Kel Tec SU16 or Mini 14???


PDA






10-Ring
December 19, 2006, 01:00 AM
These seem to be very similar...which is the better rifle?

If you enjoyed reading about "Kel Tec SU16 or Mini 14???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Eightball
December 19, 2006, 01:19 AM
Don't think I've ever heard someone complain about the SU16, aside from the fact it doesn't have a pistol grip; I've oft heard negative sides to the Mini. That, and the 16 can take STANAG mags, the Mini, you're kinda stuck.

MrTuffPaws
December 19, 2006, 01:21 AM
If you do a search there are many threads on this topic. If you siff through them, you will find that people that have tried both mostly lean towards the SU16.

Plus, if they mad an SU47, I would buy it tomorrow.

silverlance
December 19, 2006, 02:50 AM
i love my su16.

but i will likely be buying a mini-14 soon. i'm tired of ammo cases literally melting my receiver. it's only minor damage, but it's not as if i can melt it back into place.

rangerruck
December 19, 2006, 03:06 AM
this will be your choice. the keltec takes plenty of aftermarket ar stuff. it is super easy to clean, and because it is piston drive, it hardly gets dirty anyway.
it is more accurate, and will take a much wider variety of grainweights, and fire them moa capable. that being said , they are mostly plastic.
The ruger cant do any of the above stuff , at all. But it will be a more robust, throw it in the back of the truck, and bounce it around , type rifle.

RCR29
December 19, 2006, 03:16 AM
why not just save up a little more and buy an ar15. More upgrades, just as robust as the mini, and good mags are cheap and readily available.

mrmeval
December 19, 2006, 03:42 AM
Q: Does Ruger make high capacity mags for the Mini-14 that all of us can buy?

Your answer to this should be your answer to Ruger.

Dionysusigma
December 19, 2006, 03:59 AM
Why not just save up a little more and buy an AR-15? Because some may not be able to, and it's an inferior system.

jeffrice6
December 19, 2006, 04:13 AM
I would agree with RCR29, here in Ca we can buy AR's, granted their a bit neutered but........You can do a good AR for around $800 or so. The mini ( i hear ) has poor accuracy and can cost well over $1k to shoot like a Ar15 and the keltec ( i hear ) has kaboom issues. Not trying anger people, its just what i have heard. My $.02

RCR29
December 19, 2006, 04:34 AM
Dion, what system is the AR inferior to?
Q: Does Ruger make high capacity mags for the Mini-14 that all of us can buy?

A: Yes, and they are 3-4 times the cost of a milspec AR mag.

Q:Is the AR more versatile than either of the 2 guns mentioned?
A: Yes. There are a plethora of options available with an AR, not as much so with the kel-tec or mini-14.
What my point is, why spend $400+ on a rifle that is not as good as an ar15. If the mini or the kel-tec fit your needs and you have no desire for an AR style rifle, then, by all means get one of them. But consider going that little bit extra and getting something that is superior to both of these rifles.

mrmeval
December 19, 2006, 06:23 AM
I'd not heard that Ruger sells high capacity magazines for civilian purchase can you show me an authorized Ruger dealer that has some?

I'd like to see a test of those other rifles with the same specification the military used for the original AR.

railroader
December 19, 2006, 09:18 AM
http://blackstararms.com/punbb/ Sometime early next year, cali legal Uses AR mags and AR uppers. I own a keltec which I like but it has had its share of extraction problems. I just put a new stag extractor in it so I will see if that is the fix. Mark

http://www.blackstararms.com/images/rifle_splash.gif

nero45acp
December 19, 2006, 09:36 AM
Consider a Saiga .223 ($250-300), and add Mojo's AK micro-click rear sight ($59). The only downside to this set-up would be the cost of hi-cap mags ($40-50).


nero

BrennanKG
December 19, 2006, 10:09 AM
OK, I just popped onto the Blackstar site and found what was just about the coolest front page narrative I've ever read!

Fundamentally, the Blackstar rifle is simply a redesigned AR-15 lower receiver in which the trigger has been moved up and back so that a traditional comb stock can be used. As is well known to the directors of the VPC and the Brady Center, a comb stock is far less dangerous to public order than a pistol grip. Not only will Blackstar shooters be able to legally enjoy all the functionality of an AR-15 rifle, but they will be able to sleep better at night knowing their use of a dolphin-friendly traditional comb stock must result in far less injury, death and carnage than would be caused by a pistol grip stock. And fewer dead kittens.

Love it!
If I were still in CA I would absolutely need to support this company. Hell, I may yet.
:)


B.

ArfinGreebly
December 19, 2006, 10:22 AM
tired of ammo cases literally melting my receiver

I have the SU-16A. You've probably seen my field test thread.

