The Kia is a car that requires proper maintenance to stay reliable, and has a WEAK little engine. Thats the AR to a TEE my friend. When you buy your AR, your "paying $50K for a Kia" just because its painted black.
Better analogy to the AR is a Lotus Elise. Lightweight materials, high-tech construction, not much horsepower but very precise handling. And yes, they're spendy.
You'd be silly not to give the Mini-14 a serious look. It's based upon the M14/M1-A action, but is much lighter and more compact. In my opinion, and that of many professional soldiers/armorers, the M14 action is superior to that of the AR/M16. The M16 was always a finicky gun, and always will be....
Mini14. If your money matters, get it. It's the only top quality "assault" rifle you can get for well under a grand.
When I was 18 or 19, I wanted an AR, but decided to get an mini-14 Ranch Rifle instead; this was around 1989. I enjoyed it and shot it a lot, but was very dissatisfied with the accuracy (5.5" at 100 yards with match ammo off a rest and rear bags), magazine availability was terrible, and I decided I didn't like the early-20th-century styling. I eventually bought an AK (more accurate than the mini), sold the mini, and set the money aside for a Rock River AR.
The Mini-14 would be a neat rifle at $350-$400. It's not as appealing when it costs as much as a basic AR, IMO. It's hard to accessorize, your optics choices are limited, good magazines are hard to come by. If you like straight wooden stocks, don't mind using magazines that are both proprietary and delicate, and can put up with the deterioration in accuracy as the barrel gets hot and the overzealous case ejection (Ranch Rifle), it's a good rifle, though pricey. But if someone's first choice is an AR, I don't think they'll be happy with a mini, IMO. That was certainly true of me.
The AK, by contrast, is quite reliable, but also cheap. It will run while it's still in good shape, but a lot of these less expensive AKs use garbage soft metal. So that gun you paid $300 for will be worth bubkiss in 10 years with average shooting. The only AK-based gun I'd even consider is the one offered by CZ (who make excellent stuff). But then, that's pushing $1K.
That might be true of an AK you build in your garage using a receiver you don't properly heat-treat, or possibly some of the AK's that Hesse let out the door years ago. But it's not true of even a $350 Century Romanian AK, never mind a Saiga or nicer AK.
Of course, one has to wonder why a college student needs a "room clearing" gun. You mentioned, on one hand, that you only want to use it for targets, but every one of your comparisons puts your rifle of choice in a combat situation.
When I bought my first rifle when I was in college, I specifically wanted one that could serve in a home-defense role down the road. A mini-14 and an AR will both serve in that capacity.
I think you should really evaluate what you want and need. Rather than blow your money on a toy that you'll certainly be bored with in a few years, get yourself a decent bolt gun and a shotgun. Those two will take care of any situation you can think up, whether it be sporting or defensive. On the used market, you can spend less than $500 total and have TWO kick-ass guns.
Where can you find a new bolt-action with optics AND a magazine-fed shotgun for less than $500?
BTW, once nice thing about an AR is that if you get bored punching paper at 600 yards with your 20" upper and scope, you can swap a 16" midlength upper and a red dot on there and shoot IPSC/USPSA/IDPA with it. Or a 6.8mm upper and hunt deer with it. Or a .22LR upper and plink with it. Optics can go over the receiver, or over the barrel, or you can use the excellent iron sights (better than you'll find on most bolt-actions). Ergonomics are top-notch, and fit and finish is first rate. And it looks like something that belongs in the late 20th/early 21st century rather than the 19th/early 20th.
Another way of looking at it: Ask any serious shooter, "Sir, if you could only have one gun, what would it be?" I guarantee you the serious hunters/shooters will say either A.) bolt-gun, or B.) shotgun. The vast majority of those getting these assault rifles are enamored by their image as an "evil" gun, period. Sure, you can shoot some cans with it, and that's about it, unless you want to break the law.
No. I am a pretty serious shooter, and I'd pick the AR over any bolt gun or shotgun.
The AR is the choice of a lot of serious shooters of my generation. I dare say it is the #1 choice.
Anyone that says an AR or an AK or any assault rifle is a viable defense weapon for the average civilian is full of ****, period, end of sentence. If someone breaks into your one bedroom apartment, you might get him before he gets you (better hope he doesn't have a shotgun), but you'll probably also get Suzy next door in the process.
If you have access to a good library, check out Roberts G.K., "Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons: the Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared with 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant,
Police Marksman, Jul/Aug 1998, pp. 38-45.
Civilian lightweight JHP's penetrate less in building materials AND gelatin than handgun-caliber JHP's do. That's a big reason why so many police departments have switched from MP5's to M4's/AR-15's.
From experience, I can tell you an assault rifle is more fun on TV and in pictures than it is in real life. A bolt gun, with open sites or a scope, is much more enjoyable. Hell, a .22 is more fun. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bust balls or anything. I'm just saying, if you're on a budget, an assault rifle is the last thing that should be on your list, ban or no ban. You said yourself you weren't one of those paramilitary freaks with the MREs and radiation tablets in your basement, so what legitimate reason do you have for owning one?
What the HECK? "What legitimate reason do you have for owning one"?
The AR-15 is
THE most popular centerfire target rifle in the nation, and
THE most popular defensive carbine in the nation. The AR-15 DOMINATES centerfire target competition not only at 600 yards, but also at 15 yards in IPSC/IDPA style shooting.
An AR-15 kicks like a .22 but has the trajectory of a .270 and the accuracy of a bolt gun. What's not to like?
The AR is popular on its merits, not because its owners want to be Rambo.
If you have yourself set on an assault gun, I'd get the Mini-30, which is chambered in the AK 7.62x39. This is because the larger 7.62 bullet travels at a much lower velocity. The short and long of it is that the 5.56 will burn out a barrel much faster when compared to 7.62, especially in the type of rapid fire situations that assault guns are known for (that's where the "fun" comes in, I suppose).
Only if all you know about AR-15 and civilian AK owners comes from watching CNN and reading the
New York Times.
Last time I took my AK to the range, I fired 50 rounds in 50 minutes. I was the only person there who spent any time at 200 yards.
If you want the most bang for your buck, look into a Remington 870 12 gauge. I really mean it when I say a shotgun is much more versatile and more fun when compared to an assault gun.
In my opinion, a shotgun is neither more versatile nor more fun.
Plus, a lot of ranges these days have capacity limits (3 to 5 rounds in the gun at any one time), so that pretty much nixes your assault gun fun.
Only a few, and none I've ever been to. Primarily ranges run by wood-and-blued-steel types who think us Gen-X and Gen-Y types with our newfangled modern-looking rifles with funny-looking scopes are only there to burn out our barrels and make noise, I suspect.
