Over Christmas vacation I was able to put my recently purchased Mini-14 Tactical through its paces, overall with very good results. Tested with iron sights, red-dot, and scoped (out to 300 yards); and using a wide variety of ammunition. Review to follow, this post is about the process used to select the Mini-14.
The criteria my brothers and I started with in selection a group standard carbine; reliability, accuracy, durability, high capacity magazines, can use a wide variety of ammunition, weight, able to reach out to 300 yards (scoped), and price. Not necessarily in that order, we were looking at the whole rifle capability. We have Mosin Nagants for longer-ranges (review to follow).
We did a lot of research before settling on the Mini-14. While I’ve owned AK-47s and have experience with the M-16 in the military, I had not fired a Mini-14. We all read a lot of online reviews and all the “AR vs. AK vs. Mini” forum threads we could find.
While there are high capacity magazines for the SKS (7.62x39mm, like the AK-47), they are awkward and the rifle itself is larger and heavier than the other carbines being considered. We still own a few SKSs and will keep them as backups. Also looked at the KelTec SU-16C, but eliminated it early on due to concerns about long-term use of the polymer parts that are probably more apt to be bumped around than a Glock.
Something you’ll come across fairly often in forums discussing AR vs. AK is that 5.56mm ammunition will be more accessible in a TEOTWAWKI situation. While we selected a rifle in 5.56mm, I think that notion is a myth; the military and maybe police would have some but it’s not like they’re going to sell it or share it. 5.56mm might be available for a little longer, but the vast majority of ammo would become scarce at any price.
Early on in we research we eliminated the AK-47 and AK-74. They’re fun to shoot and have an undeniable track record for rugged combat reliability and durability, but the AK-47 isn’t generally considered very accurate past 100-200 yards and is a hassle to scope. The AK-74 and its 5.45x39mm ammo aren’t very prevalent in the U.S. yet, so that was also ruled out.
A few years ago I never would have considered a Mini-14 due to its notorious accuracy problems and very expensive magazines. The problem with that view is that Ruger improved the Mini-14 several years ago, adding thicker barrels, tighter tolerances, and a few different versions. Magazine prices are now also sane, at about $30 for factory 30-round steel magazines.
There are a lot of Mini-haters out there, which made forum threads painful at times. Those with no trigger time on the new Minis continued to berate their accuracy. That’s like comparing the reliability of the original M-16 to a modern M-4; apples and oranges. Nutnfancy has a thorough and bias-free review of the Mini-14 Tactical.
Having narrowed things down to an AR or a Mini-14, my brothers and I were leaning towards the AR, specifically the SIG516. Truth be told I’d like to be able to outfit all of us with these, but at about $1,350 before shipping, taxes, and FFL fees, it’s a bit too much. Additionally, there are also still valid concerns about feeding ARs cheap ammo since some ARs are finicky. Training with the steel-cased ammo is a lot cheaper, and what if the steel-cased was all that was available after TSHTF?
Sifting through the forums where people with actual trigger time on the newer Mini-14s showed the new and old to be like two different weapons as far as accuracy. Still with AK-like reliability and durability, but now with accuracy nearing the AR.
Some arguing against the Mini-14 and for the AR-15 claimed Mini-14 parts aren’t nearly as widely available as AR parts. Looking at Cheaper Than Dirt, Centerfire, CDNN, etc., that claim is absolutely true, lots more AR parts (and more accessories) out there. Why? Reading forums it seems Mini-14s almost never break (firing pin a noted issue in some Minis after high round counts).
This reminds me of another often quoted Mini-14 myth: it’s a good varmint rifle – coyotes and jackrabbits are in danger – but not a combat rifle. Right, because the 5.56mm round is lethal to varmints but won’t kill people when fired out of a Mini. These are the sorts of illogical arguments you need to sift through to find the information you’re looking for.
All our research led us to believe that the AR is more accurate than the newer Mini-14s, but we’re talking 1-1.5 MOA for most ARs vs. 2-3 MOA for non-target model Minis, at 100 yards, out of the box. And that the Mini-14 won’t normally do better than that. Accuracy was one of our critical criteria, but we felt 2-3 MOA was fine – we’re not snipers taking head shots.
