FEB 2020 rifle magazine in the MINI

Discussion in 'Mini-14 Forum' started by hawkguy, Apr 3, 2020.

  1. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    helloooo? *echoes* :p

    another poster @ another forum posted this article. thought i would share here.

    https://www.riflemagazine.com/ruger-s-mini-14-and-mini-thirty

    hmmmm...once again a credible source tests mini 14 accuracy and gets groups under 2" on a stock mini....hmmm...not the 4, 5, 6" that haters keep bringing up. :rolleyes:

    the end sums it up well, based on my experiences:

    "The Mini-14 has been a highly successful rifle with impressive production numbers sold, but it is not without controversy, which is mostly based on accuracy issues with early rifles. It is occasionally belittled by AR fans in an effort to make their rifle choice appear superior, but the truth is they can be amazingly reliable, produce respectable accuracy, are fun to shoot and are an excellent choice for many sporting applications that include hunting and recreation, or they can just be kept by the door for security."
     
    Shopfox, Oldoutlaw and towboater like this.
  2. Shopfox

    Shopfox Well-Known Member Supporter

    1,778
    1,602
    113
    I'm sorry, but having to throw out the first shot every time, and then report 4-shot 100 yard groups is laughable.

    His median 4-shot group is 2". Add in 0.5 to 0.75 for the 1st shot and it's 2.63", and 6 of the 8 ammo's are high quality. It's not a sub 2" rifle by his own data.

    A budget AR-15 will shoot groups less than 1/2 of the mini-14. It's not that I hate the mini-14; I just can't find a justification to spend more than I would for an AR-15 to secure worse performance.

    This is a standard PSA 16" blem kit w. a $30 ebay float tube, ALG hammer spring, and ~$30 Simmons 3-9 scope w. factory ( Australian Outback Sierra 69gr BTHP). Probably $200 less than a mini-14.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
    alsaqr, towboater and hawkguy like this.

  3. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    i missed that. i was wondering about 4 shot groups, but it still doesn't say if he eliminated the first shot OR his group would have been .5 to .75 smaller IF he eliminated it. but a 4 shot group does seem to indicate he eliminated it. weird...and i agree if that was the case...laughable (results).

    does the reading actually say he eliminated it? i could only read "For example, if the first shot was eliminated from the group’s measurement, the group would typically shrink by .5 to .75 inch. Usually, this first shot flier was high and right. (Additional comments on accurizing and tuning the Mini-14 can be found in my “Mostly Long Guns” column in this issue.)"

    but again, why a 4 shot group otherwise? :oops:

    never had a BAD first round flyer on my ol mini. had some vertical stringing issues when heating up. put a strut on and could normally put 75% or more of my shoots in a 2" bull...shot most 5 shot groups between 1.5-2" (if i did my part), pulled a few MOA out of my butt, but that wasn't the norm. that's just me and my range experience.

     
    Shopfox and towboater like this.
  4. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    accu-strut: testing yielded 2.4" avg groups stock. 1.6" after strut.

    http://accu-strut.com/thick-barrel-results

    chuckhawks. 2-3" stock. sub 2" after trigger job.

    https://www.chuckhawks.com/ruger_mini14_review.htm

    closer to my experience, though i know some mini owners had real trouble with first round flyers. its a problem that seems to be fairly common.

    in this testing, the ruger ar 556 seems to be about a 2", maybe slight sub 2" shooter stock in this article. not all ARs are "lights out" MOA shooters either.

    https://www.rifleshootermag.com/editorial/review-ruger-ar-556/83496

    in this report, Colt HBAR reporting 2", 3" groups with cheaper plinking ammo. find the right right ammo, sub MOA.

    http://www.thenewrifleman.com/accuracy-evaluation-of-a-colt-hbar-barrel/

    just mo, but ammo used, shooter, and gun ALL bear very different results. Is the AR generally more accurate than the mini?...in my experience, i think so. i wouldn't argue that. are they all out of the box MOA? nope. but i really like the AR in most ways, a great rifle.

    is the mini as inaccurate as many claim? i don't think so, based on my own shooting. pretty good shooter imo, can be tweaked to shoot quite well. just my 2 cents. no war intended. i really like the mini in most ways too, but I don't think of it as superior or "the best" gun though. just a viable alternative to the AR.

    i appreciate your input though. not counting a shot in a group is B.S......plain and simple.

    and i truly want to express....i am no expert....closer to a weekend warrior really...:p
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2020
    Shopfox and towboater like this.
  5. Oldoutlaw

    Oldoutlaw Well-Known Member Supporter

    2,926
    6,137
    103
    After watching a few friends of mine with the mini at our range, I eliminated it entirely. Then, went and bought my first AR 15 and out shot all of them. Even though I am 40-50 years older than them. But, the mini is fun to shoot I do admit.
     
    hawkguy likes this.
  6. JTJ

    JTJ Well-Known Member Supporter

    12,908
    6,750
    113
    I put a strut on both of mine before I ever fired it. With brass I get 2" or under @ 100 yards and I dont throw out the 1st round. With Wolf steel around 3". I have never had to scrape carbon off of my bolt.
    My AR is a gas piston. I sold my DI's.
     
