Mini-14

>>35190409
they are decent enough

File: 1501017674059.png (227KB, 651x481px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 651x481px

>>35190409
Mediocre/10

yeah, I guess

File: rugerscreech.jpg (78KB, 808x499px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 808x499px

>>35190409
Yes. Please don't listen to the inevitable incoming flood of butthurt AR fanboys who've never owned or fired a Mini and who will offer you a bunch of out-of-date fuddlore as evidence of how bad it is. The people who actually own Minis (as opposed to someone who will tell you about how their brother's friend's cousin's sister's boyfriend's grampa had one back in the 70s and didn't like it) - and I'm one - love them.

>>35190409

Fine for plinking and hog hunting, but ar just kind of made it redundant

>>35190448
I used to own one, and it was my first centerfire rifle. I love the M1 action, moreso based on nostalgia factor rather than the modern capabilities, however I really did not like the Mini 14. Mine was a mid 90's model with the older, less accurate barrel, and it was consistently a 4-5 MOA gun. That, and good magazines are expensive and hard to come by, and the cheap ones just don't work. Mounting optics is difficult to do on this platform too. I'd never recommend the Mini 14 over basically any other 5.56 rifle, unless they specifically liked the Mini 14, and didn't need a really practical rifle. They are not a good value for the price that they cost now too, which really sucks. The Mini to me was always a ~ $500 rifle, not a $750 and up rifle.

>>35190409
They'd be great if ruger would stop making proprietary everything

>>35190409
I had a stainless steel mini a few years ago and it ate anything. Did well with tapco gen 2 30 rounders and an absolute blast to shoot. I sold it and idiotically got a Sig 556xi. I'd go back in time to keep that damn thing!

>>35190520
New minis come with a thicker, more accurate barrel and a Picatinny rail for easy mounting of optics, so all those problems have been solved.

>>35190888

still looks like a weak gun that can't be taken seriously. If Ruger was really serious about the mini they would look into making it a real smaller version of the M14 but instead they know that people who live in cuck states don't have a choice in the matter if they want a semi auto

>>35190934
>still looks like a weak gun that can't be taken seriously. If Ruger was really serious about the mini they would look into making it a real smaller version of the M14

Other than the gas system, which works fine, it is a smaller version of the M14. I own both.

>>35190934
>still looks like a weak gun that can't be taken seriously
You must be at least 13 to post here, and also not a fag.

>>35190409
Lookup the Miami FBI shootout and tell me what you think

>>35190409
Too expensive for what they are, a mediocre rifle with a cool nostalgic action and accuracy issues. Just buy an M1 Garand for roughly the same price.

>>35190409
It's a great gun most people don't like the action in case they get transported to the jungles of Vietnam in their sleep during rain season and have to fight. It's a fine gun up to 200m and does what it was designed to do. ARs are cheap as dirt now due to over production and other factors but if you live in a cuck state it's a fine choice and shoots the same round

File: 1505111560159s.jpg (5KB, 250x214px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x214px

>>35190934
You're dumb

File: DSC_8962.jpg (4MB, 4608x3072px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4608x3072px

It's a quality gun and Ruger's customer service is hard to beat. They're just obsolete in every way compared to the AR. Now that AR prices are into the basement there isn't a huge reason to buy one unless you live in a ban state.

By the way, although the Mini-14 is overpriced new, they have poor resale value so I'd always buy used. Not hard to find one for $500 or less on Gunbroker. Even the new heavy barrel models.

Here's mine. GB model used by the prison system.

>>35191559

>hey're just obsolete in every way compared to the AR
Which means they were obsolete before they ever even existed.

What a terrible gun.

>>35190409
It got better, but can be better. Honestly they just need to make it use AR magazines and they would sell them five times more.

>>35190934
>they would look into making it a real smaller version of the M14
That's literally what it is, you fucking imbecile

>>35191622

I'd get one if it came in 7.62x39

>>35191626
is this b8

>>35191574
>Which means they were obsolete before they ever even existed.
>What a terrible gun.

ARs weren't common or cheap in the late 1970s, and most people didn't have interest in using a military-looking rifle for sporting purposes anyway. Heck, even police forces didn't want to use ARs for that reason.

It was the best option for an affordable all-around semi rifle back then. It wasn't until the last decade or so ARs have gotten so cheap.

