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.

Mini article by former Ruger employee

offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
edited December 2009 in General Discussion
Here's an interesting tech perspective on the Ruger Minis I found via a 'net search. Purely for informational value:
My Observations on the Ruger Mini-14

By Ed Harris Rev. 5-25-94

When I was at Ruger I tested hundreds of Mini 14 rifles of all configurations, conducting audit shoots of normal production, as well as R&D testing of the full-auto AC556, AC556 and the experimental XGI rifle in .308 Win, and assisting in the development of the Mini Thirty in 7.62x39.

To be COMPLETELY honest I was disappointed with its accuracy when compared to the M16A1 and A2 rifles, with which I am very familiar. The Mini 14 gives reasonable performance for an American-made rifle in its price range, and is safe, serviceable and realiable. It just isn't all that accurate. You can find individual rifles which shoot well, but these are statistical aberrations. We tried to test a large enough sample of rifles to pick "good" ones, then painstakingly took them apart and gaged every part to see if we could tweak tolerances or make design changes which would significantly improve accuracy without increasing production cost. It couldn't be done. We did learn a few things, however.

The long run average group size for standard Mini-14 rifles fired from a test stand is about 4-5" for ten-shot groups with M193 or M855 ammunition of "average" quality [at 100 yards? -- PAZ], producing an acceptance Mean Radius of 1.6-1.6" at 200 yds from a test barrel [Ed has an error in there somewhere -- PAZ]. The M16A1 or A2 do this at 200 yards from a machine rest. I believe the biggest factor in Mini-14 accuracy is irregular contact between the gas block and the face of the slideblock, welded to the slide handle (aka operating rod).[from Ed's comment below that Minis are tested for a 2" group at 50 yards (1" radius), we can infer that the Mini is expected to shoot a 4" group at 100 yards, or an 8" group at 200 yards. Thus, the Mini-14's 200 yard Mean Radius would be 4"--twice as bad as expected from Military AMMO (2.00" mean radius max. avg. at 200 yards), presumabably fired from a test rig of some kind. -- PAZ]

If you disassemble the rifle and inspect the face of the slide block and the rear of the gas block assembly, you may find that the face of the slide block strikes one side or the other of the gas block, rather than making a uniform and symmetrical imprint. This asymmetrical contact causes fliers. The fit-up can sometimes be improved by grinding 0.005-.010" off the face of the slide, so that with the slide fully forward, a .001" shim can be inserted between the slide block and gas block and be clear all the way around. This way the forward motion of the slide is stopped by the right locking lug in the cam pocket of the slide handle, rather than by the slide block slamming against the gas block, as is the case with the M1 Garand rifle.

I caution against removing the gas block, because these are installed in a fixture at the factory to insure proper alignment. There is a small bushing in the gas block which locates it on the barrel. You must be careful not to lose this. This is why the gas block screws are staked in place on newer guns. [Once the gas port and bushing recess are drilled, I cannot see how there can be any variation in alignment of the gas block -- PAZ]

The condition of the muzzle crown is important as well as the straightness of the barrel. Sometimes the barrels are bent when pressing the front sight on. Usually they catch this at the factory and they correct them if it causes fliers in the range, but since they only shoot indoors at 50 yards, for a 2" group, the accuracy standards are more in keeping for a plinking rifle than for the serious accuracy enthusiast.

The Mini-14 chamber conforms to U.S. dwg. #8448649, which is used for the M16A1 chamber. It has a .225" cylindrical ball seat with a slight freebore. I do not believe the GI chamber causes any inaccuracy in this type of rifle, because I have fired thousands of rounds in heavy test barrels with this chamber which gave fine accuracy. For an accuracy load I suggest 21-22 grs. of 4198 (either IMR or Hodgdon) with the 52 or 53-gr. Sierra bullets loaded to 2.25" OAL, or 23-23.5 grs. of H322. The 52-gr. Nosler solid base also is quite accurate.

The Mini-14 Ranch Rifle was made in .222 Remington for the export market to France, Belgium and Italy where civilians are not allowed to own firearms of military caliber. Overruns were sold in the U.S.

end

- 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
    This article doesn't surprise me. I think the 180 series was most prone to the "flyer" problem, which was reduced (but not eliminated) with the 182 series. But unlike the AR15 and other military "clones", the Mini-14 was never a semi-automatic version of a combat weapon. The AC556 variants were the worst, being notorious for fast burning out barrels and nagging unreliability in full-auto mode.

