# Ruger mini 14



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

i would like a nice rifle that i could hun squirrel to white tail with, and also could shoot far and accurately i would like these features (order of importance) Approximate!

-Under $700
-High accuracy Maybe somewhat like a sniper rifle
-High velocity
-reliable :sniper:


----------



## cya_coyote (Aug 31, 2005)

i have been looking into a mini 14 also, but the finances are not there for me... i have a rem 700 in 223 right now... 1/2" groups at 100yrds if i do my job... gets the job done, just not many follow-up on the multiple incoming yotes... depressing.

:sniper:


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

The mini 14 will get you all of them but the accurate part. I liked mine but it shot ok not great but ok. God mags are hard to get and very expensive. If you are looking for a semi 223 I would say get a AR-15. Go to a local dealer and order a lower receiver then get a parts kit from

http://www.model1sales.com/
http://www.rockriverarms.com/
http://www.mapartsinc.com/
many others also sell parts kits. You can get a flat top and you should not have any problems. Most kits have fully assembled upper receiver assemblies. The lower goes together so easy it is not funny. You can go to ar15.com and look at the "do it your self" section they have instructions that walk you threw it step by step.

If you want to get a gun and scope for 700 or less I would say get a savage with the new acu-trigger. I have not seen a bolt savage that did not shoot great.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

seriously.

Ar-15's are a whoping $100 more, and regardless of yor opinion of there mechanics Vs. the Mini-14, they are just plain more practical.: better, cheaper mags, 5.56 chamber (vs. 223), cheaper better more available spare parts.

Also, while the mini-14 can be TUNED to be very accurate, the AR-15 will be much better out of the box.


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

Mr. Trooper:

5.56 and .223 is the same caliber, HELLO!

I disagree, I feel that for the money the Mini-14 in a ranch model is a much better rifle than an out of the box AR.

Granted with mods. the AR is a tackdriver, but put the same mods. on a Ruger and it will out shoot the AR.

Buy a Ruber Mini-14 "ranch rifle" invest in a good scope, use factory mags, and quality ammo or match grade reloads and you won't be disappointed. If you shoot iron sights and wolf ammo you are asking for it!

:sniper:


----------



## Spyider (Nov 11, 2005)

I too am intrested in one of these. Once I get my scope for my remington, im buying one. I might go with the mini 30 though, its a 7.62x39mm so it has much more power then a .223. The 7.62x39mm cartridge is much more ideal for deer then a .223. But for squirrels, I dont know if you want to eat them or not so .223 would be better if you were to eat them.

Personally, I dont like AR-15s. I would hate to be seen deer hunting with one of these. Some people might get the wrong idea and get scared off. the mini series is less of a threat. ar-15 = scaled down or legal version of the m16, mini 14 = scaled down version of the m14. Would rather want a rifle copied from a powerful rifle then a weak sissy rifle :lol:

Oh yeah, I was jking about the m16 sissy part. (m14 is way more powerful anyways)


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

The M16 and M4 are junk, and the .223 is a sissy round.

I'm not joking about the sissy part.


----------



## Spyider (Nov 11, 2005)

Well I use that round in other rifles so I didnt want to bash my self for using it.


----------



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

.223 can take down evrything if not more than a .45 if you tae the time to place your shots.


----------



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

I think i will go with the mini 14 rather than mini 30 because the .308 will probably eat the squirrel before i get to it.

I am also wondering about savage arms. I hear they are pretty accurate.

any thing i could turn into a poor mans sniper rifle?
remember i have a buget.

thanks again for all the help guys. :lol:


----------



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

oh ya what are you guys thinkin? i cant afford no ar-15!

i also dont want a gun that can jam easily.

i would only use a colt for this reason.


----------



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

This is depressing. 

So what you guys are saying is a mini 14 isn't good for accuracy and long range.

if so can any one point me to a rifle that is good for that.

Long range accuracy
high velocity
.223-.270 caliber (i would consider a .308)
$700 max! All decked Out
Preferably semi -auto

Poor Man Sniper Rifle
:sniper:


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Remington 7400 there is no such thing as a sissy round except in the minds of those that think they are some kind of a macho Rambo guy, and the truth is there are no such men either except in their own minds. Second, the .223 and 5.56 may be the same caliber but they are not the same round....HELLO......they have two minor but very important differences which can get a shooter hurt. It is safe to shoot 5.56 in the colt and Bushmaster but no so for the Mini14. It is safe to shoot a .223 in a rifle chambered for the 5.56 but no the other way around. A little educating of yourself in these areas would serve you well.


----------



## Spyider (Nov 11, 2005)

Gohon said:


> Remington 7400 there is no such thing as a sissy round except in the minds of those that think they are some kind of a macho Rambo guy, and the truth is there are no such men either except in their own minds. Second, the .223 and 5.56 may be the same caliber but they are not the same round....HELLO......they have two minor but very important differences which can get a shooter hurt. It is safe to shoot 5.56 in the colt and Bushmaster but no so for the Mini14. It is safe to shoot a .223 in a rifle chambered for the 5.56 but no the other way around. A little educating of yourself in these areas would serve you well.