I'm very curious: what is it that happens to place hot brass against the receiver shell?

I've not had this happen to me, and haven't seen it mentioned before.

Just_a_dude_with_a_gun
December 19, 2006, 10:27 AM
The kaboom stories with the SU16 and PLR16 scare the crap out of me.
Otherwise, I'd get one.

I happen to like the mini14. Saigas are a good bet as well.

Manedwolf
December 19, 2006, 10:33 AM
I'd say SU-16.

IMO, the Mini-14 is obsolete. It was made before they knew better, and the thin barrel and inaccuracy issues just don't hold up to all the better options out there now.

Though the point of the SU-16, as to why you'd buy it, is that it folds. If you want a nonfolding carbine, the Saiga .223 makes the Ruger look like an inaccurate piece of junk, and is much cheaper besides!

rangerruck
December 19, 2006, 10:56 AM
personally , I think the kaboom stories are a bit of a myth, I think that if you use brass ammo, you will never have any probs. i would not doubt that if their was a kaboom issue, it had something to do with operator error. i have put about 6 diff mfgrs of various ammo through my plr now,including milsurp. i have not cleaned or lubricated it at all, and it runs without a hiccup.

browningguy
December 19, 2006, 11:01 AM
What kaboom stories with the SU are you talking about?

Besides mine with probably several thousand rounds through it, there are many guys shooting them in Houston with no reports of any problems. I'm sure that one or two have been blown up for various reasons, but have never heard of any significant number of problems.

I'm definately interested in seeing any actual failure reports, not just internet stories.

ArfinGreebly
December 19, 2006, 12:21 PM
I haven't seen any reports.

I've seen some "plausibility" discussion, where the "plastic receiver" is the "likely cause" because, well, it's plastic!

The actual chamber, barrel, bolt, and all that stuff is . . . steel.

The bang happens in a steel chamber.

Just like in plastic pistols.

I think we have a case of "plastic gun anxiety" showing up as "fact."

Please feel free to direct me to photos showing differently.

railroader
December 19, 2006, 08:48 PM
The problem with saigas is they are listed as assault weapons in california. There are ways around it by building one with an off list lower or I have heard there are some saigas that supposedly aren't on the assault weapon list but look identical, then good luck trying to find an ffl to receive it after you order it. Here in cali is the laws are confusing so you could get arrested by cops that don't know any better after you get it. Mark

MechAg94
December 19, 2006, 10:31 PM
A Ruger might be better if you like that style. I might be the least likely to be added to AWB lists in the future.

An SU-16 might be easier to accessorize with AR stuff and AR mags are cheaper and easier to get. Also, if you see yourself upgrading to an AR in the future, you don't have to buy another set of mags. That is a big plus to me. Collecting a decent amount of mags for each rifle you own is expensive.

rde
December 19, 2006, 10:36 PM
I have the SU-16 A and mine has the extraction issue. I have not been able to resolve it so far..but I haven't put a lot of effort into it yet (too many projects and not even time right now). I also have one of the newer Mini-14 models. Of the two I much prefer the Mini-14. And that would be the case even with out extraction issues on the kel-tec. Nothing scientific about this preference..I just like the Mini-14 better. I enjoy shooting the Mini-14..it is fun. The SU-16 is a little more accurate...as is my Bushmaster AR-15..but the Ruger is not as bad in the accuracy department as some might make it sound (about even with my Russian SKS..and slightly better than my MAK90 AK47). I have some Ruger factory 20 rounders (about $30 a piece NIB) and have had no problems with the 10 rounds mags made by both John Masen and Promag.

bhk
December 19, 2006, 11:48 PM
My buddy has a SU-16C and I have one of the newer minis. I would never trade. His jams constantly - my mini (including a previous mini I owned) has never jammed. I have had no magazine problems and accuracy of my new 580 series mini is better than my previous one and suitable for what I use it for (truck/farm). I believe my mini is MUCH more rugged than his SU-16 and I appreciate the rust resistant stainless steel my mini is made of. I do not use the mini for paper targets other than sighting in and ammo evaluation. I have bolt actions for target and long range hunting - the mini does what I ask of it in great fashion.

Also be aware, if you have aging eyes like I do and want to occasionally use the iron sights, the front sight on some models of the SU-16 (C and CA, for example) may be too close to your eye to focus on (same for almost all ARs). The mini front sight is on the end of its 18 inch barrel, making iron sight shooting much easier for me (even though mine usually wears a scope I want iron sights I can use if I had to).

