User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 6:31:30 AM EST
[#1]
Quoted:
What is the difference between the 2? Nothing is the same between the 2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 6:35:39 AM EST
[#2]
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 6:48:21 AM EST
[#3]
Could you save the money for a semi-automatic commercial M14?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 6:55:34 AM EST
[#4]
If what you really want is a semi auto m14, I think you will be let down if you go with the mini 14. IMO there are not any similarities between the two. If possible I would save up for the m14 type, even if you go for a used one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 7:26:14 AM EST
[#5]
Search the Market for a Polytech M14. I bought mine for $725. They are great rifles.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 7:37:34 AM EST
[#6]
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? In the way that a 10/22 sort of looks like an M1 carbine. Yeah, you can make a Mini 14 sort of look like a M14. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 8:18:01 AM EST
[#7]
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? Just buy an airsoft M14. It will look better in the mirror. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 9:11:28 AM EST
[#8]
Quoted:
I don't know much about either gun, but I love the styling of the M14 and the way you can set them up. But I have only shot a Mini 14. I want to build one....but the Mini 14 is the only thing in my price range. What is the difference between the 2? You do realize the Mini-14 is .223, while the M14 and clones are .308? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 1:50:48 PM EST
[#9]
Dan; Welcome to the forum. The Mini 14 is a fine lil' carbine, the M 14 is a MBR.
If this is going to be your first gas operated rifle, then starting with a Mini is fine. Once you become experienced with the Mini you'll be ready to move on to obtaining a M 14. In time, you'll want to own both. And then you'll want the M 1 as well! Getting a Polytech M 14 is one way to go. There are other choices as well. Buy once and build slow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 2:04:25 PM EST
[#10]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? Just buy an airsoft M14. It will look better in the mirror. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 2:12:28 PM EST
[#11]
Mini-14 is a good rifle, but it will be a disappointment if you use after market mags.
For about $300 more, you can get a used Polytech M14S. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 2:23:31 PM EST
[#12]
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? um... kinda. go to : http://perfectunion.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=86 its the best mini-14 website out there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 2:44:11 PM EST
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? um... kinda. go to : http://perfectunion.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=86 its the best mini-14 website out there. This is excellent advice. The two firearms are completely different, and have different purposes. This site is very unfriendly to Mini-14s, like it or not. Some of us have had decent––or better––experiences with the Mini-14, many have not. Personally, I have seen a LOT of folks who cannot shoot, and will blame it on the firearm. Since a lot of shooters start out on Mini-14s, the Mini takes the hit.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 2:57:24 PM EST
[#14]
Just save for a Polytech M14S or a Springfield Armory M1A. You`ll be much happier in the long run
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 3:06:13 PM EST
[#15]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? um... kinda. go to : http://perfectunion.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=86 its the best mini-14 website out there. This is excellent advice. The two firearms are completely different, and have different purposes. This site is very unfriendly to Mini-14s, like it or not. Some of us have had decent––or better––experiences with the Mini-14, many have not. Personally, I have seen a LOT of folks who cannot shoot, and will blame it on the firearm. Since a lot of shooters start out on Mini-14s, the Mini takes the hit.. The only issue I have with the mini-14, and yes I own one, is that there are no good after market mags. The factory mags work great, but will cost you a bunch. Here's a photo of my mini-14GB on the top and my Polytech M14S on the bottom  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 3:18:07 PM EST
[#16]
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? you can polish a turd, but it's still a turd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 3:48:16 PM EST
[#17]
Let me see if I have this straight:
AK= reliable but so-so accuracy, but gets respect, even though they're all commie-made––or nearly all. Mini-14= just as reliable as AK, and equivalent (or better) accuracy, + American made, but no respect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 4:07:04 PM EST
[#18]
You could get a M1 Garand from the CMP for less than a new Mini-14........................
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 4:24:17 PM EST
[#19]
"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."
'nuff said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 4:50:40 PM EST
[#20]
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is the difference between the 2? Nothing is the same between the 2. However... SAGE makes a stock for both of them. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2010 9:00:06 PM EST
[#21]
I have a mini-30. the ammo was cheap and the gun hits every time.