    Often the mind believes it is thinking, when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
  • leeblackmanleeblackman Member Posts: 5,303 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I bet poor magazines and alot of user error had alot to do with that. As far as I know the barrel's were never chrome lined, but I may be totally wrong, so long durations of rapid fire would cause it to wear out real quick.

    If I'm wrong please correct me, I won't be offended.

    The sound of a 12 gauge pump clears a house fatser than Rosie O eats a Big Mac !
  • steve45steve45 Member Posts: 2,940 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Exactly what several shooters on this forum have been saying for a long time. Thanks Offeror
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Ran across this doing a web search for Ruger....missed it the first time around.

    Amazing.Right from the horses mouth.

    God,Guts,& GunsHave we lost all 3 ??
  • Ruger22Ruger22 Member Posts: 385
    edited November -1
    Very valuable info. Thanks for sharing it.



    Famous line from the movie Tombstone with Val Kilmer:
    Bandit to Doc Halliday:"You're just a drunk piano player, you're so drunk , you're probably seeing double!"
    Doc Halliday: "I've got two guns, one for each of you! "
  • old06old06 Member Posts: 577 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    WOW [:0] that is whay I sold the 2 I bought just no telling where the next one would go there are other ways to go AK or what ever

    psalms 16
  • CS8161CS8161 Member Posts: 13,596 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I thought it was me! My Mini-14 is not half as accurate as my AR from Bushmaster! Its ok for out to 100-150 yards but the groups open up too much out further.

    Chris8161
    Admit nothing, deny everything, demand proof!
  • cletus85cletus85 Member Posts: 2,104 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I bought my first and last Mini 14 in the late 80's. With handloads I got about 3" groups at 100yds. I traded it off and have had no interest in one since. I used to be a die hard Ruger fan...I still own some Ruger guns and once considered the Ruger 77 to be the best factory bolt action rifle made...after the changes were made in that gun my main interest has been in Ruger handguns. I no longer consider Ruger rifles when looking for accuracy. That's too bad really. My hopes have been that someday Ruger would revive the old style 77 and resolve the trigger issues. I guess I still have a fondness for Ruger guns, but would like to see improvement.
  • billybassbillybass Member Posts: 350 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Good post as I never found Rugers that accurite I had a old AR7 that out shot the Ruger 10-22 and that was 25years ago I liked some Rugers but never loved any of them one guy said it was the investment casting process and old Bill had brought that process along to a science and it made Ruger plenty of money the Mini 14 was so much less money than a Colt but none i never shot one that was on the money at 100-200 yards ever Billy
  • paboogerpabooger Member Posts: 13,953
    edited November -1
    Id like to get my hands on one of the 222's!

    paboogerani3.gif
    To Ride, shoot straight,and speak the truth
    This was the Ancient law of Youth
    Old times are past, old times are done:
    But the Law runs true, O little son!
  • RustyBonesRustyBones Member Posts: 4,956
    edited November -1
    I see the 222's on gunbroker quite a bit.
  • reb8600reb8600 Member Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:I caution against removing the gas block, because these are installed in a fixture at the factory to insure proper alignment. There is a small bushing in the gas block which locates it on the barrel. You must be careful not to lose this. This is why the gas block screws are staked in place on newer guns. [Once the gas port and bushing recess are drilled, I cannot see how there can be any variation in alignment of the gas block -- PAZ]


    About 9 months ago I bought a new mini 14 197 series and the gas block screws were not staked in place. I removed the gas block and put a smaller gas bushing in mine to stop it from throwing the brass so far. It is hard to do at all, I have never torn one apart and had no problems doing the job at all. Got it down from 35' to about 12' and I might put the next smaller bushing in. It is my understanding that you can get it down to about 1"-1.5" groups at 100 yds quite easily. I havent had mine out to 100 yds since I did the work, which is not expensive to do. As for the ammo I am getting reports from people that they are having better success with the 42 and 62 gr. bullets not the 50-55 gr.