RevolvingCylinder
December 20, 2006, 12:35 AM
Sorry. Wrong area. Meant to post a new thread and did it here.

jimmyraythomason
December 20, 2006, 12:21 PM
I own a Bushmaster ES15 (AR15 clone) a Mini 14 ranch rifle and a Mini30 (7.62x39), and LOVE them all. High cap mags are not a problem,very available and reasonably priced. I am not familiar with the Keltec so I can't speak of it, but from my experience the Rugers win hands down!

silverlance
December 20, 2006, 01:01 PM
re: melting kel tec

kabooms are mostly not a worry for me. as someone said earlier the boom areas are steel.

that said, i use both wolf and american eagle through my CA and while i never worry about it exploding in my face i do worry every single shot about the casing melting my receiver. what happens is that the brass can get slammed by the "tactical" bolt handle's brass deflector front into the forward lip of the ejection port. the case is very hot, and each time it happens it melts a little more out of the port. there's only about half a centimeter of plastic before it contacts the steel of the chamber, so each fraction of a mm hurts.

to fix this i am replacfing the extractor with a dpms ar15 extractor and replacing the tactical handle with an original round su16 a/b handle. the only problem is that kel tec has not answered my emailed request for a way to purchase that round handle.

ultimately, the su16 is in a class all of its own. i rank them thus (not in order of anything)

1. ar15 - very reliable (mine was a bushie), very customizable, accurate, effective.
2. mini14 - very reliable, not as accurate, definitely not mil-spec. however it is rugged as all get out and will last for a very long time.
3. keltec16 - not so reliable, not mil spec, will not last you a long time, but just as if not more accurate than an ar15, light as a feather, folds, and when the SHTF you may well be more worried about what you vcan carry rather than what will last you for the next 20 years.

important note: kel tec estimates that their su16 is expected to last 6000 rounds. its on their website.

ProficientRifleman
December 20, 2006, 05:27 PM
I'd et one of the new Mini's. They are a better rifle now than they were a couple of years ago, and, the "cool factor" plays a part here....

nomad660
December 24, 2006, 09:23 AM
Agree with the last post. I just went throught this same decision recently, and went with the Mini. No regrets whatsoever. The common wisdom on "accuracy" issues I now believe is outdated hearsay, though it may be true for older mfg'd (2 yrs) rifles. I've spoken to others at the range with Keltecs, and they have feed issues. The Mini will eat anything, without a hitch. Being in CA, choices are limited, but I am ultimately pleased with what I have with this, despite the limitations. Regarding the mags, yep I wish Ruger offered me more than 5 rd. I just bought and tried the 10 rd Promag and also the John Masen today. The size is different for some reason between them, with the Masen looking larger than 10, more like 15 or something, but maybe due to the spring used. Initially, I was impressed by the apparent mfg quality/finish of the Promag, and less impressed by the finish on the Masen. Then I used them. Promag sucked. Would not (at all) feed the first round with 10 loaded, and though it initially (prior to actual use) would pop in and out perfectly, now it sticks when I go to remove it. The Masen's (bought 2 nickel versions) both worked flawlessly all day, though initially a thighter fit, & now pop out just like the factory mags. I'll buy these again, and they cost less than the Promags, too.

Liberty4Ever
December 24, 2006, 12:16 PM
The problem with saigas is they are listed as assault weapons in california


That sounds more like a problem with California than a problem with the Saiga. ;)

The Kel-Tec kabooms are all but a myth based on "plastic gun" bias. There have been a couple of high profile kabooms with the SU-16 and one with the PLR-16 (pretty much the same mechanism), but these were caused by bad ammo, typically bad reloads, including one case where Red Dot pistol powder was substituted for the rifle powder. It's the same sort of stuff that causes kabooms in any modern firearm, including ARs. Google a bit and you can find plenty of scary AR kaboom pictures too.

I have a PLR-16, the pistol version of the SU-16, and it's been very reliable, and it's a ton of fun to shoot. I'm looking for an SU-16C.

There were some issues where a batch of the SU-16s had the problem of the case being knocked back into the ejection port, as described in a previous post. Most SU-16s do not have this problem at all. I suspect there was a subtle change in manufacturing that altered the cycle timing, but I don't think anyone knows the exact reason. If you have this problem, there is no need to buy the round operating handle to replace the forward ejecting operating handle. All you need to do is call Kel-Tec customer service and ask for the round handle. It's covered under their LIFETIME WARRANTY. It's free, and while I consider it to be a bit of a work-around, it does solve the problem.

I recently shot a stainless Ruger Mini-14. I had heard they aren't accurate, but I was surprised at the accuracy at 50 yards, where I was plinking little pill bottles 60% of the time, from an unsupported standing position, with the iron sights. My old eyes aren't that good.

