Falconflyer
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I don't think Ruger lost the plot at all, have you seen what their share prices have done in the last ten years?
Ruger Mini-14 WTF!
- Thread starter Ganderite
- Start date
I don't think Ruger lost the plot at all, have you seen what their share prices have done in the last ten years?
Precisely... their new strategy of limited runs at the request of major distributors (who are directly connected to the end users) is brilliant and the units are mostly presold and commanding premium prices... they are putting out some very interesting configurations, that are directly requested by grassroots shooters.
I'm definitely missing the point here then. Once you take the gas system out of the equation, the Mini *IS* a slightly scaled up M1 carbine action. It's exactly the same length, and only 1/4" wider. M1s aren't particularly fantastic guns either; accuracy is about the same as an old gen Mini, and reliability is a good deal worse. They could also accurately be described as rattle traps.
So I guess I'm confused. If you scaled up an M1 or scaled down an M14, you'd end up with basically the same thing, and apart from the DI gas system, it would look exactly like the mini 14. To say they should have scaled up the M1 but instead ended up with a bastardized M14 copy doesn't make any sense. It's exactly as much one as it is the other.
As far as as the receiver design goes, THANK GOD they didn't copy the M1 style of just dropping loose into the reciever and hanging off the recoil lug. Talk about rattletraps with poor accuracy, that sure wouldn't have helped things.
Out of line how? It's more work to make and assemble than any mass market bolt gun. I can't think of any semi auto that's been cheaper than the equivalent bolt gun. The BAR costs more than the X Bolt. The 7400 and 750 cost more than a 700.
If a blued wood Hawkeye or 77 is about $1200 these days, $1250 for a blued wood mini seems exactly in line to me. The days of getting much for under 1k are over.
If you want a non restricted semi auto that fires .223 or x39, you have but few options in Canada, and all of them cost more than the mini does.
exactly. Lol
Nothing super special about them when put next to most other rifles.
I think I would go with a VZ58 over a mini 14 at the end of the day
Last edited:
Well, you are comparing them to a list of bolt action rifles; how is that a relevant comparison? Bolt guns are cheaper; big deal. Compare apples to apples, semis to semis. Complain all you want about how expensive Mini's are, but virtually all of its semi-auto competition is even more costly...and gives you fewer features. You say you would choose a VZ58, so...okay, let's compare those two.
The Mini, like all those bolt guns, is very easy to scope. New ones come with both a set of Ruger rings to fit the integral dovetails, AND a rail that screws right onto the top of the receiver and allows you to choose any Weaver or Picatinny rings you want. Not many bolt guns are that versatile. Most come with drilled receivers that allow you to buy...at extra cost...a set of bases to fit the rings you select. A few, like the M77, have integral dovetails and come with rings to fit. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any bolt guns that come standard with both. The VZ58? Mounting a scope will cost money; not only do you need to buy rings AND one of the ridiculous jury-rigged commercial mounts that place the scope far too high for any kind of cheek weld, but you then need to buy or cobble together some sort of cheekpiece/riser to actually use the contraption. Good choice! In this case, the Ruger is indeed "nothing special" other than being easier to scope than almost all the other choices. The VZ, in this context, certainly is special...but not in a good way...
But, okay, ignore that. Let's say that you are young enough that your eyes allow easy use of open sights AND let's say that you also have the necessary skill to do so...not a given, because a lot of young shooters have never learned to use irons. But if you have, let's also assume that you meant to say Mini30 rather than Mini14, so at least we are comparing rifles in the same chambering. Shoot the VZ and I don't care how good you are, it's impossible to say that you like those squinty little open sights. Now try the Ruger; remove that nice scope (takes a few seconds) and you are left with a very capable and effective front post sight paired with an adjustable rear aperture sight; an infinitely superior set-up that allows for good shooting. I've only had a couple of Mini30's (along with a bunch of 14's) and also a couple CZ858's. None of them are match rifles, but by and large the Rugers can equal the AK-wannabe's and will usually better them. The shootability of the sights and the inherent accuracy doesn't make the Mini's special...just better.
The Ruger comes with your choice of synthetic or wood, in stainless or blued. The VZ has that lovely chipboard'n'glue beaver barf for that warm natural feeling.
Neither gun is set up for using a 10-round magazine if that matters to you. The Ruger's 5-rounder fits into the stock without any goofy-looking snag-prone uselessly-empty mag body hanging down below. The VZ? If you look hard enough you might find a 5-round non-pinned magazine for it...which you can buy for still more money. It won't actually be flush-fitting, but it tries. AND if you actually enjoy carrying 5-round magazines that are a foot long, you can get some for your Ruger and go play soldier.
But you like the VZ; good for you! For making noise and doing 5-round mag dumps, it's every bit as good as the Mini. For use as a serious hunting rifle it's hard not to pick the Ruger; it just ticks all the boxes. But the VZ's...well, they are a character-building experience; I guess that makes them special.
