New owner checking in! - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion > Mini-14 Forum > New owner checking in!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-10-2012, 03:48 AM   #11
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Squawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 865
Liked 191 Times on 128 Posts

Default

Congrats OP on the new purchase.

__________________

If guns kill people, mine are defective.

Squawk is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 04:02 AM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Commocarl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Lufkin,Texas
Posts: 159
Liked 10 Times on 10 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tri70 View Post
Minis are very fun to shoot! A Gundoc trigger is a great mod to get if you get a package deal of bedding/trigger and save $$$. I have 2 minis with Gundoc triggers and it will impress you greatly over the factory trigger.
I sent my Mini to Gundoc, what can I say it it night and day from the rifle I sent him. I would say the biggest improvement was the trigger adjustment.

If nothing else the best thing you can do, IMO, is getting the trigger to a sane 3lb or so pull.
__________________
Commocarl is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 10:24 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 460
Liked 114 Times on 88 Posts
Likes Given: 111

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post
regardless of what i said, i don't consider the mini 14 to be inaccurate. in fact i think mine is a great little shooter. i've been in many battles with posters who claim the mini is "inaccurate." there is practical accuracy (which the mini has), and target accuracy (MOA...which the mini doesn't normally have).

i think too many people expect guns to shoot MOA these days. autoloading carbines are not generally known to be MOA guns despite many claims of it being so (by internet commandos mostly). shooting MOA consistently in like 5 shots groups in very difficult for gun and shooter, regardless of the firearm.

i have an AR also. i think it is more accurate out of the box. after i tinkered with my mini, the difference isn't all that much. my mini and AR cost almost exactly the same. and you must also remember, often people are comparing heavy barrel $1500+ AR's to the mini.....not a fair comparison. but you must remember, the basic action of an AR is very different from the mini. both have advantages and disadvantages.

the older minis got the platform its BAD rep for accuracy....and well earned....by all accounts, it seems some were very bad. but the newer minis imo will shoot with or out shoot almost every other auto loading carbine not named AR.

i think many just get frustrated with ruger as well, for not taking time to refine the mini 14 into a better firearm. i mean the owners have done more to improve the gun than ruger ever has.

also, i still think my mini handles and looks better than my AR. but this is just a preference vs thinking one is better than the other. accuracy isn't the only measuring stick of a quality firearm imo.

remember, i'm no expert on this matter. just my opinions.
These types of discussion seems to be based on a confusing misunderstanding of the min-14 and the AR-15. And "bad rep" follows.

All guns follow the Minute of Angle (MOA) rule. It's just a simple way of describing the trajectory of the bullet leaving the barrel - of any gun.
So all guns are "MOA" guns. They all follow a trajectory that can be described in angles.

As for the AR-15 and the Mini-14 that Ruger developed - there is a lot of history.
The AR-15 was developed by the US Army to replace the .308 caliber (7.62 NATO) M-14 - which was a heavier rifle using heavier, larger cartridges. The Army wanted a lighter weight rifle shooting more compact rounds - for easier carry. They wanted the rifle lighter and specifically wanted aluminum frames and composites - which they got with the AR-15. And they got the much lighter and smaller .223 (5.56 NATO) round which could be carried in much larger quantities, etc. This was important battlefield stuff - lighter weight - carrying nearly twice as many rounds in the same weight bulk package as the .308 cartridge.

But after all this AR-15 development and the gun proved very popular, Bill Ruger decided to adapt the fine shooting characteristics of the M-14 (remember - this was used as a sniper rifle, too) to that smaller, lighter weight, and very popular cartridge - the .223. Thus, he introduced the Mini-14. And he used composites here too - rather than the wood and steel of the old Army issued M-14. But there is nothing "mini" about it in terms of performance. He called it Mini-14 simply because it was not a .308 cartridge based M-14 but was based on the highly successful AR-15 but smaller round - the .223. That is what made it "mini" - the smaller round.

The AR-15, by it's design, was much more adaptable to change and "add-ons" - which continues today - with panels and picatinny rails, etc. But accuracy - both these guns have the same basic barrel and barrel length (actually both guns have had a variety of barrel lengths but have kind of settled into 16 inch carbine type lengths) and shoot the same .223 cartridge. They are both very accurate.

If someone chooses to shoot a "heavy" version of an AR-15 type gun as a target gun - that is fine - for a heavy target base gun. And he can do that. But weight for weight (same weight versions of these two guns) - hand held - both guns have the same potential - 16 inch barrels shooting the same cartridge.

The AR-15 was not originally designed as a heavy target gun - but actually the opposite - a lightweight gun. So these heavy target AR-15 builds may give better performance - because they are heavy target platforms - but that is not what an AR-15 was about - - and it not a reason to down-play a Mini-14 performance.