I like the stainless option, but the Ruger's lack of high capacity magazines is a non-starter for me. Ever wonder why Ruger doesn't provide good hi-cap mags? It's hard to believe, but Bill Ruger sold out the shooting public and was largely responsible for the 10 round magazine limits that were in the now-expired Brady Bill. A statement like that requires some documentation. Before you buy a Ruger, please read these five paragraphs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini-14#Controversy

And that's the biggest reason I'm not buying a Ruger. Actions need to have consequences. With a lot of politicians trying to legislate limits on the 2nd amendment, we sure don't need any traitors in the gun industry. Yes, it happened 17 years ago, but I have a long memory.

AZ Jeff
December 24, 2006, 02:47 PM
Actions need to have consequences. With a lot of politicians trying to legislate limits on the 2nd amendment, we sure don't need any traitors in the gun industry. Yes, it happened 17 years ago, but I have a long memory.

This old arguement is trotted out virtually EVERY TIME the Mini-14 is discussed, even when it's NOT compared to any other self-loading rifle. While the facts of the arguement are true (Bill Ruger did make the statements credited to him about magazine capacity), the fact is, it's NOT a CURRENT CORPORATE policy at Ruger. (I challenge anyone to prove this wrong.)

What is sad here is that most of those pushing this punative measure on Ruger DO NOT apply the measure to OTHER equally complicit parties. If one is going to "apply consequences" to gun companies who put "limits on the 2nd amendment" (as you say above), you had BEST include SEVERAL OTHER firearms manufacturers on this list of those getting this "punishment".

Ruger is/was NOT alone in limiting the sale of larger than 10 round magazines with their firearms, even WELL AFTER the "assault weapon ban" expired.

To single Ruger out for this treatment is hypocracy.

Liberty4Ever
December 24, 2006, 04:17 PM
It is not hypocrisy. I don't buy or own Smith & Wesson for similar reasons. They also sold out their customers in the run-up to the Brady Bill. People point out that S&W was sold (largely because of the boycott of their products) and the new owners do not sellout their customers as a matter of corporate policy, so it's OK to buy S&W now.

It matters not the least to me what their current policy is. If we allow companies to betray us, and then when they see gun owners aren't going to buy from them they cash out and retire, there aren't really a lot of consequences to their actions. The consequences occur after a betrayal such as this when their company name that was earned over many generations is suddenly worse than worthless because nobody will ever purchase a gun they manufacture, ever again. If you decide to sell out generations of customers to make a Faustian deal to sell guns to the gun grabbing government, you had better be sure they are going to buy ALL the guns you want to manufacture.

The real innocent victims here are the hard working employees at companies like Ruger or Smith & Wesson. They had nothing to do with the stupid, ungrateful and short sighted decision that was made by management, and the employees typically don't have golden parachute retirement plans. But that sort of inequity has existed since there has been management and workers. Their lives are disrupted, but there are other jobs for people who are willing to work.

Just as there are other excellent firearms to purchase from companies that don't side with gun grabbers.

I'm sorry if you like Rugers and need to assuage your conscience. I liked them too, right up until the time Bill Ruger sold me out.

I admit I'm a bit extreme when it comes to defending my constitutional rights.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!"
Barry Goldwater

chipp
December 24, 2006, 05:23 PM
I recently bought A SU16c It had extraction problems. Sent it back..
came back worse. Sent it back again...its ariving this week. I'll let you know if you'd like. I do like the gun its tiny and shoots nice. (when it shoots)
Kida wishing I forked out the extra money for a bushmaster or some type of battle rifle. Guess that will have to be next in 308.

Manedwolf
December 24, 2006, 09:30 PM
important note: kel tec estimates that their su16 is expected to last 6000 rounds

:scrutiny:

If that's true, definitely glad I went for the Saiga 223 as my choice. I expect a chunk of Russian AK like that to last through World War III, IV, V, VI...

nomad660
December 24, 2006, 09:59 PM
Read the paragraphs cited above and the link. Having heard about this, I had also wondered if it might not have been posturing to avoid more drastic measures by our enlightened government officials and hysterical citizenry. The last paragraph also refers to that possibility. IFF there is any truth to that, than perhaps nothing wrong with helping sidestep what may have been an oncoming train. Similarly, I ride bikes, and know that there were issues with faster and faster bikes getting government attention and possible legislation. The industry had no choice but to agree to a self-imposed limit of 185mph, at that time the fastest prodcution bike. Well, who really needs to go that fast, anyway... but who wants to be regulated? I prefer neither. Still, the legislation in the EU continues to ratchet down on HP over there. Our choices in pastime, whether guns (or bikes, and whether on or off-road), or whatever else is our interest, makes us a minority, and subject to be legislated out of existence by the "enlightened" and uninterested majority quite easily. Not good to ignore that, either. Now, I sure wish CA would knock off their silliness over what amounts to gun "cosmetics" and appearance...

