Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why does Ruger not go ahead and make a M-14

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by yesit'sloaded, Sep 19, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. yesit'sloaded

    yesit'sloaded Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,662
    They already make the mini 14 which is a smaller version in .223 and 7.62x39. Why don't they just start making M14s. Or would that be an M1a1. Why not? I know there is a market for them.
     
  2. skinewmexico

    skinewmexico Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,621
    Location:
    West Texas
    Because they're afraid of what people might think if they started making an assault rifle. Bill Ruger supported the last AWB.
     
  3. yesit'sloaded

    yesit'sloaded Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,662
    WTH? The mini-14 is the same gun just not in .308. It even comes in the evil caliber 7.62x39. Thats a sick joke of a thing if a company that makes a semi auto rifle in .223 and 7.62x39 is against "assault weapons".
     
  4. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,045
    Location:
    PRKt
  5. Samuraigg

    Samuraigg Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    Messages:
    274
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    I find this awesome, considering most new potential AWBs include the Mini 14 on the list of banned weapons.
     
  6. lencac

    lencac Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,068
    Probably cause Ruger knows that any M1A would be inferior to the SA M1A ...... smart folks there at Ruger
     
  7. MisterPX

    MisterPX Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    759
    Location:
    Amerika's Doyleland
    Would they be able to recoup tooling costs on production?
    Not too likely right now, lack of 308, SA marketing, etc.

    As far as Bill and the AWB, all I recall is that he was good to go on teh 10 round mag part.
     
  8. General Geoff

    General Geoff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    5,060
    Location:
    Allentown, Pennsylvania
    The M14 market is pretty well covered. The market's not nearly as large as the AR-15 sect, and I can think of three manufacturers who are currently making rifles (Springfield Armory being my guess for largest in volume, by a long shot, and Fulton Armory and LRB Arms following). Costs to ramp up for production would probably take well over a decade to pay off, assuming they made a weapon of comparable quality to existing M14 clones and offered it at a reasonable price.
     
  9. yongxingfreesty

    yongxingfreesty Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,396
    Bill Ruger, same guy that said all you need is 10 rounds.
     
  10. Spiggy

    Spiggy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    651
    Location:
    The Sunny PR of Kalifornistanichevolakia, Right be
    coincidentally, SB1022 comes to mind...
     
  11. Detritus

    Detritus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,078
    Location:
    Central NC
    Bill Ruger was a great gun designer, and he knew how to deflect scurity and criticism from his product with a well timed BS political statement /business descision. his statements about 10rd mags and the famous "no man needs a pistol smaller than a canned ham" comment fall into this category.

    Ruger didn't really "support the AWB" but he could read the 10 foot high writing on the wall and knew dang well one was coming. so he got out ahead of the thing and made statements to make it seem to the politicians that he was 'not as unreasonable about things as his competitors"

    he knew realisticly that with a very little bit of forethought and planning production wise that the Mini-14/30 could transition into and survive during an AWB, with little to no interuption or loss of profit.
    So why SHOULDN'T he milk that fact for all it's worth.

    in other words Bill Ruger was a businessman, not a politican or lobbyist. and made the aforementioned statements b/c they made good buisness sense.
    Welcome to capitalism.

    Now as to the OP
    As MP510 noted Ruger DID make a .308 sized version of the Mini-14 the X-GI, it never went into production b/c it was even MORE inaccurate than the Mini (forget "minute of pieplate" think "minute of barn door"). And since after a considerable amount of testing, the R&D Dept couldn't solve the accuracy problems in a satisfactory manner, a decision was made to not sell a model with a known and possibly unsolvable problem.
     
  12. wideym

    wideym Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    928
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Bill Ruger may have been a buisnessman, but to stab everyone with a vested interest in firearms and the CONSTITUTION in the back for money was inexcuseable. If the internet was as commonplace then as it is today Ruger would be out of buisness as surely as Zumbo. Now about Ruger M-14s, M14/M1A are usually more expensive than any off the rack firearm. People expect Springfield quality accuracy or better from M14/M1As. Ruger just can not meet those expectations and won't try. They stick with a known seller.
     
  13. Number 6

    Number 6 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    Messages:
    828
    From my understanding the Mini-14 is not a direct descendant of the M14, but instead a mixture of the M14 and the M1 Carbine. The XG1 was developed but never entered into production. A lot of reasons for this have been postulated, but as others have said the market for M14 clones is already covered. For Ruger to produce a cheap clone of the M14 would most likely not do well since it would not live up to anyone's expectations. To do a M14 clone well is not something that can be done cheaply.

