Why are Mini 14's so inaccurate?

[MrAcheson]

What I think is stopping such progress is that it would require Ruger to retool.

But Ruger did retooled recently (within the last couple of years). The current minis are built on new tooling and they are supposedly fairing a bit better. But they're also more expensive because of the retooling costs being passed down to the consumer.

 

[Walkalong]

Love my Mini 14. No, it is not all that accurate, but it is rugged, dependable, and shoots minute of bad guy from 100 yards in and that is what matters. It was never intended, as folks have said, for a target rifle. get an AR if you want to do wonderfull things at long range.

 

[allmons]

Gas block - poor tolerances

is the short answer to your query. The newest Mini's have a very definite improvement in gas block shaping and fitting. The accuracy is VASTLY improved. A good gunsmith can improve a Mini's accuracy dramatically as well.
However, it is a ranch rifle and was never designed to be a tack driver. It is a descendant of a military rifle design and focused more on reliability than extreme accuracy.
My AK doesn't have any better accuracy, but I am comfortable with the performance of both for what they are designed.

 

[Young gun]

I have already given my pro-mini rant elsewhere. But I will repeat that:

1)The mini-14 makes a good learning tool for how auto-loaders function, operate, and should be maintained esp. for the novice who would want to move up to an AR.

2)It's a dependable knock around gun.

3)Because it's dependable you are best off buying used for around $400 and not paying it's overly high out-of-the-box price tag.

Also, .223 is a small round best for smallish critters. There's a reason why the military is testing a new M-16 in 6.5.

 

[blackhawk2000]

For $400 you can buy a NEW WASR10, and some mags/ammo. Or a couple of SKS's, and some ammo.

Why not get a Kel-Tec SU-16, that takes readily available M16 mags? Same price as the Ruger. Mags are much cheaper. Company isn't Anti 2A.


If the sole purpose of the rifle is to have a nock around trunk style gun, then why drop all that extra money, when the same thing can be accomplished for a LOT less?

I don't get it.

 

[JWarren]

The mini-14 makes a good learning tool for how auto-loaders function, operate, and should be maintained esp. for the novice who would want to move up to an AR.

I see no value in this. Sorry.

Any Semi-auto will teach you the mechanics of a semi-auto. Why not learn the particulars of the ACTUAL rifle you want and put your coin towards that rifle?

I wouldn't consider a mini-14 training wheels for any other semi-auto, and why do you need them anyway? A 22 rimfire should be handled as carefully and safely as a M1A.'

My first Semi-auto rifle was a AR-15 when I was 15 years old. It, in no way prepared me for my subsequent ownership of HK-91's, FALs, AK's, or anything else. What it did do is provide an enjoyable experience and set me on the road to developing a love of military rifles.

Also, .223 is a small round best for smallish critters. There's a reason why the military is testing a new M-16 in 6.5.

6.5 is no way similar to 5.56. If anything, that statement suggests that the military is seeking to improve the capabilities of the current issue rifle. That, in no way, strengthens any arguement about the Mini-14, but neither does it detract from it. It has no bearing on this particular rifle. Sorry.

While there will be many people giving reasons why 6.5 is being considered, It is my opinion that the military is seeking a more hard hitting round than the current 5.56. I don't think it is a coincidence that many of our troops in Iraq are trying to get thier hands on M-14 in 7.62 Nato.


All the best!

John

 

[mustanger98]

Any Semi-auto will teach you the mechanics of a semi-auto. Why not learn the particulars of the ACTUAL rifle you want and put your coin towards that rifle?

I did. I got a Mini-14 and learned it and not long afterward, I started learning more about the M1 Garand and got one and learned it. Two different rifles of the same general style and their respective cartridges. They perform nicely for what I do with them, but in other situations they'll also do different jobs.

I wouldn't consider a mini-14 training wheels for any other semi-auto, and why do you need them anyway? A 22 rimfire should be handled as carefully and safely as a M1A.'

I agree with that one. If you turn your back on reality, you can get yourself killed with any of 'em.

 

[JWarren]

Mustanger,

I may not have explained myself properly regarding learning a rifle to get another one. Let me take another try at it.

With the AR-15 I alluded to earlier, it was my first sem-auto rifle. It was all new to me. I learned every inch of that rifle, every part. In very short order, I had a full understanding of that rifle.

Without a doubt, that would have made an easy transition to the mechanics of an AR-10.

But if I had my sites set on an AR-10 from the beginning, would I not be able do develop that same knowledge and profieciecy on the AR-10 itself? There would be no real need to go up in stages until I got the one I wanted.