    Guncontrol-The ability to hit what your aiming at.
  • bobskibobski Member Posts: 17,866 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    the only mini-14 i ever owned was bought in 1980. it was a GB-802. NIB. i bought on my military i.d. they didnt question the purchase because of my clean background. everyone tells me it was worth keeping, but in 86, i sold it for twice the amount a paid for it. matter of fact, i remember now...i traded it for a KART 22 kit with 4 mags! 2 weeks later, the dealer who bought it back from me had his store burn to the ground. the gun went to ashes never fired! looks like nothing was lost!

    former air operations officer SEAL Delivery Vehicle Team 2. former navy skeet team, navy rifle/pistol team member. co-owner skeetmaster tubes inc.. owner/operator professional shooting instruction.
    Retired Naval Aviation
    Former Member U.S. Navy Shooting Team
    Former NSSA All American
    Navy Distinguished Pistol Shot
    MO, CT, VA.
  • gap1916gap1916 Member Posts: 4,977
    edited November -1
    Soooo I guess that with a little modification the Mini 14 might be as good as the AR types. The question is at what price. If they made an accurate Mini 14 and I could get hi cap mags at a resonable price I would purchase. Then again this may just be fiction. Would Ruger ever do this, even in a limited production run? Some thing to think about in forums like this or maybe around a camp fire.

    Greg
    Former
    USMC
    ANGLICO
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    5.56 and 223 are two totally different chambers as the throat for the bullet is cut to different specs in the barrel. Thus why 223 ammo is not accurate in 5.56 chambers.

    a 223 chamber should not be used to fire 5.56 ammo as it will hold the bullet back a little causing excessive chamber pressure.

    Anyone beg to differ? Please email sales@model1sales.com and ask them why they sell AR15 kits in either 223 or 5.56. It's because they are not the same.

    Somebody try a box of 5.56 in your mini and report back. The mini has a 5.56 chamber.

    kabalogoshadowed.gif
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Red223

    5.56 and 223 are two totally different chambers as the throat for the bullet is cut to different specs in the barrel. Thus why 223 ammo is not accurate in 5.56 chambers.

    a 223 chamber should not be used to fire 5.56 ammo as it will hold the bullet back a little causing excessive chamber pressure.

    Anyone beg to differ? Please email sales@model1sales.com and ask them why they sell AR15 kits in either 223 or 5.56. It's because they are not the same.

    Somebody try a box of 5.56 in your mini and report back. The mini has a 5.56 chamber.

    Bullpucky.
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    Why are AR15's sold with 223 Remington Chambers and 5.56 Nato chambers? What has SAAMI stated about the chambers?


    Let's see if you can back up the bullpucky with facts.


    kabalogoshadowed.gif
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Both derive from Stoner-designed .222 Special, later becoming 5.56x45mm/.223 Armalite. One designates military nomenclature (e.g., 5.56x45, 7.62x51, etc.); the other, commercial (e.g., .223, .308, etc.). Does Model1Sales.com also sell left-handed tent stretchers?
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The difference you reference is not between .223 and 5.56x45mm Nato, but between .223/5.56x45mm Nato and 5.56mm Nato Ball.
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    Ball is the type of ammo, not a chamber.

    kabalogoshadowed.gif
  • DancesWithSheepDancesWithSheep Member Posts: 12,938 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Red223

    Ball is the type of ammo, not a chamber.

    Fer reals?
  • GuvamintCheeseGuvamintCheese Member Posts: 38,932
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Ruger22
    Very valuable info. Thanks for sharing it.



    Famous line from the movie Tombstone with Val Kilmer:
    Bandit to Doc Halliday:"You're just a drunk piano player, you're so drunk , you're probably seeing double!"
    Doc Halliday: "I've got two guns, one for each of you! "
    Is it more valuable now, 7 years later?....[:o)]
  • drobsdrobs Member Posts: 22,620 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by cartod
    quote:Originally posted by Ruger22
    Very valuable info. Thanks for sharing it.



