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.
Options
ruger mini-14 6.8
tone59
Member Posts: 672 ✭✭
i have been told the ruger mini is not an accurate rifle.later i heard the newer ones had better accuracy.the only review i have read on the mini 14 in the 6.8 cal said at first the new rifle was disappointing(5 inch 3 shot grps at 100 yards)but after 40 rds the rifle was holding 1 inch grps out performing his 6.8 AR.can anyone comment on the 6.8 mini and or tell me what size 3 shot grps they get at 100 yards with a scoped 6.8 mini 14?
Comments
Ive got a new Ranch in .223, previous owner said it did a 10-shot group at 100 yards of about 1 1/4".
I sure hope you didn't buy it based on what this guy told you.
The 11th commandment as far as buying used guns are concerned, is that you buy it based on what it is, not because of the story that came with it.
I had a couple of Mini's years back, neither would keep 10 shots in 4" no matter the lighting or if it was a good day or bad day.
rufe-snow...thanks for the warning.if i do get a mini it will be a new one not used.i have heard several stories similar to yours regarding the older models.i have also been told the newer rifle barrels have been improved on.jeffb1911s comments seem to back this up.
Pre 581 series have a pencil barrel. Post 581 have a heavier barrel the goes down to a tappered.
The shoot better then the pencil barrels but MOA still isn't likely.
Atleast from what I have read. I have an older ranch and didn't but it for accuracy so I am not sure what groups it holds.
But on the subject of accuracy in general, this article explains what exactly Ruger has done to tighten up the accuracy of these guns:
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/featured_rifles/rugranch_071807/
My personal take on these is that they're accurate "enough" for use as a defensive arm out to 150 yards or so, which is basically all they're meant for.
If you really want sub minute-of-angle match-type accuracy, you're probably going to have an easier time getting it starting with an AR-15 type gun.
There are two diametrically opposed groups that usually found discussing Min-14s:
Those that like them and will defend them to the death.
Those that recognize poor (cheap) design coupled with cheap manufacturing and try to enlighten others to save them money and aggravation.
It's not hard to tell which side I take...
If you have made up your mind to buy a 6.8 SPC Mini-14 then no manner of dissuasion will stop you. Go buy it and hopefully a great one managed to worm it's past the inspectors and out of the factory by accident. Those that quote small groups such as 1/2" - 3/4" all day long are using the one decent group they managed to shoot for the rule, not the exception that it is.
If you think that 1-1/2" to 4" groups ON AVERAGE are suitable for your shooting then go buy one by all means and enjoy!
But if you're looking for quality, reliability and accuracy, you're barking up the wrong tree.
Now, as to the cartridge comparison, you are way off base but it's probably not your fault. The internet, advertising writers and the manufacturers often distort or manipulate 'facts' and 'statistics' to make their case as an attempt to make a sales point.
We shoot a lot of 6.8 SPC and .243 Win. in several barrel lengths and rifle configurations. Your data has been juggled to make it seem that the 6.8 SPC is just as good as the .243 Win. with those bullet weights.
When I tested ARs with 20" barrels chambered for the 6.8 SPC and then used one of AR10 rifles with a 20" barrel chambered for the .243 Win. we noted a significant difference. The cartridges used the 115 for the 6.8 and the 105 for the .243 Win. My Oehler Ballistic Lab showed 2649 FPS for the high end of the 6.8 SPC and 2900 FPS for the .243 Win. This is consistent for several tests not just one shot from each rifle. Pressures remained the same for both test batches of ammunition.
This amounts to a 400 ft/lb difference at 300 yards in favor of the .243 Win.
Good luck with your decision!
Best.
ADDED:
As I've stated before, I believe completely in the 'Fully Informed Jury', not only in the courtroom but in all aspects of making decisions in our lives. That's why I spend the time writing the information here and in other venues. I have access to the experience and hardware that others don't, it's that simple. I'm not trying to be vindictive about the Mini-14 but rather, provide information that might otherwise be overlooked or misinterpreted.
Useless comparisons and dulcet tones of written verbiage whether by professionals or everyday folks, seek only to confuse the issues.
The Mini-14 or the 'Ranch Rifle' version suits lots of folks obviously, since Ruger routinely drops products from the manufacturing line up for lesser performance in sales. However, as always, I encourage everyone to do their level best to gather as much useful information about a product before purchase. It will save you a ton of aggravation in the long run.
Good Luck with your selection!
Best.