I understand what you are saying about the Mini and Garand having similar operation properties, and I imagine that is very handy.

But had you already known you wanted a Garand, I would imagine spending the time you spent befriending the mini would have made you just as good a friend in the Garand, had it been in your hands first.

That's all I was saying.


John

 

[mustanger98]

One thing I was trying to get across though is even as similar as the Mini-14 and M1 are, they are quite different and the similarities didn't prepare me for the differences. It's a little different to you and the AR-15 vs. AR-10. But I agree that the Mini and the M1 would be just as good a friend, whichever was in my hands first. But okay, let's compare two totally different rifles... let's say... Winchester '94 .30-30 compared with AR-15. The only part of the Winchester that'll prepare someone to shoot an AR-15 is if the Winchester had a Williams FP/TK and maybe practicing the trigger squeeze, but other than that, they're two totally different deals. Now, back to the Mini-14 vs. AR-15, the former preparing the shooter for the latter. The only part that will do this is familiarity with the .223/5.56mm round. Otherwise, we go back through the differences in triggers and gas systems and stock fit, plus how many complaints about either system, depending who we're talking to.

 

[fatelk]

I've had a series 182 mini-14 stainless for over 15 years. My dad bought it sometime around 1990 or so. I didn't realize until not too long ago that the mini has a bad reputation. On a good day, I can easily shoot at least 2MOA with good ammo. My best group was 5 rounds just under 1.5" at 100 yds. This is pretty consistent, with the occasional irritating flyer. Open sights, of course; I couldn't find a scope mount worth using. I must just have a good one I guess. That's a whole lot better than any AK I've ever seen.
As to reliability I can say only one thing- factory magazines only. A friend had some USA magazines that were scrap metal.

I do like mine and plan to keep it, but I do know there are better rifles out there. I'm not a survivalist or a weekend warrior. My interest in firearms is rather eclectic. I have no interest in the latest greatest high dollar semi-auto rifle or wonder pistol. I would prefer something with history and character. Give me my 1943 Underwood carbine over an AR10 any day. If I was a soldier or someone with survivalist tendencies, I know I would feel differently.

 

[Rifleman 173]

The are all sorts of myths and rumors about the Mini-14 rifles, their reliability and their accuracy "problems." The truth is that the rifle was not meant to be a tack driver. It was designed to meet the needs of a foreign customer many years ago. Somebody overseas, from South America if I remember right, wanted a rifle in .223 caliber that looked like and felt like a cut down version of the old M-14 rifle. Because of the way the .223 cartridge is and because of the length of the barrel and such, inherent problems came to be when it was used by Americans. For the overseas customer the rifle's accuracy was good enough for minute-of-bad-guy shooting and it was reliable enough for their needs. The rifle is lightweight and petty dependable for most people's needs for a basic rifle/carbine. You've got to remember that one thing that makes ANY rifle effective is the way it is used. The FBI found out in Miami many years ago that tactics involving the Mini-14 can make it extremely deadly and fast to use at close range. As one tacky person I know once said, "Miami FBI 2, bad guys 4."

 

[ECVMatt]

Jeff Cooper came up with the term Hoplophobia...

To describe people who have an irrational fear of guns. I guess we could piggyback off that term and Hoplominiphobia for folks that have an irrational fear or hate of the Mini-14.

It cracks me up when I read all these post slamming the Mini. I have owned three or four over the past 20 years and every one of them worked great. In my circle of shooting buddies we own maybe 7 or 10 Mini's and they all work the same. On several occasions they worked better than my AR. More than once my Mini would eat up ammo that would jam my AR about every 5th round. I have never had a Mini jam from anything other than poor magazines. I have never had or seen a Mini break.

I also like to use my Mini for varmint calling. It is a great gun for close in work and allows you to take multiple coyotes when the chance allows. I really don't care that much about the whole accuracy thing because all of my Mini's would shoot at or around 2" at 100 yards. My new 580 series will consistently shoot under 2" at 100 yards. I generally use bolt guns when I need more accuracy than this.

My Mini was also welcome more places than my AR. I like go to the country a lot. On several occasion I was invited to shoot or hunt on folk's ranches. I never had any comments made about the Mini, but was told not to use bring my AR to a couple of places. I don't agree with that thinking (a bit Zubo'ish), but it was their place and they are nice people.

There are many choices out there. If the Mini doesn't do what you like then pass on it. However for lots of folks the Mini works just fine.

Matt

 

[ArmedBear]

LOL

Right with you, Matt.

Furthermore, people who've shot my Mini-14 tend to really like the way it handles.

