I need a comparison

[recole]

I read in one of the already posted forums a good discussion comparing Ruger Mini -14's vs. AK-47's. The thread pretty well found itself in favor of the AK for superior magazines and toughness.
My question is: I'd like to see a serious discussion about the Ruger Mini 14 vs. a SKS. I have one of each and find each one has good and bad points. One of these are going to be my survival gun. Which one should it be and why?

Thanks
Ron

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

The SKS is battle-proven, and designed from the get-go with military purposes in mind. Any made for the military arms will take into considerations things that commercial only firearms will not.

This doesn't mean it is better than the Mini-14.

For weight, I'd say the Mini-14 is better because it is lighter than a fully-equipped SKS.

For accuracy, I'd say they are the same.

For toughness, I'd say SKS - but only if you intend on seriously abusing the rifle. I'm not certain of the Mini-14's ability to handle bad conditions like rain, sand, mud etc...

For capacity, the Mini-14 is better.

Right now, 7.62x39mm is very scarce. It is approaching .223 prices but with low availability. This, for the time being, gives the Mini-14 an advantage.

SKS is way, way cheaper. Mini-14 is an expensive rifle for what you get. Most people opt for a lower-cost AR-15 instead. That is the best of all worlds, since it is a military pattern rifle, and brand new 30rd magazines are readily available, and if bought in 10-packs, are $9 a piece. Not to mention more accurate, can handle the heat of rapid fire better, and is customizable to your imaginations end.

The Mini-14 has better iron sights than the SKS.


The key to the Mini-14 having an advantage over the SKS is whether or not you can get magazines that are reliable and greater than 10rds, and hopefully, relatively inexpensive.


You noted a need for it to be a survival gun? Well...if I had to choose, probably the SKS - but first I'd do the following.


I'd get that really lightweight, very cool camoflauge synthetic stock. More ergonomic and nice. Then, I'd chop off anything that's not useful, such as flash hider/ grenade launcher, bayonet etc...hopefully this would help lighten up the rifle somewhat. A 16" paratrooper SKS would be a better platform to begin with, then lighten that up. Then I'd add that really slick rear peep sight that mounts to the receiver behind the rear cover. That solves the bad sights. Then I'd buy a bunch of stripper clips and a pouch and forget about magazines.

Done.

 

[dfaugh]

SKS all the way

First, I can buy 3 SKSs for the price of a Mini-14 (or Mini-30).

Accuracy is similar, at least in a survival situation.
More powerful round in the SKS.
I can drag the SKS through the mud, all day and it'll still work
On a "regular" SKS I can load quickly from stripper clips.

Now, the "ideal" SKS IMHO is an SKS-D or SKS-M, which take AK mags. More expensive than a Yugo for example, but with the following advantages:

As durable as any other SKS
More accurate than an AK.
30 or 40 round mags readily available.
Shorter ("paratrooper") length barrel

(I own an SKS-M, scoped, and an un-issued Yugo)

 

[The Grand Inquisitor]

The SKS is 10x the rifle the Mini-14 is.


And the Ak47 (or Ak74!!) is 10x the rifle the SKS is.

 

[B.D. Turner]

The SKS and the AK have both been proven in combat and are still in use. The Ruger Mini-14 has never been the weapon of choice by any military.

 

[MachIVshooter]

This one has been done to death and, barring those die-hard "SKS is the best rifle EVER!" types, it always comes down to price. Feeding either has become a moot point as of late, with 7.62x39 prices through the roof, but an SKS can still be had for less than 1/3 the price of a mini.

Of course, we're talking Yugo's here. A decent Norinco will run $300 or better and an actual Soviet will be ~$500.

SKS's are good plinkers, but that's about where it ends. The Soviets replaced them after two years with the AK; this is a nation that typically holds onto a weapon design for a half-century or more. They are heavy, inaccurate and slow to load. Other than M-variants, you are stuck with 10 rounds, as they almost never run well with hi-caps. Metallurgy is so-so and fit and finish is invariably lowsy. Having fired literally dozens of them, I cannot bring myself to get one, even when they were $69. I see it as $69 I can put toward a better rifle. With average SKS price today around $150, you can get a perfectly good Lee-Enfield, K-31 or a host of Mausers-guns with nice lines and real history .