>>35191409
>>35191559
Have you tried not being poor? I have, and it means that a couple hundred bucks in price difference on one gun vs. the other doesn't really matter to me - I just buy what I like, and don't worry a lot about the price. And not only that, but a few bucks' difference in price of magazines *really* doesn't mean anything at all.

I know it involves getting a job instead of beating off to trap porn all day, but give it a chance - you just may end up liking it.

>>35190409
I know this is not a popular opinion and will trigger a lot of people.

But I don't like the garand action...

Needs a dust cover.

I've said it once I'll say it again, somebody needs to tinker with making a modernized material and manufactured SKS, RSC or MAS rifle in popular american calibers at somwhat affordable costs.

If we can have a couple of crazies make a somwhat lightened and modernized BAR of all, things, I don't think it's impossible for the others.

What is it with burgers and complaining about mag compatibility all the goddamn time?

File: DSC_9247.jpg (1MB, 4588x2099px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4588x2099px

>>35191666
I beat off to trap porn as much as the next guy, but saving a couple hundred per gun means moar gunz.

File: 1504653384720.jpg (72KB, 1136x640px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1136x640px

>>35191626

>>35191676

We are legally able to own more than one gun, hard to understand I know.

This is important because it means we already have magazines for guns we shoot.

If I want to buy this, I need to reinvest hundreds of dollars to buy magazines. If it could use AR mags, I would need to spend zero dollars.

>>35191666
your satan trips do not fix stupidity.

>>35191713
Isn't just buying a couple mags for every gun an option?
That's what I do and it's been fine so far.
Haven't had to fight off an army by myself yet

>>35191713
>reinvest
It's called buying things. Stop trying to make it sound like you're trying to make profit at every turn.

>>35191676
Mag comparability is an issue if you're NATO and have to distribute tens of thousands of magazines to a couple dozen different state militaries. It's meaningless if you're one guy with a rifle. The reason people sperg out about it here is that 1) they really think they're going to operate operationally if SHTF, when in truth if they merely manage to somehow survive survivally it'll be a big accomplishment, and 2) they're cheapskates or poorfags who think that only a fool would pay more than ten bucks for a magazine when they exclusively buy cheap plastic mags from Crapco.

>>35191673
If it got through Guadalcanal, it'll get through anything *you* put it through.

>>35191743
no

>>35191732
are you noguns?

>>35191744
Why do mini-14fags post like this? You can't act superior when touting an inferior firearm, it's just silly.

>>35191732
Not that guy but it is an option. I usually only do buy a couple mags per gun. BUT I could see why a gun with a very similar magazine to the most standard magazine on the planet could be modified to utilize that standard mag. Like someone already said here they would sell more Mini 14s immediately. I don't like having a variety box full of different magazines because I like a variety of guns but I guess that's a reality of gun ownership.

>>35191772
>are you noguns?
Are you illiterate?

>>35191706
See, the cool thing about having a job is that they keep giving you new money every couple of weeks, so you don't have to worry about running out if you spend some extra on something you like.

>>35191772
>Why do mini-14fags post like this? You can't act superior when touting an inferior firearm, it's just silly.
Have you tried making a not-shit argument?

>>35191776
I read your post, I'm still asking anyway. Because even buying like 3 mags puts you over a hundred dollars. That adds up when you could instead be buying other guns.

>>35191778
And the cool thing about non-properietary magazines is you can spend that money on other things. Christ this is why we own you fucking goys. If you don't HAVE to spend the money, that is a good thing! You could instead spend that money on other things.

>>35191789
Well, when your argument is "waah poorfags and NEETs" while talking about what should be a bargain bin rifle, it just rubs me the wrong way. ARfags get to act like elitists and shit on poorfags because their money is spent on at least supposedly worthwhile things. Taking some sort of pride in throwing money away needlessly is silly.

>>35191778
>implying I don't have a job
>implying saving money when it's easy to do it is a bad idea

Holy shit the fedora is strong here.

>>35191820
>"Buying what you like instead of what I like is just throwing away money."
You're like that one uncle who asks why anybody would go to Ruth's Chris when the steak at Denny's is a quarter of the price.

