Mini-14 or AR-15

[Sheepdog1968]

I love the garland style action and as such strongly prefer a mini-14 over an AR. It's fine for plinking and range work and more than adequate for self defense work. I've run my mini-14 through three different multi day defense firearms classes and it runs just fine for that purpose.

 

[TwoEyedJack]

I use to have a Mini-14. At 100 yards I could shoot a 20 round clip into a group that was 2" wide, and 10" tall. I sold it and got an AR-15. Now when I want to shoot a nostalgic rifle I break out the M1 Garand that Bill Clinton so thoughtfully provided me through the DCM program. I understand that Ruger is at least stress relieving Mini barrels now, so you would probably do better.

 

[Quentin]

I agree with most advantages of the AR-15 already mentioned. And I've build four now, configured differently. It's really hard to beat the AR as it's such a flexible design and parts are available from countless sources. Customization is easier than any other rifle I can think of and you can use common tools you may already have on hand.

If you like a traditional looking rifle with the Garand action but would like a smaller version in a smaller caliber than the M1 or M1A/M14, well then the Mini-14 shines. I've long wanted one and glad I finally got one.

So I'm in the get both camp. And throw in a Garand and M1A! And AR-10... You can see where this is going!

 

[justin22885]

those who know me know i hate the AR-15, cant stand it or much of anything about them for many good reasons.. however, i would take one over a mini-14 any day

 

[Edster12]

Ok I lied I took Quentin's advice too!!!

 

[Cowhide Cliff]

AR would be my choice as I no longer even own a mini 14 and have no desire for one.

Looks mean nothing on that choice, I wouldn't consider either one a good looking rifle.

Even a good Mini14 wont shoot any better than a bad AR.

 

[samweller]

Mini 14 all the way. I've had several over the years and much prefer the Garand action...more reliable, easier to clean. I hated the M-16, and I hate AR's. Anything that needs an assist to lock up the bolt is poorly designed. I think the whole M-16/AR thing was some gov't/corporate politically engineered deal that marketing made a fad. Think about it: In WW II at Normandy, soldiers were retrieving M-1's from the sand and water, field stripping and cleaning them while under fire behind dunes, and quickly returning them to action. Try that with an M-16.

 

[Walkalong]

only thing they are really better than an AR at is throwing brass into the next county.

lol, they are sure good for that. I have one I bought used back when they were cheaper than ARs. Old pencil barrel Ranch Rifle. It shoots about 3 or 4 MOA with cheap plinking ammo. It's fun, reliable, and if they costs $200/$250 would be a better option. I wouldn't buy one over an AR at today's prices, despite their improvements in the accuracy dept.

 

[jmorris]

I suppose there are other things a mini could do that you can't with an AR.

Like make it a machine gun with a piece of string (note: it is illegal to do this unless you have an 07 FFL and an 02 SOT).



You can also make them fire once with the pull of the trigger and again upon release with a staple and it turns out that that is legal.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=62411

 

[Desertrat357]

This has been a good read. I will throw another vote in for the mini-14. I do enjoy the Garand style action and traditional wood/steel. I even got a dist. exclusive and mine is fitted with some attractive circassion walnut for the stock. But, I recently shot a friend's S&W M&P 15 sport, and it handles so much better, and the controls are very intuitive. I am currently budgeting to buy my first AR. I won't be selling my mini to get it though!

 

[JO JO]

put me in the AR side , I do like the mini but not at there current price

 

[1KPerDay]

Even a good Mini14 wont shoot any better than a bad AR.

Good grief.

 

[mf-dif]

AR is a superior rifle in all aspects. The only thing that is arguable is looks. Then I'd say if in 100 yards, M1 Carbine. If 400 yards+ .308 M1A. The mini-14 was for a time when .223/5,56 guns were scare and expensive. Now that the AR is here and the market is saturated we get to reap the benefits (low prices).

 

[hq]

AR is a superior rifle in all aspects.

Without a doubt, yes, but it seldom is that simple. Personally I've often bought something I really like instead of a clearly superior product, and found myself being happier afterwards. I think the question boils down to shortcomings and weaknesses: is a product sufficiently good for its intended purpose. Potentially mediocre accuracy out of the box, expensive magazines and a far less modular design are undeniable weaknesses of Mini platform. It all depends on what you can live with.

These days when everybody and their dog has an AR of some sorts it might just be about trying something different.

 

[200Apples]

.
So, say someone (me), like some others here, might be from the Garand Generation, where walnut and blued steel still catches our eye... but this someone appreciates accuracy. And lives in California... and hates bullet buttons.

Would anyone show me an attractive, featureless AR? Doesn't have to have wood furniture per se... but a traditional-style butt stock and some good iron sights. Thanks in advance.

 

[ThomasT]

I have both and much prefer the Mini. I have the newer 580 series and it is much more accurate than the older pencil barrel mini my buddy owned. I just like the way feels in my hands better. The AR feels awkward to me.

My mini will shoot 2-2.5" groups with cheap Academy Monarch ammo with open sights. I can't comment on the AR because I just don't shoot it much.

As for mini mags being expensive well yes they are. But they are made from steel and heat treated. AR mags all seem to be light weight aluminum. I have 9 Pro Mag mags for my mini and they just as well built as the ruger factory mags and cost me $20 apiece.

And minis are expensive. But budget ARs don't always comes with sights so you have to figure the cost of those in there. And if you buy an AR then everyone will tell you what parts to start replacing to make it a better rifle. Like a new charging handle. A match trigger and sear. And a new hand grip and so on. My mini is just like it came from the box and doesn't need a single thing done to it.

On the plus side ARs are easy to mod to your personal likes. Minis are easy to add a scope to. Mine even came with the scope rings. But I have never scoped it. I like the open sights on it and my AR.