Actually your wrong... In the ruger mini 14 manual it says it can shoot both rounds.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

Remington 7400 said:


> Mr. Trooper:
> 
> 5.56 and .223 is the same caliber, HELLO!
> 
> ...


Good Lord in heaven your ignorant.

First off, the 223 and 5.56 may be the same caliber, but they are NOT interchangable. the 5.56 has a slightly diferent shoulder, and is loaded much hotter. SAAMI maximum pressures for 5.56 NATO are significantly above those of the 223 Remington. You can shoot 223 in a 5.56, but you CAN NOT shoot 5.56 in a .223. It would be like shooting 357 magnum in a 38 special.

Secondly, MSRP for Mini-14's is $750. You can buy a Bushmaster 16" carbine NEW for $760. REAL BIG price difference there.

Third problem with your post is that Armalite, Bushmaster, and Colt ar-15s comonly shoot sub MOA out of the box. Your mini-14 will shoot MOA if your LUCKY. Youl be dumping $1,000 or more to make your Mini-14 out-shoot a factory AR-15.

Its not like this is anything new. Its been this way for years and people like you keep poping up and jibbering about things with wich you have no experience. I dont need some up-start Militant Tiger Wana-bee telling me what i do and dont know.

And As to the 223 being a "sissy" caliber...well, Your right. 223 is a sissy caliber. thats why no military uses it. the 5.56 NATO on the other hand is anything but. Just look at the kind of cavity a hollow point makes in a material HEAVYER and DENSER than human flesh. This is AFTER penetrating Level IIIA body armor!









Also, If the Mini-14 is Gods gift to military rifles, then why was it REJECTED by every military Ruger sent them to? Because it can't take the heat, THATS why.

Its Less accurate and the Irons SUCK. There are no such thing as good Hi-caps because no serious agencies adopted it, thus Ruger sees no need for factory, IE: quality, hi-caps. There are no such thing as aftermarket parts. If it breaks you have to send it to Ruger to get it fixed :roll:

Again, there is a REASON All those Militaries and all Law enforcemt aganecies that can afford the extra $10 choose the AR-15 over the Mini-14.

But i supose its all some VAST conspiracy to down play the MAGNIFICENCE of the Mini! :roll:


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Didn't say you could not shoot them, said it was not safe. Do so at your own risk. The differences are:

1) The 5.56 round has a length .002 longer than the .223 round.
2) The 5.56 round has a slightly steeper shoulder angle.

Maybe Ruger is now chambering their 14's for the 5.6, I don't know but if not then the combination of a slightly longer casing and steeper angle on the shoulder of the 5.56 round, can cause the bolt to not completely close and lock. The bottom line and my main point is there is a difference.


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

The 5.56x45 NATO and .223 Remington are interchangable rounds in both the AR rifles and the Ruger Mini-14.

Meaning you can shoot both rounds from either rifle interchangably.

As for Mini-14 accuracy, I have a Ranch Model that will shoot 1/2 inch MOA at 100 yards all day long. I have a buddy with a standard Mini-14 with a B-square scope base and it will shoot 3/4 inch MOA at 100 yards all day long.

Maybe we were lucky and have gotten ahold of rare rifles, but ours will shoot.

If the M-16 is so great why does everyone in uniform hate it? They are very prone to jamming and the examples I were around were innaccurate.

*Gohon Wrote:*



> Remington 7400 there is no such thing as a sissy round except in the minds of those that think they are some kind of a macho Rambo guy, and the truth is there are no such men either except in their own minds. Second, the .223 and 5.56 may be the same caliber but they are not the same round....HELLO......they have two minor but very important differences which can get a shooter hurt. It is safe to shoot 5.56 in the colt and Bushmaster but no so for the Mini14. It is safe to shoot a .223 in a rifle chambered for the 5.56 but no the other way around. A little educating of yourself in these areas would serve you well.


As for a sissy round and Rambo.

I do not view myself as Rambo, I do however know for a fact that when comparing the .223 and 5.56 to other calibers currently in service around the world it is weak at best. Both the .308 and 7.62x39 soviet rounds are better man stoppers.

If may cost over $1000.00 to completely accurize a Mini-14, but a Panther Arms "sniper grade" AR will cost alot more than that.

My opinion anyway.