File: lana nope.png (43KB, 318x470px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 318x470px

>>35190409

>>35190409
the fact that it doesn't take STANAG (AR) mags kills it for me

>>35191848
>>implying saving money when it's easy to do it is a bad idea
There's a difference between being frugal and being cheap. A lot of that difference can be seen in someone's willingness to spend money on durable items that they're going to keep for a long time. I have no qualms about spending a few hundred bucks extra on that kind of thing in order to have it be the way I like it.

>>35190409
Whatever you do, please don't buy a gun from that shitty store. Go to Pullman or HAD. Literally any other place.

File: you-are-poor-500x349.jpg (43KB, 500x349px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x349px

>>35191820
>Because even buying like 3 mags puts you over a hundred dollars.
Seriously! I mean, a hundred dollars? An entire fucking ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS?!?! How the hell could anyone expect you to come up with *that* kind of cash?

>>35190409
Get the big-14.

>>35191820
>over a hundred dollars
wtf I hate this hobby now

>>35191676
Also, I wonder what the deal is with people stocking up like, 50 magazines when they're just one guy. Protip: Having way more magazines than you could ever possibly carry around with you is actually really, really silly. Combat troops carry 210 rounds with them, so seven 30-round magazines. Even giving yourself a couple of spares JIC, there's really no reason to have more than ten magazines for your SHTF rifle.

Why bother paying over $500 for a rifle that can barely shoot minute of paper plate at 100-200 yards? Just not worth it IMO.

I can see how they might be fun, but a lever action rifle in .22 or .357 - hell, even .45lc if you reload - will offer you more fun, accuracy, and utility within that range while costing less money for both the rifle and the ammo and less trouble with jams, failures and shitty magazines.

File: 2132432423432543.png (138KB, 362x346px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 362x346px

>>35190436
>Rabbit
>buzzing

>>35192030
>Why bother paying over $500 for a rifle that can barely shoot minute of paper plate at 100-200 yards? Just not worth it IMO.
Aaaaaand this is exactly the kind of outdated fuddlore I was talking about.

File: rabbit.jpg (44KB, 940x940px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 940x940px

>>35192046

>>35191919
I have a really nice mosin nagant you'd be interested it for just 800 bucks. :) It's all the same right?

>>35192166
>I have a really nice mosin nagant you'd be interested it for just 800 bucks. :) It's all the same right?
You keep saying things that aren't arguments. You think they are, but they aren't.

>>35191626
I'd get one if they came in 7.62x51

But seriously I've shot it and I much prefer the ar15. I felt as though the action exaggerated the recoil in comparison to an ar15. There's nothing wrong with it per se but it's more of a question of why spend more money for something of equal or lesser value

>>35190409
It's mediocre even by the standard of Garand-pattern rifles.

>>35191763
That's nice, dear.

>>35192250
I'm not who you were talking to. I just a stool pigeon when I see one.

A big downside to the mini 14 is that it takes proprietary Ruger magazines.

If you want a 5.56 carbine, you may want to try a Kel Tec SU16. I picked one up a while back and it has two ten round magazines that tuck up into the butt stock. Plus it takes regular AR magazines so that's a plus too.

The only downside I've seen is that there's a pin you pull out which allows it to fold it in half. If you ever lose that pin, you're fucked.

>>35192448
>I'm not who you were talking to.
How do you know that? We're all anonymous.

>>35192477
>A big downside to the mini 14 is that it takes proprietary Ruger magazines.
We've been over this. It's a complete non-issue for private citizens who aren't poorfag NEETs.

>>35192523
>yes Mr. Ruger, please do me up the butt some more while I pay $30+ for a magazine instead of a fraction of that for a STANAG magazine
>all so I can use them in an outdated pile of mediocrity

>>35192606
You're still not making an argument. And you're still poor.

>>35192606
You do know that $30 isn't a lot of money right?

File: exclusive shit.png (38KB, 578x712px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 578x712px

>>35192523
Get a load of this guy. I guess Mr. moneybags can afford to light his money on fire.

>>35192633
it's not about the money, it's about the value.

>>35192606
Just stop embarrassing yourself and go back to your gun non-enthusiast containment thread.

>>35190409
>Regardless of how it compares to the AR-15 is this still a quality rifle?

Yes.