    As to the image that producing an M14 clone would entail. Ruger has shied away from making guns that have the appearance of being military in nature. The Mini-14 and Mini-30 have been marketed to the civilian market as ranch rifles. Making a full-fledged clone of the M14 would not fit in with the corporate image that Ruger is trying to create for itself. Before people are too hard on Ruger, remember that one of the reasons that Marlin dropped the Camp Carbine series was that it did not fit in with the image that Marlin was trying convey. Could Ruger change their image and might they be in the process of doing so? I certainly hope so, I think they could do well to make more "militarized" rifles, and make a good bit of money. I am not sure if an M14 clone would be possible however, given the above reasons.
     
  14. cbsbyte

    cbsbyte Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Location:
    Cradle of Liberty
    People consider Bill Ruger a great gun designer? Every gun he designed was just a copy of another firearm and poor one at that. Mini-14 is cross between the Grand and M14 action. Mark 1 pistol is an almost direct copy of a Japanese Nambu pistol. This guy really did not come up with many great designs. He is no John Browning.
     
  15. Baron357

    Baron357 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    141
    Location:
    New England
    Ruger may have been a good Businessman but he sold out every gun owner in this country. Go and buy a new mini-14 of 30 and what does it come with...a 5 round mag. That is all Ruger thinks us peons should get.

    As for the OP, Ruger could not make a quality M14/M1A for any less then SA so there is no reason. Plus Ruger would probably make the mags proprietary and only 5 rounds unless you were LEO. NOBODY in their right mind would choose that over a nice Springfield.
     
  16. Rexster

    Rexster Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,913
    Location:
    SE Texas
    I seem to remember the XGI used M-14 mags.
     
  17. trbon8r

    trbon8r Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    863
    Location:
    MD
    You have to remember that back in the day the Springfield M1A was a considerably cheaper weapon than it is now. I bought my first one back in the late 1980s on sale for the princely sum of $499.

    Keep in mind that M14 surplus parts were plentiful and dirt cheap back then. Springfield could assemble guns using quality GI parts that the gubment was practically giving away. Ruger would have to compete with the M1A with added burden burden and expense of making all new parts. Someone would have to be on crack to buy the Ruger over the M1A, and Ruger likely figured that out.
     
  18. yesit'sloaded

    yesit'sloaded Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,662
    I want my red label m14.
     
  19. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,986
    Jan Stevenson, then editing The Handgunner, Ltd. in England, said he got two separate letters from Ruger about their discontinuing the XGI project. One said that they had the action working but could not get acceptable accuracy; the other said that it was an accurate rifle but they could not get reliable function with the wide range of ammunition available.
    He concluded that it was neither reliable or accurate and they gave up on it.
     
  20. armoredman

    armoredman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    16,214
    Location:
    proud to be in AZ
    Hmmm, all that new tooling they just did for the Mini-14, wonder if there is any interest in a new set for an XGI. Do remember, they guy who sold us out IS DEAD. Maybe his hiers would be more, "receptive", shall we say, to reviving this dream, and making it workable?
     
  21. Baron357

    Baron357 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    141
    Location:
    New England
    I suspect if that were true new Minis would have at least a 10 rd. mag. to go along with the 5 rounder and high cap mags would have been released to the public already. Maybe things will change...
     
  22. Vitamin G

    Vitamin G Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    934
    Location:
    Monroeville, PA (Home of the Zombies)
    Ruger will not, CAN NOT, make an M14/M1a platform. The gun simply does not have enough surface area for the warning labels that Ruger would want to put on such a fine weapon.
     
  23. CajunBass

    CajunBass Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Messages:
    5,633
    Location:
    North Chesterfield, Virginia
    Well the last time the Ruger board of directors called me and asked for my advice I told them................
     
  24. Werewolf

    Werewolf Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,192
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Based on my personal experience with 3 Ruger products there's no way I'd ever purchase an M-14 made by them and that's before taking into consideration ole Bill's sell out of the people that buttered his bread.

    Ruger could drop off the face of the planet this very second and I wouldn't shed a single tear over it. In fact it would probably generate a smile or two and might even make my day.
     
  25. JoshM

    JoshM Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    115
    M14 Market is covered

    Ruger's success has evolved by noting gaps in the market and then filling the gaps with useful/reasonably priced products. So, between the Springfield Armory and NORINCO products - on a worldwide scale - the market is already well catered for.

    Example - At the entry level a new NORINCO M305 (M14 clone/knockoff) can be purchased for approxmiately $450 US, with the Springfields dominating the high end of the market.

    I expect that a revived XGI would likely run into the same problems of a crowded marketplace - Saiga, Remington, Browning, HK, and even Benelli have centerfire semi automatics available.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page