I have heard a lot of people complain about the accuracy of the mini-14. the few I have shot had no problems. although it does have a light weight barrel and will not perform as well as another make with a better barrel. That siad I have never seen an AK or SKS out perfom either. the mini-14 is .223 not many parts avalible action is based off of M14 but mag lock-up is different and as much as I like Ruger the mag lock-up should not have been changed like this. I think the mag thing is its biggest sore spot. I would not discount a good gun for having a less then perfect mag lock-up. the M14 is .308 Great gun I like the action and the round it shoots. the cost of the .308 is more but so is its performance. What are you wanting to do with the gun? hunting, action shooting, three gun competition, just plinking, personal defence? the answers to these will help you decied. Bottom line buy a gun. learn to shoot it well. good luck, have fun, and be safe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 2:10:18 AM EST
[#22]
Quoted:
"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."
'nuff said. If this language had been adopted, as written, we would have been arguably better off today then we currently find ourselves. There would have been many types of firearms imported in toe country that were banned. Magazines are easy to make, whole firearms much less so. Besides the above not being adopted as the sole action item of the Gun Ban, Ruger, who is alleged to have written it has been dead for years, and his family has been out of Ruger, inc for years as well. Ruger peresonally donated millions of $ to pro-RKBA causes in later years, and disproportionately funded the defense against the lawsuits slapped against most gun manufacturers. It's a new century, folks, time to stop living in the past. Do any of you hate Henry Ford for accepting Nazi Germany's highest civilian award? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 2:51:16 AM EST
[#23]
Quoted:
You could get a M1 Garand from the CMP for less than a new Mini-14........................
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e350/mbmphoto/M1Ga.jpg this, and I love my mini; but in the rock paper scissors game, Garand beats the Mini |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 4:01:00 AM EST
[#24]
Quoted:
Let me see if I have this straight: AK= reliable but so-so accuracy, but gets respect, even though they're all commie-made––or nearly all. Mini-14= just as reliable as AK, and equivalent (or better) accuracy, + American made, but no respect. Very accurate comparison. Some other truths: The mini-14 is not a M14. The mini-14 is very reliable w/ factory mags. 20 round mags are under $30 now, straight from Ruger. Almost all mini-14s are 4 MOA or better carbines. It doesn't matter how well anyone can shoot off a bench. How accurate can someone shoot from field positions is all that is relevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 9:11:22 AM EST
[#25]
I'll admit it I like my Mini 14, but then again I knew what I was buying. Mine is a stainless 180 series, in a chaote folding stock. Super sniper nija seal force recon delta force, hang a bunch of crap all over it bad ass..................no. Lightwieght, reliable, low maintenance 4 MOA rifle.......................yes. If you can find one at a decent price go for it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 10:15:37 AM EST
[#26]
but the Mini 14 is the only thing in my price range.
Throw you a Choate M-14 style front sight/flash suppressor unit on that bad boy and see what you think. Keith |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 3:04:04 PM EST
[#27]
Quoted:
"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."
'nuff said. Bill Ruger is dead. Get over it. Besides, did you even read what you posted? Did you read the entire article you took that from? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 3:09:41 PM EST
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."
'nuff said. If this language had been adopted, as written, we would have been arguably better off today then we currently find ourselves. There would have been many types of firearms imported in toe country that were banned. Magazines are easy to make, whole firearms much less so. Stop with the logic and reason. It has no place in a good Ruger bash. As you said, we would have been better off. There would have been no preban/postban rifles as the rifles would be left alone. Some think he just wrote this so as to present some sort of ban when the reality is that this was his alternative for the ban that we got. Some also say he wrote this to save the Mini. Now, where the fuck that logic comes from is a mystery as it would affect the Mini as much as any other rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 3:25:44 PM EST
[#29]
Mini14's are fussy about mags and suffer accuracy issues. If you buy one, because it looks kinda like an M14 you will regret it.
Get a Polytech or Norinco M14 and you will never look back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2010 6:18:30 PM EST
[#30]
Keeps me some Mini's... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2010 7:55:01 AM EST
[#31]
What about a Russian SKS, of Chinese Paratrooper SKS. I have seen both for less than 400. On a side note I feel old saying that. My first gun was a Chinese paratrooper, my Dad bought me, he paid 99$ for it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2010 12:31:58 PM EST
[#32]
If the mini is what you can afford, I say buy it, and start enjoying it! I own both, and enjoy them both, they are just different animals. Ignore the insults from the M14/M1A gunsnobs, and buy the MINI 14!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2010 2:47:26 PM EST
[#33]
Quoted:
If the mini is what you can afford, I say buy it, and start enjoying it! I own both, and enjoy them both, they are just different animals. Ignore the insults from the M14/M1A gunsnobs, and buy the MINI 14! What he said. Time is very short, it's better to have something in hand. NOW! Get it - something - now while you still can. And lots of ammo. And with a little "can do" and knowhow the Mini can be made to shoot quite well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2010 1:41:14 AM EST
[#34]
I have both and discussions (arguments?) like this are pretty much a waste of time.