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
Ruger's parts are investment cast through a lost wax process. cheap, repeatable, and fast. tooling has been around forever. still as accurate as well. What little machining is done is mostly for aesthetics, not to improve accuracy.
And the second part? RUGER owns the Investment casting plant. So. They have absolute control on the process from raw material to finished product which should help base price... why is the savings not passed to consumer.
Anyhow a Mini-14 is a fine rifle, I was never so glad to sell mine for something that would make a group instead of a 'pattern' on a sheet of plywood at 100m
Oh, I agree, but in terms of out of line, my question was... compared to what? Any bolt rifle with the comparable amount of work into it is the same price or more, and there's not one currently made semi NR .223 or x39 I can think of that's cheaper. Even the base BAR stalker is more. So... out of line compared to what? I think the pricing falls exactly in line with where things are at these days.
Of course Ruger isn't going to pass on any lower costs to the consumer - supply and demand is what sets retail pricing, not manufacturing costs. Not only are they going to price their product where they get the most revenue, they're obligated to. If you want to know why someone charges what they do for something, don't look at the seller, look at the consumer. I personally can't fathom paying over $2k for a No 1, but obviously there's lots of people that can, because they keep selling all of them. Now THERE'S a rifle where I don't see the value, but again and as always that's up to the individual. Not really any competition for the No 1 either, so they've got an near monopoly on the supply of you're looking for a decent single shot that isn't a premium rifle.
Last edited:
Oh, it was a genuine question. I could see preferring the VZ as a NR blaster / hunting rifle, and the mini as a hunting rifle / blaster. The VZ isn't bad, it's a lot of fun to shoot, but I dont see where it's in any way better than the mini for the sam price, except perhaps fun factor and that's totally subjective.
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
There are a few better choices, Macabee, 180 etc etc. And you are correct, No.1's are getting a little too pricey for their own good, and I own a few!!!
Put another way, 1400.00 I want to HIT my target, semi or bolt action, it better give me at least 2-2.5 MOA or better with todays ammo and metal foundries.
h ttps://www.ruger.com/casting/index.html
good old Pine Tree Castings....
Ah yes, forgot about the 180c, thanks. Definitely cheaper. Though not an option if you want x39. The macabee is much more expensive.
Hitting your target? All depends on the size of your target
I never, ever, ever would have imagined buying a mini, it was the last thing I ever would have seen myself buying... right up until I did. Admittedly it only happened after I had a few too many scotches and impulsed purchased it, only to wake up the next morning to see with some horror the reciept in my email. I figured worst case if it was awful I'd just take the hit and flog it used.
Is the accuracy impressive? No. Is it suitable for the intended use and acceptable using surplus x39? Darn right. As I've said before, if AKs were $1400 and NR, they couldn't bring the sea cans of them in fast enough... and they're measurably worse in every way unless you were actually needing a combat rifle. Perhaps I have low expectations, but getting 4 moa out of surplus and 2.5 moa out of good ammo is about all I'd expect from a lightweight x39 semi, which is exactly what it delivers.
I wouldn't have said I was a mini hater, just highly indifferent to them. Now I get it. They're light, handy, fun, cheap to shoot, and sufficient for the role. What's not to love?
Last edited:
I owned one. BNIB. Never shot it, returned it. Must have been made on a Friday aftenoon 20 mins before quiting time. That was in the days of Ruger's really bad QC wave they had. Still, if i could find one for under 1K, that was put together right, i'd still consider one. Even more so if the stupid mag cap didn't exist.
Ruger seems to have cleared up most of the QC issues, I finally own a Ruger rifle worth keeping. Though their prices have climbed to the top of the range for the products they sell. American made means a lot in the US, and when stacked against some of the crap Remington has turned out recently, they look pretty good.
Ruger seems to have cleared up most of the QC issues, I finally own a Ruger rifle worth keeping. Though their prices have climbed to the top of the range for the products they sell. American made means a lot in the US, and when stacked against some of the crap Remington has turned out recently, they look pretty good.
Well, you are comparing them to a list of bolt action rifles; how is that a relevant comparison? Bolt guns are cheaper; big deal. Compare apples to apples, semis to semis. Complain all you want about how expensive Mini's are, but virtually all of its semi-auto competition is even more costly...and gives you fewer features. You say you would choose a VZ58, so...okay, let's compare those two.
