss" accuracy (no pun intended.) Durable design, but don't expect 1 MOA groups on most samples.

I ultimately decided on the AR for my first .223 rifle. The AR-15 is a pretty slick machine, IMO. Nearly all factory AR-15's shoot 1 MOA or less out of box.

[TexasRifleman]

I have a Mini14 that I got for Christmas when I was 13. It's been pretty much indestructible. I've left it behind pickup seats for years on end and it's always functioned. Now, hitting what I was aiming at is another story.

It's a great truck gun because it's so tough, but the AR is by far a better rifle.

As usual, they each have a use, not necessarily the same one.

[MCgunner]

If I wanted a .223, I'd get a bolt gun, but between a mini and an AR, I prefer the mini's "real rifle" handling and the AR's accuracy and more especially accuracy potential. Lots of ARs in military rifle type shooting and lots of gunsmiths can accurize them. That's why between these two, I'd go AR. Shame, though, cause I love Rugers and I like the garand/M14 style lock up the mini 14 uses. But, accuracy wins every time.

[deputy tom]

I have shot both and enjoy them both...I just need some feed back on which to buy

Buy the one that you enjoyed shooting the most.tom.:D

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Run 3,000rds through a Mini-14 in 3 days or take it to a Gunsite-style carbine class and it will die due to parts breakage. ARs will handle that level of use and are more accurate as well. ARs are also around twice the price of a Mini-14.

If you plan on doing some occasional hunting and range trips without any heavy duty shooting, the Mini-14 will do just fine. If you do any serious training with a rifle, you might as well go with the AR now and save yourself the angst.

[Karate]

Ask Riley

[jrpeterman]

I own and like both. When I bought my mini 14 ranch, I got it new for under $300.00 on sale. Colt ARs were twice that much. I bought my Colt AR-15 National Match for $659.00. Right now, a Mini-14 is right about $500.00. A Bushmaster or other AR clone will be about $750.00. For that price difference I would go with the AR. I don't think the ARs are worth much more than twice the price of an mini. I would look for a good used mini-14 for $350.00 or less and get a new Bushmaster, DMPS, or RRA. If you decide to go with Colt, look for a nice used one and save a few $$.

[Karate]

Seriously...I have shot both and it would be hard for me to choose...I have a Mini (as you know) not because it is more PC than the AR but because I got it at a great price...if hung up on Black then by all means get a AR...Price wise a base AR is going to be 2 or 3 hundred higher than a Mini...and by the time you add all of the bells and whistles...it will still be higher...there is no dening that out of the box an AR is more accurate...but I can shoot neither well without optics of some type added (unless something has changed since Monday you are in the same boat)...Stock sights on both are for close range and fast target acquistion...I agree with MCgunner that if you want a .223 get a bolt gun...if you are wanting a BLack Combat rifle try Remington's .223 pump rifle...designed for use in Iraq..because in urban CQB a semi auto jam could(probably would) get you killed... for what I know that you will be doing with it get an M1 Carbine...I know it is not on your list but a better choice for what you will be doing with it...besides no one in our group as thougth about getting one yet.

[Preacherman]

There's a third option - the Kel-Tec SU16C. I prefer this gun to both the AR and the Mini-14 for "private use" (I freely admit that I'm biased against the AR15/M16 platform due to past problems). It's usually in the $350-$450 range, and I think it's a great design, light, compact (particularly if you're traveling - it folds up to a size that can fit in most suitcases or duffel-bags), and very reliable in my experience.

[Phantom Warrior]

...if you are wanting a BLack Combat rifle try Remington's .223 pump rifle...designed for use in Iraq..because in urban CQB a semi auto jam could(probably would) get you killed...


Huh?

[MCgunner]

Originally Posted by Karate
...if you are wanting a BLack Combat rifle try Remington's .223 pump rifle...designed for use in Iraq..because in urban CQB a semi auto jam could(probably would) get you killed...



Huh?

:rolleyes: Huh ain't the word. Combat is the realm of the auto. We had the Garand 60 years ago against the Mauser...whadda mis-match! Picture yourself working a turn bolt while the Americans are firing and maneuvering on you fast as they can pull the trigger. Fortunately for the Germans, they had the MG42. G.S Patton called the M1 Garand the greatest battle implement of all time. (a semi auto)

Hey, pumps can jam. I should know, I had to extract a couple of rounds this morning from my Mossberg 500 by taking the barrel off and using my multi-tool to get the shell out. It wasn't the gun's fault. My rounds are a year old and had been exposed to the salt marsh last year. They get a little rusty and guess what happens. New ammo works fine, but I'm too cheap to throw away a whole box of steel shot. I tossed a few really bad ones, fired the rest, but had a couple that wouldn't extract.