:sniper:


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

Not every one that is in the armed forces hates the m16. I can tell you the only time mine jammed was when we were in powdered dirt about 8 inches deep doing a low crawl. As soon as I was able to manually fire three weak blanks it was shooting again. With real m855 it would have probably took 1 or 2 before it was rocking again. I have fired my fair share of AK's full and semi they would have jammed also granted probably would have only taken one rd to fully clear. Now show me a AK that I can hit a person sized target 80% of the time. I NEVER treat my M1 Garand this way. I am sure it would have jammed also. As time goes by the M1 and M14 will be better and better rifles as the people that shoot them are slowly dieing off. (thank you to all of them that defended my freedom before I was able to). During the D-day landings there were reports of the M1 Garand jamming also.
I think you are lucky about the accuracy of your mini14's. Most of the time they are not that great. I have owned two of them the first was the standard one and its chamber was so tight I could not get fully recised brass with a small base die to fit back in the gun. It only shot on average 1.5 to 2 inches. The other mini 14 I had would take any thing with the cheep peep sights I was only able to get about 2 inches. Granted that was off a bench with out aid of a sling. The sights on them are not really set up for accurate aimed shooting on paper. The sight bases were so far off you could see the scope point to the right of the gun. Sure you can dump a bunch of cash in to it then have something that shoots great, but why? Sure there is a stigma associated with the AR-15, but they shoot plain and simple. Mini14 mags are very expensive and Ruger only makes 20rd mags last time I checked. Granted when hunting you do not need 30 even I use twenties with 15rds loaded when shooting Parie Dogs with my flat top. 
With the 15 there are so many different companies that make parts for it you have a hard time choosing what to get.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

The Mini-14 is LISTED as being chambered for the .223 Remington. Do what you will with that information.

I second the above: people in uniforme dont HATE the M-16A3. maybee the original M-16 back in Vietnam, but not so today.

The Mini-14 is fine for a civilian knock-around gun. Its just not up to my, or many other peoples standards. If its OK with you, then fine.


----------



## Spyider (Nov 11, 2005)

mr.trooper said:


> Remington 7400 said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Trooper:
> ...


But still, why the heck would you want to go deer hunting with an ar-15? He made it clear that he wants to hunt deer. You would be stupid to go out hunting with an ar-15. Also, kind of what i said earlyer... m14 is more older and powerful then a m16. Would rather have something that was scaled down from something much older then a m16. Now, the m16 still may be used today, but so is the m14. I wonder which one is more accurate when turned into a sniper rifle...


----------



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

Have you ever heard of the M-14 DMR sniper rifle? The rifle most marine snipers use!
Why? Because it is better than anything that costs twice as much as it.
Also the military didnt even use M-16s after the 70s. Now they use M4s and a few Ar-15s for training.

I really need help deciding on a gun to buy. No M-16 style Way to expensive.
Also the msrp of the mini is $750 but people dont buy it for that. Usually around $599. I need a cheap accurate long range rifle. Preferably .223 but will accept others no more than $700 all finished lookin like a sniper rifle. :sniper:

People have told me that out of the box savage arms are accurate can anyone tell me about them?


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

"At the October 2001 IALEFI Conference in Reno, Nevada, Giles Stock, retired from Phoenix Police Department after 20 years service, discussed the differences between the .223 Remington/SAAMI and 5.56mm/NATO rifle chambers. The long-time range master for handgun, rifle, carbine and shotgun at Gunsite and developer of the acclaimed Giles Tactical Sling suggested that, as a general rule, recreational rifles have the former, and military rifles the latter... *but there is some overlap, most notably in the popular Sturm Ruger Mini-14 which has been offered in both specifications!*

NATO chambers have a long leade1. SAAMI chambers are tighter and have a short leade. SAAMI chambers are designed for increased accuracy, but will yield dangerously high pressures in guns using military ammunition and/or which are subject to high volume shooting. Under such high pressures, a primer may back out completely, drop into the action and cause the firearm to stop working."

It has been suggested that an autoloading rifle utilizing a SAAMI-spec chamber may increase risk of overpressure due to the tighter, shorter leade which retards the projectile somewhat as it is attempting to exit the case. Leave the SAMMI chambers to the a bolt action and single-shot rifles.

http://www.thegunzone.com/556v223.html

You can read the entire article at the site listed.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

MarineCorps said:


> Have you ever heard of the M-14 DMR sniper rifle? The rifle most marine snipers use!
> Why? Because it is better than anything that costs twice as much as it.
> Also the military didnt even use M-16s after the 70s. Now they use M4s and a few Ar-15s for training.
> 
> ...


To be specific, Snipers dont use Designated Marksman rifles...Designated Marksman do.

Also, M4s are not used by EVERY ONE. They also use M-16A3's, and are starting to phase in the A4.

Some marines are still issued 1911's, and one tank unit actulay uses Ruger KP945's. While there may be a "standard" weapon, there are others in service.

If you want an accurate "sniper" rifle in 223, go for a Tikka T3 in 223. It has a 1-8" twist barrel, so you can stabalize the heavy bullets needed for longer ranges. (75gr A-max, and 80 Grain SMK's). Its light, accurate, and has an adjustable trigger.

Top it with a decent scope, and it will shoot as well as you can.