Personally, I'll take my Mini over an SKS any day. But I'll take my AR-10 over the mini

 

[recole]

Need comparison

You bring up good points about both rifles. I may very well sell the Mini-14 as it's not really a military grade rifle. And I believe I can use that money to buy a whole lot of ammo for the sks.
I like the looks of the mini but if I'm protecting myself and family, the looks of a gun doesn't matter. It's the reliability that's the key. I might even have enough money left over to buy some more 45acp.

Thanks for the advice

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

For toughness, I'd say SKS - but only if you intend on seriously abusing the rifle. I'm not certain of the Mini-14's ability to handle bad conditions like rain, sand, mud etc...

Like I said above...SKS wins in this dept only if you plan to abuse the rifle in tough environmental conditions. This is NOT likely at all for home defense, ranch defense, or any personal defense scenario. I've argued in the past that the AK-47 offers NO practical reliability advantage over the AR-15 because at home, at the ranch, or wherever...it is not going to be subject to sandstorms, mud and other grunge and grime over the course of days (like a soldier who is patrolling outdoors in a war). It is going to go from the clean, dry, air conditioned closet (or wherever you store it) right into action. Nice and clean and oiled. Just like the SKS or Mini will.


I wouldn't sell the Mini-14 if I already own the thing only to replace it with an SKS. If I didn't have either, I'd go SKS - but the Mini isn't bad.


If your Mini-14 doesn't jam, and it's been totally reliable - I'd keep it. If you're looking to find a rifle that is cheaper on ammo - that isn't a good idea right now. 7.62x39mm is nearly at .223 prices, yet with lower availability.


That's just my opinion.

 

[MyRoad]

My question is: ...One of these are going to be my survival gun. Which one should it be and why?

That depends on a few things.

First, Mini-14's out-of-the-box vary in accuracy. How accurate is yours? SKS's also vary in quality of manufacture and accuracy, so the same question holds there. And within this question, how about at 50 yards vs 100 yards -- depending on which distances you feel are most relevant.

Another question for you is, what does "survival gun" mean to you?

If it is HD, do you live in a rural or urban environment? If "survival" in your definition includes hunting, what would you imagine you'd be hunting, and what would be the range of the shots you'd be taking?

When preparing to 'survive', we are only limited by our imaginations. You can go to the fringe and think "invading armies" or the old generic favorite, "zombies". Or take a more historically relevant approach, thinking "natural disaster" (for instance) and that you'd be sitting tight at home for a few days, waiting for normalcy to return, and hoping that no one tried to loot your house and force you to defend it.

Personally, the closest comparison I have to your question would be my accurized Mini-14, and my Arsenal, Inc. AK-47. If I were woken up in the middle of the night by a hoard of approaching zombies, I would grab the AK. If a nuclear bomb went off upwind of me, the roads were clogged with thousands of people trying to escape nearby cities and I had to leave on foot in a hurry, I would grab the Mini-14. You see, it's all about what you are willing to imagine and what you think you are going to be prepared for.

 

[JohnKSa]

The Ruger Mini-14 has never been the weapon of choice by any military.

I believe that the Mini-14 (or variants thereof) have seen some military service in various parts of the world. Nothing as widespread as the M-16, FAL or AK-47, but it has gotten the nod by a few military organizations.

 

[MatthewVanitas]

From Wikipedia (and have read same info elsewhere for those anti-Wikists)

The Mini-14 in its various guises has been adopted by various police and paramilitary forces around the world. In 1978, the rifle was purchased by the Royal Ulster Constabulary to replace its stock of aging U.S. M1 carbines. In 1983, The Bermuda Regiment replaced its British made L1A1 SLR's (7.62 mm) with the wooded stocked Mini-14 20GB, a semi-automatic only variant.

Well, 530 Bermudan servicemen can't be wrong, right?