I mean, civilian use, sure, use a pump, lever, whatever. But, a combat squad of marines ain't gonna go out with sticks and stones and battle full auto AKs and stuff, RPGs, whatever. In 21st century warfare, so far, firepower has replaced marksmanship, to a large extent. Of course, there'll always be a use for the sniper. ;)

Much as I don't care for auto rifles for my own personal uses (hunting and targets), I concede that warfare is the milieu of the automatic.

[Deer Hunter]

If you really want to compare the two .223 platforms, then the AR is going to come out on top in some catagories, and the Mini in others. Mini is more conservative, costs less, ect. Yet the AR has the erogonmics going for it, has great accuracy, and you can find parts easier.

I would pick the AR over the Mini. Out of the box, an AR will outshoot a Mini.

[f4t9r]

i just like the AR better

[Karate]

Remington 7615...check it out...I agree that a pump can and will jam,,,I have a 870 Marine Magnum that had to be serviced after about 25 rounds for jamming...I perfer a Semi Auto also...but the new urban combat pump from Remington looks pretty sweet...and according to Remington it was designed for use in Iraq...I can neither comfirm nor deny whether this is true or not.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Remington 7615...check it out...I agree that a pump can and will jam,,,I have a 870 Marine Magnum that had to be serviced after about 25 rounds for jamming...I perfer a Semi Auto also...but the new urban combat pump from Remington looks pretty sweet...and according to Remington it was designed for use in Iraq...I can neither comfirm nor deny whether this is true or not.

Sounds like marketing hype to me... in any case, I've seen a lot more short stroking the pump during the relatively stress free environment of a three gun match than I have of AR15s failing to fire.

[colt.45]

but the truth is, the ar is better. man i wish ruger would give the mini a better barrel:rolleyes: but i can only dream or do it myself

[1911user]

Also consider mag costs if you are planning to aquire more than a few spare mags. New USGI 30rd mags for the AR are $11-$13 each and they aren't seconds, off-brands, or junk. Restrictive Ruger policies really hurt the mini-14 concerning mags that hold over 5 rds. Even the 5 round mags are expensive IMO. It doesn't take very many $30-$40 ruger 20rd mags to make up any price difference between an AR and mini-14. If you are inclined, you can build an AR with the parts you choose starting around $600 or even less with careful used parts purchases.

[Drakejake]

The Ruger Mini-14 mag situation is now very good. Cheap aftermarket 20 and 30 rounders are available and factory 20 rounders can be had for around $35 each.

Drakejake

[1911user]

Has anyone (other than the old PMI mags) sold an aftermarket 20-30rd mag for the mini-14 that was reliable as OEM? What do they cost?

$35 for a 20 rd mag doesn't sound that great to me (I realize the situation used to be much worse).

[lycanthrope]

You can build a new AR for as low as $515. That's what this one cost.

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~jefwolfe/Model1small.JPG

This one was born 12-25-05 in about an hour.

[mustanger98]

I like my Mini-14. :cool: It hits where I put the front sight. :cool: Shooting it is part of where I caught the Garand bug.:cool:

People complain about accuracy or lack off it. I haven't noticed a real difference with mine, except that it shoots real good with 68gr HPBT's running 2400fps. On a good day I've torn up a business card at 50yds with mine and this handload from offhand standing w/sling. :cool:

I don't like AR-15's. :barf: They don't look good and they don't feel like a rifle should feel, IMO. :barf:

[Sir Aardvark]

The Mini is cheap and makes a great truck gun!

[jayhway]

The Mini is cheap and makes a great truck gun!

I really wouldn't call the Mini cheap. I paid about $450 for my Stainless ranch version. For the money you can't beat a $150 SKS as a truck gun.

[Elarski]

Go with the AR, you can build other Uppers for it as well.

[IrvJr]

for hire,

I was in the same boat as you recently. I recently wanted to get a .223 rifle and was debating between the AR and mini 14. I like them both. However, I ultimately decided on a Mini 14 and I am very happy with my purchase. The Mini was better suited for my purposes. I wanted a centerfire rifle that was fun to shoot, accurate within 100 or so yards, and easy to maintain. I've found that my gun handles well, and it's good for quick, close up shooting. It's been very reliable out of the box.

I think the Mini is a fun, handy, well-built gun. They make good "all-purpose" guns, and don't require too much maintenance and cleaning. My mini is accurate enough for me - I get about 6" - 8" groups at 100 yards using the iron sights. I can get better groups (3" to 4") if I only shoot 3 rounds (slow fire) at a time.

I used to own an AR style rifle (Bushmaster with a 16" barrel) and I liked it a lot, but I sold it to fund another gun-related project. I've heard that the AR requires a little more maintenance and cleaning than the Mini to keep it running smoothly (I didn't really clean my AR much).

