AR beats Mini-14

[GunnSmokeer]

I haven't owned an AR-15 since the 1980s, when I had an Olympic Arms jamm-0-matic.

But I've shot a LOT of AR's since then. Even possessed some for months, borrowing them from friends and family.

My go-to semi-auto battle rifles are the Springfield Armory M1A and the Ruger Mini-14 (a scaled-down version, pretty similar).

You know what? I don't like them as much as I like AR-15s.

The AR mags go in straight. None of this "approach at an angle like an airplane landing in a 30-knot crosswind" stuff. AR mags drop free with the push of a button. Mini-14 mag changes are slow and awkward (as are M14 mag swaps, as are AK-47 mag swaps. NONE of them are ever going to be as smooth and fast as chaning AR rifle mags.

Modern flat-top-receiver AR's are easy to mount optics to, and remove them. AK's don't accept optics. Mini-14s can be scoped, but only with a long conventional scope. There's no good way to mount a red dot on a Mini-14.

My old eyes need an optic now. Iron sights just aren't working for me. I'm getting 6 m.o.a. with rifles that I know would do 2 m.o.a. if they had scopes on them.

If you want to attach accessories to a mini-14, you have to clamp them on the barrel. That affects barrel harmonics and changes your point of impact.

I just added a 2-AAA miniature Mag-Light, and it made my gun shoot 3 feet low at 200 yards. Three feet! Now I've got the rear sight as high as it can go without being too wobbly, and I'm still hitting 6" low. I guess I can live with that.

The AR pattern guns let you put your lasers and tactical flashlights and stuff on the handguard-- preferably a free-floating hardguard. No point-of-impact shift.

I've had my Mini-14 too long to give it up, but if I ever want to compete in 3-gun matches or take another tactical rifle course, I'm going to have to get an AR. It's really the only sensible choice.

 

[Robert28]

I’ve never owned a mini 14, never really had an interest in them. Really, to tell you the truth, I never owned an AR or any gun that wasn’t a traditional shotgun or hunting rifle or pistol until I bought my first AR in 2016. Main reason I bought one was because the Democrats didn’t want me to have it and with the election coming up I figured why not. Honestly, if there wasn’t such a stigma attached to the AR or AR type rifles that there is today, I probably wouldn’t even own one. I don’t shoot mine as much as I probably should, that’s my fault though not the guns.

 

[transfixer]

I owned a few AR's years ago, but slowly got away from them and got into AK's and sks's, I've never been a fan of the 5.56 round, its fast, and it can be very accurate, but not much knockdown power, and most AR's won't shoot the cheap steel cased ammo which is good for just plinking and having fun.

The AK's 7.62x39 round has much more knockdown, ammo is super cheap, and those things will digest any ammo, Russian, Chinese, Yugo, doesn't seem to matter. sks's will as well,

Fast forward to last year, I got interested in the .300blk out cartridge, and had a local FFL put me an AR together using some better than average components, I'm impressed ! Super Accurate, energy is very close to the 7.62x39, ammo isn't what I would call cheap, but I can load my own , and 5.56 cases are plentiful to cut and resize, choice of bullet weight is very varied, I can shoot anything from 110gr to 220gr.

Over the course of the last year I've learned who makes good parts, who makes better parts, and so on, so I'm now putting a couple together myself, just because , and in case anything ever happens where they become scarce. I'm seriously considering building one in .458socom, now that has some knockdown ! AR's still have one drawback I don't care for, and that's the direct impingement gas system, it requires a fair amount of lube, clean burning ammo, and good maintenance, I'd prefer a piston driven AR, but those are pricier , and not as common.

 

[Jester896]

I built my DMR/Recon rifle with a mid length Adams system. I haven't run it a lot but so far so good. It sure doesn't dump all the stuff in your rifle when suppressed....runs a bunch cleaner.

 

[JackSprat]

I just purchased an AR-15 - it's like my 40th gun. Been "studying" on it every since Bamer was elected president. I'm not one to make a hasty decision.

I really wanted a Mini-14, but every point you made was a factor in my decision.

Plus the Mini-14 reputation for mediocre accuracy.

 

[rosewood]

Bought my Mini-14 back when it was cheaper than an AR. Thought of it as the poor man's AR. Now the pendulum has swung the other way and you can get an AR cheaper than a mini. Bought my first AR not too many years after the Mini cause I had more money then. Bought a Colt HBAR at a pawn shop for a pretty good price. After I started handloading, I discovered it would shoot sub 1/2 MOA. The mini will do at best 1.5 moa if I am lucky and it heats up quick. I like the size of the mini better, but the AR is more accurate and as Smokeer said, it is easy to add stuff to. Not to mention, good quality AR mags are less than half the price of the only good quality Mini mag out there (factory).