----------



## MOGLEY (Dec 20, 2005)

Marine Corps,

Looks like you started something here huh? I have done a lot of reading on the net in forums like this on different calibers I think I would like to have. I just recently bought the savage 17HMR for shooting crows and chucks etc. In my search SAVAGE got mostly great remarks for accuracy out of the box and is definetly the low end of the price range. I personally think they come up a little short for looks but I would rather have a great shooting gun than a mercedes with no engine!
One rifle I think is in your price range that has a very long history of superb workmanship and looks and accuracy is the CZ. Comes with a single set trigger (adjustable). I have the CZ527 in 222 and it is a fantastic gun. I spent 450 on it 5 years ago. I have a harris Bi-pod and it is the cats meow
Savage or CZ. Bolt action for hte best accuracy. Least problems.


----------



## t_lowe_3081 (Oct 10, 2005)

i can speak for the tikka t3, and the mini 14, the t3 is a great gun, i have gotten mine down to 1/2 MOA they are garanteed 1 MOA out of the box! the mini 14 is fun, but its really just a knock about rifle...i have found that they are indeed not very accurate at all!


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

this is true.

Also, i think some people are confusing the Mini-14 with the M-14. The mini-14 has many features barrowedf romt he M-14, but it is NOT EVEN CLOSE to being the same gun, and its nowhere-near Mil-spec. the M-14 is.

Also, YES, i WOULD hunt deer with an AR-15. They are PLENTY accurate to do the job, and just TRY and tell me that a deer is guna walk away from that kind of wound. A Bear-Claw or similar round will expand to a large diameter, and still retain enough weight to completely penetrate the deers body. hit any vital organ with a bullet of propper design and it will go down quickly.

And YES, you CAN buy 223 loaded with bullets designed SPECIFICALY for deer sized game. :wink:

First choise? No, but it is certainly not Inadequate when proper bullets are used.


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

If you handload or don't care to buy the high dollar factory stuff a .223 could be a deer slayer.

As for hunting with the AR, it could be done, I've actually seen it done, I think it raises alot of eyebrows from the antis and non-hunters, but there is nothing wrong with deer hunting with an AR.

The M14 was made by Springfield for the US Military and is chambered for the .308 cartridge.

The Mini-14 was made by Ruger, it is based on a modified M14 reciever, and is chambered for the .223 cartridge. they also make one chambered for 7.62x39 and call it a Mini-30.

The M14, Mini-14, and Mini-30 are NOT the same rifle.


----------



## Spyider (Nov 11, 2005)

Right, the mini 14 is a scaled down version of the m14, just like the m-16 and ar-15, there not the same rifles. There similair.

What I meant by deer hunting with an AR is by the looks. It can kill deer but why would you want to go out hunting and scare off people by the looks of your gun? Its happened and in Wisconsin that Chi Vang guy had an assualt rifle and killed 6 people and wounded 1 person I believe.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

I thought "Assault Rifles" were full auto or select fire? Sturmgewehr the original word for the stg45 something about "storm rifle" if I can remember correctly. Well I just looked it up and the anti gun people got to the dictionary people as now they include semi-automatic in the same classification as real military guns.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

Spyider said:


> Right, the mini 14 is a scaled down version of the m14, just like the m-16 and ar-15, there not the same rifles. There similair.
> 
> What I meant by deer hunting with an AR is by the looks. It can kill deer but why would you want to go out hunting and scare off people by the looks of your gun? Its happened and in Wisconsin that Chi Vang guy had an assualt rifle and killed 6 people and wounded 1 person I believe.


Worrying about what other people think and letting them decide what you take hunting is why we are losing gun rights, do not worry what they think of you. And 223 will drop a deer in its tracks every time, you just have to shoot them in the right spot. I cant help but laugh at these hunters with 300WSM rifles and spendy scopes walking around in a field shooting at deer 50 yards away. Just shoot them in the vitals,you dont need all that gun.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

I agree.

Also, Federal loads Bear claws, and Nosler partitions for the 223 Remington. Its not plinking ammo for sure, but its not exactly Gold Metal Match either. While it is significantly more expensive than FMJ plinking ammo, its not THAT bad.


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

marinecorps you got allot of info here, The ar-15 style rifles are in a class by themselfs "much better and worth it than mini - 14s". That being said yes they are expensive. If you do not want to fork out the cash the best option IMOP is savage based on what I hear about them. Personally I would recomend a Remington model 7 in .243 winchester or go with the AR-15 in 5.56/.223. Also look into cz-usa website they make tack driving bolt action rifles in .223 /and even 7.62X39. With all those good choices it comes down to going into a gun shop, look them all over and pick the one that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.


----------



## mr.trooper (Aug 3, 2004)

The CZs have been drawing my eye a lot lately also. the only thing is that i dont buy gins that have wooden stocks, and CZ makes very few synthetic ones. Anyone know if aftermerket stocks are avalable for them?