I bought my mini new because I wanted to get the kind with the newer, garand style front sight. However, you can also find used Mini's for good prices if you scour the gun shows and shops.

The factory magazines (20 round Ruger, LEO marked) cost about $30 a piece. There are several aftermarket mags available for less than half that price. Many Mini 14 owners have reported good results with a brand called ProMag (they have great customer service too with a lifetime warranty on all of their mags).

If I were in the market for serious, service-grade rifle, I would definitely go with the AR. They're really accurate, easy to shoot, and there are many suppliers of guns and parts available. Plus, they are really versatile.

However, I think the Mini makes a handy, general purpose, fun gun that can double as a defensive gun if needed.

Here are some links that you might want to check out,


http://www.ar15.com/content/swat/200203-AR-15_vs_Mini-14.pdf

http://www.perfectunion.com/forums/index.php?showforum=8

Deputy Tom is right - get the gun that you enjoy shooting the most.

Good luck with your purchase!

[BozemanMT]

You're kidding right? the mini isn't even in the same ballpark. the AR is by far the better rifle for any task.
Buy the AR, don't look back.

[Onslaught]

I really wouldn't call the Mini cheap. I paid about $450 for my Stainless ranch version. For the money you can't beat a $150 SKS as a truck gun.
Wow, this thread made it all the way to the second page before somebody suggested an SKS :neener:

I guess "cheap" is relative... I would definitely call $450 "cheap".

I have owned ARs for several years. When my son wanted his "own" rifle, I chose a Mini-14 because it was CHEAP but still used the same caliber as my ARs. Paid $350 for a stainless ranch rifle with a laminated stock (which he didn't like, so I sold it for $$$ and bought him a plastic one for $, and kept the change ;) ). After a couple of range sessions, I realized that what I "needed" for a truck gun was a Mini-14 as well! :D So I found myself a nice used non-ranch Mini-14 in stainless for $300, put a Choate folder on it for $65, and locked it up tight under the back seat of my pickup along with a couple of 20 round magazines. My research found that ProMag 20's and 30's are 100% reliable, are sold out as fast as Midway USA gets them, and run about $20 each.

There you have it... 2 mini-14's, two stocks, under $700 total. I paid $900 for my first Bushmaster back in '93, and with all the optics, forends, etc. I've got one carbine that cost me $1400 and a mid-length that's more like $2100! (ACOG and DD forend). I can assemble my own ARs, but I won't buy cheap no-name parts, so it still costs me more than $700.

AR15
Pros:
More accurate out of box
Inexpensive quality mags
Superfast mag changes

Cons:
more expensive

Mini-14
Pros:
Less expensive

Cons:
Less accurate out of box
Slower mag changes
Quality mags (though easier to find than they used to be) still require more effort and a few more $$.


OK now, before anyone complains about what I left off the list, let me say this:

Ergonomics and overall looks are all opinions so they don't count for either rifle. Ditto for "less politically correct" or "doesn't scare the sheeple".
I've never had a malfunction from any of my ARs or any of the Minis either, so I can't call that one way or the other.

I can say that I know a couple folks who have bought a Mini14 and then sold it to purchase an AR15, but I don't personally know anyone who's sold an AR to buy a Mini.

Buy what you want... Or buy both :D

[mustanger98]

Those of us who use and like the Mini-14 are never kidding. I think it's mostly that those of us who like wood stocks and Garand type actions are a minority lately because this type rifle isn't the ultramodernsupertacticool deal you can hang so many toys on. My Mini-14 performs very well for me and I would recommend one to anybody. It's the one to have when you don't want to be carrying your toolbox too.

[Justin]

From High Power to 3 Gun, the AR15 platform dominates nearly any semi-auto centerfire rifle competition.

The rifle can be set up in a mind-boggling array of configurations, and magazines are cheap and plentiful.

There's no comparison. Except for price, the AR dominates in every way. You get what you pay for.

[mustanger98]

From High Power to 3 Gun, the AR15 platform dominates nearly any semi-auto centerfire rifle competition.

Not all of life's uses for a gun revolve around competing on a set and controlled course of fire. For much inside competition, you go with rifles and configurations that suit you. For anything outside that, it's all up to personal preference.

The rifle can be set up in a mind-boggling array of configurations, and magazines are cheap and plentiful.

Remember K.I.S.S.? (Keep It Simple, Stupid.) Garand types rule.

There's no comparison. Except for price, the AR dominates in every way. You get what you pay for.

