Newer More Accurate Mini-14?
- Thread starter dubious
- Start date
- Status
You mean the newer Mini-14 Target Rifles?
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firea...tion=Mini-14® Target Rifle&bct=Yes&type=Rifle
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firea...tion=Mini-14® Target Rifle&bct=Yes&type=Rifle
Vicious-Peanut
Member
No, all of the newer ones (580 series +) are more accurate than the older ones. It is because Ruger redid all of their tooling. The new ones are usually 2 moa where as the older ones were 3-4.
Vicious-Peanut
Member
I think one or two years ago. 580 will be in the serial number yes, but any new one should be 580.
If the Mini has a black front sight blade with protectiove wings it is one of the newer production rifles. The barrel is stiffer which should make it slightly more accurate.
The Target model is capable of sub-MOA accuracy but weighs slightly more and lacks iron sights.
The Target model is capable of sub-MOA accuracy but weighs slightly more and lacks iron sights.
Pecos21
Member
The new 580 series minis are definately more accurate. They also increased in price by around $50-$75. I believe they are still fairly priced for a reliable utility rifle.
Overall, I think Ruger made some great improvements. I was looking for a backwoods semi-auto rifle for sporting purposes and chose the Mini over the AR-15 and the Remington semi auto.
Overall, I think Ruger made some great improvements. I was looking for a backwoods semi-auto rifle for sporting purposes and chose the Mini over the AR-15 and the Remington semi auto.
580-series (and later) Mini-14s are made on completely new receiver molds and fresh, CNC machines. [If y'all bought some Ruger (RGR) stock, you'd know this too!
] The new receivers are easy to spot as they are "round" at the rear instead of "square". Barrels have a slightly thicker contour and are hammer-forged instead of button rifled.
Just having everything made on new tools has permitted tolerances to be tightened up and function improved. I believe that most Minis and Ranch Rifles will provide about 2MOA with decent ammunition. That's where mine started.
With a good 'scope, an Accuracy Systems adjustable gas block and some careful handloads, mine is closer to 1MOA, but that does require some effort.
] The new receivers are easy to spot as they are "round" at the rear instead of "square". Barrels have a slightly thicker contour and are hammer-forged instead of button rifled.Just having everything made on new tools has permitted tolerances to be tightened up and function improved. I believe that most Minis and Ranch Rifles will provide about 2MOA with decent ammunition. That's where mine started.
With a good 'scope, an Accuracy Systems adjustable gas block and some careful handloads, mine is closer to 1MOA, but that does require some effort.
Pecos21
Member
I've also read that the way the older mini's sight was installed led to some inaccuracy. (being pressed on the barrel) That is why they changed up the front sight.
These new rifles are actually great hunting carbines. I still doubt they compare to the tactical and combat advantages similar rifles like the AR, but for sporting carbine purposes, they are hard to beat.
I'd be interested to find out the result of the firing pin delima in another thread. I've never heard of anything like that and I've seen mini's put through hell and back.
These new rifles are actually great hunting carbines. I still doubt they compare to the tactical and combat advantages similar rifles like the AR, but for sporting carbine purposes, they are hard to beat.
I'd be interested to find out the result of the firing pin delima in another thread. I've never heard of anything like that and I've seen mini's put through hell and back.
skinewmexico
Member
Only on a Mini-14 would people be talking about 2 MOA like it's a good thing.......
alsaqr
Member
"Only on a Mini-14 would people be talking about 2 MOA like it's a good thing......."
Yep, and the thing costs as much as a good AR-15.
Yep, and the thing costs as much as a good AR-15.
K3
Member
You owe me a new keyboard!
A buddy of mine has one that'll do 0.3 to 0.5moa, but it has a free floated bull barrel, receiver glass bedded, custom trigger that is at 14oz IIRC, and a whole host of other mods done to it. I think he's got $2500 in it not counting the scope. It's an excellent varmint gun for 150 yards and under, but I bet I could build an AR that will do the same or better for less than half that much money.
Still, it is a handy little thing, and I've killed many a fox and bobcat with it calling at night. My friend has taken literally hundreds of coyotes.