This lightweight stuff is kind of funny when you hear guys complain about not liking or refusing to have anything to do with polymer or aluminum frame guns - usually pistol talk - this is. Because the AR-15 was specifically designed around the use of as much aluminum and "plastic" as possible to lighten the Army's field rifle - aluminum frames and receivers and "plastic" stocks, etc. And these guns were rugged. And these guys usually completely defend the AR-15 - because they own them, perhaps. But they put down pistols unmercilessly, that are not "steel" - because "plastic and aluminum make terrible guns...".
---- Not really - since Vietnam - that's what has been the primary gun materials in the much admired AR-15.

MOA (minute of angle) simply describes the characteristic trajectory drop of the bullet (out of any gun) in terms of angles rather than distance. The angles are broken down into minutes of degrees - i.e 1/60 of a degree is one minute. The angle (in minutes of degrees) of drop for a particular gun and cartridge load is then converted to distance drop by applying the distance from the shooter to the target to the gun's characteristic trajectory - with that known projectile load.

That Mini-14 you have is a fine gun with great accuracy potential - as great an accuracy as the shooter is able to control - as is the case with most guns.

I do not own either of these guns. But I am beginning to lean towards a purchase of a Mini-14 because performance is great and I like the looks of a traditional rifle better than that of a "machine gun" look. But that's just me...
The .223 is, by far, the cheapest modern rifle cartridge to shoot - if much practice is planned --- ignoring the Mosin Nagant 7.62 and the most obvious and truly cheapest --- the .22LR.
__________________

Last edited by Colby; 12-10-2012 at 11:38 AM.
Colby is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 06:08 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Isn't it obvious? :P
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squawk View Post
Congrats OP on the new purchase.
Thank you sir. Nice M&P in your avatar!

Quote:
Originally Posted by colby View Post
Stuff about the history of the Mini-14.
I don't think anyone is arguing about it here, and you're probably preaching to the choir--me especially considering I have already bought and plan to customize (in my own manner) my mini!
__________________
California is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 11:22 PM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,838
Liked 2706 Times on 1587 Posts
Likes Given: 1718

Default

Quote:
Colby;1046325]

All guns follow the Minute of Angle (MOA) rule. It's just a simple way of describing the trajectory of the bullet leaving the barrel - of any gun.
So all guns are "MOA" guns. They all follow a trajectory that can be described in angles.
of course you are right....BUT.....related to shooting MOA is an accuracy standard set for guns as well. this why some guns may promise MOA/SUB MOA out of the box. and why scopes are set in MOA clicks.

an MOA gun by most shooter's definition is one which can group apx 1 inch at 100 yards, 2" at 200 yards, etc. the mini 14 IS NOT an MOA gun out of the box....doubt me? well, but one and find out.

its ok, though. many guns are not MOA out of the box, including some ARs. and then you have to be an MOA shooter as well, which ain't easy. i'm sorry but, "all guns are MOA" simply isn't correct..



Quote:
The AR-15, by it's design, was much more adaptable to change and "add-ons" - which continues today - with panels and picatinny rails, etc. But accuracy - both these guns have the same basic barrel and barrel length (actually both guns have had a variety of barrel lengths but have kind of settled into 16 inch carbine type lengths) and shoot the same .223 cartridge. They are both very accurate.
you are completely ignoring the fact that they are two entirely different operating systems. the tighter tolerences of of the AR make it more accurate in general than any other auto loader. but often, in practical terms the difference could be an inch or less.

the same reason the AR is more accurate, also creates other problems, like the AR dumping on its action with every shot. every gun is different.

there is a reason AR's are the choice for many competition shooter? not many mini 14's competing there.

Quote:
If someone chooses to shoot a "heavy" version of an AR-15 type gun as a target gun - that is fine - for a heavy target base gun. And he can do that. But weight for weight (same weight versions of these two guns) - hand held - both guns have the same potential - 16 inch barrels shooting the same cartridge.
again, i think you are ignoring how different these guns are and you are only focused on the cartridge and the barrel....which is really the only thing the AR aand mini have in common.



Quote:
This lightweight stuff is kind of funny when you hear guys complain about not liking or refusing to have anything to do with polymer or aluminum frame guns - usually pistol talk - this is. Because the AR-15 was specifically designed around the use of as much aluminum and "plastic" as possible to lighten the Army's field rifle - aluminum frames and receivers and "plastic" stocks, etc. And these guns were rugged. And these guys usually completely defend the AR-15 - because they own them, perhaps. But they put down pistols unmercilessly, that are not "steel" - because "plastic and aluminum make terrible guns...".
---- Not really - since Vietnam - that's what has been the primary gun materials in the much admired AR-15.
if every one hates plastic pistols, how has the glock become so dang popular?