AR dominates nothing. Personal preference dominates everything. I'd like to see an AR15 and a Quigley Sharps go head to head on the 1000yd line. I inject the Quigley Sharps here because at that distance, I've never seen a 5.56 in any make and model that had what it takes. Back to the subject at hand, the Mini-14 makes a good plinker, defender, hunter/varminter for the truck/ranchhouse. An AR15 in basic configuration may cut it, but whether it gets the nod depends on what the individual shooter likes. Some of us like Garand type actions in wood stocks. Personal preference dominates everything.

[R.H. Lee]

If I could have an AR-15 I wouldn't even consider a Mini 14. In fact, I can't have an AR-15 and still wouldn't consider a Mini 14. It's a no brainer. Go for the AR. :)

[Justin]

Not all of life's uses for a gun revolve around competing on a set and controlled course of fire. For much inside competition, you go with rifles and configurations that suit you. For anything outside that, it's all up to personal preference.

Certainly competitive shooting isn't the be-all-end-all. But the fact that the AR15 platform has been so widely adapted to such disparate forms of competitive shooting says volumes about its attainable level of accuracy, durability, functionality, and yes, even reliablility.

As a rule, serious competitive shooters are primarily interested in stuff that works within their particular discipline. But even the most esoteric forms of competition shooting stress accuracy, repeatability, and reliability.

Remember K.I.S.S.? (Keep It Simple, Stupid.) Garand types rule. Is the AR15 platform really that much more mechanically complicated that Garand-derived designs?

AR dominates nothing.

It's already been noted that the AR dominates more than one discipline of competitive shooting, as well as wide acceptance of the AR/M16 among military and police. If it wasn't at least a somewhat serviceable fit for these things, no one would use them.

Personal preference dominates everything.

Certainly. But one would be wise to evaluate the relative merits of the platforms.

I'd like to see an AR15 and a Quigley Sharps go head to head on the 1000yd line. I inject the Quigley Sharps here because at that distance, I've never seen a 5.56 in any make and model that had what it takes.

You're comparing Orange Juice to Coca-Cola here. I've never made a statement about the 1000 yard effectiveness of the .223, and trying to criticize the .223 by shoe-horning it into something that it's not meant to perform in doesn't really yield useful info.

Back to the subject at hand, the Mini-14 makes a good plinker, defender, hunter/varminter for the truck/ranchhouse. An AR15 in basic configuration may cut it, but whether it gets the nod depends on what the individual shooter likes. Some of us like Garand type actions in wood stocks. Personal preference dominates everything.

If the Mini14 does everything you need it to do, and you find it aesthetically pleasing, then yes, go with that. Personally, the Mini doesn't do what I need, which is why I unequivocally recommend the AR.

[Chris Rhines]

If you're deeply in love with the Mini-14 (or if it's all you can get) that's fine. It's a decent plinker, but it's not a rifle for serious shooters.

- Chris

[MechAg94]

Personally, I think people should buy and learn to use what they feel comfortable and confident in.

My Dad has an old Mini-14 that is a very good shooter and is very reliable. I have an Armalite that is a very good shooter and is very reliable. Take your pick. Any rifle you expect to depend on should probably be run through its paces pretty heavily.

If you want a truck gun or a gun you rarely have to clean, okay maybe an AR is not the best. I would prefer a levergun for a truck gun though.

I think I will end up getting a stainless mini-14 one of these days, but the magazine situation bothers me. I can get quality mags cheaper for my AR, my AK, or my M1A. Seems strange to me that someone can't make quality mags for those kinds of prices. I haven't seen the SU16 so I can't comment on that idea.

[Old Dog]

I stayed out of this one for a while because I knew the lines would inevitably be drawn ... they were:which is why I unequivocally recommend the AR.Actually, it seemed as though in your previous post you totally dismissed out of hand the Mini-14 (while displaying the typical condescending/patronizing tone many AR dudes adopt when someone dares mention the Mini-14 can be practical.

Having been issued the M-16 for years, been in situations having to maintain it and keep it with me ... I just can't succumb to the AR mystique that so many guys fall for. Example of an AR guy cutting down the Mini: It's a decent plinker, but it's not a rifle for serious shooters. That one is mildly amusing, since I know many, many serious shooters who don't use ARs or even own one.

And then geez, we got guys who don't own either of these rifles chiming in with their preference for the AR ... It's just a freakin' tool. They're ugly and engender no pride of ownership for me, but I'll give you that they can be quite accurate and they're light and handy little buggers.

I've got no dog in this fight; my Mini-14 is a great truck gun and a excellent coyote-killer, but I've no sentimental attachment to either the Mini or the AR (overpriced, overhyped, and yes, they do break more than the Mini ...). Frankly, I much prefer the M-14/M-1A platform.

[mustanger98]

Personally, I think people should buy and learn to use what they feel comfortable and confident in.