Pecos21
Member
2moa is a good thing. Its about what an etry level bolt action or AR style rifle will do.
The thing is, I can shoot 2-3moa free hand day all day long with the mini or an AR. No better, no worst. The only time I've seen the AR shoot less than 2moa is in a vice or at least a sand bag on a bench. Accuracy has a lot to do with the shooter and how the shooter defines accuracy. First shots out of a mini are always dead on. This is accuracy to me as I am a hunter and not a match shooter. Groupings may be of more importance to another person and the mini does tend to heat up and the group size grows.
As for costs, I paid $525 for brand new 580 series mini. A brand new AR, one that is ready for a scope to be used in sporting conditions, costs $799 in my parts. To me, that is a lot of money for parkerized and plastic rifle that feels flimsy in my opinion.
To each his own. I'm glad we have so many choices here in America!
The thing is, I can shoot 2-3moa free hand day all day long with the mini or an AR. No better, no worst. The only time I've seen the AR shoot less than 2moa is in a vice or at least a sand bag on a bench. Accuracy has a lot to do with the shooter and how the shooter defines accuracy. First shots out of a mini are always dead on. This is accuracy to me as I am a hunter and not a match shooter. Groupings may be of more importance to another person and the mini does tend to heat up and the group size grows.
As for costs, I paid $525 for brand new 580 series mini. A brand new AR, one that is ready for a scope to be used in sporting conditions, costs $799 in my parts. To me, that is a lot of money for parkerized and plastic rifle that feels flimsy in my opinion.
To each his own. I'm glad we have so many choices here in America!
RSVP2RIP
Member
I have a 581 series mini30 and it is definetly more accurate than the previous versions. Even in 7.62x39 I'm getting 1.5 MOA @ 100yards (honestly). They are handloads that feature Hornady 150gr. SPs though and the "mil spec" steel cased loads get about 4" patterns at 100 yards. I even found that the Nikon Omega muzzleloader scope with the 250BDC reticle matches the trajectory of my handloads perfectly out to 250 yards where the group is 1" high on the target (aprox.). Gets about a 5" group at 250 yards. Alot better than the Kalashikov rifle...but he makes good vodka!
My NEW 580-series Ranch Rifle cost $580, in my hands, within the past year.
The last time a new AR-15 cost less than $600 was sometime about, oh, 1980.
The same guy who provided me with the Ranch Rifle NEVER sells a Black Rifle for less than $1,200 -- because everyone's willing to pay more!
The last time a new AR-15 cost less than $600 was sometime about, oh, 1980.
The same guy who provided me with the Ranch Rifle NEVER sells a Black Rifle for less than $1,200 -- because everyone's willing to pay more!
Yep, and some of us actively DISLIKE the AR-15 types and their imitators. I'm one of that group, and Mini-14s probably owe some of their appeal to such as me just for that reason.
I handled one of the new "Target" Mini-14s just last weekend. To my mind, it deprives the Mini of its essential practicality, being heavy and awkward compared to the original concept. It may well be very accurate, but if I'm going to haul that much weight, I already have plenty of good rifles at similar poundage which are probably more accurate.
The same criticism applies to most of the AR-15 types. As originally conceived, they were LIGHT highly-portable almost-carbines. The first M-16s, whatever their failings, were indeed light and handy. Compared to them, the existing A2s etc are clubs, handling-wise, and fragile clubs at that. In the unlikely event that I ever own an AR-15-type rifle, it will be configured to match the early M-16s as closely as possible. The M4 types lose too much in ballistic performance for my taste.
I once owned an original 7.62 NATO AR-10, Netherlands-built for the Sudanese contract, and it was MUCH lighter than most current AR-15s. It was under seven pounds as-issued, and handled like lightning. I still preferred the M-14, though....we lived in Canada at the time and could buy original US-made M-14s for peanuts ($190 for my last one, TRW-built and excellent condition).
...just another comment from the geriatric sector!
