In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Ruger Mini-.308

offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
edited September 2002 in General Discussion
Why should Jeff Cooper be the only guy to get a rifle made, huh? I went to the Ruger web site and found they have no feedback or e-mail addresses at all -- but they do have a Catalog request form. So I entered my name as NRA Lifer at Gunbroker.com, and in place of the address and State I entered "We NEED a Mini-.308!!! Please give us a Mini-.308!! Please??"

I wonder if anyone is listening. Oh well.... Nothing ventured, nothing gained.... Can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket, and all that....

- Life NRA Member
"If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878

Comments

  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ruger was gearing up to make the .308 Mini 14 almost twenty years ago. Production instead switched to the 7.62x39. Certain Gun Digests in the 1982-1983 period actually show a cataloged .308 Mini.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Dances --
    I'm aware of that. Apparently they had some material problems that led to quality issues. I think they should try again with modern materials. I would love to see a scanned picture of the Mini-.308 if you can point me to one on the 'net, or upload one from your literature. Thanks a lot.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Offeror: I remember thinking what a great idea it was. I seem to recall now that it was a materials/liability issue. I ended up getting a BM62, which is slightly bigger than the Mini and a whole lot better made. I'll see if I can find the pics/article on the Mini .308 and get them to you.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I just realized the full import of what you said -- that they were actually cataloged... does that mean a few may have made it out the door? If so, they might be rare, but it would be interesting to own one. Even with quality issues, it could be a good carbine to be carried frequently but shot little. The key today, I think, would be keeping the price down between $500-600. I would challenge them to engineer such a gun.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Offeror: They actually list the Mini .308 in the catalog section of the Digest, and show pics of them testing it. However, I do not think any were ever produced for sale or cataloged by Ruger.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • dads-freeholddads-freehold Member Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    greetings, i like the concept but i bett the price would be prohibitive. atleast to the average shootist. also the comparative competion in the market would make the proffit margin not that lukretive...still i would like to see and maybe touch one..someday. respt submitted dads-freehold

    if your going to be a savage, be a headhunter
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    There's no point in doing a prohibitively priced Mini in .308. The whole point is to have a $500 gun like their .223 and 7.62x39. The challenge is to build the gun simply and strong enough to be a quality entry at the appropriate price point. It would be a deucedly attractive gun to those of us who currently have only the .308 imports to choose from in that price range.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Offeror: The 1986 "Gun Digest" (DBI Books) shows the Ruger XGI Auto Rifle on page (appropriately enough) 308. It had a 5-shot magazine and was both 1 1/2 pounds heavier and two inches longer than the Mini-14. It also had a different lockup than the Mini-14, a patented Garand-type rotating bolt system. Price was $425 ($45 more than the Mini-14). Interestingly, the catalog shows the XGI was introduced in 1985...hmmm.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Interesting -- would be a lot more interesting with a 10 round mag, even more interesting if it would take M1A 20-rounders. Might as well get it right at the start. Not many people would be interested in a tactical defense gun holding 5 rounds these days. We're spoiled. Glad to hear the price was reasonable though. --
    REVISION:
    Hey, guess what? Just found another article on the .308 model (Ruger XGI as in "ex-G.I.") and it was originally supposed to accept M14 mags! Nobody believes the wandering zero excuse, by the way.... Bad engineering is probably NOT the reason this rifle was not produced, and everyone whose posts I'm reading agree these rifles, accepting M14 mags, would literally fly off the shelves the first few years, if manufactured today. Personally, I agree, if the mag well accepted the Army surplus .308 boxes.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878

    Edited by - offeror on 09/27/2002 17:48:29
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    From the New York Times obituary of Bill Ruger, the following excerpt: "The weapons did not always meet his high expectations. In the mid-1980s, the company planned to introduce a new rifle, the XGI. Twenty-four thousand complete sets of parts had already been manufactured for the weapon, but Mr. Ruger couldn't get the rifle to perform up to his standards so he had the project scrapped. ''He could be very tough, very demanding, '' said Sanetti."

    I did a quick Google search and came up with the nature of the prototypes' potential problems being burned barrels, wandering zero, and maybe a few cracked receivers. None of this is absolutely confirmed, nor does any of it sound like something Ruger couldn't have overcome.

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
  • idsman75idsman75 Member Posts: 13,398 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    DancesWithSheep--Are you happy with your BM62? I was giving serious consideration to one of those over the summer. Any recommendations for someone considering one of those?
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    IDSMAN: I have the good fortune of owning or having owned just about every civilianized hi-cap semi-auto military rifle ever made (FAL, FNC, Galil, Valmet, Sig 550, Sig AMT, Sig Pe57, M1A, Aug, HK91, HK93, AR-15, ad nauseum). For purposes of quality, balance, accuracy and natural shooting comfort, I pick the BM62 hands down. Sig makes fine rifles and HK's are reliable as hell, but for me personally...no contest.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.

    Edited by - DancesWithSheep on 09/27/2002 17:57:42
  • boeboeboeboe Member Posts: 3,331
    edited November -1
    I know a guy who wants to sell his Berben imported Beretta BM62. That would mean it's all original Beretta, I believe, but after some of the discussions we've had on the BM59 here lately I wouldn't swear to it. He was offering it to me for $1,200.00. BUT, and this is one big BUT....

    For some reason he didn't go into, it doesn't have the original Beretta rear sight. It has had a Garand rear sight put on it. I don't know why this was done. I was wondering if perhaps the sights available from Reese were original Beretta, it might be simply a matter of replacing it with one of their sights.