I own both a Mini 14 and ARs and I honestly love shooting the Mini 14. I have some bias because I grew up watching the A Team with my dad and it was his favorite rifle of mine to shoot.

>>35191666
>Have you tried not being poor?

Fuck off dude. I own a Mini 14 and love it, but they really aren't $750 guns and acknowledging that doesn't mean you can't afford one. At the retail price they tend to go for it's impossible to justify when there are $400 ARs on the market right now.

>>35190409
They are well made rifles, and honestly you get your moneys worth.

>>35191659
>ARs weren't common or cheap in the late 1970s, and most people didn't have interest in using a military-looking rifle for sporting purposes anyway. Heck, even police forces didn't want to use ARs for that reason.

Anon most shit posters here have parents who weren't even born until the late 70's early 80's. They have no idea what gun ownership was like before 2004.

>>35191732
>Isn't just buying a couple mags for every gun an option?

Just a heads up anon, Mini 14 factory magazines (the only ones that are guaranteed to be reliable) are $50+ each. For $100 I can get about 10 AR magazines or about 2 Mini 14 magazines depending on capacity.

>>35192633
The last two mags I bought were about $200 a piece, but even I'll tell you that $30 Mini-14 mags are a fucking joke.

I want a Mini-14 that takes STANAG mags.

>>35192746
>but even I'll tell you that $30 Mini-14 mags are a fucking joke.

Unfortunately this. I've had ok luck with knock offs. But that just means about 1/5 magazines have had things like bent feed lips out of the box or cause FTF. I was testing a non factory magazine at the range once and it just spit out the last 5+ rounds in the magazine through the breach and locked the bolt back.

>>35192739
For $100 I can get about 10 AR magazines or about 2 Mini 14 magazines depending on capacity.
60 seconds with Google shows me that factory 30-round Mini-14 magazines are $35 at Midway, and 30-rounders for the Mini-30 are the same price at Brownell's. So the problem here is that you overpay because you're just shit at comparison shopping.

So instead of spending AN ENTIRE THIRTY FIVE FUCKING DOLLARS on magazines for the rifle you'll trust your life to in an emergency, you'd prefer to buy more magazines than you can carry that are shit-tier plastic junk.

This is the soul of poorfaggery.

>>35192817
"Hey mom look! I'm posting on 4chan!""

File: dudearg.jpg (246KB, 891x1280px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 891x1280px

>>35192836

>>35192817
>are $35 at Midway

On sale. Which yeah no fucking duh when they're on sale they're going to be cheap. Still more than twice as much as a PMag.

However when I bought my Mini 14 and went looking for magazines the factory mags I bought were $50+ because I bought them before the last election (got the Mini 14 and mags in 2012) when the market started to bottom out.

>
So instead of spending AN ENTIRE THIRTY FIVE FUCKING DOLLARS on magazines for the rifle you'll trust your life to in an emergency, you'd prefer to buy more magazines than you can carry that are shit-tier plastic junk.

It's almost like you're making a baseless assumption in order to shit post.

I have factory magazines for my Mini 14 that I spent ~$50 each on because that was the market at the time. I also have PMags and GI Mags for my AR which were a lot cheaper for the same or better reliability.

>This is the soul of poorfaggery.

This is the soul of shit posting.

File: is that a steel frame from 1988.jpg (193KB, 950x950px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 950x950px

>>35192817
>relying on a Mini-14 to save your life

Are we incapable of a discussion of the mini 14 that does not revolve around how much it costs?

>>35192855
>On sale. Which yeah no fucking duh when they're on sale they're going to be cheap.
Yes, that's literally how you get things cheap - you look around for a sale and then buy them at a low price. This isn't exactly some top-secret financial strategy known only to high-powered investors.

>Still more than twice as much as a PMag.
So, twice as much as cheap junk.

>>35192896
>Are we incapable of a discussion of the mini 14 that does not revolve around how much it costs?
On a board full of cheapskate NEET poorfags like /k/, we pretty much are.

>>35192899
>Pmag
>cheap junk

Lol

So what about the GI mags?

>you look around for a sale and then buy them at a low price.

Which I did. When I was buying them. It's almost like you didn't start buying guns until a few months ago and don't realize how low prices have gotten compared to the Obama years.