It's true: if you expect the thing to be fun to shoot at paper off the bench, you'll be disappointed. Get a heavy barrel bolt gun if that's what you want -- or the new target model Mini, a Varmint AR, whatever.

I HAVE had a part on my stainless ranch rifle Mini-14 break. It was a free replacement from Ruger. However, I had no idea the part was broken until I took the gun apart for its once-a-year cleaning -- no need to clean the thing every time I take it out. The gun WORKED FINE with the broken part.

 

[Oohrah]

Wow this Post still continues! I have not heard if Ruger
will up grade those who are not satisfied with accuracy.
Can't recall the exact date I bought mine, but it is one
of the early ones. The price was $182 and I think it included
tax. It has never failed to function, but with a 4x scope it
puts out a 2-3" groups. Approximately what a couple of
SKSs I own will do. It's a fun gun that I would trade with
one of my others in a 308 or 30-06, if the varmit ran on two
legs. It is MORE accurate than early M-16s, and MANY times
more reliable. With modifications (many) of ammo and platform,
it still remains with ball ammo an unreliable two legged stopper.
Although the 223 Ruger is not a tack driver and shoots about
the same bullet weights as back in the 70s, it has gone through
one modification to improve accuracy.
Think I'll keep mine

 

[Timthinker]

As unbelievable as this may sound, I used a knight muzzleloading rifle to outshoot a friend firing a Ruger Mini-14 some years ago. The distance for this match was 100 yards and he has never lived down this defeat. I am not implying that this poor performance is common for that particular Ruger, but this event actually happened. Unfortunately, I have never shot that well since then, but it was a memorable win. Now everyone knows why I am a muzzleloading enthusiast.


Timthinker

 

[Houston Tom]

I have had my Mini for over 20 years it is a 184 I have put countless rounds through it, the only problems have been because of poor mags. It is not a target gun, was not designed to be one nor do I get it to be one. But for what I want it for it works and I love it.

 

[ROMAK IV]

To describe people who have an irrational fear of guns. I guess we could piggyback off that term and Hoplominiphobia for folks that have an irrational fear or hate of the Mini-14.

But what if the fear, hatred, and/or loathing is rational? I was looking to buy a rifle some years ago, when the survivalist movement was alive. Modified 10/22's and mini-14's abounded. I considered a mini-14 and decided against that choice because it is a civilian rifle and not milspec. I finnaly decided against 223 rifles in general. Still the Mini-14 seemed to be the choice of the A-team as well as assorted religious fanatic commune groups.

Subsequently, I would discover Bill Ruger's treachery and swear the company's products all together. In reality, the mini-14 is an anomoly among Ruger's products which are generally too expensive, too PC, too retro, or all of the above. I have tried to be simply indiferent towards the Mini-14, but I have just seen too many defective Mini-14's for sale in pawn shops and gun stores throughout the years. I suspect, that those with good quality Mini-14's tend to keep them, while the owners of defective rifles tend to try to "pass" ythem onto unsuspecting victims instead of fixing or getting rid of such rifles. The worst case of this I ever saw, was where some body was attempting to "trade" a Mini-14 for a new AR-15. As the owner began to clean the Mini-14, it became evident that there was a bit of rust in the barrel. To make a long story short, that barrel was the worst rusted barrel I have ever seen, with pieces of bore coming out like grains of sand. So, I concede, the problem with the rifle is probably more a factor of who owns it than the actual rifle. You know, kind of like Volkwagen owners.

So I'm sure the Mini-14 is reasonably accurate and reliable most of the time. However, considering the Anti-freedom stance of Bill Ruger, and the premium price I am just not interested. It's really kind of ironic, whwn you consider how Ruger was more interested in pleasing the government and the anti-gun part of the public, than he was his own customers, or potential customers, that the current AWB bill HR. 1022 list the Mini-14 by name, as an Assault Weapon.

 

[brentn]

You guys seen the new mini14's? On rugers site they only list target grade barrels now, minimizing barrel flex when shooting I suppose, among other things.

They look fairly promising, and around the same price as well.

 

[yongxingfreesty]

I love mine, can shoot out a tennis ball size group at 100yds.
I know I can the torso of a man size target at 200yds w/ the help of my 12x40mm

you mean the stainless target version with msrp close to $1000?

 

[brentn]

Wow, I'm retarded.. They still list the old rifles as the "ranch rifles". There are two versions of the target rifles as well, which I thought was replacing the others. They are also 200$ more.

My bad.

Point being though, are the target ones actually worth it when comparing accuracy to the regular ones?