The less scary trope comes up repeatedly in Mini-14 discussions, but I have never seen it quantified.

Nice.

I wanted one so bad I made an SBR that looked like that.  The prices on them keeps climbing.  They around $15K+ for a Ruger AC556

COOL as hell

what’s the cyclic rate on that ?

I can kinda-sorta see it, years ago when the dept went from wood stocked 870's to black plastic SpeedFeed stocks  a number of people actually complained about the look.  When DPS went from Mini-14's to AR's even GD was screaming about "militarization".

The militarization is being able to hit something, not the look.  

The Antis will eventually try to ban all firearms.  They begin with "Evil-Looking" black rifles as being "low-hanging" fruit.  Rest assured that the Antis will try to ban ALL semi-auto rifles.

Folks thinking they live in States that are "Safe" from this are mistaken.  The Antis are already hard at work buying your State legislators.

A LGS advertises on FB and he put up a new Mini 14 for sale. I messaged him and told him I would trade EVEN for my 1977-78 Smith and Wesson model 41 with 2 mags.
He messaged me back saying “that’s not a trade we’d be interested in”
His asking price on the rifle was $1125.  His loss.
Side note, his prices are usually higher than the bigger stores.
I figured I’d use the shit out of a mini 14 for coyotes and varmints while my 41 sits in the safe.

I find myself wanting a early "180 series" mini 14. (early to mid 70's made)
Yea they are slightly different and are no longer supported by ruger and if it breaks, you are SOL.
But something about them attracts me to it instead of the newer ones.  I just like the older vintage ruger guns for some reason.
Do not care if it is 2-3 moa rifle, I still want it.

I posted a comparison of the 180 series with the subsequent 181 up to but not including the 580 series on a few forums a couple years back.

My 180 series was 2 MOA in its stock configuration, and that’s consistent with the reviews Jeff Cooper did on the 180 series Mini 14.  He liked it a lot.

Then came the AC-556, a full auto development of the Mini 14.  They made a number of changes including a larger gas port bushing (.080” compared to .052”), a heavier slide, a deeper gas block, deeper receiver, and deeper stock to accommodate the heavier slide, a heavier bolt without a roller, and a new bolt hold open design.  The idea was to beef it up for both full auto operation, and the over gassed condition it was now in for increased reliability in dirty conditions.

Unfortunately, Ruger incorporated the same changes in the Mini 14 beginning with the 181 series.  They saved money on production  and parts commonality, but the major down side was accuracy went from 2 MOA to 3-5 MOA.

The other casualty was exceptional handling.  The 180 series Mini 14 handles extremely well compared to the fatter and heavier 181 and later series. The 180 series is slimmer, trimmer, and extremely fun to shoot.

—-

People talk about parts breakage and being screwed if something breaks on a 180 series. But there are two things to consider.  

First, because they beefed up the AC-556 for full auto use and the over gassed condition, and then transferred those changes to the 181 series Mini 14, shooters started thinking the original 180 series was weak and prone to breaking. That wasn’t the case, as it wasn’t over gassed like the AC-556 and later Mini 14s.

Second, Ruger re-tooled the Mini 14 with the 580 series and because of that no longer provides support for the pre 580 series Mini 14s either.

But frankly I don’t worry about it as I have never managed to break anything on a Mini 14.

——

The differences.

Dakota, thank you for posting that, I think I read your comparison here a couple of years ago, and I greatly appreciate the reexposition.

What series are each of these rifles?



And which is the 180 series receiver in this photograph?



ETA:  Now that I finally got the 2nd pic to display larger than Photobucket & my browser would allow me to zoom it, I'm guessing the lower receiver is an original 180 series w/ the different bolt hold-open & the lack of a side scope mount that appears on the top receiver?

Concur that "breaking" things on Ruger Mini-14/Mini-30 is seldom encountered.  However, replacing the Op-Rod spring after much use is always required on most firearms which use them, the Mini being no exception.  For that matter, any spring which sees a lot of use may stand replacing for best reliability. Hopefully the rest of the springs on the 180 series Mini are not so exotic that they cannot be replaced with decent counterparts, IDK.