Rosewood

 

[Balrog]

I think that is a pretty good analysis. I like the Mini 14, but there is no area where it exceeds the capabilities of a well built AR. I also agree with the opinion that the 556 is a little weak, but with proper bullet selection, that can be mostly overcome.

 

[NCHillbilly]

Even though I have a few ARs, I haven't gotten rid of my SKS yet. You can dump it in a mudhole, throw it out the back of a truck, and it'll still go bangbangbang.

 

[GunnSmokeer]

...I've never been a fan of the 5.56 round, its fast, and it can be very accurate, but not much knockdown power... The AK's 7.62x39 round has much more knockdown...

Verily I say to thee, there is no such thing as "knockdown power" aside from raw recoil impulse. Any gun that has true knockdown power will also knock you over backwards when you shoot it. (Newton's laws about equal and opposite reaction, you know.)

Incapacitation from bullet wounds is a product of bullet placement, velocity, bullet size, wound track width (including temporary cavity, which damages nerves and structures the bullet never directly touches), and depth of penetration.

I've never heard of any study of any quality or attempt to be scientific that says the 7.62 x 39 round is a better manstopper than the .223 / 5.56 mm round, either with FMJ or, preferably, with expanding bullets (soft point, ballistic tip, etc.)

Actually, I've never heard of ANY study of the effectiveness of various rifle rounds and bullet styles, the way that Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow studied and wrote a book on the effectiveness of various handgun calibers back in the 1980s.

 

[GunnSmokeer]

I owned a few AR's years ago, but slowly got away from them and got into AK's and sks's, ...AR's still have one drawback I don't care for, and that's the direct impingement gas system...

Since the topic of this thread is about ARs (the ubiquitous "assault rifle" of today) versus the Ruger Mini 14 (the more popular "assault rifle" of the 1970s and 1980s), rather than any consideration for commie guns like the AKs or other designs, it's interesting that you bring up the gas system of the AR.

The Mini-14 has no piston, but instead the gas is directed against (and into) a block on the end of the operating rod, which runs all the way from the barrel band back to the locking lug on the bolt.

It's a very reliable system, and is not prone to clogging or corrosion from normal use or failing to clean it for a few days after use (or even getting it wet in the rain or fresh water).

 

[transfixer]

I knew I shouldn't have said " knockdown power" when I typed it, I thoroughly understand the science behind it, and having said that, a rifle that fires the 7.62x39 round will have more felt recoil to your shoulder than a rifle firing the 5.56 round, my statement of stopping power comes from reading various articles of our soldiers complaining that it takes multiple hits from a 5.56 to stop and enemy combatant. As a result many soldiers in Vietnam chose to carry confiscated AK's, and soldiers in Afghanistan still complain about the lack of " stopping power" of their M4's, the Defense dept is currently in the process of studying/choosing a new caliber/rifle for troops to be provided with.

I don't know of any scientific study myself, but I'm sure they have been done, otherwise the military wouldn't be considering another round, in fact the reason the .300blkout exists is because of the need to find a round with more stopping power than the 5.56, and its also the reason we have the .458socom round, a couple of spec ops soldiers wanted to come up with something with more " stopping power" than the 5.56.

The information is out there, and most of it is from "real world" experiences from guys whose life depended on the weapon they were carrying in combat.

 

[rayjay]

Go shoot metallic silhouettes and you will start to believe in knockdown power . Of course, the human body is much more permeable than a steel plate.

 

[rayjay]

The Mini-14 has no piston, but instead the gas is directed against (and into) a block on the end of the operating rod, which runs all the way from the barrel band back to the locking lug on the bolt.
).

I don't think there has been a gas operated gun that doesn't have a piston and cylinder. The Mini 14 has a fixed piston with a moving cyl. In the AR15 both the piston and the cylinder move. Initially only the cyl is moving.

A completely unintended consequence of the AR15 design is the total lack of bending force applied to any part of the action by the gas system. This is why they are inherently accurate. The piston and cyl are directing inline with the bore. There is no way the military target rifle teams give up their well developed National Match M-14s without getting a rifle that shoots better scores which the M-16s did. With a LOT less work. The National Match M-14s took a lot of work to build and then a lot of effort to keep them shooting up to snuff.

