Looking for a good 20" barrelled .223 self loader


July 5, 2003, 05:34 PM
I've been looking at the mini 14's for a long time now, but they have accuracy problems and only have a 18.5" barrel. Are there any good 20" barreled .223's out there other than an AR? A folding stock would be fun too.

If you enjoyed reading about "Looking for a good 20" barrelled .223 self loader" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
July 5, 2003, 08:51 PM
Why not an AR??


July 5, 2003, 08:58 PM
AR-180B, HK 93, FNC, AK series...to name a few.

I would probably only buy an AR or AK series, but then again, I'm boring. ;)

Art Eatman
July 6, 2003, 12:15 AM
WonderNine, I've had four Minis. On each of them, I mounted a Weaver K4. They all gave me three-shot groups of about 1.5 inches at 100 yards. Now, if you need better accuracy than that, shun the Mini.

However, I managed to collect a few jackrabbits, coyotes and feral cats with mine. :) Killed a lot of tin cans, as well.


Sir Galahad
July 6, 2003, 01:20 AM
Feral cats...heh heh:evil:

Well, Wondernine, coming here and asking that is kind of like going to a casino and asking if they have games with three rolling wheels besides slot machines. Folks are going to say AR and as much as I like the AK, with a 20" barrel, the AR is really the only game in town. But you might look into a Saiga. They do make a 20" barreled one. Ten round mag only, though. Folding stocks you can forget unless you can find a pre-ban HK-93 that has one. But as I recollect, that's actually a collapsable stock. The early AR-180 had a side folding stock. Why .223 anyway?

July 6, 2003, 01:23 PM
Why not an AR? cost, and reliability issues. Also, I believe an M-16 type rifle should be select fire, not semi-auto only.

I like the fast powerful .223 as a round. I'm thinking of an AR-180 right now, with its more reliable gas system. Do they accept AR-15 mags? Seems like the mini would heat up pretty badly shooting it alot. Does anybody have a 20" target barrel on their Mini-14?

Sir Galahad
July 6, 2003, 02:38 PM
When I was a young soldier, we had M-16A1s. On night fires with tracers, you could see that full-auto was all over the page. Semi-auto is much more accurate. This is why they went to 3-round burst; after 3 rounds of full-auto, it's all overhead. Full-auto is overrated by people. With something heavy from a bipod or tripod, ok. Otherwise, it's a waste of ammo. The AR you get off the shelf at your gunshop is going to be a lot more accurate than the average M-16 out of the arms room of an average army unit. How do I know this? I was small arms repair in the army; I did all the headspacing and barrel erosion gaging of those weapons and could generally find 10 per arms room with shot-out barrels.

The AR-180b that is out now is a nice rifle, though it could have better sights. It does accept AR mags. You know, check out the .223 rifle Robinson Armament has out. Or find yourself a used Galil.

July 6, 2003, 03:37 PM
If you buy an AR-180, cough up the dough for an original one. That crappy remake by "Armalite":rolleyes: , looks like junk. Plastic lower and shoddy fit and finish. I viewed one at a local gun-shop and would rather go with a Mini-14 than the AR-180B.
As for AR-15s; in a quality AR there is no reliability issue anymore, period. But, there is alot of junk out there too.

Sir Galahad
July 6, 2003, 04:45 PM
The original AR-180 had lots of problems. Supposedly, those problems are corrected with the AR-180b. It doesn't have a "plastic" receiver; it's polymer. Don't see Glock getting a bad rap over that.

Any other glittering generalizations?

July 7, 2003, 01:52 AM
None, and I was not generalizing. The gun loked like crap and the plastic, which is what it felt like, looked crappy for what they wanted for the thing. I happen to own 3 Glocks so I'm not anti-polymere.
I used to own an original AR-180 and the new one is not anywhere near the quality of fit and finish.
When I was a kid I also owned a few toy guns made of plastic and that's what this thing reminded me of.
One of the original purposes of the first AR-180 design was to be a rifle that was easier to manufacture than the AR-15/M-16. Mainly due to the upper and lower reciever being stamped steel.
You would think with modern manufacturing techniques this would be even simpler to do. But no they had to make a rifle with poorer workmanship that costs nearly as much as a decent AR-15.

If you want to buy one go ahead. I had been interested in the AR-180b until I handled it. :barf:

Steve Smith
July 7, 2003, 09:29 AM
Quality ARs will not have "reliability issues." Get yourself an AR and be happy.

July 7, 2003, 09:57 AM
I have both AR's and Mini's. Older Mini's had an accuracy problem. In the past year, I got a new Ranch and standard model. I am pleased with the accuracy (military M193 shoots quite well). I have an older SP which is very accurate.
Sir Galahad when were you in the Army. I was an 11B in 1968 with the 4th INF. Byron

If you enjoyed reading about "Looking for a good 20" barrelled .223 self loader" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!