If you want a truck gun or a gun you rarely have to clean, okay maybe an AR is not the best. I would prefer a levergun for a truck gun though.


This is a big part of what I was trying to get across. BTW, I'm a levergunner too. Personally, I never did take to spaceguns.

I think I will end up getting a stainless mini-14 one of these days, but the magazine situation bothers me.

To my way of thinking, the cost of magazines just goes along with buying the weapon one is most comfortable and confident with. There's a trade-off with everything. Personally, the best deal I found is after I got my M1, I saw where CMP was selling boxes of 400 en blocs for $50 bucks now and I jumped on that deal when I had the chance, so not having AR, AK, M1A, I don't have to have those magazines. That's just me and my train of thought.

[mustanger98]

It's a decent plinker, but it's not a rifle for serious shooters.

Define "serious shooters". If I'm shooting, I'm usually serious.

That one is mildly amusing, since I know many, many serious shooters who don't use ARs or even own one.

Yeah, I know several too.

I just realized this- when I take my Mini-14 to the range where there's a wide range of preferences of weapons, I don't hear the "my AR's better than your Mini-14" I hear online. At all.

[Chris Rhines]

Touchy, touchy...

That one is mildly amusing, since I know many, many serious shooters who don't use ARs or even own one. I said nothing about the AR in my post. I said that a Mini-14 is not a rifle for serious shooters. I stand by that statement - in my experience, the Mini-14 is neither accurate enough nor reliable enough for anything beyond casual plinking.

Actually, it seemed as though in your previous post you totally dismissed out of hand the Mini-14 (while displaying the typical condescending/patronizing tone many AR dudes adopt when someone dares mention the Mini-14 can be practical. I dismissed the Mini-14 based on my experience with the platform. I have more than a few rounds through the Mini, you know. If you find that consending or patronizing, well, sorry. I'll try to be more careful of your feelings in the future.

- Chris

[Old Dog]

Uh, Chris, I wasn't being touchy (I don't think) ... I was actually commenting mainly on Justin's post ... and c'mon now, ya don't need to worry about hurtin' my feelings (though it's nice that you care) ... I was merely venting my feelings about the arrogance a lot of dedicated AR-enthusiasts display when comparing their chosen platform to any other ...

However, in my experience, I have found that the Mini-14 can be accurate enough for some serious shooting, albeit, as noted, not for sustained shooting (I wouldn't take it to Gunsite for a carbine class) ...

[MechAg94]

I wouldn't say I was a levergunner Mustanger98, but I do have a few of them and appreciate their reliability, ease of use, and accuracy at practical ranges. The only downside I can think of is in loading rounds. That takes a little practice to do it fast (I need to practice more). :) My goto home defense gun is a .357 Rossi clone by the way. I may get a self defense shotgun some day, but that is not the priority right now.

For myself, I don't have much preference over what a gun looks like. However, my leverguns are probably the best looking guns I own. Cool factor is great, but I didn't learn to shoot with pistol grips.

For practical uses and ranges, I think the mini-14 is a perfectly acceptable gun. However, I think a lot of people prefer it as much for the feel and the design as much as anything.

[Justin]

Actually, it seemed as though in your previous post you totally dismissed out of hand the Mini-14 (while displaying the typical condescending/patronizing tone many AR dudes adopt when someone dares mention the Mini-14 can be practical.

For the shooting that I do, yes, the mini is pretty much dismissed out of hand. I cannot think of even one serious rifle competitor who runs a mini.

As has been already said, it's a servicable plinker, and fine for what it does, but for me, I'll take the AR.


Having been issued the M-16 for years, been in situations having to maintain it and keep it with me ... I just can't succumb to the AR mystique that so many guys fall for. Example of an AR guy cutting down the Mini:

Mystique has nothing to do with it. I've run AR's at both Service Rifle and 3 Gun matches with nary a problem, and both rifles performed as needed. I own a Ruger 22/45 pistol, it's a fine little plinker, but it's not something I would ever consider taking anywhere that I plan to do serious shooting.

[natedog]

AR-15, without question.

[Zundfolge]

Every time I see a Mini 14 I hear this little voice in the back of my head saying "...no honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun..."




Anyway, if you really like the Mini 14 than get one, but if you want advice on which rifle is overall better than its clearly the AR ... if money is an issue that KelTec is supposed to be pretty nice and it uses the less expensive AR mags.

[Old Dog]

Aw guys, I don't believe I implied the Mini-14 was the rifle for competition ... I was talkin' attitudes ... And, as I said, give me an M-14 (well, I have to settle for a Springfield M-1A) anytime ... I'll use the M-1A National Match for competition ...

And yeah, from my point of view -- I do see guys caught up in the "mystique."