When I tested ARs with 20" barrels chambered for the 6.8 SPC and then used one of AR10 rifles with a 20" barrel chambered for the .243 Win. we noted a significant difference. The cartridges used the 115 for the 6.8 and the 105 for the .243 Win. My Oehler Ballistic Lab showed 2649 FPS for the high end of the 6.8 SPC and 2900 FPS for the .243 Win. This is consistent for several tests not just one shot from each rifle. Pressures remained the same for both test batches of ammunition.
This amounts to a 400 ft/lb difference at 300 yards in favor of the .243 Win.
Using these numbers I think we get the following:
A 6.8mm (.277) 115 grain bullet at 2649 fps yields a kinetic energy of 1791 ft-lbs and a momentum of 304.6k grain-fps.
A .243" 105 grain bullet at 2900 fps yields a kinetic energy of 1960 ft-lbs, and a momentum of 304k grain-fps.
Assuming my arithmetic is right, with those loads the 6.8mm yields 91% of the kinetic energy of the .243, and because we're using a heavier bullet in 6.8 for the comparison, nearly identical momentum. So I do think it is fair to say, as the original poster did, that the two are fairly similar *at the muzzle*.
I agree that no matter what caliber or variant, a mini-14 just isn't a 300 yard gun. Yes, Ruger has made these better than they have been in the past, but to put it politely, if you're looking for accuracy, there are better platforms to start with. To me, a mini-14 makes the most sense if you want something for relatively short range and you live in a jurisdiction where AR-15s aren't allowed.
Purely for ballistics comparison, here are some published numbers on 6.8 vs .243 from Hornady (which is not quite as invested into this caliber the way Remington is):
6.8mm 110 grain; Muzzle 2550fps/1588 ft-lbs 300 yds 1877fps/860 ft-lbs. (Note that this is with a short 16" bbl; a 20" bbl should give you another 100+fps, and more might even be possible with a 24" bbl).
As an interesting comparison a 110 grain 6.8 at 1877 fps at 300 yards yields nearly identical ballistics to a 110 grain .30 carbine round at 1900 fps, at the muzzle.
.243 100 grain; Muzzle 2960fps/1945 ft-lbs 300 yds 2299fps/1173 ft lbs (24" bbl)
You got 2650fps with the 110 grain 6.8 with a 20" bbl, and interestingly this shooter claims the same exact velocity chronographing his own Vmax 110 grain reloads from an 18" bbl: http://demigodllc.com/~zak/firearms/6.8SPC/faq.php
Starting with that number and extrapolating should yield about 964 ft-lbs at 300 yards, reducing the difference in kinetic energy between the 100 grain .243 and 110 grain 6.8mm to about 210 ft-lbs at 300 yards.
Again, the fatter/heavier 6.8mm bullet should offset this difference by a small amount. Also, going to an apples/apples comparison of identical barrel lengths and identical weight bullets might also help offset the difference a bit more.
Bottom line to me is that the main point of the 6.8mm round is to run it through an AR-15 platform gun. Yeah, it falls short of a .243, but you're also firing it through a cheaper and smaller platform; and that's really the point of it. Looking at it from that perspective, I think its not a terrible approximation of a .243 and it still does better than .223.
Reference:
http://www.hornady.com/store/6.8mm-SPC-110-gr-BTHP-with-Cannelure//
http://www.hornady.com/store/243-Win-100-gr-BTSP/
Look at the Mini and look at the competition. The Mini is a rugged short-barreled carbine. They named it Ranch Rifle. Typically this little firearm can be found doing exactly what its name denotes. Seldom does the competition get used for the exact same purposes as the Mini. There's usually a reason for this.
Accuracy? Accuracy is more perspective than anything else. The Mini will deliver a killing shot at 100 yards. For some that's plenty. For others it's not enough. Pencil barrels aren't noted for being target quality.
Reliability? Again perspective. Those who spend time keeping their gear free of dirt and grime and lubed to perfection are likely not the same folks who use the Mini. At least they don't use the Mini for the same purposes. The Mini is simple, reliable, loose by some standards, and tolerant of abuse. Much like the AK in terms of pulling the trigger and expecting the weapon to go bang.
So... If we're talking about placing a lead pill in the eye of a newt at 100 yards, the Mini probably isn't a weapon of choice. Then again, it wasn't designed for that type of accuracy. On the other hand, if the object of the game is an ability to cover a basketball-sized target in a hail of lead at 100 yards under just about any conditions, the Mini may well be the firearm of choice.
In my opinion it's more about choosing the correct tool for the job. While there's a degree of crossover, the Mini does best as a reliable utility firearm. Using iron sights at fairly close distances to reliably place a number of lead pills is its specialty. Scoped to place one pill at MOA accuracy at 250 yards? Not so much.
You decide.