We had two major concerns about the AR platform. First the repeated use of caveats when describing the reliability of the system, for example it’s reliable when properly lubricated or when properly cleaned. Some claimed to have fired a million rounds though their AR with no cleaning/lubrication (yes, I’m exaggerating), but those claims didn’t mesh well with the vast majority of credible information we read. Mini-14 users never used those caveats, just reported that it always goes bang.
Second was that ARs can be choosy about the type of ammo it cycles well, specifically some problems with cheap steel-cased ammo. This is a problem because it could potentially increase the cost of training with the AR, and in the perhaps unlikely but still possible event that it’s TEOTWAWKI and all you can get your hands on is some Wolf ammo.
However, unlike the Mini-14, ARs have much cheaper magazines (good ones for $10) and can be scoped with a variety of optics very easily. The Mini-14 has $30 magazines and using the provided scope rings (which are not quick detach, or QD) blocks iron sights. Overall, we considered these annoyances rather than deal breakers, and a B-Square mount for the Mini-14 worked out very well (w/o rings for ~$50, review to follow).
Considering our criteria and planned use as a TEOTWAWKI weapon, we settled on the Mini-14. If we never expected a SHTF situation, could afford to stock up on tens of thousands of brass-cased rounds, and price was not a concern, might’ve gone with an AR. The Mini-14 accuracy is now very good, reliability/durability excellent, can reach out to 300 yards easily, not picky about ammo, and the price is right – under $600 at CDNN.
In the end, it all comes down to your personal (or group) criteria and preferences. If you like or dislike the ergos, etc. on one or the other, go with what you like. IMO the AR, AK, and Mini can all good choices, depending on your specific needs.
The final factor for my choice which made the 5.56 round my main round was availability and cost of reloadable brass.
Like you I have an SKS, AK47, AR I got rid of my early model Mini-14 some years past. All good rifles but 7.62×39 brass in anything not military is very very expensive and hard to find.
I am working towards at least 5000 rounds of components for my main caliber and 7.62 just wasn’t gonna cut it.
I own both a mini-14 (w/a 16 inch barrel) and an AR. I bought the mini as my first rifle so it has a special place. Accuracy is decent for what the rifle is designed to do … an all purpose, rugged ranch rifle. It is less susceptible to dirt and stuff causing malfunctions in real life conditions than an AR.
However, the AR also serves a purpose and is a good weapon.
Either choice would be acceptible in my opinion.
I’m glad to see someone besides me likes the mini. I’ve had good success with my old-style (1st gen?) mini’s by mounting a scout rail over the barrel. It stiffens up the barrel to give satisfactory 2-3 MOA. I also find the scout scope to be very fast on target acquisition. I took my mini to Front Sight in 2005 for the Tactical Rifle course. I won the metal popper shoot-off against much more experienced shooters. Also of note, I never had a jam or misfire the entire 4-day course, and I was using aftermarket 10 round mags (I was a Cali resident at the time). There were 3 of us in the course with mini’s. The other two were a husband/wife team shooting wolf ammo. They never had any jams either. In contrast, there were two newbies next to me on the line with brand new AR-15s that had several jams throughout the day. I’m not sure what the issue was with the AR-15s, just one man’s observation. To be fair, the top shooter in the course had an AR-15, but it was a $2500 custom job, and he was a very experienced shooter with sub MOA accuracy. For me, the best part of the course was the last afternoon when we got to use the sniper range. I was making 200 yard shots on 55 gallon drums with ease (you can hear the ping when hit). I was using basic 55-grain PMP-brand ammo, nothing expensive. That course gave me all the confidence I needed in the mini.
Two other items worthy of note. I also like that the mini looks civilian (versus military like the AR-15). Yes, if you want to intimidate people, go with the AR-15 or AK. But I try to keep a lower profile. I think that might be an advantage in some situations. I’m sure the young bucks out there will love to flame this comment, but when you are old and gray like me, your perspective softens with time.
I’ll admit I’m a fan of the Garand and M1A. So I will admit I’m biased towards the mini for this reason. YMMV.
To be fair, the one problem I had with the mini was mag changes under time pressure. I tended to miss getting the front lug engaged in the mag well cause I was going to fast. I will agree the AR is easier/simpler to shove a mag in fast. But I consider this a training issue, which I have worked on to my satifisfaction.
