Which is "better", SKS or Mini-14/30???

[Didorian]

OK.
Ya'll please forgive me, my firearms experience is kinda limited as far as civilan arms go....
But my preference is usually american.... So when I first found out about the Ruger Mini-14 and Mini-30, I was excited.
From what I could tell they were both more rugged than the AR rifles, and fired the same rounds....
But when people talk about reliable semi auto rifles, I hear about ARs, and AKs and SKSs but remarks about the Minis go unheard......
I mean, aside from the stance of Mister Ruger..... I had thought that these were good rifles.... so why is it that no body ever mentions them as a choice for a cheap, reliable semi auto rifle???
Ya'll please explain this to me. Because I'm kinda want'n to get one.

 

[psyopspec]

... when people talk about reliable semi auto rifles, I hear about ARs, and AKs and SKSs but remarks about the Minis go unheard......

I believe this is because of the sisters of those models that serve in armies foreign and domestic. Being in combat helps a rifle to gain a reputation of being "battle capable." While the Ruger is certainly battle capable, it's reputation is more based upon being a ranch rifle for varmints and defense of livestock. Without popularity it's price is cheaper. I'd certainly rely on one, but with military experience with the M-16/M-4, those are the models I tend to be partial to. You're certainly not wrong for going with the mini though.

 

[MachIVshooter]

The Mini-14's are extemely reliable. Generally speaking, the only negative press they recieve is in regards to accuracy. I'll freely admit that they are not tack drivers by any stretch (at least, not stock). Mine is scoped and averages 2-2.5 MOA. Some folks consider these numbers optimistic. I have only owned 1, so I cannot speak for other rifles. That said, it is certainly adequate for a 200 yard coyote shot, and very capable for any other purpose not requiring pin-point accuracy. I cannot remember ever having a failure of any kind with either the stock mag or quality high-caps. Just stay away from cheap magazines and the mini's run flawlessly.

 

[Sunray]

Hi, Didorian. Cheap they ain't. For $750 plus MRSP, they don't shoot well enough to warrant that kind of money. Reliable, but not accurate enough to consider. A Ruger Mini is an expensive piece of junk.
A decent SKS is a better rifle.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I prefer the SKS to either of the Ruger Models. In my experience, the SKS and the Ruger Mini-14s have similar accuracy. The SKS is probably more reliable and durable. My dad has a pre-Ranch model that is pretty accurate and has been 100% reliable. My uncle has a Ranch model that is no more accurate even with a scope mounted, damages brass while throwing them 30 feet, and has a nasty tendency to fuse the bolt shut for some reason. I loved my Russian SKS before I sold it to pay utilities :banghead: and my brother has a neat little Yugo. Both cost siginificantly less, even after upgrading, than the Rugers these days while being 100% reliable.

O I don't know if I would call the Rugers "expensive peices of junk" but I think they cost more than they are worth. I can't see spending that kind of money on a Ruger when the SKS can be had for 1/3 of the price, easily, and offers similar accuracy and capabilities. You can buy an SKS in good condition and put a new stock, sights, and pin on flash surpressor and still be several hundred dollars less than the price of the Ruger.

 

[zahc]

. For $750 plus MRSP, they don't shoot well enough to warrant that kind of money. Reliable, but not accurate enough to consider. A Ruger Mini is an expensive piece of junk.
A decent SKS is a better rifle.

x3000

 

[MachIVshooter]

For $750 plus MRSP, they don't shoot well enough to warrant that kind of money

If you pay more than $500 for a wood/blue Mini-14, you got hosed. And define "shoot well enough". Everyone knows the Mini's aren't tack drivers, but they are far more accurate than an SKS. I won't even delve into the other attributes that make them superior (not the least of which is that they American made).

The SKS is probably more reliable and durable

I have yet to see an SKS that can average better than 50 MRBS with anything but the stock 10 rd. fixed mag. Even then, they are typically less than 300 MRBS.