JShirley
December 24, 2006, 10:00 PM
important note: kel tec estimates that their su16 is expected to last 6000 rounds

Where was this information obtained? I know of KT P-11 pistols with well over double that amount. It's difficult to believe they would have made a rifle with less life expectancy.

J

Liberty4Ever
December 24, 2006, 10:32 PM
The "6,000 round lifetime...it's on their website" is an old saw of Kel-Tec detractors. Here's the actual quote.

http://www.kel-tec.com/faq.php


Q : What is the expected life of a Kel-Tec firearm?
A : All Kel-Tec firearms have an expected life of 6,000 rounds or more.


Note the "or more" part. The 6,000 figure is sort of a worst case claim for their very small and powerful pocket pistols. These are not range pistols. They were optimized for self defense, with small size and light weight being the primary design constraints. They are intended to be shot monthly to keep in practice, but they were not intended to shoot 400 rounds every week at the range.

The SUB-2000s, SU-16s, and PLR-16s are very durable. There are some with very high round counts, far in excess of 6,000. The pistols are generally good for a lot more than 6,000 rounds too.

And if there is ever a problem, Kel-Tec has a lifetime warranty, and they are very reasonable about it. I've never had any problems with my Kel-Tecs, but I've seen them cover obvious abuse that required the entire firearm to be replaced. So what is the lifetime of a Kel-Tec? Well, pretty much, its lifetime is your lifetime, or maybe longer, because I've never known Kel-Tec to enforce the "original owner" clause in their lifetime warranty.

How many manufacturers sell affordable firearms and have the confidence to back them up with a lifetime warranty? Kel-Tec and Hi-Points, and that's about it.

AZ Jeff
December 25, 2006, 04:20 PM
It is not hypocrisy. I don't buy or own Smith & Wesson for similar reasons. .............I'm sorry if you like Rugers and need to assuage your conscience.

It's hypocrisy if you don't include EVERY firearm manufacturer/importer who has limited full capacity magazine availability in the pre or post Crime Bill period. Most persons have NO idea which companies really behaved in this manner, but DO remember Ruger, so Ruger gets singled out. As long as you include Ruger, S&W, Colt, and some others that I cannot remember, than you are not being hypocritical. Otherwise.....

BTW, I am not assuaging my conscience, as I bought my Mini-14 (and a pile of factory 20 round mags) back in 1979, LONG before the whole magazine issue erupted.

chipp
December 26, 2006, 05:39 PM
Looks like keltec pretty much sent me a new gun. even replaced the grips.
I should have said before that they were pleasant to deal with. To me is important with stuff like this. I'll post after I shoot it.

SniperStraz
December 26, 2006, 05:42 PM
I have yet to hear any consistant complaints.

richardschennberg
December 27, 2006, 03:48 PM
Quote 1:
Actions need to have consequences. With a lot of politicians trying to legislate limits on the 2nd amendment, we sure don't need any traitors in the gun industry. Yes, it happened 17 years ago, but I have a long memory.
Quote 2:
This old arguement is trotted out virtually EVERY TIME the Mini-14 is discussed, even when it's NOT compared to any other self-loading rifle. While the facts of the arguement are true (Bill Ruger did make the statements credited to him about magazine capacity), the fact is, it's NOT a CURRENT CORPORATE policy at Ruger. (I challenge anyone to prove this wrong.)
...[end quotes]

It is common knowledge that Henry Ford I supported Adolph Hitler.
The current Ford family contributes to pro-Arab anti-Israeli political organizations. This is not widely reported yet is easily verified.

If three generations of misconduct by the Ford family would not stop you from buying a Ford car or truck, why would one transgression by Bill Ruger stop you from buying the type of gun you want at a fair price?
Richard
Schennberg.com (http://www.schennberg.com)

Dave Markowitz
December 27, 2006, 04:06 PM
I just bought my second Mini-14 today. It's a used stainless steel GB in the 186-series. I also have a regular blued 182-series Mini-14. I got three Ruger factory 20 rounders with it (1 came with it, I paid $20 each for two more used mags).

Unless you're in a state where you must have pre-AWB mags, the magazine issue isn't. You can get factory 20s used or new online. The new Pro Mag 20s have a very good reputation and go for under $20 each.

Granted, Ruger mags are more expensive than AR-15 mags, but AR-15 mags SUCK. They are a weak point in the AR-15/M-16 system. People are still tinkering with them to improve reliability over 40 years after they were first introduced. E.g., green followers, different springs, MagPul followers, and different finishes. Mini-14 magazines are much more robust.

browningguy
December 27, 2006, 04:20 PM
Where is the list of other manufacturers that refused to sell standard capacity magazines to civilians?