FWIW, I bought some "much-used" genuine Ruger Mini-14 30-rd mags back in the 1994-2004 Fed "Ban Era" and I needed to replace the springs on all of them for reliable function.

No expert, but one obvious and critical part which is found only on the 180 series Mini is the roller on the bolt.  Users of 180 series Minis should GREASE the bolt roller well and often, same as on the M-14/M1A.

ASI has been offering firing pins for a while now, don’t know who’s manufacturing the new extractors?

I really like that fake gas tube and M1A front sight post/flash hider on that bottom one. Really gives it the look of a actual mini M14.

The SOCOM length AccuStrut really helps improve the accuracy but stiffening the barrel.

So does the Choate combination front sight and flash hider. It adds enough weight to the end of the barrel to improve the barrel harmonics.  The front sight picture is also much improved over the wide Ruger blade front sight. A Tech Sights rear sight also replaces the crappy sight on the ranch rifle and allows for very good iron sight accuracy.

From top to bottom they are a 184 series Mini 14, a 180 series Mini 14, and a 187 series Mini 14 ranch rifle.

In the bottom picture the lower receiver is the 180 series with its rather odd looking Rube Goldberg style bolt hold open.

Both of these have Tech Sights rear sights. The 180 came with a large and clunky scope mount that used the rear sight base as one of the mounting points and the rear sight did not come with the rifle. Similarly the 184 series mini 14 has the same rear sight.

My 187 series ranch rifle was surplussed from the NC dept of corrections where it had been scoped.  I replaced the crappy ranch rifle rear sight just because it is crappy.

Thanks.  I'm becoming more & more interested in the 180.

Funny enough, I actually saw my first 180 series in the wild at a gun show yesterday. It had the exact same scope mount you describe. It replaced the rear sight and then I saw it had a set screw that tightened against the rear receiver heel.
I figured finding a original rear sight would be hard and most likely that set screw would leave a ugly mark on the receiver that would bug me, so I passed on it. It also did not have a price on it and the seller was too busy with someone else.
With the prices of all the other mini 14's at the show being $1200-$1500, I was not even going to bother asking, as I knew it was too much.

No offense, but a slight correction is in order.  From Accu-Strut FAQ section: "The single-clamp Socom was developed in response to sustained customer request for a shorter, more compact strut. It is already known that the double-clamp configuration is greatly superior for stabilizing a rifle barrel. As such, there is less certainty that the Socom model will provide any measure of accurization at all, although it does happen. In the frequent instances that no improvement is seen, the benefit is mainly ornamental. In any case, our Socom model continues to sell very well."

Accu-Strut FAQ

I’ve read their FAQs and I understand they’re promoting their longer strut a a better option. In fact I read their FAQs before I bought my first one and went with the shorter strut anyway.  If you look at the first mini 14 I modified the reason is obvious.  A prior owner had shortened the barrel to 16”, probably to try to improve the horrible accuracy.  I don’t know if shortening the barrel helped but, I doubt it as it was still a 5 MOA rifle when I acquired it.

The Choate flash hider is a known accuracy enhancement on its own by improving barrel harmonics as well as sight picture compared to the wide blade Ruger puts on them.  Fitting a full length two clamp AccuStrut on the 16” barrel with the flash hider installed would mean putting the rear clamp right next to the gas block, and then putting the front clamp just behind the flash hider, leaving over an inch of strut in front of the clamp doing nothing.



It worked for me in improving accuracy from 5 MOA to 1.5 MOA using Hornady 55 gr FMJ bullets.

Personally, I think attention to detail and quality of the installation make a difference.  I took care to fit the strut snugly against the gas block and parallel to the barrel.  I then marked the gas block where the screw centers contacted the block for milling divots in the gas block for the set screws. Once the divots were added I reassembled it. The solid contact with the gas block and screws engaged in the divots make it solid even before the clamp is reinstalled, rather than allowing the strut to pivot on the gas block. That probably acts much like a second clamp improving barrel stiffness between the gas block and clamp, and it accomplishes the same thing as squaring the strut with the barrel that is accomplished with a pair of clamps.