    Famous line from the movie Tombstone with Val Kilmer:
    Bandit to Doc Halliday:"You're just a drunk piano player, you're so drunk , you're probably seeing double!"
    Doc Halliday: "I've got two guns, one for each of you! "
    Is it more valuable now, 7 years later?....[:o)]


    I hate to say it but I've been thinking about trying another Mini-14. Maybe one of these new EBR ones with the flash hider. I hear Ruger replaced their worn out tooling finally.

    Was not impressed with the last Mini-14 I had and traded off for something I no longer have.
  • BaseJumperBaseJumper Member Posts: 5,570
    edited November -1
    I have always read this about 223 vs 5.56 and thought it was the truth. You guys saying it's not?

    While the external case dimensions are very similar, the .223 Remington and 5.56x45mm differ in both maximum pressure and chamber shape. The maximum and mean pressures for some varieties of the 5.56 mm (different cartridge designations have different standards) exceed the SAAMI maximums for the .223 Remington, and the methods for measuring pressures differ between NATO and SAAMI.[2] The 5.56 mm chamber specification has also changed over time since its adoption, as the current military loading (NATO SS-109 or US M855) uses longer, heavier bullets than the original loading did. This has resulted in a lengthening of the throat in the 5.56 mm chamber. Thus, while .223 Remington ammunition can be safely fired in a 5.56 mm chambered gun, firing 5.56 mm ammunition in a .223 Remington chamber may produce pressures in excess of even the 5.56 mm specifications due to the shorter throat
  • cwi555cwi555 Member Posts: 1,132 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    .223 dimensions:
    800px-_223_Remington.jpg
    5.56 dimensions:
    800px-5_56x45mm_NATO.jpg

    Take note of the shoulder differences.
  • TxsTxs Member Posts: 17,809 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The article just affirms out-of-the-box accuracy issues that we've known about since this design was introduced.

    People often put down the AK design as terribly inaccurate, but my AK shoots groups comparable to what my old Mini14 was capable of with comparable, military type ammo.
  • chollagardenschollagardens Member Posts: 4,614 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    [:D]Can't help but think about the TV series The A Team. They keep shooting and shooting their Mini 14s and never hit anything.[:D]
  • BGHillbillyBGHillbilly Member Posts: 1,927 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by chollagardens
    [:D]Can't help but think about the TV series The A Team. They keep shooting and shooting their Mini 14s and never hit anything.[:D]
    Thiers were FA often in twin mounts, never figured out why they chose minis unless it was because of low budget TV.

    Remember the bad guys never hit anything whith the AKs/ARs either.
  • topdadtopdad Member Posts: 3,408 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    All the mini-14's suck. Pack them up and send them to me
    for proper disposal.
    Really I love my mini-14,now if I was wanting to shoot
    the nad's off a flea out past 100 yds. it's not the rifle
    I would grab, but if I needed to defend my home when it
    hits the fan I would grab it before any of my bolt guns
    or my shotguns that give me five rounds of buckshot.
    Yes of course there are better rifles out there, but
    the mini-14 fills a nitch preaty well.
  • txlawdogtxlawdog Member Posts: 10,039 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thats good info, thanks.
  • MossbergboogieMossbergboogie Member Posts: 12,211
    edited November -1
    This must be older because the 196 series and up had some changes. Also the Ranch rifle is also now in .223.
  • drobsdrobs Member Posts: 22,620 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Txs
    The article just affirms out-of-the-box accuracy issues that we've known about since this design was introduced.

    People often put down the AK design as terribly inaccurate, but my AK shoots groups comparable to what my old Mini14 was capable of with comparable, military type ammo.


    I had the same experience. The Mini-14 I had shot soccer ball size groups at 100yds. My Ak's - soft ball size groups.
  • yrralguthrieyrralguthrie Member Posts: 1 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    If you look at the drawings of the 223 and 5.56 closely you'll see there is no difference in the drawings.

    The two radii mentioned are incorrectly written as 0.00 which obviously isn't correct. However by looking at the start place and end place of the drawn angle it easy to see they start and end at the same place.

    Sooo...looks like there is NO difference in the external dimensions of the two cases. All the other numbers are the same I believe. Those drawing pretty well prove that.

    So there should be no problem with a handloader using either .223 or 5.56 cases in either a .223 or 5.56 chambered rifle.



    Larry
Sign In or Register to comment.