P.S. -- Leverguns rule.

[Seraph]

Ruger's Mini-14 is a great little carbine. I've owned a couple of them, and maybe I got lucky, but both mine were perfectly reliable and fairly accurate. However, they were not the equal of AR's and M-16's I have used, in terms of accuracy and utility (note here that I believe ergonomics contribute very heavily to utility), and I can't say I ever had to prove the reliability of my Mini-14's in any degree or kind of adversity (since I was a little boy, I've always kept my weapons immaculately clean, and have never used a Mini-14 in anything resembling a desert or a swamp). I'll also include that I never fired more than 300 rounds through a Mini-14 in a single session. On the other hand, I have used M-16's in some nasty environments. Those that have been in my care (which has always meant fanatical maintenance) have exhibited dogged reliability, as well as unequalled finesse. Of the two admirable designs being discussed here, I would certainly give unequivocal preference to the AR-15/M-16, but I would also offer that the Mini is no slouch. Some might think it crazy, but I think I would choose a Mini-14 (but not a Mini-30) over an AK or SKS.

[adaman04]

If you're deeply in love with the Mini-14 (or if it's all you can get) that's fine. It's a decent plinker, but it's not a rifle for serious shooters.

- Chris

This is where my can of worms opens. I consider myself to be a VERY serious shooter, in fact, guns and activities which involve them, are really my ONLY hobbies. Because I own a Mini, I'm not a "serious shooter"? Excuse me? The AR has far better accuracy and mags are cheap. They are great guns, I like them just fine. Does this make it the supreme choice for all situations? Hell no. Just because I like the Garand action in a small package, and don't always need a 6-position stock, pistol grip and a light mount on top of a 30 round mag, doesn't make the Mini junk, or me a novice shooter. Have a nice day.

[P0832177]

The Mini 14 is what Bill Ruger designated as, the world most expensive plinker with an original MSRP of 200 bucks! They spew bullets! They, Ruger, sort of sold out with the 10rd magazine Clinton, ban and in my book just as bad was what S&W did! Needless to say, they are perfect gun not to rile feathers with being int he back of pickup truck rifle rack! They are not all that accurate! I know from personal experience! It took three tries to convince me of that! The first one had SK mount that was tapped into the receiver, and with tweaking hand loads it would shoot 3" at 100, and it was with a good Loopy scope too! It was the gun, not the operator! Just look at the bust with the Ruger XGI, they never could get any degree of accuracy! Now, are there places that accurize them, you bet! But, for modularity the AR is hard to beat! Mags are cheap, at least for now!

Me thinks the Rem 7615 was designed for use by police, to skirt the ASSAULT RIFLE issue with the public and other political pot holes. It provides the same manual of arms as the 870 in most respects, and thus I bet is a selling point, too! http://www.remingtonle.com/rifles/7615.htm

[Euclidean]

I'm just telling you what I did.

I was initially attracted to the Mini 14 family because of its price point, and I like everything else Ruger makes to some degreee. I think their semiautomatic pistols are a good value, I think their revolvers are fabulous, and I love all their other long guns.

But I started looking at it real carefully, and realized I'd have to get a Mini 14 and a Mini 30 to do what I wanted to do.

I thought about it some more and realized there was nothing I wanted to do with the Mini 30 that a second hand SKS wouldn't do. So I solved that issue pretty early.

I have waited for about a year and a half to get my CCW stuff under control and have decided to get into a nicer rifle. I looked at the Mini 14, went to websites devoted to it, etc. and here is what I found out:

#1. It's not as bad as it used to be but it still has problems
#2. It can be optimized to perform like I would want it to, no problem. It just costs money.

I can't afford expensive customization, and realized a lot of the work I'd want to do, I'd have to find a smith for. The parts alone were in my budget but not the labor costs.

So I went with the AR15. I've actually started it already. Picked up a stripped DPMS lower yesterday. I plan to get a parts kit and a buttstock on my next paycheck, and then shop around carefully for a complete upper in the exact configuration I want. I don't have to compromise, I don't have to replace anything, I can do all the work myself, and I will wind up with exactly what I want.

I'm not really saving any money, but I'd rather build something to its exact intended purpose than buy something else that's halfway there and saw and file and bang away at it to make it do what I want it to.

Also, AR-15s, once you get over the sticker shock of the initial price tag, are cheap to own use operate shoot and get training for. Parts etc. are always going to be available even if there is no surplus, etc. to speak of, and will always be commercially made for as long as any of us are alive even when the Army inevitably moves on to a new rifle. If you like to bargain hunt and screw around and pick up things on the cheap as you find them, you'll probably do better with this option. Also, as an armchair survivalist, I like the idea that I am going to know how to build, run, operate, and fire this military weapon especially once I finally get to a carbine class.

