The Marvelous Mini-14

By Dave Anderson, GUNS Magazine

The Ruger Mini-14 was an instant success when it appeared in the mid-1970’s. To understand why, you kind of had to be there. In 1976 if you wanted a semi-automatic .223 your choices were a Colt AR-15 ($300), Armalite AR-180 ($300), or HK-93 ($330).

The Mini-14 was priced at $200. Now $100 or so doesn’t seem like much today, but in 1976 the national average wage index was roughly $9,200. Compared to the increase in wages, the price difference of $100 or $130 is like a difference of $500 to $650 today.

The military M16 (and by extension its semi-auto version, the AR-15) was widely criticized at the time. Dozens of articles, both in gun magazines and in the popular press, castigated the M16 for perceived failings such as unreliability and mediocre accuracy.

There was much speculation on what sort of rifle would replace the M16. If you had said in 1975 the M16 would still be America’s military rifle 40 years later you’d have been laughed out of the room. And if you suggested the day would come when an AR would consistently shoot 1/2-MOA groups…

I had one of those early Mini-14’s, made in 1976, as well as a Colt AR-15 of the same era. In terms of accuracy and reliability there was little difference. Groups of around 6 MOA seemed to be about the norm with either. The one undeniable Mini-14 advantage was cost. A C-note saved is a big deal when you’re making $200 a week.

I liked the balance, feel and overall handling of the Mini, but its lack of accuracy made it seem more like a bulky, hard-to-conceal pistol than a rifle. Moreover the lack of accuracy seemed inherent in the design, not due to any lack of quality in materials or workmanship.

Any semi-automatic rifle using an operating rod along with a gas block on the barrel is handicapped in terms of accuracy. As the operating rod is jolted into motion and separates from the gas block, the barrel gets a little (and inconsistent) tweak added to its normal vibrations. Careful hand fitting of parts helps, especially in combination with a heavier barrel.

The barrels on those early Mini-14’s were certainly not heavy, quite the opposite. Add the operating rod factor to an already light, whippy barrel and accuracy problems were almost inevitable.

Regular readers may recall a column on the Amega Mini-Scout sight base for the Mini-14 in the September 2010 issue. Not just a sight base, the Amega system acts as a strut to stiffen the light barrel. With a forward-mounted Leupold Scout scope attached, the Amega base transformed my old Mini. It’s still no tackdriver but at least it seems like a rifle rather than a big pistol.

Ruger has made a number of changes to the Mini-14 over the years. The amazing developments in AR accuracy, versatility and aftermarket components have occupied my semi-auto rifle interests for some decades now, while the Mini-14’s have been relegated to the back row of the gun safe. To see how they’ve changed over the years I purchased a current (2014) production Ranch Rifle at a local store.

The current model has a heavier, stiffer barrel, better iron sights, it accepts Ruger rings for mounting a scope over the receiver, the upper forearm is synthetic instead of wood and it has a recoil pad that sticks to your shoulder rather than sliding around the way the old slick plastic would.

The original was marked Mini-14 and .223 Rem on the receiver, and the barrel had a 1:10-inch twist. The current model is marked Ranch Rifle and 5.56mm, the barrel has a 1:9 twist. A set of Ruger rings come with the rifle. A Picatinny-style rail is also included and can be attached to the receiver for more sight-fitting options.

I used the Ruger rings to fit a Redfield Battlezone 3-9×42 to the receiver. Comparing out of the box accuracy, my current production Ranch Rifle is far superior. With handloads using the Hornady 55-grain V-Max bullet it consistently produces 5-shot, 100-yard groups between 1.5 and 2 inches, averaging around 1-3/4 inches. Groups were nice and “round” with no tendency to horizontal or vertical stringing even when the barrel heated up.

These groups were shot while dealing with an atrocious factory trigger. A semi-auto trigger, in order to be safe and reliable, needs a bit of take-up and overtravel, as well as a good margin of sear engagement. Even making those allowances, this trigger needs work.

Weight of pull is 6-1/2 pounds. Take-up and overtravel are acceptable but the actual sear break is long, creepy, and with detectable “steps.” Shooting for accuracy from the bench was a chore.

Incidentally, this was the one area where my ’70’s vintage Mini-14 was superior. Weight of pull was also heavy at 5-3/4 pounds, it has take-up and overtravel, but the actual sear break is not bad at all, reasonably crisp and consistent. It’s not great but it’s tolerable.

Reliability was excellent with no failures of any kind. If accuracy is the downside of an operating rod system, reliability is the upside. The weight of the operating rod plus the bolt assembly results in considerable momentum once they get moving. The result is positive extraction and ejection of fired cases, and positive feeding and chambering of the next cartridge. Heat and residue from hot powder gases are around the gas block under the forearm, while the bolt and receiver remain relatively cool and clean.

Certainly this Ranch Rifle is superior to my old Mini-14, and the stainless-steel version would add corrosion resistance. (The only reasons I didn’t get the stainless model is I couldn’t find one for sale locally). Relative to the increase in wages over the last 40 years, price is about the same as it was in 1975.

But while the Mini-14 has improved, the AR design has improved almost beyond recognition. In 1976 the Mini-14 provided about the same performance as the AR-15 at two-thirds the cost. Today there’s a seemingly endless array of AR makes, models, accessories, cartridge choices and price points. There are AR’s which are more accurate and much more versatile than the Ranch Rifle while costing the same or even less.

True, some of the high-end AR’s (including Ruger’s own SR-556) cost much more than the Ranch Rifle. Compared to these, the Ranch Rifle is a good buy. Other advantages? The balance and handling of the Ranch Rifle feel similar to my bolt-action hunting rifles. In some countries and states, the more conventional-looking Ranch Rifle is subject to fewer legal restrictions. Yes, you and I know this defies logic and common sense, but sadly such traits are lacking in many lawmakers.

It may not have kept up with the incredible developments in the AR design, but my Ranch Rifle retains the virtues of my old Mini-14—compact size, handiness, reliability and durability—while adding sight options and dramatically improving accuracy.

BENEFITS	READERS PASS	PATRIOTS	FOUNDERS
Daily and Breaking Newsletters	✔	✔	✔
Daily Caller Shows	✔	✔	✔
Ad Free Experience	✔	✔	✔
Exclusive Articles	✔	✔	✔
Custom Newsletters	✔	✔	✔
Editor Daily Rundown	✔	✔	✔
Behind The Scenes Coverage		✔	✔
Award Winning Documentaries		✔	✔
Patriot War Room		✔	✔
Patriot Live Chat		✔	✔
Exclusive Events			✔
Gold Membership Card			✔
Tucker Mug			✔

The Marvelous Mini-14

Check out now

Register now

Check out now

Sign in

Sign in or Sign up

Register now

What does Founders Club include?