As for "This site is very unfriendly to Mini-14s" and "respect", I care less as I enjoy shooting both so get both.    |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2010 1:46:18 AM EST
[#35]
Quoted: Quoted: Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? Just buy an airsoft M14. It will look better in the mirror.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2010 3:18:52 AM EST
[#36]
....as soon as you reach 37,000 posts, you can be that funny too! Something to look forward to.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2010 8:27:06 PM EST
[#37]
The mini is a great rifle. It will not shoot with any decent AR, but does the trick. Mine has been doing very well with 64 gr PP hand loads.
I would trade a pair of LRB M14s for an AC556 any day
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 5:07:33 AM EST
[#38]
My only problem with the mini14 is the cost is so high for what you are getting. And EVERYTHING for it is expensive or cheap crap. The cost to get into a mini14 just isn't worth it (to me at least).
Maybe if you watched the A-Team a lot in the 80s, then it might have other "value" to you to get one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 7:03:33 AM EST
[#39]
If I wanted a M1a, but coldn't swing one, I'd probably do a Garand or an M1 Carbine to fill the void. The little Ruger would not be high on my list. Looking at it one would have to look at the AR and one of those are way batter on so many levels. It is a wonder we are even talking about this. What are we talking about again?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 12:48:18 PM EST
[#40]
Quoted: My only problem with the mini14 is the cost is so high for what you are getting. And EVERYTHING for it is expensive or cheap crap. The cost to get into a mini14 just isn't worth it (to me at least). Maybe if you watched the A-Team a lot in the 80s, then it might have other "value" to you to get one. The "A Team" TV show is the ONLY reason I own any weapons. I can't wait for the movie to come out so I can get more inspiration to buy more.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 12:53:19 PM EST
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, can I make a mini 14 look like an m14? Just buy an airsoft M14. It will look better in the mirror. I would rather have that than a Mini, I think. Quoted:
"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."
'nuff said. He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 1:40:48 PM EST
[#42]
Quoted:
He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. I dunno if they're doing that, exactly, but the new management is cetainly taking the company into places that 'ol Bill never went. Let's not forget a few things. All we really have against Bill Ruger is the word of a likewise dead man, repeated again, and again on the 'net. As against that, Ruger, while still alive poured millions of dollars into RKBA causes––Money that he didn't have to spend. Ruger also spent tens of millions defending against the orchestrated spate of anti-gun lawsuits against most all gun manufacturers. A single loss in any one of thise cases might have wrecked the US civilian gun industry. Ruger spent far more than their fair share defending aginst the suits. Maybe Bill Ruger made a mistake in trying to bargain with the Antis. I think that he realized this later on, because he admitted that the Antis couldn't be bargained with; that their real goal was elimination of civilian firearms, which was something thet Ruger initially did not understand. I figure that 'ol Bill tried to make up for his mistake while he was still alive. Maybe that was not enough for some folks, but being a forgiving sort, I'm ready to cut him some slack on that account. Even if you are not ready to forgive Bill, he's DEAD, and the company is in altogether new hands. Factory standard-cap Mini mags for the public? New CCW pistols? When you consider that Glock and S&W have committed far worse treason against the Second Amendment, what Ruger is said to have done––forget his attempts at atonement–– pales to nothing. You Ruger-haters might want to take a close look at Glock and S&W before trashing Ruger. At least Ruger tried to atone for his errors. Glock and S&W haven't even admitted their sins, let alone atoned for them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 2:16:18 PM EST
[#43]
My Mini-14 will shoot ammo my AR-15 won't. It is accurate enough for coyotes and two legged critters. I'm keeping it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 2:18:22 PM EST
[#44]
M14 vs Mini 14
M14 hands down - no question about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 6:02:01 PM EST
[#45]
Quoted: Not a "Ruger hater" (as I own a considerable number of them) but I believe that S&W is not now owned by the people that took part in the earlier nefarious deeds of that company. Quoted: He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. ...You Ruger-haters might want to take a close look at Glock and S&W before trashing Ruger. At least Ruger tried to atone for his errors. Glock and S&W haven't even admitted their sins, let alone atoned for them.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2010 7:44:20 PM EST
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a "Ruger hater" (as I own a considerable number of them) but I believe that S&W is not now owned by the people that took part in the earlier nefarious deeds of that company. Quoted:
He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. ...You Ruger-haters might want to take a close look at Glock and S&W before trashing Ruger. At least Ruger tried to atone for his errors. Glock and S&W haven't even admitted their sins, let alone atoned for them.