I handled one of the new "Target" Mini-14s just last weekend. To my mind, it deprives the Mini of its essential practicality, being heavy and awkward compared to the original concept. It may well be very accurate, but if I'm going to haul that much weight, I already have plenty of good rifles at similar poundage which are probably more accurate.
The same criticism applies to most of the AR-15 types. As originally conceived, they were LIGHT highly-portable almost-carbines. The first M-16s, whatever their failings, were indeed light and handy. Compared to them, the existing A2s etc are clubs, handling-wise, and fragile clubs at that. In the unlikely event that I ever own an AR-15-type rifle, it will be configured to match the early M-16s as closely as possible. The M4 types lose too much in ballistic performance for my taste.
I once owned an original 7.62 NATO AR-10, Netherlands-built for the Sudanese contract, and it was MUCH lighter than most current AR-15s. It was under seven pounds as-issued, and handled like lightning. I still preferred the M-14, though....we lived in Canada at the time and could buy original US-made M-14s for peanuts ($190 for my last one, TRW-built and excellent condition).
...just another comment from the geriatric sector!
I just bought a heavy barrel OlyArms AR for my Daughter for $699.
But I'd love to have a 2 MOA or better Mini. I've owned 3 Minis over the years, and none would do better than about 4 MOA. This is good news. I'd like to pick up a 6.8, and if anyone out there has one, range report please.
BTW, my new SA scout rifle is only a 2 MOA gun. 2 MOA ain't bad for a military style autoloader.
But I'd love to have a 2 MOA or better Mini. I've owned 3 Minis over the years, and none would do better than about 4 MOA. This is good news. I'd like to pick up a 6.8, and if anyone out there has one, range report please.
BTW, my new SA scout rifle is only a 2 MOA gun. 2 MOA ain't bad for a military style autoloader.
The Mini in .223 I tested just after the equipment change-over held around 2-3 inches with iron sights off the bench at 100 yards. I've never had a problem with that type of accuracy in the Mini, considering what the Mini is.
I don't know how representative the 6.8 sample I tried a couple months back was, but I got 5, 6, and 7-inch groups with irons at 100 yards, and that included a Remington match load.
Gun returned to Ruger, Ruger apparently found it within specs, project cancelled.
Denis
I don't know how representative the 6.8 sample I tried a couple months back was, but I got 5, 6, and 7-inch groups with irons at 100 yards, and that included a Remington match load.
Gun returned to Ruger, Ruger apparently found it within specs, project cancelled.
Denis
cracked butt
Member
Yay! Ruger now makes a semi-auto that actually can shoot a bit better than a SKS that costs 1/4 as much
That comparison is silly.
I mean, Remington charges $700 for a wood-stocked bolt gun with irons when I can buy a milsurp Mauser for 100 bucks?
I mean, love it or hate it, the Mini-14's price is for a new American gun, not something 50 years old, made with slave labor, and dug out of a warehouse in the former Eastern bloc.
The stainless/synthetic Mini is a joy to carry in the brush, compared to just about any other gun out there. I wish I knew how well the 6.8 shoots. It's not cheap enough for "buy it to try it", but it would make a great hunting carbine around here. But if it doesn't shoot accurately enough for shooting out to 300 yards, a Marlin 1894SS is a great hunting carbine, too.
I mean, Remington charges $700 for a wood-stocked bolt gun with irons when I can buy a milsurp Mauser for 100 bucks?
I mean, love it or hate it, the Mini-14's price is for a new American gun, not something 50 years old, made with slave labor, and dug out of a warehouse in the former Eastern bloc.
The stainless/synthetic Mini is a joy to carry in the brush, compared to just about any other gun out there. I wish I knew how well the 6.8 shoots. It's not cheap enough for "buy it to try it", but it would make a great hunting carbine around here. But if it doesn't shoot accurately enough for shooting out to 300 yards, a Marlin 1894SS is a great hunting carbine, too.
cracked butt
Member
I mean, Remington charges $700 for a wood-stocked bolt gun with irons when I can buy a milsurp K-31 for 100 bucks?
There, fixed it for you
There, fixed it for you
- Status