To be fair, I also properly torqued the gas block screws and as noted above added a browning style Choate flash suppressor to improve barrel harmonics and sight picture, indexed to mechanically zero the added Tech Sights rear sight.  I also installed an .045” gas bushing and a shock buffer.

But in my experience, none of those other changes by themselves produce the same level of accuracy as also adding the strut.

The Hornady 55 gr FMJBT bullets are far more consistent than the average 55 gr FMJ, but 1.5 MOA is fairly close to the accuracy limit with the Hornady 55 gr FMJs.  I can squeeze very close to 1 MOA out of them in my 20” bull barrel Varmint AR, but they give similar 1.5 MOA accuracy in my Colt M16A1 and Colt SP1.  I doubt this 184 series Mini 14 would shoot any better with a full length AccuStrut assuming it would fit.

I was pleased enough with the results that when I acquired my 187 series Mini 14 ranch rifle, I gave it the same accurizing treatment and again used the short SOCOM length AccuStrut fitted in the same manner.   It also shoots 1.5 MOA five shot groups and again I doubt a full length strut would shoot any better with the ammunition involved.

In short, I’m stating what worked, twice, not what I read in an FAQ.

No offense intended!  I'm glad that your set-up works well for you; that's all that matters in the end.

Becoming more interested in the 180.  Will any of the various struts fit the 180?

Maybe not.  See quote from Accu-Strut's Application Guide

IDK about others; The only other one that comes to mind is the Mo-Rod.  No doubt others.

Suggest asking questions of all strut manufacturers you can find.

From very limited info I've received, the 180 series may not benefit as much from a strut as do later "Pencil-barrel" Minis.  IOW, the 180 series Mini-14 may be inherently more accurate than a later "Pencil-barrel" Mini.

This is purely speculation, and I wouldn't bet the ranch on it until some modern owners of 180 series minis show up with accuracy testing results..

Apparently depends on the version of 180...

https://www.rugermini.com/mo-rod-5-5-barrel-stabilizer-mini-14-std-barrel-pre-2005/

Well, I'm no "expert" on 180 series Minis.  I suggest that you contact mfrs of struts that "might" fit 180 series Minis and ask for pix (or at least very good text descriptions) of what 180 series Minis their products will fit, and pix of what 180 series Minis their products will NOT fit.

As said above, the 180 series Mini-14 had few parts in common with later series Mini-14s.  That explains why some parts and support for later series Mini-14s are still available, but the 180 series of Mini-14 is no longer supported by Ruger.

In all truth, the 180 series Mini-14 is almost entirely different rifle from later series of the Mini-14.  It's quite possible that a 180 series Mini-14 might NOT require a barrel strut which is so effective on the later and much-different series of Minis.

You might ask questions HERE and discuss things with folks who currently own 180 series Mini-14s.

I think that's what interests me the most about the 180 - it was the rifle that established the Mini's popularity, and then Ruger added considerable weight to it and precision went downhill.  And it's not been made since.  Gunbroker prices on the 180's are running about the same as new ones.

The other thing that interests me in the Mini is the leftist gun bans and the stripper clip guides.  The stripper clip guides likely do not work stock with a 180 Mini, but likely can be modded, although the receiver might have to be drilled and tapped.  We have not suffered so many leftists in Texas as the West Coast & NE have, but I would like to travel all over America and have a gun that's legal wherever I go, despite having to do paperwork in advance.

A Mini w/ a 10 round mag & a stripper clip guide is not that different in function from the SKS, a rifle design I have grown to appreciate as I've gotten older.

My 186 series Mini-14 has a Cogburn Arsenal stripper clip guide installed.  My State has an "Assault Weapons Ban" bill currently being considered, and possible it will pass.  In that event, I have at least two "practical" methods to circumvent the Ban, and not "register" my Mini with the State.  All reversible when such Bans are declared "Unconstitutional".

I also have a nice Tula Russki SKS.  Concur with your remarks.

BUT don't forget that the Antis will eventually try to ban all civilian-owned firearms.  They are just beginning with the "Evil" black rifles, but will, if not stopped, eliminate all civilian firearms ownership.  I didn't use to think so, but now I do.

Forgive me for not offering details about my firearms.  Anti-gunners read these forums.