I could write more, but probably have written too much already.
SG
pioneer preppy,
Reloading is something I like to get started on – along with several dozen other projects. We don’t have anywhere near 5k per person yet, but are working on it. Considering 5.56mm, 7.62x54R, 7.62×39, .22, etc., we’ve run into a good long-term storage problem… but are working it.
Publius,
IMO the AR is a great weapon with the above mentioned caveats. Pretty much perfect is you want to accessorize/customize. And since so many have hands on experience in the military, no surprise a lot of those will be more comfortable with the AR. The real deal-breaker for us was concern about the use of steel-cased ammo. Maybe after we’re all outfitted and find a piston-AR that eats all types of ammo, we’ll go AR.
Going from the designs it was based on (M1 and M14), I see no reason why the Mini-14 (esp. the newer ones w/thicker barrels) should not be considered for a combat role, especially in a SHTF situation.
SG in Virginia,
Sounds like you have a good older one, but you should still try a newer one to see how you like it. I also really like the looks of the Mini especially with a wood stock, but also the AR (flat topped). I’m not too concerned about instant mag changes, IMO any fighting with it will mean a total breakdown in local/national society/law enforcement and every single round will count – shots would be 1-2 and move (shoot and scoot).
In own neither gun.
However, it seems to me the Mini-14 has an advantage of giving a less threatening appearance yet still packing a good punch if needed. That less threatening appearance can help keep a situation from going bad. I tend to believe in avoiding a conflict as much as possible.
OTOH while the AR-15 does make a strong statement perhaps there could be a time when such a statement is needed.
Food for thought.
I have a Mini-14 one of the new ones and my son-in-law has a AR and they both shot about the same. Just I could drag my mini-14 to the range and I’m sure it would still shoot and I can run any .223 ammo and he can only run brass in his. I love my mini-14 and plan to get a 2nd one.
MasterPo,
With the wood stock, yes, the Mini looks more traditional. My Tactical model comes with a black synthetic stock (which I plan to DuraCoat OD green), and I’ve added picatinny rail to the bottom for a foregrip and bipod. BTW, what firearms do you own or plan on getting?
CAsurvivalist,
Running any type of ammo was and is a major concern on mine and my prepping brothers. On that topic, I recommend this post at Survival Cache that discusses pros/cons of different types of ammo, including;
http://survivalcache.com/survival-carbine-survival-rifle-7/
My thoughts are already on the record. However when we talk modern weapons of similar types it is probably a lot less substantive than anyone will really admit.
There are few if any situations where the difference between an AK/AR/Mini 14 will be a significant factor. It is about the shooter and then maybe the broad type of gun.
I recently stumbled upon your blog and found the Mini 14 article was very well written.
I was on the PD & FD for 33 years but have no military background. I confess I don’t have much knowledge regarding assault weapons.
Thank you for the great information.
Ryan,
I agree, at least out to 100 yards, depends on the user and not so much the weapons in this class. Also agree to what you said about long shots in your follow-up post;
http://tslrf.blogspot.com/2011/01/more-ak-discussion-accuracy-revisited.html
If it wasn’t for wanting the option of a little more reach out in a potential WROL situation, we’d have gone with AKs and been done with it.
Rich,
Thank you, much appreciated.
Ruger did well in shortening the barrel and the new front sights are great.
Your point about the cost of magazines is right on. And the quality of Ruger factory mags is excellent, as is all their machining work.
I also like the built-in scope mounts.
But whatever rifle you pick…AR15, Mini14, 30-30, Mosin Nagant…the most important element is practice, practice, practice.
I like the new masthead.
I like the new masthead. too.
Looks like my old neighborhood in Houston!
Michael & Steve,
Thanks, have had the pic for a few months, finally got around to using it.
Last summer I built a carbine and rifle style ARs and have stocking up(6 years now) on 5.56 rounds. The bulk of which are SS109 steel core. Like other posters here my M1A eats 7.62 and I have in conjunction with a friend put together 175gr SMK BTHP rounds to “reach out and touch someone with.”