    hawkguy and Shopfox like this.
  7. Shopfox

    Shopfox Well-Known Member Supporter

    1,778
    1,602
    113
    I'm making the assumption (dangerous...), that because he considers that first shot a called flier, he is removing it from the data set. The 4-shot groups is something I've never seen before (ever), so it gives me a 2nd reason to believe 1 shot is consistently being excluded in the data set.
     
    hawkguy likes this.
  8. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    the good news: people posting here again! :)
     
    Shopfox likes this.
  9. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    that would make sense, though he never actually said he removed the first shot form the equation.

    but i agree...you'd have to assume it was removed. i've seen 3 and 5 shot groups in reviews....never 4. that's straight stupid and misleading to remove a shot from the data. i'm glad you called me on that. NOTE TO HAWKGUY: read more thoroughly before you post!:D
     
  10. Shopfox

    Shopfox Well-Known Member Supporter

    1,778
    1,602
    113
    This is a criticism of the author, not at you... there's reasons to own a mini-14 - and it's ok to say, "it's a 2-1/2" shooter out of the box with good ammo."

    A stock AR is in the similar ballpark. The fundamental difference is the ease of making an AR shoot well and the potential for tighter groups.

    I like the wood on the mini and the classic look. I like the gas system. I like that it's practical for coyote and 2 legged varmint within 250 yards. The fact that it can be tweaked and tuned to get to the 1.5" range is enough to pique my interest. I just can't get past the price tag of the base model, thinking about buying more magazines, special scope mounts, gunsmithing costs, etc. It doesn't make the gun less interesting - it just keeps it out of my gun cabinet.

    For guys that can afford it, rock on, and I'd love to shoot yours some day at the range!
     
    hawkguy likes this.
  11. Shopfox

    Shopfox Well-Known Member Supporter

    1,778
    1,602
    113
    only as an interesting note, the HBAR groups are 10-shot averages. From this:
    http://ballistipedia.com/index.php?title=Range_Statistics ,
    A 10-shot group should be about 1.24x's larger than a 5-shot group. With the XM193, the 2.31" and 2.49" average is 2.4". 2.4" divided by 1.24 works out to the equivalent of a 1.93" 5-shot group.

    That puts it pretty close the the 4-shot 2.25" of the mini-14 shooting AE 5.56.
     
    hawkguy likes this.
  12. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    thanks, but i understood that. i just should have read the article more thoroughly before posting....that is my bad.

    everything you posted here makes sense to me. i completely respect that you're not really a fan of the mini (especially at the price point)...BUT you obviously aren't an irrational hater either. i would also agree that the mini's price point is currently too high to be truly competitive in any gun market that isn't banning "assault weapon" features.

    AR's...as a market...just exploded. the prices on them right now (well, in non-panic time) is mind blowing. their quality keeps increasing as their price drops.

    I really like AR's. they shoot very well and they are so easy to set up to personal preferences. in several ways, performance wise and in function, the AR is better. but like you said, the mini just has that classic look...the ergonomics suit me a bit better. but the mini is not a "better" rifle than the AR, just different. in a perfect world, everybody gets both! :cool:

    PS-before all this panic garbage, i saw 2 used, modern minis in great shape between $5-600 (retail, gun store). now..forgetaboutit.

     
  13. hawkguy

    hawkguy Well-Known Member

    5,263
    583
    113
    yes, i did notice they were 10 shot groups. thanks for the info and comparison.

     
  14. Hildy

    Hildy New Member

    14
    14
    3
    I am in the process of making a few improvements to my, new to me, mini-14...when all is said and done, my total investment will be around $300. I just can't beat that for a really cool looking fun little gun to shoot...and I love my AR too.
     
    hawkguy likes this.
  15. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member Supporter

    8,769
    4,525
    113
    Glad to see Ruger has "accurized" the mini-4. The 1980s models were often less accurate than a decent SKS.
     
    hawkguy, Shopfox and sheriffjohn like this.
  16. sheriffjohn

    sheriffjohn Well-Known Member Supporter

    1,591
    2,859
    113
    Still have my 180 series mini from when they first came out and helped buddy sight in a new stainless Ranch model (his with scope). Old mini always strung shells as it heated up but would maintain zero if allowed to cool for 5 minutes or so between shots. The new ranch did not have the problem. Don't know what the difference is, but it was very apparent.

    Neighboring Sheriff's Office had the full-auto Mini (GB?). It was fun to shoot.
     
    Shopfox likes this.
  17. JTJ

    JTJ Well-Known Member Supporter

    12,908
    6,750
    113
    The newer mini has a heavier barrel. A strut on the old mini helps a lot. I had an old mini 30 that was 4"-6" with steel. I put a strut on it and it went to 2"-3" and no stringing. Did not have to wait for the barrel to cool. My newer mini's also have the forward rails installed. The 14 has an Ultimak and the 30 has an Amega. The Amega looks better but the Ultimak is a better choice. The rail is lower than the Amega so a red dot sits lower. Still wont co witness.
     
    hawkguy likes this.