I don't really understand why you're getting so invested in this. I have a Mini 14 and I already bought factory magazines for it which I stated a already.

>>35192869
>Thinking that the Garand action that literally won WWII isn't reliable.

>>35192896
It's inferior to the AR (or any number of other rifles) in every way except for lacking most "assault weapon" features. It's probably the worst Garand-pattern rifle, which is saying something when the M-14 exists.

>>35192896
>>35192907

It comes up because it really is a huge factor in the "worth" of the Mini 14. It does absolutely nothing better than an AR so there's not really anything to discuss other than the cost.

And even as a fan of it there's nothing I could argue that makes it better than an AR that wouldn't be bullshit.

>>35192746
Midway is selling them for about 23 each right now

>>35192911
>Which I did. When I was buying them.
What I don't like is the compulsive psychological need that people here have to justify being poor and having the nickel-and-dime mentality that chronically poor people have. It's like someone sperging out about how great Walmart-brand Dr. Thunder is and how you're a fool for spending the extra dollar per case to get genuine Dr. Pepper instead. Look, if you're poor, fine - I've been there and done that plenty of times in my life. But - and it's not just this thread, it's all over this place on /k/, constantly - I get sick and fucking tired of people not just getting defensive about penny-pinching, but actively getting angry at anyone who's willing to pay a few bucks extra to have something that they like instead of going with the standard poorfag budget choice. If you like your AR, or if you like Dr. Thunder, great - but pitching an eppy because I like the Mini-14 and because I make enough money that the price of its magazines are not an issue for me is a symptom of a disease on this board that I just have zero patience for anymore.

>>35192986
desu he's a poorfag for owning a sub-$1500 AR-15

>>35192929
>It comes up because it really is a huge factor in the "worth" of the Mini 14.
Again, the couple hundred dollar difference between the price of the Mini and of a decent AR may be an issue to nickel-and-dimers. It isn't to me.

File: absolutely disgusting_anna.jpg (162KB, 956x856px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 956x856px

>>35192986
>>35192995
>trying this hard to justify paying more for an inferior product

>>35193001
Could you go be poor somewhere else? Thanks.

>>35193004
you're not fooling anyone, NEET

File: laughing padawans.png (561KB, 854x740px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 854x740px

>>35193004
>he thinks spending an extra couple hundred on a mediocre Mini-14 is some sort of badge of honor

>>35193026
We can go around and around on this, but the bottom line is that you're so poor and so stuck in nickel-and-dime mentality that you literally can't comprehend the idea that there could be anyone for whom a couple hundred dollar price difference between two competing products is simply not any kind of concern at all. Like, it just doesn't register that there are people who don't think that's a lot of money and who aren't bothered at all by spending it to get something they like.

Enjoy your Dr. Thunder.

>>35193047
Some day you will have to come to terms with the fact that you overpaid for an inferior product. Sorry, but that's reality.

>>35191626
>what is a mini-30

>>35192322
because the mini-14 is a more accurate weapon platform than the AR.

>>35193072
thanks, I think we all needed that laught

File: 1498228613530.png (36KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x640px

just get a fucking ar unless you're a retard or ruger shill

saged because this thread is very autistic

File: thisgunkilledcommies.jpg (45KB, 620x443px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 620x443px

>>35190409
great rilfe to kill young commies with

>>35191676
We've been spoiled by cheap AR mags and Glock mags. That really all it is. If any new gun comes out in 5.56 it doesn't matter what the design is like, people will want it to have cheap ass AR mags even if other designs are better. There are people that scoff at mags over $20

>>35191820
>That adds up when you could instead be buying other guns
And in a world were a person get a decent AR, a decent polymer handgun and shitload of mags and ammo for $1500 who gives a fuck how somebody spends money after that.

>>35194608
>>35194644
there is literally zero reason for the Mini-14 to not be STANAG-compatible

>>35191138

That had more to do with

the shooter was an army ranger

The FBI came hilariously unprepared to take down two perps who were known to be armed, dangerous and have killed people before

>>35190448
>after 100 years in production there is still no STANAG compatible version
>barrel-whippety-whip
nothin to see here, move along

>>35191559
>They're just obsolete in every way compared to the AR

There should be a rule against nogunz posters like you.

>>35195208
Legal bullshitary, and protectionism.