In addition, I purchased a Kel-Tec SU-16C in 5.56/223. Very light-weight with a folding butt-stock that will actually fit over a 30 round magazine. It turns out it is a great CQB weapon!
I’ve had my eye on the SU-16C, may give it a try.
FYI – The Mini-14 was the issue weapon for the Argentine military during the Falklands war.
I own 2 mini-14′s. I like them, and even competed with them in a high-power sporting match (didn’t win, but was in the top half) and my only gripe about the platform is that it doesn’t use a STANAG magazine, and you can’t find stainless or aluminum magazines. They rusted on me due to my inattention over several years.
Given that genuine Ruger mags were mostly unavailable for so long, I had some aftermarket ones that worked ok (never really got that much of a workout), but all those surplus AR mags that were so cheap that I couldn’t use because they Just-Don’t-Fit drove me crazy.
I have looked at the Mini 14 several times. Like your post says, everyone seems to have an opinion about it, yet it seems to continue to call my name. Currently, I have a couple of SKSs and a quite a cache of 7.62×39 ammo, and have been hesitant to rid myself of them. However, I see the tactical advantage of a rifle like the Mini 14, and happen to like the fact that it does not look like an AR. I keep one of my SKS’s completely stock because I still like the feel of a traditional rifle in my hands…
I see many good points to the .223 consideration, but think about this.
Backwater countries use AK’s like it’s their business. Surplus ammo abounds and is dirt cheap. Have it shipped from out of country. 7.62×54 even is plentiful, as Russians use it in Dragunovs and PSL’s, (for my Mosin, which is my “reach out and touch someone” option.) It’s sad to say, but you will most likely be fighting off renegade looters/general assholes who want to kill and steal/deserters/what have you. Most likely, they will have 7.62 in some fashion.
You can take an AK or SKS (or similar in that family) through dirt, dust, water, and generally all hell and it will be just fine. Parts are also plentiful. They are very simple.
5000 rounds seems impractical to me. Soldiers aren’t even given that much. It’s heavy and can’t be carried practically if your hideout is ambushed and looted. It will probably just be stolen. Of course, if none of those happen, you will be citadel. Give or take.
AK parts are everywhere, including the ones people will surely be carrying. If something on your gun goes FUBAR, you will be wishing the internet and the companies that sell parts were still functional and available.
Tyler,
Considered the AK and like them, but passed it over due to generally poor accuracy past 100 yards. The SKS is more accurate, but larger/heavier and I don’t care for SKS hi-cap mag options. The Mini-14 is similarly rugged and with the newer models has accuracy nearing the AR – best of both. Having said that, I’ve had AKs in the past and still have a dozen or so mags, as well as a supply of ammo for our SKSs (we’re keeping them, they’re just not in a primary SHTF role for us).
A common combat load is 6x 30 round magazines, or 180 rounds. A figure of several thousand rounds would not be to carry, but for a TEOTWAWKI situation in which resupply might not be possible for several years. That stockpile would need to provide defense plus some practice shooting, etc.
I’m shooting AK47 with Ulyanovsk FMJ 122 grain and TulAmmo HP in 122 grain both from the same manufacturing facility. I was considering purchasing some surplus Yugoslavian 7.62×39. It is brass case as opposed to steel. Has anyone shot this ammo? I have read the AK47 was designed with steel cased ammo in mind. I’m curious if the brass casings might be a problem in a AK like jams etc with a softer case. May not be an issue at all.
I’m a CA resident and am in the market for a Carbine, so my options are a SU-16CA, Yugo SKS, Mini 14, or SAIGA. I’m equipped with a Remington 870 and a longer Mosin that I’m debating over whether to mod into a viable designated marksman rifle or just leave as a back up. I’m looking for long term TEOTWAKI reliability over tactical capability; I need something that will ride out the long haul. I’m not a fan of proprietary magazines so the Saiga is out. I think the kel tec wouldn’t last through a mad max scenario, though probably better than an AR. For me, I was trained on .223 and prefer it, but since I can only work with 10 round magazines perhaps higher stopping power is in order; besides, my plan is to stockpile cheap 7.62×39, not run to the local gun shop and raid the .223 ammo (stupid on at least four counts). I guess my question is this: Do you think that the sks is a long term reliable, short term idiot proof, viable carbine option? Besides, I can buy two for the cost of a mini.