Quote:
MOA (minute of angle) simply describes the characteristic trajectory drop of the bullet (out of any gun) in terms of angles rather than distance. The angles are broken down into minutes of degrees - i.e 1/60 of a degree is one minute. The angle (in minutes of degrees) of drop for a particular gun and cartridge load is then converted to distance drop by applying the distance from the shooter to the target to the gun's characteristic trajectory - with that known projectile load.
correct. but what it means to shooting is about 1 inch at 100 yards.

Quote:
That Mini-14 you have is a fine gun with great accuracy potential - as great an accuracy as the shooter is able to control - as is the case with most guns.
ok, but an out of box mini needs a bit of work to bring out its best. if you doubt me, buy one and find out. i love my mini, but it is what it is. check the stickies in this forum related to making a mini shoot better. they were made by a guy who has forgotten more then we'll ever know about minis.

Quote:
I do not own either of these guns. But I am beginning to lean towards a purchase of a Mini-14 because performance is great and I like the looks of a traditional rifle better than that of a "machine gun" look. But that's just me...
The .223 is, by far, the cheapest modern rifle cartridge to shoot - if much practice is planned --- ignoring the Mosin Nagant 7.62 and the most obvious and truly cheapest --- the .22LR.
ahhh...but you see... i DO own both guns. i have shot them side by side several times. what i am telling you is generally accepted by virtually every mini owner, most of whom love this little gun.

get that mini....you won't regret it. i love mine, even more than my AR.

be sure and let us know when you get it. post pics, tell us about it...and give our shooting challenge a go as well. good fun!
__________________

Last edited by hawkguy; 12-10-2012 at 11:57 PM. Reason: typos
hawkguy is offline  
Colby Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 11:53 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,838
Liked 2706 Times on 1587 Posts
Likes Given: 1718

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by California View Post
I don't think anyone is arguing about it here, and you're probably preaching to the choir--me especially considering I have already bought and plan to customize (in my own manner) my mini!
amen! we love those mini guns around here!
__________________
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 08:05 AM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 460
Liked 114 Times on 88 Posts
Likes Given: 111

Default

Hey Hawkguy,
Thanks for the stuff!
We could talk on and on, I'm thinking.
I appreciate your input - and you obviously know more particulars about the two guns - you own them both - as you said!

I didn't mean to imply that most people don't like plastic guns. I was just referring to the vocal ones that like to make a huge issue of it --- as if nothing is good enough if not steel... The logic just escapes me (or the lack of logic). Of all the shooters out there -- I'm sure their numbers are small...

__________________
Colby is offline  
hawkguy Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 10:57 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
tri70's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Siloam Springs,Arkansas
Posts: 1,324
Liked 540 Times on 324 Posts
Likes Given: 2178

Default

A lot of us mini owners will use aluminium strut clamps or UTG rails that also work as a heat sink. I think this would cause problems with the AR variant rifles as the aluminium receiver could warp as it gets warm in extended firing. I know many have no issues, I don't own an AR but like the minis, you hear all kinds of rumors on the net.

__________________

Remember the battle of Athens, TN!

"Work as if you were to live 100 Years, Pray as if you were to die To-morrow." --Benjamin Franklin

tri70 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 12:42 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,838
Liked 2706 Times on 1587 Posts
Likes Given: 1718

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colby View Post
Hey Hawkguy,
Thanks for the stuff!
We could talk on and on, I'm thinking.
I appreciate your input - and you obviously know more particulars about the two guns - you own them both - as you said!

I didn't mean to imply that most people don't like plastic guns. I was just referring to the vocal ones that like to make a huge issue of it --- as if nothing is good enough if not steel... The logic just escapes me (or the lack of logic). Of all the shooters out there -- I'm sure their numbers are small...
hey, we all know opinions are like....well, we all have them..

like i said, friend....i'm not an expert, but i do try to listen to them when i get a chance. guys like tri, steve, masterp, gundoc and others could teach you a lot about these little mini guns, and are twice as helpful as anyone at ruger CS will be.

hope you get that mini. like i said, i doubt you'll regret it. i like the action of the mini so much. and i also tend to prefer traditional rifle set ups. the AR is fun, but the mini is still king in my gun case.

thanks for the discussion and keep it up. we need more posting in this near dead mini forum.
__________________
hawkguy is offline  
tri70 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 03:38 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Isn't it obvious? :P
Posts: 5
Default

Hey Hawkguy, is that a stock, well, stock on your mini? I have been poking around for a wooden stock (because the stainless + wood look you rock is sweet), but I don't know if I want to pay full-retail for just a factory replacement + the mounting hardware.

__________________
California is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Checking my 30-06 spittinfire Range Report 5 09-09-2010 02:46 AM