----------



## MarineCorps (Dec 25, 2005)

Thanks alot guys all this info is definetally gonna help me decide.
:beer:


----------



## Jiffy (Apr 22, 2005)

> i would like a nice rifle that i could hun squirrel to white tail with, and also could shoot far and accurately i would like these features (order of importance) Approximate!
> 
> -Under $700
> -High accuracy Maybe somewhat like a sniper rifle
> ...


Oh boy....I can't for the life of me even understand why I am responding to this thread. It must be getting late!!

I think it may be the POOR representation of the orginal posters "screename".....

PLEASE....if you are going to "pick" a screename that represents ME and the entire Corps. Put some intellect and articulation in your question.

Sniper Rifle??? It is not the rifle gents...its the man behind the trigger!!

I had to say it...my bearing has been "broke"...I could not take it anymore!!


----------



## Jiffy (Apr 22, 2005)

PS: I guess I should at least try and answer your question....I would say a 12 ga. shotgun.

8 shot for "tree vermin" and slugs for whitetail deer..

Just for the record. A .223 will "vaporize" a tree vermin just as bad....aaaaaahhhh.....or should I say...."just as good as" a 7.62x51 NATO.. If not more so!!! Depending on range.


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

Jiffy

I have the time,.... you and I will make it work. We will do it and call yotes and ice fish. I am so close to purchasing a ice shelter...........depends on what is available............. I was goona buy a Eskimo QuickFish III but all the sporting goods stores sold out, now I am after ther the impossible or the Clam 56000........ fot a reasonable price.........


----------



## marcus_rubbo (Dec 11, 2005)

hey MarineCorps if u get a gun that is under 700 with great sniper like accuracy all decked out that is capable of 5 to 600 yard shots that dosent kick hard plz plz let me know because they pretty much dont exist.....but if u find a good buy close to what u are looking for let me know seriouly cuz everybody would love that gun!


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

MarineCorps said:


> Have you ever heard of the M-14 DMR sniper rifle? The rifle most marine snipers use!
> Why? Because it is better than anything that costs twice as much as it.
> Also the military didnt even use M-16s after the 70s. Now they use M4s and a few Ar-15s for training.
> 
> ...


I just built an AR-15 for 603.95 after every thing was said and done. And yes Savage rifles are awsome.


----------



## SDHandgunner (Jun 22, 2004)

MarineCorps said:


> i would like a nice rifle that i could hun squirrel to white tail with, and also could shoot far and accurately i would like these features (order of importance) Approximate!
> 
> -Under $700
> -High accuracy Maybe somewhat like a sniper rifle
> ...


I do not think the Rifle you specified exists. First of all yes the .223 Remington Cartridge is capable of what you are after, but only if you Handload, and at that the Reduced Loads that would be required to cleanly harvest Squirrels (without blowing them to pieces) would not cycle the action of a Semi Auto. Yes with proper bullets and handloading techniques the .223 can and has been Handloaded down to duplicate the Ballisitics of a .22 LR or .22 WMR. Secondly the .223 can be a very accurate cartridge, but from my experience not in a Mini 14 without lots of work and $$$ stuck into it. Lastly, Yes with the proper bullets and shot placement the .223 cartridge is very effective as a Deer Cartridge, but the shooter MUST know it's limitations.

In addition to the Factory Loads and Bullets mentioned for use on Whitetail Deer, Winchester produces a 64gr. Power Point that if you talk to Winchester they will tell you was designed specifically for Hunting Whitetail Deer with the .223 Cartridge. I have used these bullets (handloaded to 2912 FPS) on Whitetails with good results provided the range was kept reasonable (200 yards or less).

Recently I have been working with a buddies Mini 14. We have free floated the Gas Block and Barrel (which helped somewhat in the accuracy department). We have also disassembled the entire trigger mechanism and polished everything mirror smooth, which again also helped in the accuracy / shootability department. Still the absolute best accuracy we have been able to achieve is 5 shot in 2" at 100 yards from a Bench, and this was only with ONE particular Load. Most other ammo tried printed 5 shot 100 yard groups that were in the 4" to 5" range.

I, on the other hand just picked up a Stevens Model 200 Bolt Action Rifle chambered in .223. Stevens uses a 1 in 9" rifling twist in their .223's (like most AR's and Mini 14's) which is said to better stablize longer / heavier bullets. With the Rifle I picked up Warne Scope Bases and Rings, along with Butler Creek Flip Open Scope Lense Covers, and a slightly used 3x9x40mm Nikon Buckmaster Rifle Scope, and I have a grand total of $425.00 invested (considering your $700.00 limit that would leave lots of $$$ for AMMO to practice with).

I did the normal things I do to a new Rifle before shooting it, ie cleaning the bore, polishing the bore, re-cleaning the bore and tuning the trigger for a crisp trigger pull. I normally also Free Float the Barrel, but this Stevens came with the Barrel Free Floated from the Factory.