It's true if I'd went with the Mini 14 I'd have it now, but considering all I'd want to do to it, I wouldn't be able to shoot it anyway. It does look a lot nicer than the AR15, FWIW.

[R.H. Lee]

I'll give you an example. At the range yesterday, a guy was standing, shooting an AR offhand. He consistently hit the metal plates at 200, 300, & 400 yds. I challenge anyone to do that with a Mini 14. Won't happen. After a few shots, that skinny barrel will heat up and the POI will be all over the place. And unless you're using the factory mag (limit 5 rds BTW,) chances are you'll be clearing jams.

[benEzra]

As a mini-14 owner, I'd say definitely go with the AR.

The best group my 188-series Ranch Rifle has ever shot, from a rest and rear sandbag, is 5.5" at 100 yards.

For a lot of critical parts, Ruger will not send you a replacement so your local gunsmith can install it. They require you to ship the rifle to them.

The quality of over-5-round magazines for the mini is VERY hit-or-miss. Ruger refuses to sell you anything more than a 5-rounder, and it takes a lot of trial and error to find aftermarket mags that work in your rifle.

The ergonomics of the AR are a LOT better. Even with a more ergonomic aftermarket stock, the AR's mag release is far superior, the mini doesn't have a bolt release (you have to tug on the charging handle to release it), and the mini safety is almost impossible to disengage quietly.

The AR sights are vastly superior.

AR's are easier to customize, and you can get uppers in different calibers.

I like my mini, but if I had it to do over again, I'd have gotten an AR instead. IMHO, the AR has most of the mini's strengths and few of its weaknesses.

[Art Eatman]

I've had five ARs and four Minis, sorta off-and-on since way back when. For me, they're not at all for the same purpose. So, no competition between them for my uses.

I like the appearance of the Mini much more than the AR. My Minis have always put the first bullet into the coyotes or feral dogs/cats at which I shot. How can I do any better with anything? Dead's dead, and that's all that matters to me.

In some three thousand rounds +/-, over the years, I never had a failure to feed, fire or extract/eject. Apparently the 20/30/40-round magazines of 20 to 25 years ago were of better quality than later ones.

I've just never seen the point of all the squabbling...

:), Art

[mustanger98]

They are not all that accurate! I know from personal experience! It took three tries to convince me of that! The first one had SK mount that was tapped into the receiver, and with tweaking hand loads it would shoot 3" at 100, and it was with a good Loopy scope too! It was the gun, not the operator!

What set-up were you using for your tests? Unless you used a ransom rest like the bigtime gun writers, you won't see the results they report and then you'll think you got a lemon. The scope does not help your group size; it just gives you a better view of the target, so scoped or irons don't really matter. 3" at 100yds is 3MOA- that's better than the gov't's acceptance standard for Garands back then being 4MOA at worst. But back to the statement that "it was the gun, not the operator", unless you take most all the human element out of the test, there's a whole lot of operator error.

[mustanger98]

Regarding Justin's comments, I rewrite my statement so it makes more sense.

The AR dominates nothing while personal preference dominates everything. There I hope my meaning is clear, that while the object may be more prevalent in some arenas, it only "dominates" because some people think it does.

I was watching American Rifleman TV last night and they had that segment on about building an AR. They showed film clips and commented on 3gun competition and some other stuff. For fast shooting, I believe if you put two operators of equal skill side by side on the same course, one proficient with his AR and the other equally proficient with his Mini-14, the AR won't do anything the Mini-14 won't do. And I'm talking about with very little extra work done to the Mini-14, such as a trigger job, bigger aperture, recoil buffer, and finer front sight. That same work may have had to have been done to the AR, unless it was built to be that way to begin with.

[mustanger98]

After a few shots, that skinny barrel will heat up and the POI will be all over the place. And unless you're using the factory mag (limit 5 rds BTW,) chances are you'll be clearing jams.

Neither statement is consistent with my experience.

[MSGT9410]

Neither statement is consistent with my experience.

:)

The stainless Mini-14 I've been using has yet to cause problems for me. I watched my father use it to drop a groundhog at ~200 yards (SWAG on the distance, was in a large field on the farm we used to live on). I love shooting the thing -- it's not a tack driver, but it gets the job done for me.

