I don't run optics on my mini-14 and if I did I would slap a scope in the supplied factory rings. Doesn't seem hard to me...Same rings my M-77 uses. Rock solid rings, I really like the ruger system... But if you're a quad rail kind of "operator" there are rails availible.
While being nonrestricted is defiantly high on the list, it's not the only reason I'm a fan of the ruger mini-14. Short, light, stainless, reliable and pisses of antis and fat mall ninjas alike.
Truth be told, I love the factory synthetic. I might put a hogue on it but see no need to change the ergonomics. I don't even understand the obsession with changing the stock or trying to make it look like something it's not... Maybe it's because the gun fits me but ergonomics are fine for me and I don't care how my guns look.
Accuracy, this always makes me laugh. Every mini-14 I've owned has been more than accurate enough for the job intended... But every blow hard on the Internet says they aren't. Maybe I just keep getting good ones? Hickok45 has some interesting things to say regarding acuracty, in both hismini review and a video called acuracy.
It's not an AR-15 and it never will be... But that's one of the reasons I like the Mini-14.
Conventional glass isn't the only option for optics. Mounting a reddot is not easy nor possible from the box. If you mount a conventional scope with the standard/stock rings you will likely have to remove the rear sight as well making the front sight useless and eliminating the ability to have back up sights. Quad rails are retarded and outdated. A pistol grip is far more comfortable than a conventional stock if you spend any amount of time carrying or shooting your rifle. The options for such with the mini14 are very limited and add cost and weight. An adjustable stock is absolutely necessary for a proper fit regarding your stance and eye relief which again, the options for the mini14 are limited and add cost and weight. Here's a list of other issues or features that are lacking on the mini14 vs an AR.
Non threaded barrel
Non adjustable front sight and non tritium
Inability to co-witness irons and optics
Inability to quickly detach optics(if you have a rear to use)
If you keep the rear sight with a mounted optic your cheek weld is all but non existent due to high mounting of optic, hence the adjustable riser on the Archangel stock as well as the ATI offering. Neither of which are great quality.
Inability to quickly change barrel lengths(or complete setups for that matter)
Magazines are expensive and usually the short 5 round variety with no option for 10 or 15 round versions.
Short magazines are difficult to load quickly if competing and can be difficult with gloved hands due to size.
After market magazines are unreliable
Trigger is heavy and difficult to change/modify
The safety is ambi but its in a stupid location
If you install a scout mount(additional cost and aftermarket) and run a reddot the balance is well forward of the balance point
If we look at the Archangel stock as it most closely represents what a stock AR has going for it, we will see that it adds about 1 pound over a factory synthetic stock which brings the rifle to 7.25 lbs. If you go cheap and use an ATI stock and a rail for mounting a reddot you're adding more weight. According to Hical.ca website the rail weighs a pound, but that's likely shipping weight so lets go with 1/2 lb for the rail. From Ruger's website their ATI dressed rifle weighs the same as an Archangel dressed rifle at 7.25 lbs. Add the pic rail for mounting the reddot and you're at 7.75 lbs. A stock 16" barrelled AR comes in at between 6.25-6.5 lbs depending on who's data you use. A full pound or more lighter than a similarly setup mini14 which still lacks many of the same features. So much for light weight and its still longer than an AR. The Archangel stock being the better offering has issues as it requires removal of the rail and a screwdriver to disassemble. The AR requires no tools for disassembly. The ATI is all polymer making the front rail useless for optics. Stainless is unnecessary and inferior to anodizing as far as corrosion resistance goes. Either way, a coat of paint solves the problem.
Here's a "great" review I found of a mini14 and its stellar accuracy
http://www.perfectunion.com/vb/tips-tricks/34858-mini-14-rr-project-results-06-23-a.html
Note what the user had to do to achieve a decent group from the rifle, bedding of the action, installation of a muzzle brake and shortening the barrel to 17.25" to achieve optimal harmonics and decent groups. Which is a non starter in this country if you want to stay non res.
Lets look at cost shall we? All prices are from Canadian vendors.
mini14
rifle $899
ATI stock $140(Archangel stock $289)
Rail $89
Total $1128 for ATI and rail
Total $1188 with Archangel
Core 15(16" barrel) $1000
Dominion Arms(Op's selection) $700
Norc AR $529
Magpul BUIS $50
Total $529-1050
Just for fun lets look at a CSA 5.56 rifle as it is the closest to a stock Ruger as you'll find and was mentioned as an alternative. Iron sights, detachable mags(factory or AR with adaptor) adjustable stock, threaded muzzle, and oh yeah, a design that has been and still is fielded by a military with a proven track record unlike the mini14. Weight of the rifle is near identical(CSA is .05 lbs heavier when compared to an ATI stocked mini14) and the CSA is only an inch longer. Optics mounting is just as difficult as the mini14 and the solutions are similar. With mag adaptor the rifle is still cheaper than a stock mini14 while using a far superior magazine with the option for 10 or 15 round mags.
Rifle $909
Mag conversion $100
Total $1009
I don't see how the mini14 is anywhere close to the value of an AR?? Expensive, heavy, poorly equipped and shoots like sh*t, but hey, it is non restricted so I guess that makes up for all the negatives.....
TDC