 

[cracked butt]

SKS- a much better rifle for a lot less money.

For the the price of a Mini-whatever you can buy a real rifle, the M1 Garand.

Everyone knows the Mini's aren't tack drivers, but they are far more accurate than an SKS

Plbbbbbt!

I have yet to see an SKS that can average better than 50 MRBS

What does MRBS stand for? More Ruger BS?

 

[steve4102]

I have a Ruger Mini-30 and I love it. It goes with me every time I go to the range and to the field. I call it my "Peashooter". My peashooter will shoot 1 to 1 1/4 inch groups all day. It has never failed to function properly even under some pretty nasty weather conditions. Like any rifle the mini can be made to shoot with just a few bucks and some TLC. Here is a web site that will help any mini owner get his or her mini on track.

http://www.perfectunion.com/forums/index.php?showforum=8

If you are looking for a mini, GunBrocker has lots.

http://www.gunbroker.com/

 

[c_yeager]

For less than $100 you can get a rifle that of comparable accuracy, and superior reliability than the $500+ Mini-30. I dont see how this is even a debate. Actually, come to think of it, it isnt a debate. There are vast untold quantities of SKS rifles in the hands of shooters all over this country and relatively few Mini-30s.

 

[student]

It is ignorant to call any admitted reliable rifle junk. Overpriced, YES. If you want a mini, buy used and try to pay less than 400$. About 7 years ago I got my '89 stainless 1:7 used for ~350$. SKS is definitely the better bang for the buck. I have both and would personally choose the mini anyday over the SKS, but I value the SKS and the option to use it. For the money I would get an SKS 1st, then a CMP M1 and then a mini-14 or other .223 rifle. May also want to look at the SU-16 or save up for an AR. Although I love my mini-14, if I had to start over (no guns and lots of cash in hand) I would get a reliable AR as my 1st .223.

 

[Pilot]

If you can afford a Mini14 or 30, you can afford an AR-15. Get the AR. If you want to save money but still have a good rifle, get an SKS, preferably Russian.

 

[peteinct]

I own both

Hi, Didorian, I own a sks and a mini 14 ranch. They are similiar. I think the mini is Ruger's reworking of the SKS concept or the M1 carbine. I think the rugers are expensive for what they are and Rugers magazine limitation stance enraged a large section of aware gun owners. So I think there is a lot of ruger hate that is over the top. Because of the name people compare it to a Garand which it isn't instead of the M1 carbine which is a more fair comparison.

As guns, my ruger is stainless, has a detachable magazine and a better trigger which are better than the sks. But my SKS has a grenade launcher attachment and a bayonet which are in its favor. They shoot equally well or poorly.

For the money the SKS is better because it was so much cheaper to buy and cheaper to shoot. If money isn't an object I would spend the extra couple hundred dollars and buy an AR. One thing good about a mini 14 is that it doesn't look like a scary black rifle which helped keep it off of the assault weapons list in my state.

pete

 

[dave3006]

I have both. The Mini IS overpriced. But it is better.

Mini has

Better sights
Better magazine system
Better trigger
Better safety
Better round
Smaller profile

 

[itgoesboom]

You can get 3-5 SKS for the price of one Mini-14.

And I don't know what the person above was saying about mean rounds before stoppages (MRBS), and the SKS only able to go 300 rnds.

I have close to 2k rounds through my SKS, Wolf, Uly, and Norinco Steel Core. Never a single failure of any kind.

I have put 4-500 rounds through my SKS in one sitting before, many of those rounds bump fired. Not a single hiccup.

And I don't think I have ever seen another SKS with the standard 10rnd mag (the one it was designed to take) have a stoppage.

Anyone that thinks that the SKS is unreliable needs to go back on their meds.

I.G.B.

 

[albanian]

I am a huge SKS fan because I like getting the most bang for the buck. Without doubt the SKS is the best bang for the buck. I had a SS Ruger Mini-14 which I loved and try to get back all the time from my friend whom I sold it too. It was 100% reliable like all Minis I have seen and it was plenty accurate.