John,
I agree that “long term” the Kel-Tec isn’t the best choice. I like mine and think they’re a quality rifle, but the stocks just aren’t meant for the long haul (unless maybe you get the collapsible stock adapter, but for that price may as well go AR). I also agree the Saiga mags are too much trouble.
On SKS vs. Mini-14 (I’ll be referring to the newer models only), it depends. Here are some pros/cons for each. I’ll probably miss a few, so others feel free to point them out;
SKS pros:
- Long term reliability/durability
- Cheaper
- More powerful round
- Fixed 10 round magazine
- Can easily accept quality 30 round Tapco magazines
- Lost of spare parts/mods available
- Shoots anything fed
SKS cons
- Heavier (about 8.5 lbs)
- Poor scope mounting options (I”m planning a post on this)
- Less accurate than the Mini-14 past 100-150 yards (can do some mods)
Mini-14 pros:
- Long term reliability/durability
- Good accuracy out to ~300 yards
- Better scope mounting options than the SKS (still not perfect)
- lighter (Tactical version is 6.75 lbs)
- Shoots anything fed
Mini-14 cons:
- More expensive
- Magazines expensive (but come in 5, 10, 20, and 30 rounds)
- Less spare parts available (can get firing pins at Midway)
7.62×39 and 5.56mm can be had for about the same, when buying the Russian or surplus stuff, so that cost isn’t an issue.
Comes down to your preferences and plans. If weight is an issue, go Mini-14, if not, either will do. If you plan to use 30 round mags after TSHTF, either will do, though the Mini-14 does that a bit better – but for more cost. The Mini is also more accurate, but you can bed the SKS and do a few other things to help there, so no big deal. Scoping he SKS is more difficult, but can also be done. I think either would be fine, just depends on your prefs.
I’m also planning a post on scoping the Mosin Nagant, probably within a couple weeks. My brothers and are are in the process of setting up several right now.
US military commissioned studies of combat facts when contemplating new combat rifle.
The evidence from WW2 on demonstrated that the vast majority of shots were under 100 yards, even given the different terrain
( rural / urban / jungle / mountain ).
The document commented that you had as much likelihood of being shot beyond 200 yards as you would of being hit with an artillery round fragment.
The point is that, as a combat vet that actually participated in MOUT
( military operations in urban terrain ) and in clearing residential and commercial areas and buildings, shotguns ( preferably auto-shot ) and carbines ( M4 ) seem to be the weapons that are most effective…
The Ruger tactical mini-14 has it’s detractors ( mostly because of the comfort level those folks have with AR style platforms ) but within 200 yards, I can honestly say that I would be just as comfortable using one as the other.
SKS-56 and the variants of the platform are comparatively inexpensive against the AR and Rugers and while are effective, are not up to the level of the American manufactured weapons.
Many owners mistakenly use military grade 5.56mm ammunition in their civilian rifles that were intended for 223 caliber ammunition ( yes, there is a difference ). The military weapons are designed for the higher pressures experienced with the 5.56 mm ammo…and civilian variants should stick to 223 caliber ammo. Don’t take my word for it, do your own research.
That said, 1,000 rds of top quality 223 ammo can be had for about $275, if one is looking. It is widely used throught the US by law enforcement and military ( not to mention civillians ) and as such, ammunition and parts would be readily available.
I have been to the range with AR owners ( I have a Bushmaster and a Ruger Tactical ) and I have never had a problem demonstrating the ability of my Ruger to outperform their AR’s, time after time.
The weapon is no better than the shooter, who uses it.
I am in a state where I can have higher capacity mags and I do.
Regardless, always treat your weapons as if loaded and ALWAYS secure them from children and liberal democrats……LOL
It looks like my set up will include an SKS because my possible engagement ranges in my bug in are “suburban” probably averaging out at 50ft. I’ll have the Mosin if I need extra reach. I’m aware that most .223 rounds aren’t as powerful as M855 (not to mention the core) so I want the close range knock down power over accuracy primarily because I’m legally limited to 10rnd magazines. Besides, my main defense partner is going to grab an SKS so commonality of parts comes to mind. I would like to be able to choose between shotgun, carbine, and marksman rifle and throw the left overs and several as is mosins to the unprepared in my defense plan. Thank you for your responses and thank you for your service; veterans insights are always appreciated.