I used Ultra Max Commercial Reloads (with 55gr. Winchester Pointed Soft Point Bullets) to break the barrel in and sight it in. Upon getting the scope zeroed at 30 yards I moved my target frame back to 100 yards. The first two rounds out of this Rifle at 100 yards were nearly touching (about a half a bullet hole seperated the two holes on the paper). So far the largest 5 shot group fired with this Rifle and this Ammo at 100 yards has been 1".

Now I am not saying you should rush right out and buy a Stevens Model 200, but I am telling you of my experiences with a single Stevens Model 200 vs a single Ruger Mini 14.

Yes I would love to have an Accurate Mini 14, but considering my experience and the fact that I like hitting what I am shooting at, I am not willing to take the gamble that I would get a good one.

truth be known my preference in Rifles is for Ruger M77's, but I have heard and read so many good things about the Accuracy of the Savages and now the Stevens I just had to try one. So far I am not regretting my decision to try one.

Larry


----------



## VarmintHunter117 (May 28, 2005)

A good accurate AR can be built for around 700.oo, a wealth of info can be found @ http://www.ar15.com

anyone who would question the accuracy of what an AR can do check out the following post for AR15.com.... I have never seen a Mini-14 or 30 for that matter shoot as good as these AR's http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=262165

the 100yrd 10 shot group is typical of what they are capable of let alone the 300yrd!!!

The only 5.56mm Mini-14 that I know of are the LE editions that Ruger had built... all Civilian built were/are cambered for .223 Rem.

And yes Savage makes a very fine accurate rilfe! I have owned 2 both were tack drivers OTB! Still own 1 a 300WM and love it! I replaced the synthetic stock as it flexed to much for my likeing... It now sports a Boyds thumbhole laminate. http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/ ... ul1807.jpg


----------



## Hawkseye (Nov 21, 2005)

People said:


> The mini 14 will get you all of them but the accurate part. I liked mine but it shot ok not great but ok. .
> 
> Take a look at http://aimstraight.net ...I've developed a solution for the mini-14/30 accuracy problems...The price is under a hundred bucks, and there is test data and a testamonial about it.


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

Can I say (though it might be too late) to look at the BAR. It comes in many cals and is what I shoot.

With that said, the biggest problem with the guns the US troups shoot (NATO 5.65) is the stopping power. So not they change rounds to a 6.8mm SPC form remington. I am looking at getting one of these though it only comes in a bolt action unless you get somthing like the Barrett M468 costing close to $2000.

I also found this on a web site:
The Barrett M468 leaves the performance of the 5.56mm for others to ponder. The M468 can be utilized by law enforcement, military, and civilian shooters. The performance of the 6.8 Remington SPC far surpasses that of the 5.56 mm. This opens new hunting opportunities in states where the 5.56 is too small for larger game.

I dont know the specs of the 5.56 but they say the 6.8 is 2600fps and 2600Flbs. :2cents:


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

VarmintHunter117 said:


> And yes Savage makes a very fine accurate rilfe!


I would have to agree there. I have a hunting buddy that would fight over the dependability and love he has for his savage (.25-06)


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

http://aimstraight.net/ that does look very interesting. If I still had a mini 14 I would have to give this a try. I only have AR-15's now. If you are just going out to buy a new rifle I say the best way to go is the 15 verses the mini-14. If you already have a 14 then go with the aimstraight device.

The nice thing about all of this for the time being we still have the freedom to chose what we buy. Purchase the one that will make you the happiest. Just let us know what you get and how good it shoots.

On a side note on the accuracy side. As you know I shoot service rifle competition (200, 300, & 600 yds) after talking to the others I shoot with about how to get more shooters out to the range for practice and competition, they were talking about the people that have M-16's and how they talk about how they get MOA accuracy out of the guns they have. When you get them shooting at paper trying to make those tiny groups they hardly ever get any where near that. Granted they may have been having a bad day, who knows? All this comes down to is "I have a gun that can shoot in the 1's" well can it? Probably not.

Chuck Norris thinks that MacGuyver is a complete prick because he doesn't have facial hair.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> 6.8 is 2600fps and 2600Flbs


A hair over 2,000 FPE is a little closer from the reports I've read.


