Video: "Why Won't the Ruger Mini-14 Just Die?"

 

VIDEO: "Why Won't the Ruger Mini-14 Just Die? [Part 1]"--Lucky Gunner Ammo (15 min.)

    Since this video is the first part of a two-part series, it doesn't answer the question. Rather, it sets up the question by going over the history of the rifle, looking at pro's and con's, and comparing prices versus a Colt AR-15 and a budget AR over time. For most of its history, the Mini-14 cost less than an AR-15, and this gap widened considerably in the late 1980s and going into the 1990s. I can remember when you could walk into a gun store and the Mini ran about 50 to 60% of what an AR15 costs. But that has changed: the price gap has narrowed and, over the past couple of years as the video shows, the Mini-14 costs more than a Colt AR-15 and significantly more than a budget AR. Also, as the video notes, the magazines cost double (or more) than you would pay for an AR magazine, there are no good ways of attaching optics or lights, and the rifle still suffers a bit in the accuracy department (although the modern models are more accurate than the earlier models of Mini-14). Yet people are still buying the weapon and so the question posed in the title: why won't it die?

    I can think of several reasons. First, notwithstanding the issues with aftermarket magazines that developed after Ruger stopped selling factory 20- and 30-round magazines to the public, the rifle always had--and I believe continues to have--a reputation for eating everything you feed it. In the 80's, the Mini-14 was considered by many in the prepping community to be more reliable than the AR (partly because of a couple well-publicized incidents where cops with ARs facing down criminals with Mini-14s came down on the losing side).

    Second, it is a light and handy gun. It weighs less and, in my opinion, is better balanced than the AR. It doesn't have all the things--pistol grips, magazine wells, and high-rise sights--that tend to catch on clothes, seat belts, brush or branches, and so on.

    Third, it has a traditional look and feel about it, especially with the wood stock. Not only does that appeal to people that like traditional looking rifles, but is less likely to frighten those members of the public that are 2nd Amendment impaired.

    Fourth, it's accuracy is acceptable for the person that actually uses a gun in the field. The reality is that the original Mini-14, sporting a pencil profile barrel, was never "inaccurate" compared to the original AR sporting a pencil profile barrel. The "inaccuracy" issue arose when comparing the original Mini-14 to the A2 models with the heavy barrels and the improved peep sights. Sticking better peep sights and a heavier barrel seemed to alleviate a lot of those issues. Also, as I've noted before, up until the end of the 1980s, the Mini-14 sported a 1:7 twist at a time when people were still mostly shooting 50 and 55 grain bullets, and probably would have done better with a 1:9 or 1:12 twist.