One thing people like to bring up on the mini is if you break a firing pin ruger will not sell you one. You have to send it back. You can buy firing pins after market from Brownells. But if you don't sit around dry firing it you will most likely never need a new firing pin anyway.

So now you have several post with views from both sides. The best thing to do is shoot both and then decide for yourself. Either one is a good choice as far as I can tell. Make sure you shoot a 580 series or later model mini if you can. They are better made. Plus they have a smaller gas port and only throw brass about 8-10 feet away.

 

[benEzra]

Would anyone show me an attractive, featureless AR? Doesn't have to have wood furniture per se... but a traditional-style butt stock and some good iron sights. Thanks in advance.

http://www.aresdefense.com/?page_id=729

No iron sights in the pic, but I believe it will take any AR upper. If you can buy the lower separately from Ares, you could fit it with your own iron-sights upper, or just have Ares sell you one with sights.

 

[chicharrones]

That needs a side charging handle upper. Then you'd be in business.

 

[justin22885]

military testing in the early 1950s on the M1 garand rifle as well as a few others including the FAL, british EM-2 and a couple others showed that out of all these rifles, the M1 garand was significantly, and grossly less competent than these other rifles in the conditions including sand or mud, these tests were recreated by inrange tv to include the M1A and a couple others and their outcome was the same, the military generally only got one shot off with the M1 garand before it had completely siezed up to the point of being unable to clear it

these tests reinforced numerous soldier reports about problems the garand had in dusty environments and throughout north korea they had major problems with the bitter cold

the characteristics in the design of the M1 garand that causes these serious reliability issues carried over 100% to the M1A, and 100% to the M1 carbine... it also carried itself over 100% to the mini-14 and mini-30, the problem they were having was the very largely exposed oprod on the side of the rifle getting grit underneath it and creating so much friction it would fail to operate...

i used to own an M1A, i did test mine to see how reliable it was in anything but the best of conditions and i have to say.. it sucked.. nostalgia has people looking at these weapons through rose tinted glasses apparently because countless soldier reports and every torture test to date has shown them to be one of the least reliable weapons available

my advice?.. buy an mini-14, most people have this assumption the M1 family of rifles are better than they were, few who bought M1As will ever let their ego admit it probably wasnt worth what they spent on it, and those with the nostalgia will only hear the information that they want to about these weapons.. i was that way too once until i tested for myself.. so buy the mini-14, do some mud, sand, and dirt tests and when it performs unfavorably, sell it and buy yourself an AR-15 or an AK

 

[justin22885]

.
So, say someone (me), like some others here, might be from the Garand Generation, where walnut and blued steel still catches our eye... but this someone appreciates accuracy. And lives in California... and hates bullet buttons.

Would anyone show me an attractive, featureless AR? Doesn't have to have wood furniture per se... but a traditional-style butt stock and some good iron sights. Thanks in advance.

my current 308 rifle is a MAS 49/56, these things cost around the same price range as an AR or AK, beat out both the AR-15 and mini-14 in reliability, unfortunately you have to hand load to get good accuracy but when you do they are VERY accurate rifles, they also have the more traditional look you may be interested in, though ive been wanting to rebarrel mine with a proper .308" bore on a quality barrel while adding an adapter that'll allow me to mount a free-float tube to the front

theyre .308 though, not 5.56

 

[Ash]

I once owned three quality AR's, an old-school Bushmaster, a Stag Arms, and a Rock River. They all went by the wayside yet I still own the Mini-14 GB that I got surplussed from the Mississippi State Troopers.

I have owned two different MAS 49/56's, both in original 7.5 French calibers, and I would hesitate to say they were more reliable than the Mini I have.

As to superior, I have found nothing about the AR that would make it superior for my uses. It cannot kill a coyote or rabid racoon any deader with any more reliability than what I currently have. None of my AR's killed better or more reliably.

 

[samweller]

Well, Justin, that "testing" contradicts everything I have read on WW II (I am a WW II history buff) and first hand accounts from my Dad and uncles., as well as my own experience with an M-16. Suit yourself. I'll take the Garand action.

 

[justin22885]

Well, Justin, that "testing" contradicts everything I have read on WW II (I am a WW II history buff) and first hand accounts from my Dad and uncles., as well as my own experience with an M-16. Suit yourself. I'll take the Garand action.

then go test them for yourself

 

[d2wing]

I like the look of a Mini, I would own one if they were near as accurate as an AR. I did use an M-14 in the Army and owned a Garand. I would like a scaled down version if they were anywhere near as accurate. I have never heard of what that kid is talking about. I never had a problem with either the M-14 or Garand. Many of my buddies from Nam loved the M-14 and hated the M16. No one ever complained about the M-14. My buddy had one issued with a scope that he used to great effect as a sniper rifle. Pics of him and his rifle appear in two books about battles in Nam.I like wood and steel but like accuracy better.

 

[danez71]

.
So, say someone (me), like some others here, might be from the Garand Generation, where walnut and blued steel still catches our eye... but this someone appreciates accuracy. And lives in California... and hates bullet buttons.

Would anyone show me an attractive, featureless AR? Doesn't have to have wood furniture per se... but a traditional-style butt stock and some good iron sights. Thanks in advance.

Im not much into pistol gripped rifles my self but I need a new center fire rifle.

Couple local links for you

You got a AK Saiga in 7.62
http://www.turners.com/izhmash/izhmash-saiga-762x39-16-barrel-230060

Stag Arms "featureless" AR in 5.56. Im sure about the grip/trigger reach though. You can buy a similar stock for an AR and de-feature it yourself.
http://www.turners.com/stag-arms/stag-arms-featureless-model-3--432579


I don't think I've seen that Ares posted above. That looks real interesting to me.