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

If 800 fps is a hair then yes


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

I had read in a magazine and another posting about the 6.8 SPC and they were talking about 2600fps and 2600flbs. Did somthing change then? The artical I read was talking about how this new cal is suppost to have more stoping power, better range, better accuracy, and just as easy on the person shooting it. I dont remember what magazine it was in, the artical was given to me by a friend of mine who knew I was looking for a gun for my father. There was a post on here too by a fella that just got one and I was talking to him about it. I guess somthing might have changed :huh:


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> If 800 fps is a hair then yes


*"When compared to the more powerful and well-established 7.62 mm NATO cartridge, the 6.8 mm falls shorter in all these areas but has less recoil, is more controllable and is more likely to fragment in tissue at close to medium range, creating greater damage to the target. While the 6.8 mm generates around 2000 ft·lbf of muzzle energy with its 115 grain bullet, the 7.62 mm NATO (M80) launches a 147 grain bullet at 2750 ft/s for 2460 ft·lbf of punch."*

"*The round has also been favorably review by hunters, who consider it an excellent medium sized hunting cartridge. Its power, however, is only equivalent to the .243 Winchester, which is generally regarded as a marginal deer cartridge. (The .243 cranks out 1950 to 2050 ft·lbf of muzzle energy, depending on the load selected.)*" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.8_mm_SPC

About half way down look at the chart the below link.
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammuniti ... gton_0303/

Go ahead and see if you can dig 800 FPE above 2000 out of there.


----------



## SDHandgunner (Jun 22, 2004)

The formula for calculating Foot Pounds of Energy is Velocity Squared divided by 450240 multiplied by the bullet weight in grains.

If the 6.8mm Remington SPC shoots a 115gr. Bullet at a muzzle velocity of 2600 FPS then the Muzzle ENERGY is 1726.6346 Foot Pounds, not 2600 FtLbs or even 2000 FtLbs.

Larry


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

I see...just say'n what I read before. The thing is though the 7.62 mm is about the same as a .308 just like the 5.65 is like the .223 in size (going form mm to cal). The .308 has much more power then the .223 but lacks trajectory unless you can compinsate for it. Back at the beggining of time when guns were used there was a trend to find a smaller gun with less kick but still can have good range and wont cost the tax payers a ton of money. Well first there was the 30-06 in WWI and WWII. Then we went to the .308 (7.62m). Now we have the .223 wich is nice to shoot but it lacks kocking power. Thats why they are steping up to somthing just a bit bigger. Pluse you only need 2 things to kill a deer, 1000flbs of energy and a bullet that wont break up on impact. I'm not sure the speed, energy, or slug weight they use on the 5.56 but seeing how its a bit shorter and a lighter bullet I dont see the numbers being that high unless you reload your own. :sniper:


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Seems I recall that a special blend of powder was being used to attain the figures that were released. Nevertheless to me it seems that it is not that the 5.65 is a lousy combat round but that the 5.65 as discovered in Afghanistan and Iraq would not punch through cinder blocks and hit the bad guy on the other side. So a heavier round was sought and the military wanting to save money decided to come up with something that would work on the AR15 lower platform and be of a small package to work in urban warfare situations. Thus the 6.8 SPC. Personally I don't understand why the military doesn't just go back to the 7.62 with only semi auto available and be done with it. I can't think of a better fighting round we have ever had. And personally I see no use for the 6.8 as a hunting round as even the old 30-30 with the new leverevolution rounds will perform just as well and as ballistics seem to indicate the .243 will out perform it.


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

Seems like the military dosen't know what they want. You have the Joint Combat Pistol adoption to replaces the Beretta 92 :lol:, efforts to replace the 5.56 round and possiably the entire M16 platform :lol:, then the SAW beltfed machinegun seems to be complete junk, with jams requiring a complete tear down in the middle of a fire fight, also chambered for 5.56 :lol:, then they are replacing their sniper guns, upgrading them to .300 win mags and Lapua mags. :lol:

I can tell them how to fix it though, readopt the 1911, M14 and M60 7.62 cal machine gun.
:beer:


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

The M40A3 and the M24 are both chambered in 7.62. The M24 is on a long action so they can go to 300 win mag but that was tested and not gone with. The 300 Win mag guns were relegated to shooting competition. They are being phased out in favor of the 6.5-284. The army has tested semi-auto 300 Win mags and they never produced the accuracy or durability they wanted. The Marine Corps is starting to field a semi auto AR-10 like gun. I do not remember what the name of it is right off the top of my head. I do not know if the Army has been looking for a gun like that yet. The reason the USMC is going that way is because the shooters can more easily blend in with regular Marines. I have heard that they have tried the 338 Lapua but as of yet I have not heard any mass change over to it except in Europe. Here in the US if we need a heavy hitter we go to the 50BMG rifles.

The 6.8 SPC is not being fielded currently from what I have heard they can not get to the speed they originally quoted. They are 200FPS short.

The m249 SAW in use today has only one thing that really makes it jam and that is the ability to use m-16 mags. All of the times I used one in the USMC the only times they ever jammed was when I was trying to shoot blanks threw the M-16 mags. I NEVER fired M-855 or M-856 rounds threw a magazine. You would get more jams if you had the regulator pointing to the right(makes it shoot faster (cyclic rate)). When using the belt I never ever had a problem. I was talking to my friend in the Army and he said that he shoots his SAW with M-16 mags and M-855 all the time and never had a problem with it at all. BLANKS SUCK!!! and you can take that to the bank.