To be honest the only company I knew of that refused to sell standard cap mags, either before or after the AWB demise, was Ruger. But I don't own Colt or S&W, and my only Ruger is a very early Tang safety 77RSI (pre-Bills sellout), so I guess I'm good to go.

Liberty4Ever
December 27, 2006, 04:25 PM
I think there is a difference between something that happened in the 1920s and something that happened in the 1990s. The Nazi collaboration seems mostly inaccurate, as Nazis had seized the Ford plant in Cologne Germany for war prouction and it was not under Ford control. But Ford did write The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem as a series of artcles in the early 1920s. By some accounts, he recanted and apologized in the 1940s. By other accounts, he continued to be antisemitic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford#Antisemitism_and_The_Dearborn_Independent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Motor_Company#Nazi_Collaboration

http://www.amazon.com/International-Jew-Henry-Ford/dp/0849004187

IBM was cooperating with the Nazis in WWII, providing information management systems using punch cards to keep track of the numbers that were tatooed onto Jews in concentration camps.

Neither are particularly proud moments in American history, but do serve as examples that corporations can do evil things, because ultimately, the decisions are made by people.

It mades me glad that I don't own a Ford, or an IBM, even though the 1920s and 1940s were a long time ago.

Have any reliable documentation about Ford currently supporting Arab causes? I looked and found nothing reliable, and even found unreliable evidence that Ford was channeling money to support Israelis.

If there really were Ford misdeeds in my lifetime, such as supporting terrorism, then I wouldn't buy a Ford product on those grounds.

richardschennberg
December 27, 2006, 04:27 PM
Ever wonder why the 30-round magazines for AR-15/M-16 ar curved, but the 20-rounders are straight?
It is pretty obvious that 30-rounders have to be curved or they would not work with a slightly rimmed case like .223/5.56. However, I feel that straight 20-rounders was a design error. All of my 8, 10, and 30 round magazines work perfectly up to capacity, but 3 of my 4 "20-rounders" only work reliably with 18 loaded. Perhaps a couple only look like the top round points too low when loaded with 20 and would actually feed, but I still only have one-20 rounder that I fully trust.
Richard
Schennberg.com (http://www.schennberg.com)

Liberty4Ever
December 27, 2006, 04:47 PM
I don't care for the Ruger Mini-14 magazines, at least the ones I used. They seemed awkward, and not the sort of thing I could reliably use in a hurry. A lot of that may be a matter of familiarity, but the AR mags seemed more intuitive and easier to use from the start.

I bought two 20 round mags and three 30 round mags from C-Products several months ago. The 30 round mags are curved quite a bit, and the 20 round mags are curved a little.

http://64.68.152.84/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=cp&Category_Code=20rnd

There was an announcement on their website that they will be offering straight 20 round stainless mags in 2007.

I do agree that the AR mags weren't very good at first, like many other aspects of the ARs, but I think they are very good now and low cost too. They're good enough that it makes a lot of sense for a company like Kel-Tec to design the PLR-16 and the SU-16 so they accept AR mags. When there is already a good standard, the only reason to abandon it would be to make money selling proprietary mags, and I hate that sort of weasel marketing. Similarly, my Kel-Tec SUB-2000 folding 9mm carbine uses the very reliable, readily available and inexpensive 33 round Glock 18 magazines.

Srigs
December 27, 2006, 08:19 PM
I plan to pick up a SU16 in a couple months.

Why? It is reliable, folds, portable, light and uses AR15 mags. :D

gezzer
December 27, 2006, 11:06 PM
While the facts of the arguement are true (Bill Ruger did make the statements credited to him about magazine capacity), the fact is, it's NOT a CURRENT CORPORATE policy at Ruger. (I challenge anyone to prove this wrong.)

Try buying one through Jerry’s Sports distributors. None for civilian, yes I can buy through the Law enforcement but not for everybody. Reason Ruger restricted. Call them if you are a dealer they will explain it to you.

Liberty4Ever
December 27, 2006, 11:46 PM
There are plenty of companies that make good firearms and know better than to exceed the government restrictions placed on firearms ownership. I don't need to support gun manufacturers who are intimidated by gun grabbers to the point they're joining ranks with them. I've bought Glock, Mossberg, Kel-Tec and Kahr. I plan on buying Kel-Tec, Mossberg, Rock River Arms and Bluegrass Armory. There are plenty of others to choose from as well. I don't feel the burning need to buy a Ruger, Smith & Wesson or Colt. It's a real shame when some of the most historically significant firearms manufacturers sell out the firearms industry and their loyal customers.

I'll probably inherit several Ruger pistols from my dad. He bought them in the 1970s, and they're fine pistols. I have fond memories of shooting them back then, but Bill Ruger has now tainted those memories and I'll never feel as good about those Rugers again. Happy father-son memories are now bitter sweet. Every time I see those pistols I think of the Brady Bill and Ruger's hand in it.

mrmeval
December 28, 2006, 01:40 AM
Well I'd not buy Ford for the same reason I'd not buy Lorcin.