It sucks but it's true.

I'd love one that does it, but it doesn't really have a shot to happen.

>>35191559
>obselete
Meaning...? You act like people are fighting wars with this shit. It's a novelty gun, you stupid faggot.

Ruger is now selling the Mini-14 chambered in .300BLK

>>35192920
The thing is, Mini-14s are standardized in quality. ARs are total wildcards depending on how much money you sink into it. Of course they're "better" but at what cost? After a certain point you're just playing dress up and whittling your range rifle down to fractions of a percent in improvements. Unless it's a competition rifle, you're wasting money.

>>35192929
>It comes up because it really is a huge factor in the "worth" of the Mini 14.
only to welfare recipients that cant afford the hobby in the first place. they probably have money for tattoos and cigarettes, though. priorities, man. priorities.

So I want to get one in as much of an original configuration as possible. Where should I look?

>>35195456
the mini is still an objectively superior, inherently more accurate weapon

>>35195508
only chance is to steal one from the factory floor

>>35195208
>>35195305
Would there be experienced machinists who could modify the mag well or whatever the fuck needed to be done to accept STANAG mags?

>>35195520
Meaningless unless it's being used for sporting or hunting. If you're a collector why does it matter?

>>35195456
A bargain-bin AR is still going to be at least as good as a Mini-14. For the same price as a Mini-14, you can get a much better rifle.

>>35195527
Possibly. Without having one in front of me I can't say if there is room to pass the mag release through the receiver between the mag well and the trigger group.

I don't think there's any way to make the existing mag release work, so you'd essentially be building from scratch.

File: Mini 14.png (25KB, 496x700px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 496x700px

>>35195305
>after 100 years in production there is still no STANAG compatible version
>after 100 years in production

Ruger mini 14 confirmed to have served in the Great War

>>35195553
>moving the goal posts
kys

>>35195721
That blows. Thanks for the information, though.

File: 1496321653019.png (205KB, 653x653px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 653x653px

>>35195305
>the 14 in Mini 14 means produced in 1914
Ruger mini 14 confirmed to be best rifle in WW1

>>35195868
Not really. I said in my original post >>35195456 before that unless you're using it for competitions and shit where it's important, none of that matters so arguing over something as flawed as accuracy (largely dependant on the shootet by the way) is a retarded way to justify your purchases.

>>35196009
Wouldn't be surprised if it was in Battlefield 1 as DLC for the Medic class.

>>35192057
I have one like that but it shoots blanks

Bang Bang.
http://www.armslist.com/inside?utm_source=c000032&utm_medium=plink&utm_campaign=p394691

http://www.armslist.com/contests?utm_source=c000032&utm_medium=plink&utm_campaign=p394691


http://www.armslist.com/blog/gear?utm_source=c000032&utm_medium=plink&utm_campaign=p394691

>>35192322
>felt as though the action exaggerated the recoil in comparison to an ar15
Congrats, you figured out why the fg42 was a big deal

>>35192730
ARs being $400 (now) doesn't make the mini not a $700 gun. A lot of people don't consider them direct competitors and they each have their own appeal. Tiger has no trouble moving minis OR AR556s so what motivation do they have to find a price drop? The AR is now a fantastic value, the mini is about the same as it's every been price wise while being a slightly better rifle than it once was, with stainless, .300blk, 6.8spc, and pseudo EBR kits. A lot of people say they would rather them be $500 and I get the appeal, but personally I would rather see them tighten up the whole line as long as the price was under $1k. Its pretty well understood what it takes to make a mini mechanically precise, it would be shit for Ruger to do it. ASI is the most well known shop for this.

To hell with the target line, I want a goddamn Mini-14 Match Champion

>>35192920
The vast majority of rifles on the market are inferior to the AR. Same with handguns. Doesn't stop us from having reasonable conversations about those. Its amazing how quickly people forget that just a few years ago you were looking to drop at least $1000 for a reputable AR

Put another 300 rounds of federal through mine today in 90 mins without one FTE/FTF and it kept a 2 or 3 moa group at 100 yards with irons it's a nice gun

>>35195208
Aside from the mini coming into existence before every fucking rifle on the planet needed to use AR mags? When SP1s were for richfags? Nobody gave a fuck about shit like that until after the sunsets just like nobody thought HKs were expensive . people just have a fucked up perception now.