John,
The SKS is a good choice (can’t go wrong with either, really). It’ll give you more reach than an AK.
If you want to use a red dot system or scope, I strongly suggest staying away from the receiver cover mounts, they just don’t work and you have to re-zero after cleaning. I recommend either;
Choate SKS mount
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=435151
ScoutScope SKS mount
http://scoutscopes.com/sks-scope-mounts/
The Choate requires drilling/tapping, but is see-through, while the ScoutScope isn’t see-through and requires a LER scope, but no drll-tap installation.
I’ve used both and they are very solid.
I’ve just recently bought the new mini 14 tactical and equipped it with a 4×16-40mm scope, after sighting in the new scope i took it of to clean the gun and put it back on a few weeks later when I went back to the range. I was surprised to find that I was about as accurate as I was before without adjusting the scope. The mini 14′s scope mounts are extrememly accurate and work well with the removal of the scope. They do a great job of centering the scope right back where it was.
Well I purchsed a Mini-14 Tacical with the ATI Stock back in April, 2011 and I have been to at least 2 Tactical Carbine Classes plus shot over 1,00 rounds through this Rifle and Iwould personal Say you can shot 2′ MOA Ihace a Aimpoint Comp M2 Red Dot Scope mounted with a cheaper 3x magnifier and It shoots great i am building my first AR-15 from BCM but I will never get rid of my Ruger Mini-14 its my Battle Rifle and not to mention Ishot all types of stell cased and brass ammo it eat all of it up.
I live in California and have been shopping around for a good TEOTWAKI(or SHTF) rifle. The AR platform is out because in CA. they need a tool to release the mags. So I’ve been looking at Mini 14′s and M1A’s. I want something with barrier penetration so I was leaning towards the 7.62 NATO. But the M1A’s are pricey and after CA. sales tax I’m looking at close to two grand(if not more). And then I have to buy ammo to boot. I like the mini 14 but I’m worried that the 5.56 won’t be effective against an assailant taking shots at me from cover,(behind a car for example). I’ve been reading reviews about the 6.8 spc round and people seem to like it. The Mini 14 is available in this round. I know the ammo is less common and more expensive than 5.56. But if I can buy a rifle that’s half the price of an M1A I figure I can spend more to stock up on some ammo. Maybe you or some of your readers have some thoughts about this.
The mini 14 is an excellent choice for this situation. People who discuss accuracy over reliability never had to shoot at someone shooting at them. Factually, in that situation most people who spray 10 rounds and miss on all of them. the difference in the 14′s ability to quickly acquire a target can make all the difference. and the .75 moa difference doesn’t matter when you actually HIT the target shooting at you instead of a miss and they hit YOU.
Yup” take you Mini or your AR 15 , or what ever you have in your hands , and Pop ~Pop …. shoot and Scoot like the ole boy said above …. Getchor self to a diff. aproch and care on…. Pop~ Pop … Shoot and Scoot again….. and Again if nessary , Tell you getcha , a good shot pattern on your target . The Element of surprize , work`s ever time …. In the right hands ….. even a .22 Cal. Rimfire rifle , dubbel tap head shot , will take out a threat .A still target is a lot easyer to hit than a Fast moving target …… Shoot and Scoot ! ….. Some one above also mentioned 12 Gauge Auto Shot Gun with 10 rounds of , 00 Buck shot….. About The Most Deadyest Thing There Is In a Man`s Hand , I don`t care if your behind a car or Whatever ” , In a fire fight with that” comming at you …. Your Going Down ! If your Not” too good of shot , with a rifle…… Arm yourself with a good 18 inch barreled 12 Gauge Tactical Automatic Shot Gun , with 3 inch. 00~Buck , and you`ll more than likely come out the winner , when an adversary is trying to over take you . Myself , in a Close~Up” , fire fight” , I like my Mini 14 with 6 / 30 round Tapco Generation 2 ~ Clips….. 180 rounds of Pure Smokin Hell ” Raining Down On Ya , outa that M~1 provein action .