Box stock, I got 1 1/2" - 2" groups at 100 yards with a scope. That was with Wolf ammo as well. That is all the accuracy I need and felt it was almost as good as most of my AR-15s which if I do my part can get 1 1/2" groups at the same distance. I think either the reports of the Mini-14 being not accurate are over blown or I got a good one. My friend also has a blued Mini-14 that shot well too so I think they can be expected to do 2" at 100 yards without much problem. I may be totaly wrong about this however since I have only shot two of them.

The SKS I have found generally are pretty accurate if given a scope. Try to shoot them a 100 yards with the lousy open sights they come with will result in dissapointment unless you are really good with iron sights. I have mounted scopes on some of my SKSs and been impressed with the accuracy. I have never shot them at 100 yards on paper but I have shot them at 50 and less than 2" groups with no effort. All my SKS shooting is done with cheap Russian Wolf or similar ammo BTW.

Here is how I compare the SKS to the Mini-14:

Reliabilty, equal. I have never had a jam in with either that wasn't cause by an after market mag. I consider these two rifles to be the most reliable semi-autos the world has ever seen. The AK is below these two because I have seen plenty of AKs jam despite their rep as being un-jammable. Don't believe everything you read or hear.

Accuracy, slight edge goes to the Mini-14.

Capacity, Mini-14 all the way. With detachable box mags, it can shoot 30rd mags be design. The SKS is a 10rd gun, you can fix detachable mags to it but they may not be reliable and they are not as easy to attach and remove as the Mini mags.

Weight and size, the Mini is smaller and lighter so the edge goes there.

Quality, equal. SKSs are quality guns despite their low price. Made every bit as good as Mini-14 or many other guns costing several times more.

Sights, Mini. Peep are better than open,

Trigger, Mini.

Safety, Mini. The SKS safety is actually dangerous because to flip it to fire, you have to hook your finger on the safety and pull back. In doing this movement, you are putting your finger in the path of the trigger.


While both guns are great choices for a rugged reliable semi-auto, I can't think of any way where the SKS is actually better than the Ruger. It is as good or slightly less than the Ruger in everyway. So if the Ruger Mini-14 ranks a 8 on a scale of 1-10, I would rate the SKS a 7 1/2. The question is, is the Ruger worth five times as much as the SKS for only giving you a little more? I don't think so and that is why I sold the Mini and bought five SKS.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Okay. I had a 1954 Russian SKS with matching serial numbers. I put over 2000 rounds of Wolf through it and only had two malfunctions with the standard 10 round magazine--both of them ammo related. In one of them the bullet split the case neck and in the other the bullet was pushed back into the case, both upon chambering. Both resulted in a failure to feed that was easily cleared just by manipulating the charging handle.
My brother has a Yugo carbine with about 1000 rounds through it and has never seen a malfunction with the standard magazine.
My friend had a Chinese SKS that he put thousands of rounds through without a malfunction.
My grandpa has put several hundred rounds through his Chinese SKS with an aftermarket 30 round magazine and not had a single hiccup.
Anyone who says the SKS is a 300 round gun with the standard magazine system is full of "IT" with a capital "SH."
A good argument could be made that the Ruger does have a better magazine system, but what gets me is how many people will defend the Garand's en bloc system when comparing fire rates with the M14 yet bash on the SKS's internal magazine when used with stripper clips.
The safeties would be a close call. You at least have to take your finger out of the trigger guard to manipulate the safety on the SKS.
Sights from factory go to Ruger but Mojo ghost rings can be put on the SKS for under $40 that even that out pretty well.
Trigger goes to the Mini but I've never had a big problem with the triggers on the SKS and I have to believe an aftermarket trigger could be installed along with your other gizmos--sights, stocks, muzzle attachments, ect--and still be under the price of even a used Mini.