So go ahead and design an adapter for the mini and make your millions or come up with a cost effective redesign for the Minis bottom metal and bolt so it can use them without it costing Ruger a ton of time and money when the rifle already sells all fucking day long. Go ahead.

This is the same argument used by people that say " I would buy X if they made it with Y" full well knowing they still wouldn't do it

>>35195527
there are online forums that go into the conversion to STANAG. apparently some people have been doing this

>>35196365
Some guy on perfect union did it acouple years ago

>>35196274
We have discussed the Mini-14, and the consensus is that it is has little value in today's market unless you live in a state that heavily restricts ARs or other assualt-weapony rifles. Sorry if you don't like the way the conversation went, cupcake.

>>35196740
>it is has little value in today's market
it's a semi auto rifle grip intermediate cartridge rifle with room for a scope and plenty of aftermarket stocks to fit whatever ergos you want

not every gun has to be an AR you brandwhore

>>35196767
The semi-auto .223 market is so deep right now that the Mini-14 is still thoroughly mediocre even if you ignore the AR.

>>35196246
>the Mini-6.8
I wonder how the higher capacity mags worked with that one, all the pictures I saw on it were straight bodied instead of curved.
Might as well have been an upscaled M1 carbine at first glance.

File: IMG_2531.jpg (30KB, 542x416px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 542x416px

>>35191409
>just buy an M1 Garand for roughly the same price
Are you fucking stupid or are you just dumb?

>>35191772
>inferior

Better than a shitty tacticool AR.

>>35191858
>Lana
>knowing shit about guns

TWO TEC-9S.

NO ADDITIONAL MAGS.

SPRAY N' PRAY.

There's a reason why Archer always got the cool guns.

>>35191706
Nice ithaca, does it slamfire?

>>35190409
I've shot both this and the ar15. And the ar is slightly easier to clean. But the mini14 is a close second place for semi auto 5.56 rifles and that includes the scar. The scar is a great rifle but it is so damn expensive.

>>35196825
ARs are the most mediocre gun ever made

>M-MUH STANAG

actual milspec stanag mags are garbage and mini14 mags are cheap as shit and fairly ubiquitous

>>35197461
impossible, the Mini-14 exists

>>35190546
This. Ruger rings and mounts suck.

>>35197487
there is nothing more boring yet more tryhard than an AR15

it's the honda civic of assault rifles

a mini-14 is like the twingo -- small, cute, light, but still a decent thing, all at a very affordable price, with just as much of an interesting aftermarket as any ricemobile

Alright alternative for AR, price got higher because of some political and economic reasons

>>35196246
>The AR is now a fantastic value,
not really when you need to put $1000 worth of crap and replacement parts on it to make it worthwhile

>>35197514
not even good bait. you overplayed your hand

File: 1492800570336.png (181KB, 315x323px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 315x323px

>>35197537

>Most no-name AR knockoffs have shit extractors and have a hard time handling steel case
>Cheap out on a gun, but can't cheap out on ammo

He's right though.

>just bought the mini 14 ranch rifle today for hogs coyotes and deer

I don't even care that I could have gotten an AR for cheaper, I've already got an AR and I wanted muh garand style action and fudd looks

>>35190409

I have the Mini-14 NRA edition. (NRA sucks, that's not the point) I love it. I've had zero failures in 1500~ rounds. It's plenty accurate out to 100 yrds. Would recommend.

>>35193111
that bayonet looks odd....

I have a newer model Mini 30. It gets the job done for what I need it to do. It's easy to operate and doesn't really require maintenance to keep it running.

I've run steel and everything I could to get it to fuck up, and everything works as it should.

I don't really care for rocking the mags in (but after you've done it a few times, it's easy to do reloads.)

I usually keep it in my car on long road trips, because if something happens, I'd rather be using a non-scary looking rifle (cali fag), than my scary black allegedly unfaggotized rifle to be held up to a jury in court.

I didn't mind the buying of mags to use for this rifle.

DESU it's a good rifle for what it is - You aren't going to be picking of zombies from 1000 yds with it, but it will go 'bang' and it's a lot of fun to shoot. It's my beater gun, and I love it.