The Mini, like all those bolt guns, is very easy to scope. New ones come with both a set of Ruger rings to fit the integral dovetails, AND a rail that screws right onto the top of the receiver and allows you to choose any Weaver or Picatinny rings you want. Not many bolt guns are that versatile. Most come with drilled receivers that allow you to buy...at extra cost...a set of bases to fit the rings you select. A few, like the M77, have integral dovetails and come with rings to fit. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any bolt guns that come standard with both. The VZ58? Mounting a scope will cost money; not only do you need to buy rings AND one of the ridiculous jury-rigged commercial mounts that place the scope far too high for any kind of cheek weld, but you then need to buy or cobble together some sort of cheekpiece/riser to actually use the contraption. Good choice! In this case, the Ruger is indeed "nothing special" other than being easier to scope than almost all the other choices. The VZ, in this context, certainly is special...but not in a good way...
But, okay, ignore that. Let's say that you are young enough that your eyes allow easy use of open sights AND let's say that you also have the necessary skill to do so...not a given, because a lot of young shooters have never learned to use irons. But if you have, let's also assume that you meant to say Mini30 rather than Mini14, so at least we are comparing rifles in the same chambering. Shoot the VZ and I don't care how good you are, it's impossible to say that you like those squinty little open sights. Now try the Ruger; remove that nice scope (takes a few seconds) and you are left with a very capable and effective front post sight paired with an adjustable rear aperture sight; an infinitely superior set-up that allows for good shooting. I've only had a couple of Mini30's (along with a bunch of 14's) and also a couple CZ858's. None of them are match rifles, but by and large the Rugers can equal the AK-wannabe's and will usually better them. The shootability of the sights and the inherent accuracy doesn't make the Mini's special...just better.
The Ruger comes with your choice of synthetic or wood, in stainless or blued. The VZ has that lovely chipboard'n'glue beaver barf for that warm natural feeling.
Neither gun is set up for using a 10-round magazine if that matters to you. The Ruger's 5-rounder fits into the stock without any goofy-looking snag-prone uselessly-empty mag body hanging down below. The VZ? If you look hard enough you might find a 5-round non-pinned magazine for it...which you can buy for still more money. It won't actually be flush-fitting, but it tries. AND if you actually enjoy carrying 5-round magazines that are a foot long, you can get some for your Ruger and go play soldier.
But you like the VZ; good for you! For making noise and doing 5-round mag dumps, it's every bit as good as the Mini. For use as a serious hunting rifle it's hard not to pick the Ruger; it just ticks all the boxes. But the VZ's...well, they are a character-building experience; I guess that makes them special.
Lol. I was comparing ruger bolt guns to other bolt guns. Ruger offers nothing over the top special compared to other brands. So pick what ever one you want and im sure no critters will complain.
You sound like you own a mini 14. Now get off that presumptuous high horse.
Honestly neither of them are good. VZ or Mini.
I Dont like either but if I had to choose. Id that the VZ because I think it is easier to clean.
AK "wana be's" some would argue better then an ak so idn.
Both guns suck for optics.
VZ comes in things other then beaver barf. Just like the mini's they have synthetic options.
NEITHER the vz or the mini is a match rifle lol.
Mag size is better in the ruger. The long mags only look cool if you dig that.
I Will have you know I HAVE OWNED BOTH. I SOLD of BOTH.
A $400 Savage Axis II absolutely SMOKES both rifles for a hunting rifle.
Now do you need a stool to get off that high horse or are we going to cut the #### attitude because someone doesn't love the exact same stuff you do ? Cuz your mini 14 sucks. Lol
Wow. Thin-skinned game indeed.
The absolute best reason to buy a gun is simply "Because I want it". No need to explain, to anyone else or to yourself. But when you decide to bend the facts to create the justification, you can't expect others to just say "Oh...okay...you're right".
You were comparing features, so I did the same; I've had several of each, and had the chance to play with a few more, and that's what I based my comments and opinions on. You are correct, for most hunting purposes, any bolt gun is superior to these semi's; but the thread is about a Ruger semi-auto, and then someone (you?) brought the VZ58 semi-auto into the discussion, so it seemed reasonable...not presumptuous...to compare them, feature by feature.
The VZ is easier to clean? Both are pretty simple to strip down, but you're probably correct that the VZ is a tad easier. But stating that both guns "suck for optics" is patently ridiculous. If you owned both of them, you know that. If you owned a VZ, you know that it is one of the worst guns imaginable on which to mount an optic, especially if you want to actually shoot it. If you owned a Ruger, you know that anybody who can operate a screwdriver can put a scope or red dot on it in a couple of minutes, right out of the box. I'm almost tempted to say that "I'll have you know..." but, of course, you've owned both so you do know.
When the CZ858 (which is, as you know, pretty much the identical gun to the VZ58 and was introduced earlier) came out, one of its major selling points was its superficial resemblance to an AK; the fact that it was a capable rifle was almost secondary to a lot of buyers. Did some users say it was superior to an AK? Beats me; I don't remember hearing that, so I don't know. By the way, what does "idn" mean?
You're free to buy whatever you want, enjoy it, keep it, hate it, sell it...and others are free to agree or disagree. I'll have you know it's still a free country, more or less...