:neener:

nemoaz
December 28, 2006, 04:53 AM
The current Ford family contributes to pro-Arab anti-Israeli political organizations. This is not widely reported yet is easily verified.

Anyone have any links to this? I know that Michigan has a sizeable Arab population. What kind of support are we talking about? PM me if you will. I doubt the mods will want more of this posted.

RE: Blackstar. That is UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGly. Looks like a SKS screwed an AR.

benEzra
December 28, 2006, 09:24 AM
(Dionysusigma)

Because some may not be able to, and [the AR-15] is an inferior system.
Inferior to what? Certainly not the mini-14.

Yes, the AR-15 gas system is dirtier in the bolt area than the Kel-Tec's and the mini's. But the mini's uber-heavy gas piston that blows off a lightweight gas block cantilevered off a pencil-thin barrel is the worst possible arrangement from an accuracy standpoint.

If a piston is important to you, the Kel-Tec, AR-180B, gas-piston AR variant, or a civvie AK-74 lookalike (SAR-2 or whatever the current iteration is) would IMHO be superior to the mini.

The mini's gas system is probably as reliable as an AK's. But that's about all you can say for it, IMHO.

(FWIW, I own a 188-series Ranch Rifle.)

(MechAg94)

A Ruger might be better if you like that style. I might be the least likely to be added to AWB lists in the future.
Too late. The mini-14 was banned by name in S.1431/H.R.2038 (2004 session), the "revised and expanded" AWB that helped cost Kerry/Edwards the election in '04. Even the wooden-stocked, 5-round-capacity models. The Violence Policy Center, which created the "assault weapon" bait-and-switch in the first place, loudly proclaims the mini-14 to be an "assault weapon." And since fewer people own mini's than own AR's and civvie AK lookalikes, don't think its popularity will save it in the event of a new AWB.

Any bill that bans the SU-16 will ban the mini-14. You can bet on it.

Besides, if the mini were not going to be listed on some hypothetical AWB, that would be a good argument for getting an AR instead--because if it wasn't being banned, you'd always be able to get a mini, but not an AR.


(nomad660)
The industry had no choice but to agree to a self-imposed limit of 185mph, at that time the fastest prodcution bike.
But they set the self-imposed limit at 185 mph, not 65 mph, didn't they?

If Bill Ruger had suggested a capacity limit of 35 or 40 rounds, it would have been a little less laughable than his 15-round suggestion (though no less wrongheaded)--and a bit less self-serving as well. Think his choice of numbers was a coincidence? Ruger's P-89 held 15 rounds; the Glock held 17, with the higher capacity being one of the Glock's selling points.

For small-caliber firearms like 9mm's and .223's, a 10- or 15-round capacity is the firearm equivalent of a bike governed at 60 or 65 mph. Yes, it will get you from point A to point B. No, you don't "need" to go faster than 60 or 65 mph 90% of the time. But a limit of 60 or 65 mph for a bike is unreasonably and irrationally low, and wouldn't do a darn thing about bike deaths anyway since most bike fatalities occur in under-60-mph crashes.




To address the original post:

My biggest beefs with the mini-14 are (1) generally poor accuracy, and (2) magazine cost/availability. Yes, it is possible that new mini's are more accurate than the older ones, and I have heard that the very first mini's were more accurate than later models. But as someone who has own a mini for 16 years, and has read avidly on the topic, it seems to me that a mini that will shoot 2.5" groups at 100 yards from a cold barrel is quite the exception; accurate mini's exist, but those who own them got lucky.

The best group my 188-series Ranch has ever shot at 100 yards, with or without optics, with or without premium ammunition, from a front rest and rear bags, cool barrel, windless day, is 5.5", or just over 5 MOA:

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=49644&stc=1&d=1166703910

The upside--yes, the mini will eat pretty much any ammo without a hiccup. Fit and finish is pretty good. If you like straight 1800's/early-1900's-style stocks (or live in California where they're required), the mini has one. The downsides are that good magazines are expensive, of hit-or-miss quality, and are next to impossible to find locally (even at gun shows) in most places.

Also, with the mini--even the Ranch Rifle--your optics choices are limited. To put an Eotech, a widebody red dot, or other CQB-style optic on a mini requires you to shell out another $200-ish for an Ultimak MIL-STD-1913 rail, whereas IIRC you can get the Kel-Tec with one. The Ranch Rifle allows you to easily mount a scope of traditional dimensions in the traditional location, but that's about it, unless you can find a red dot with a 1" tube and are OK with it mounted that far back. It's probably easier to add a light to the Kel-Tec as well.