No matter what, everyone is going to shit on whatever you buy. I'd take it over trying to accurize an M1 (with the pricetag as well). I know my limits with the rifle, and if i wanted to try and hit further, then I'd just use the CZ550.

>t. Mini 30 with scout rail and a red dot owner.

File: this guy knows whats up.jpg (236KB, 620x412px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 620x412px

>>35191409
>M1
>Same price as Mini 14

Wat?

>>35195387
>hurr who cares if a Ducati is faster than a Honda Ruckus, just spend the money on the Ruckus because they're both motorcycles so they'll do the same thing lmaooooooooo

You're a fucking retard and literally using circular logic to justify buying a Mini 14. You're saying that you should buy a Mini 14 because you want a Mini 14, not because you want a rifle and have decided that a Mini 14 suits your needs the best.

Being that emotionally attached to an inanimate object is pure, unadulterated autism.

>>35191676
because AR 15 magazines are literally 7 dollars for a surplus magazine or a PMAG. It really makes everything else seem like a rip off in comparison.
>>35191706
You are my nigga, this is probably my favorite arsenal picture I've seen posted to /k/ this week.

>>35191919
>"Lmao why would you get 10 functionally equivalent magazines for a hundred dollars when you can get 3?"
Nigger you're the poorfag, that doesn't make any economical sense.

>>35192477
Eh, not really the hugest deal. The magazines aren't 1911, AR, or AK tier cheap but they're really not that unreasonable.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ruger-Mini-14-Magazine-10-rnds-/253158128992?epid=1601536734&hash=item3af1667d60:g:b6wAAOSwfCZZve2V

>>35192817
>pmags
>shit-tier plastic junk
lmao

>>35197985
a mudder fuckin' DOUCATI

File: autismlevel++.png (170KB, 1080x434px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1080x434px

>>35190934
>looks like a weak gun
but thats subjective and retarded anon

>>35195387
>It's a novelty gun
That's a retarded justification to buy an overpriced fudded-out AR

>>35190409
>is this still a quality rifle?
Hope so, I just bought one. I got the discontinued Mini-14 Target because the store knocked a few hundred bucks off the price. Hopefully the government won't confiscate it when the new Norwegian gun law passes in a few months.

>>35195208
there are several reasons related to the design of the Mini-14's bolt for it to not be STANAG-compatible

>>35198163
>for a surplus magazine
even brand new STANAGS dont cycle properly half the time
>or a PMAG.
plastic trash

>>35199522
*tips fedora*

>>35195387
>>35195349
>Meaning...?

Meaning there's nothing practical the AR can't do better in every way. I own both. I like the Mini but if you don't live in a ban state AR is a better gun now that they're cheaper than Minis.

And technologically speaking, the Mini is a much older design than the AR. AR was all new when it debuted in the '50s. The Mini-14 is based on Garand action with a gas system I think was part of the M1 carbine program.

Same way the M14 was obsolete when it came out in the '50s. All the other armies in the world were focusing on postwar designs and the M14 was a mix of the best features of rifles includes in the early '30s trials.

File: DSC_7248.jpg (3MB, 4608x3072px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4608x3072px

>>35197306
You betcha. It's a late '40s model.

>>35198163
Thanks. I'm not where I want to be with it yet. Want to get a .22 pistol, replace the model 11 with a skeet gun, and sell a couple guns I don't use much.

What a worthless, BS fagot thread full of children w/nogunz faggotry

>>35191763
Except, y'know, modern 30-06 loads.

>>35191763
Garands had reliability issues in the pacific theater. All that sand and humidity.

File: Ithaca37s.jpg (126KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 960x720px

>>35199815
God damn you.

I have an Ithaca 37 that looks just like yours and faggot bubba got ahold of it before me painted it green. However if you look under the pump, the bluing is perfect.

Luckily my riot model is pretty much perfect.

File: DSC_6694.jpg (4MB, 4608x3072px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4608x3072px

>>35200611

Bubba got to mine, too. Someone in the past cut the barrel off at 20" with a hacksaw. I got it for $100 because of that. One of these days I'm going to take it to a smith and get it properly finished with a new brass bead.

I used to have a Winchester 1912 from 1914, too. It was pretty worn out and had a 28" mod choke barrel. When some guy on a shooting forum offered me $400 it was gone.