They were owned by a British holding company, Thompkins LLC, I believe, but were sold to an American company called Saf T Hammer after being threatened with ritual immolation following all that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2010 12:25:26 AM EST
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a "Ruger hater" (as I own a considerable number of them) but I believe that S&W is not now owned by the people that took part in the earlier nefarious deeds of that company. Quoted:
He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. ...You Ruger-haters might want to take a close look at Glock and S&W before trashing Ruger. At least Ruger tried to atone for his errors. Glock and S&W haven't even admitted their sins, let alone atoned for them.
The chain of S&W owners failed, during the Bush Administration, to try to rid themselves of the Klinton-era, court-imposed, legal agreement that will castrate S&W––and perhaps some others in the industry, should the Obama administration see fit to enforce it. The Bush Admin specifically stated that they (the admin) would not lift a finger to enforce the judgment. And there it sits. The court judgment is as binding on the current owners as it was on the owners who lost the court battle. S&W had eight years to rid themselves––and by extension, the rest of the firearms industry of this albatross around the whole industry's neck, but failed to take the least step towards doing so. When the Obama administration sees fit to do so, their enforcement of the still-valid court judgment against S&W will be much trouble for us all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2010 1:02:00 AM EST
[#48]
This is as close as I've seen one come.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2010 1:43:25 AM EST
[#49]
Quoted: While I have stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, I am not a lawyer. That said, I find it difficult to believe the agreement (not court judgement) could be enforced now as the government never delivered on it's part of the bargain. Quoted: Quoted: Not a "Ruger hater" (as I own a considerable number of them) but I believe that S&W is not now owned by the people that took part in the earlier nefarious deeds of that company. Quoted: He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. ...You Ruger-haters might want to take a close look at Glock and S&W before trashing Ruger. At least Ruger tried to atone for his errors. Glock and S&W haven't even admitted their sins, let alone atoned for them. The chain of S&W owners failed, during the Bush Administration, to try to rid themselves of the Klinton-era, court-imposed, legal agreement that will castrate S&W––and perhaps some others in the industry, should the Obama administration see fit to enforce it. The Bush Admin specifically stated that they (the admin) would not lift a finger to enforce the judgment. And there it sits. The court judgment is as binding on the current owners as it was on the owners who lost the court battle. S&W had eight years to rid themselves––and by extension, the rest of the firearms industry of this albatross around the whole industry's neck, but failed to take the least step towards doing so. When the Obama administration sees fit to do so, their enforcement of the still-valid court judgment against S&W will be much trouble for us all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2010 2:20:31 AM EST
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
While I have stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, I am not a lawyer. That said, I find it difficult to believe the agreement (not court judgement) could be enforced now as the government never delivered on it's part of the bargain. Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a "Ruger hater" (as I own a considerable number of them) but I believe that S&W is not now owned by the people that took part in the earlier nefarious deeds of that company. Quoted:
He's dead. And buried. And Sturm, Ruger, and Co. are pissing on his memory by building ARs, tactical 10/22s, and concealable semi-auto pistols. ...You Ruger-haters might want to take a close look at Glock and S&W before trashing Ruger. At least Ruger tried to atone for his errors. Glock and S&W haven't even admitted their sins, let alone atoned for them.
The chain of S&W owners failed, during the Bush Administration, to try to rid themselves of the Klinton-era, court-imposed, legal agreement that will castrate S&W––and perhaps some others in the industry, should the Obama administration see fit to enforce it. The Bush Admin specifically stated that they (the admin) would not lift a finger to enforce the judgment. And there it sits. The court judgment is as binding on the current owners as it was on the owners who lost the court battle. S&W had eight years to rid themselves––and by extension, the rest of the firearms industry of this albatross around the whole industry's neck, but failed to take the least step towards doing so. When the Obama administration sees fit to do so, their enforcement of the still-valid court judgment against S&W will be much trouble for us all.
Last I heard, we had lawyer types post here who had read the documents and were familiar with the case. All of 'em said that the only thing between S&W and the imposition of the terms of the judgment was the stoke of Attorney Gen'l Holder's pen, himself a rabid anti-gunner. Perhaps some or all of this info is dated or even incorrect. If so, I stand ready to be corrected. Absent such corrections, I will go with the latest, best opinions/facts on the subject. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