I never really shot them side by side on paper, but it seemed similarly easy or difficult to hit similar targets at similar ranges for me with each.

And I would like whoever said it to explain how the Mini-14 round even compares to the SKS round, let alone is somehow superior. The 7.62x39 is an excellent round for such a carbine. It is cheap, adequately powerful to dispatch any varmints as well as medium game at close range, accurate enough in this platform to perform these duties, and available just about everywhere.

 

[Didorian]

OK, Here's another question, that is a concern of mine....
Can you stop by Wal-Mart, or the local hardware store(If in an out of the way town) And buy ammo for the SKS like you can the ruger?
And yea.... If I'm gonna buy a mini, it's gonna be from a pawn shop...

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Walmart around here sells 7.62x39 so yes.

Hardware stores usually sell 06, .270, maybe some 7mm Rem Mag, but are far more likely to have 7.62x39 than .223 in my experience.

Most people I know don't hold the .223 in high regard because they need a rifle that is good for more than whistle pigs. The .223 is a fun shooter but it really isn't that valuable if you actually need to do something with it.

 

[Dienekes]

SKS, as in Yugo M66/59: Crude in concept, pretty well made, cheap,accurate enough, reliable. Also pretty quick at short ranges. Owned a Ranch Mini in .223 way back when, didn't care for it, sold it. Agency had a couple, had one lock up from piston corrosion in a trunk. Not too inspirational.

Bought the SKS as something of a joke and to play with. I usually shoot M1 or M1A out in the sagebrush, but lately have thought about getting a short AR or AR-180B. However the SKS actually fills the same niche pretty well with no fuss at all.

I gave it about 50 coats of Tru-Oil but it is still ugly. But reliable ugly beats cute and quirky every time.

 

[Didorian]

Is 7.62x39 the same as a .308???

Probably a stupid question.... but I don't know the answer and I KNOW that you guys do.

 

[jobu07]

While 7.62x39 equals .30, .308 Win equals 7.62x51

 

[MTMilitiaman]

The 7.62x39 is an intermediate powered rifle cartridge developed by the Soviets in the 40s and first seen in the SKS and later in the Kalashnikov. It typically fires a 125 gr bullet at 2400 fps. Most Soviet weapons an ammunition were actually .311 caliber rather than .308 but the Mini-30 and most American ammunition are true .30 caliber.

The 7.62x51 NATO is a full power rifle cartridge devleoped by the US to duplicate the performance of the .30-06 in its military configuration pushing a 150 gr FMJ at 2700 fps. It is seen in battle rifles like the M14, FN FAL, and HK G3 as well as Light Machine Guns like the M240.

In metric designations, the first number usually designates at least an approximate caliber (bore diameter) while the second number designates case length, both in millimeters.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Apples vs Oranges

I've owned more SkSs than Minis. The minis were always more accurate,
easier to shoot, and just flat out carried better. However, the SKSs were
far more durable. I've never had a part break on the SKSs --even the
1960s imports that were well-used when they got here. On the other
hand my personal track record for the Mini-14 included: broken rear
sight, extractor blown in half, and the gas tap fell out of it's housing
under the barrel (um, no I did not previously remove it either). All
of these required return to the factory.

Yes, if you have the $$$ for a new Mini you can get an AR-15. You'll
get even better accuracy, etc. Parts are cheap and easy to replace
yourself. We could debate all day on which is more reliable and durable,
but the AR is going to need regular upkeep to compete on that with
the SKS which requires far less. But, if those were the only two measures
you were considering then a surplus bolt-action could be a consideration.

Consider ease of attaching accessories, cost of ammo, and how many
rounds you'll want to have in the attached magazine.

 

[Slater]

The SKS (most of them anyway) has a high percentage of milled parts. A lot of folks prefer these over stamped/cast/MIM parts for long-term durability.

Making an SKS today using the original methods would be pretty spendy.