We do not need to bring back all those old style guns. Weight costs combat effectiveness. You can carry almost two rounds of 5.56 for every round of 7.62. It is also much harder to shoot the M-14 accurately. If you do not believe me go to http://www.nationalmatch.us/ and ask them. As far as bringing back the 45 maybe in a different gun. Personally if we are going to go to a new gun just switch all M9 barrettes to 40 S&W. This would have to be done on a whole base at a time so there would be no confusion of 9mm to 40cal. Cost would also be keep to a minimum.

What we really need is more training for our people. The vast majority of the armed troops out there do not need any thing else. The ones that need more fire power they should get it. There is a happy medium but we have not found it yet. With the new HK416 and 417 that may allow a new round to more easily work in the M-16 style gun. Only time will tell. I know they looked at the 6.5 grendel and they did not care for it for what ever reason. Maybe this would suit the bill http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek068.html http://www.6mmar.com/

I am done hijacking this thread. As I said before the AR-15 is better than the Mini 14 but get what you want.

Chuck Norris was actually born a triplet. His brothers were death and pain.


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

The thing is though if you talk to enough people you will see how anti auto-loading they are. I was looking at getting a 25-06 BAR. The guy was so anti it that I finnaly said ok what do you suggest. I ended up with a bold but for far less $$$. The point is how anti auto/semi people are. We dont want to be know as the only country that shoots a bolt for the military. Granted like the SAW, you shoot enough times to hit somthing helps . As far as shooting though walls to kill somone I think it would be hard for a 6.8 7.62 or a .30cal would do it, a .50 yes (the monvie Navy SEALS). The two simi auto rifles ( a .22 and a .300) have been very easy to sight in and prove to be very on with several groupings of less then 1". I think there is a bit of pregidous out there tward certain guns. I have seen many videos on the SAW taking out car engins, thats impressive. I also have seen videos on the 5.56 vrs 7.62 round of the AK's. The 5.56 shot much better, farther, and was easier to handle. The AK hardly hit the target they were shooting at, it was very hard to handle in full auto mode, but the impact of it was much much more of the 5.56. I can see a need for a better gun, but cant they do somthing better then they got with the technology out there? :huh:


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

What are you talking about? Where did the anti auto loading thing come from? Bolt actions ? Shooting through walls?......


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

Don't feel bad Gohon, he lost me too.


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

Gohon said:


> What are you talking about? Where did the anti auto loading thing come from? Bolt actions ? Shooting through walls?......


Actually Gohon you mentined the 5.65 as discovered in Afghanistan and Iraq would not punch through cinder blocks and hit the bad guy on the other side in your last post.

And I'm saying when I went to buy a rifle in the store and was looking at maybe getting an auto-loader I had to sit and argue with the guy before I finally walked on. If you walk though a hunting store there is much negitive energy tward autos. It would not make a great deal of scence to make a bolt for cambat now would it? So dont you think we could come up with somthing that shoots better for less and not sacrifice speed, range, and impact. (was that to hard to understand)


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

> It would not make a great deal of scence to make a bolt for cambat now would it? So dont you think we could come up with somthing that shoots better for less and not sacrifice speed, range, and impact. (was that to hard to understand)


Do what? :huh:


----------



## Jiffy (Apr 22, 2005)

> It would not make a great deal of scence to make a bolt for cambat now would it?


Oh I dont know........this one seemed to work ok:http://www.snipercentral.com/m40a1.htm


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> Actually Gohon you mentined the 5.65 as discovered in Afghanistan and Iraq would not punch through cinder blocks and hit the bad guy on the other side in your last post.


Yes I did say that but I didn't use the term walls. Reports I read was that in those places the structures were made of cinder blocks or clay and sand mixture and the 5.65 would simply fragment when it struck them where 30 caliber or larger would if not on the first round would usually punch through on the second and third round. I can take my 30-06 and blow cinder blocks in half all day long and in those country the stuff they call cinder blocks is far more fragile to what we have.



> It would not make a great deal of scence to make a bolt for cambat now would it?


Yeah me to........ what? :huh:



> So dont you think we could come up with somthing that shoots better for less and not sacrifice speed, range, and impact


We've already got those...... it's just a question of putting it in a lighter smaller package. Apparently the 6.8 SPC ain't it.


----------



## Bore.224 (Mar 23, 2005)

Hey how about the .223 WSSM or the .243 WSSM in the AR platform. They have short stubby cartridges that may work well in an autoloader? Or for you cinderblock shooters the 25 WSSM yeh yeh thats the ticket the 25 WSSM!


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

For the AR to shoot the .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum you have to have an AR-10 type gun. The reason that http://www.armalite.com is using the Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum is because the web of the casing is larger and holds up to the stresses of semi auto firing better than the Winchester casings.

See just one more reason to pick the AR-15 you can have two different guns that are very similar so you can have muscle memory when switching from one to the others. I am not saying that you have to go and buy a AR-10 type rifle but it is something else to think about.


----------