 

[transfixer]

Go shoot metallic silhouettes and you will start to believe in knockdown power . Of course, the human body is much more permeable than a steel plate.

True ! There is also a reason .45's are the usual choice for bowling pin shoots, instead of 9mm. The 45's "knock the pins down" a lot easier than the 9mm's !

 

[NCHillbilly]

I owned a few AR's years ago, but slowly got away from them and got into AK's and sks's, I've never been a fan of the 5.56 round, its fast, and it can be very accurate, but not much knockdown power, and most AR's won't shoot the cheap steel cased ammo which is good for just plinking and having fun.

The AK's 7.62x39 round has much more knockdown, ammo is super cheap, and those things will digest any ammo, Russian, Chinese, Yugo, doesn't seem to matter. sks's will as well,

Fast forward to last year, I got interested in the .300blk out cartridge, and had a local FFL put me an AR together using some better than average components, I'm impressed ! Super Accurate, energy is very close to the 7.62x39, ammo isn't what I would call cheap, but I can load my own , and 5.56 cases are plentiful to cut and resize, choice of bullet weight is very varied, I can shoot anything from 110gr to 220gr.

Over the course of the last year I've learned who makes good parts, who makes better parts, and so on, so I'm now putting a couple together myself, just because , and in case anything ever happens where they become scarce. I'm seriously considering building one in .458socom, now that has some knockdown ! AR's still have one drawback I don't care for, and that's the direct impingement gas system, it requires a fair amount of lube, clean burning ammo, and good maintenance, I'd prefer a piston driven AR, but those are pricier , and not as common.

I built me an AR in 7.62x39 a few years ago that has quickly became my favorite woods hunting rifle. Best of both worlds.

A friend of mine has one chambered in in .50 Beowulf, it will knock many sizeable things down, and will fold up cheap metal gong target like taco shells.

 

[transfixer]

I built me an AR in 7.62x39 a few years ago that has quickly became my favorite woods hunting rifle. Best of both worlds.

A friend of mine has one chambered in in .50 Beowulf, it will knock many sizeable things down, and will fold up cheap metal gong target like taco shells.

I'm debating on what to build next, I'm thinking I want one in .458 socom, but the .50 Beowulf would be about the same, I'm just thinking either one of those probably needs a billet upper and lower, as opposed to a normal forged set. I've heard the .458 is hard on receivers, the .50 probably is as well.

 

[Robert28]

I'm debating on what to build next, I'm thinking I want one in .458 socom, but the .50 Beowulf would be about the same, I'm just thinking either one of those probably needs a billet upper and lower, as opposed to a normal forged set. I've heard the .458 is hard on receivers, the .50 probably is as well.

I’m hoping to find an upper in 450 Bushmaster to give it a try one of these days. Ruger has that caliber in their Ranch series rifles and it seems like it would be a lot of fun!

 

[rosewood]

Even though I have a few ARs, I haven't gotten rid of my SKS yet. You can dump it in a mudhole, throw it out the back of a truck, and it'll still go bangbangbang.

The SKS was my first "assault rifle" because I could afford it then. I haven't shot it in years, but do not plan on ever letting it go. It shoots the commie rounds if I ever need to.

 

[rosewood]

...otherwise the military wouldn't be considering another round, in fact the reason the .300blkout exists is because of the need to find a round with more stopping power than the 5.56, and its also the reason we have the .458socom round, a couple of spec ops soldiers wanted to come up with something with more " stopping power" than the 5.56.

I thought this was how the 6.8 SPC was developed. I thought the .300 BO was developed for supressor use, not specifically for military.

 

[rosewood]

I don't think there has been a gas operated gun that doesn't have a piston and cylinder. The Mini 14 has a fixed piston with a moving cyl. In the AR15 both the piston and the cylinder move. Initially only the cyl is moving.

A completely unintended consequence of the AR15 design is the total lack of bending force applied to any part of the action by the gas system. This is why they are inherently accurate. The piston and cyl are directing inline with the bore. There is no way the military target rifle teams give up their well developed National Match M-14s without getting a rifle that shoots better scores which the M-16s did. With a LOT less work. The National Match M-14s took a lot of work to build and then a lot of effort to keep them shooting up to snuff.

That is interesting information. I never considered that the bolt is the piston and that it is directly in line reducing torque on the action. I did realize that the stock being inline with the bore is why the recoil is straight back instead of up though.

Always learn something new on here.

Rosewood