    I'm leaning towards buying another, perhaps the Nigerian BM59 or a BM69 would be my choice, but I'd kinda like an Alpine model if I could find one for the right price.

    If you would be interested in talking to this guy with the BM62, drop me an e-mail and I'll put you in touch with him. Grant_Reynolds@msn.com. Also, I found a pretty nice board for lovers of the BM59 type rifles, but there are so few BM59 fans out there, people don't post there often. Still, it has some good reference posts. It is:

    http://www.machinegunbooks.com/cgibin/ikonboard/forums.cgi?forum=4



    To err is human, to moo is bovine.
  • boeboeboeboe Member Posts: 3,331
    edited November -1
    There should be an underscore between my first and last name, it doesn't show up too well in the above post.

    To err is human, to moo is bovine.
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    RE: BM62, I should add that I am referring only to the Berben import rifles. Springfield and others have their BM59 variants using Beretta parts, but only Berben NY imported a true, built-in-Italy-by-Beretta BM62. Beware of parts guns!

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • airborneairborne Member Posts: 1,728 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Just finished reading thread titled "Mini article by former Ruger employee" by Ed Harris, dtd 9/27/2002, 18:29:44. In his article he mentions test firing a Mini-.308.

    B - BreatheR - RelaxA - AimS - SightS - Squeeze
  • boeboeboeboe Member Posts: 3,331
    edited November -1
    Actually, the Gun Trader's Guide indicates the Springfield BM59 is valued considerably higher than any of their other rifles, including any M1As, even if it just a "parts gun" by DWS definition. Well, it is priced equally with their SAR-48. The Reese versions are actually Springfield BM59s.

    Also, I have discovered that Berben WAS NOT the only importers of Beretta BM rifles straight from Beretta. Some were imported by Bennett, and were assembled completely by Beretta.

    The quality of the Springfield/Beretta marked BM59 is far superior to the M1A. There's not a thing wrong with them. According to figures I have read, there were only some 500 of the Springfield/Beretta BM59's made. I believe with the name Beretta and Springfield they are very much collectable, as reflected by their price in the Gun Trader's Guide.


    To err is human, to moo is bovine.
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    BoeBoe: Do you have any info on the Bennett guns? I've not heard of these before.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • boeboeboeboe Member Posts: 3,331
    edited November -1
    After a couple or three posts on the BM59 board, I had a guy contact me who had collected BM rifles for a while. He had noticed my post saying I was interested in buying another. He indicated he had several, including the Berben and Bennett imports. He was going to be selling a few, and the first to go was going to be the Berben/Beretta BM62 which, for some reason, had been fitted with the Garand rear sight. Regardless of the fact that it is a Berben, I really would prefer one of the other models.

    He has sent jpegs of the Berben he has for sell, with plenty of details, and it was as he described. I doubt someone would go to the BM59 board and try to scam someone like this, there's little reason to seek out someone interested in BM59's to perpetrate a fraud. I'm taking him at his word that he has a few BM type rifles, and assume he's a knowledgeable collector. If he says he has Bennett imported Beretta BM rifles, I am inclined to believe him.

    As I said, there are not many fans of the BM rifles, most probably because there are so few people who know anything about them. Even the Springfield Armory version apparently had a production limited to about 500 rifles. But the posts on the BM59 board all speak very highly of the Reese/Springfield/Beretta rifles. The Reese family was, after all, the original owners of Springfield Armory, Inc. and it make sense that they have the remaining Springfield/Beretta rifles.

    For anyone interested in the BM series of rifles, I would think you would want to read through the posts on the BM59 board and see what they say.



    To err is human, to moo is bovine.
  • JudgeColtJudgeColt Member Posts: 1,790 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Ruger XGI (NOT Mini-.308) was cataloged in standard Ruger catalogs and the gun annuals of the same period, the mid-1980s as I recall without checking. It was designed to accept M14 magazines, which of course makes great sense, since the pool of available magazines is large. It would not have been prohibitively expensive as already pointed out, only a bit higher than the Mini-14.

    The reasons given for the failure of the concept may be true, but it surprises me that they could not be solved. The M1A seems to have worked fine with a cast receiver, but did benefit from a huge pool of proven surplus GI parts for everything else. Knowing the dark side of William Ruger in regard to the magazine capacity limit, and the odd refusal to fix certain things like the awful aluminum ejector rod housings on blue single actions, etc., perhaps the reasons given are not the real ones. With him now gone, perhaps someone will revive the concept.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Mini-.308 was my handy coined term for the rifle I'd like to see. The XGI was Ruger's term for the rifle they "almost" released. However, reading the gentleman's article in the other thread (the fellow who used to test fire Minis for Ruger) I begin to see how the Mini's limitations might only have been exaggerated and amplified in the more powerful .308. If the Mini was really designed as a plinker of 2" groups at 50, 4" groups at 100, and 8" groups at 200 -- and was prone to additional accuracy variances due to things like bending the barrel while installing the front sight -- well, I think we can see the challenge Ruger had when making a rock-solid carbine to shoot the .308 reasonably well. In fact, I come away from that other article thinking one really needs an aftermarket bull barrel to have an accurate Mini of any caliber. Still, if they could take another run at the XGI, and borrow a little more in terms of solid strength from the M14 design, we could perhaps have a nice Ruger Mini carbine (308).

    - Life NRA Member
    "If cowardly & dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary...and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Sign In or Register to comment.