Pic of her, for good measure ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/M0ldyM1lk/mini14-1.jpg

[Tomac]

I've used both AR's (everything from stock SP-1's to a custom XM-177E2) and Mini-14's for the past 3 decades but currently don't own either. I've experienced too many problems w/the AR platform to ever trust it (yes, I know there are reliable AR's out there) and it's the only platform I know of where a double-feed jam turns it into a crew-served weapon. On the other hand, my Mini's had always been 100% reliable and nothing else shoulders/points as quickly/easily for me (YMMV). I'd take a Mini over the AR any day of the week and may have to pick up another to see if what they say about cutting back the barrel & torquing the gas block screws really does improve accuracy. Pick the one that best serves your needs & budget.
Tomac

[swingset]

I've owned a whole lot of both rifles, with the preference going to the AR.....for a whole littany of reasons.

1. Availability of parts
2. Modularity
3. Customization
4. Ease of customization
5. Ergonomics (controls & mag changes, specifically)
6. Quality and price of magazines
7. Multiple configurations with the AR, stuck with 1 on the Mini
8. Accuracy
9. Trigger options
10. Optics platform, the AR rules here
11. CQB, the Mini isn't worth considering
12. You can drop a LL or DIAS into an AR and have F/A, not so with the Mini
13. Convertability....conversions, multiple calibers, etc. all possible with 1 lower.



I could go on, but that sums it up. The Mini is an Ok gun, but for what it is an SKS will do the same dance for $300 less.

[benEzra]

As an owner of a 188-series stainless mini-14 Ranch Rifle, I'd say go with the AR. The price difference isn't all that significant, and the AR is a better rifle for the money.

If the mini-14 were $350, it'd be a closer call.

[ArmedBear]

The Mini has the advantage in only two areas, really. Those would be size/shape and dirt/fouling tolerance. The AR leads in the others.

The AR is a bulky gun, with crap sticking out from it in all directions. It just doesn't fit under the truck seat as well as the Mini. And the AR's probably not as happy if you leave it under there attracting dirt for a couple years, then pull it out and expect it to feed perfectly.

Otherwise, what swingset says, holds true, except that the Mini really is a more compact, handier carbine than an SKS.

I like my Mini-14 stainless Ranch Rifle, but frankly, the things are overpriced. They're reliable and compact, but for the money, they should shoot more accurately. $350 would be a good deal, not the $600+ they go for around here.

Still, if you have a specific purpose that a Mini fits better, I'd recommend it. But if what you are really looking for is a toy gun in .223, and you plan to keep it indoors and clean it, get the AR. It's a better toy, with every sort of accessory and tool readily available, and you can swap it out and shoot many calibers, too.

[colt.45]

minis are inaccurate because of there skinny barrel, that causes barrel whip and it heats up too fast. a mini will typically do 3-4moa out of the box, but if you buy a muzzle accesory, this being a: muzzle brake, flash hider, compensator it will usually half the group sise by cutting down on whip. you can also slow the heating process down in various ways, one i have been contemplating is buyinng some thick steel tubing that has the same inner diameter as the outside diameter of the minis barrel, and cutting a slit down the length of the whole tube so it will slide over the front sight and go behind the gas block. a stock mini will never be as accurate as an ar-15 but it is half the price and definately a fun gun to shoot and experiment with. plus, the barrels are around $20 so if you screw up the old one just get a new one, and some people just like the feel of a REAL wood stock

[tommytrauma]

I may have missed it in the three pages of heated replies, but has anyone asked for hire what he wants to use the rifle for?

[student]

My 1st rifle many years ago was a used 1989 stainless standard mini-14 that came with a flash suppressor. At the time an AR was way out of the question from a cost constraint. Over the years as I have read more about it I realized it wasn't the same as an AR-15. Accuracy is as good as I am standing or at rest with the iron sights. I have not let loose with multiple mags of ammo to experience the ill effects of a thin wobbly barrel. I found out the hard way that aftermarket mags can suck. To remedy, at first I got extra ruger 5 rnders, then Masen 10 rnders, and after the ban lifted either factory 20's or pro-mag 20's. I have never had a weapon failure with a good mag. Since then other guns have been purchased including the SKS, AK, and M1. Still haven't entered the AR world, not from dislike but from lack of priority. I see my mini-14 as a good BOB gun. It can be easily taken down into 2 small pieces and reassembled in seconds. I will shortly be adding a butler creek folding stock to facilitate this practice. In that form it is the same size as my folding AK but with far less weight for my pack and an extra 2.5" on the barrel. As designed, it is not meant for sustained combat activity (I have other rifles that could function for that), but it has a purpose in a survival or travel scenario where a reliable light and discreet semi-auto with reasonable accuracy from iron sights is sufficient.

[AFhack]

Oh heck - all the "A" Team needed was mini 14's so they must be great :neener:



Ok... on a more serious note: the main question seems to be what you need the 223 rifle for. Personally, I'd chose an AR platform but a lot of that is based on the fact that I want it for competition and varmint shooting (in that order). If I wanted a truck gun in that caliber I'd probably go with the mini14.