Liberty4Ever
December 28, 2006, 11:08 AM
Interesting post, benEzra.


...optic on a mini requires you to shell out another $200-ish for an Ultimak MIL-STD-1913 rail, whereas IIRC you can get the Kel-Tec with one


The Kel-Tec SU-16 has a flat top receiver with an integrated Picatinny rail. It's an easy (and relatively inexpensive) matter to add a scope or red dot. The stock folds under the SU-16, not above, so the optics can stay mounted without interfering with the nifty folding feature. Street price is $500 or less, depending on the particular model and your location.

http://www.kel-tec.com/su16c.html

chipp
January 1, 2007, 12:21 AM
if anyone is intereted...following up on my other posts. after sending my su16c
back 2 times, I tried it out Yesterday. Our relationship changed dramatically.
I shot about 80 rounds without a problem. Then tryed different ammo and some small problems. Overall I think I will be happy with it.
I didn't pay much atention but it seems to draw a a crowd everytime I take it to the range. Yesterday A guy came up to ask me about it and then proceeded to tell me he was trying out his new 5 7. lucky me I swapped him for a while. I liked it but think I'll pass. (Saved me some money)

ndh87
January 1, 2007, 05:44 PM
i have a mini 14, dont spend the time money or aggrivation on one

Prince Yamato
January 1, 2007, 06:30 PM
You know, the A-Team used Mini-14s and they never hit a damn thing they were shooting at... Get an SU-16.

MISFIRE
January 2, 2007, 03:34 PM
Remember guy's he's from CA. so our choices are limited. I have a friend with a SU16 and as a result I'm looking for a Mini.
Bill

ECVMatt
January 2, 2007, 06:30 PM
and I am very impressed! It was too windy today to put up paper targets, so I will have to wait to see what the official results will be, but I was able to hit an 8" gong at 200 yards with every pull of the trigger. I was using a cheap scope, but all I had to do was center and pull the trigger. I was also able to ring it very consistantly with the iron sights. I know that 8" is a huge target, but it was freshly painted this morning and I could see that all my shots were hitting in the middle well w/in the edge of the disc. They were also forming a nice circular group.

The 300 yard gong was also easy fodder. Once I figured out the correct hold over, I could ping it every time.

I had zero malfunctions of any kind. The gun is nicely made and well put together. Most importantly it feels like a real gun to me. The Kel Tec's just don't feel like they will hold up well over the long run. I could be wrong.

I really couldn't have asked for more from the Mini. My older ones did not shoot this well. If I need more accuracy I will go to one of my bolt .223s.

I think the new mini would make on heck of a coyote calling gun. It would be able to take down multiple yotes and reach out to 300 yards if needed. I am very fired up about this and can't wait to get out to the desert to call some up.

I would highly recomend the new Mini to anyone in the market.

Matt

Liberty4Ever
January 3, 2007, 12:41 AM
The best group my 188-series Ranch has ever shot at 100 yards, with or without optics, with or without premium ammunition, from a front rest and rear bags, cool barrel, windless day, is 5.5", or just over 5 MOA


The stainless Mini I shot was a lot more accurate than that.

I just put a scope on my Kel-Tec PLR-16,. Its a .223 pistol which has the same mechanism as the SU-16, only it's attached to a 9" barrel.

http://209.197.93.201/PLR-16_ScopeA.jpg

http://www.kel-tec.com/plr16.html

I didn't have a bipod or sand bags so I just balanced it on a 30 round magazine on the bench and it was teetering a lot. With inexpensive Remington 55 grain ammo from Walmart, I shot a 2.07" group at 50 yards. I'm confident I can do as well at 100 yards once I get a precision bipod on the front so I can shoot from a stable platform, and develop an accurate load for it. I've seen where another PLR-16 has shot 2" groups. M2_Carbine, are you out there?

http://209.197.93.201/PLR-16_Target50YardMagRestA.jpg

I think any decent rifle should shoot 2 MOA, and a good rifle should shoot 1 MOA or better if it's a bolt action. The Kel-Tecs are surprisingly accurate, considering their low cost. They aren't tack drivers, but should consistently do at least 2 MOA with decent ammo, and some do 1 MOA.

Glockfan.45
January 3, 2007, 01:09 AM
The first step is admitting you have a problem. I have shot mini-14's and they were junk, inaccurate, and clumsy. I hate Bill Ruger and wouldnt see fit to relieve myself on his head if his eyebrows were on fire. All this and yet I still want a mini-14 to add to the collection anyway. I have a problem and need help. To the OP if you just want a rifle thats fun to shoot the mini-14 is a fine choice.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kel Tec SU16 or Mini 14???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!