Tweet
Before I go any further, let me say that I know this will devolve into an AR vs Mini-14 thread, and that's absolutely not my intention. But because I am the one starting it, please accept my apology in advance.
Another bit: I have a Mini-14. It's a stainless 185 series. I'll make no claims for it's accuracy, it's reliability, or anything like that. But I do like it. I like the way it looks, feels, and sights. I think a lot of other people do, too, which is why they are still made.
Having said that, there are some shortcomings of the platform, and even die-hard Mini-14 lovers will probably agree to that. From my own experience, and reading most every Mini vs AR thread out there, I think the lay of the land is like this:
Pro:
Classic stock layout
Quick handling
Reliable action
Reasonable accuracy
Nostalgic action
Gas system doesn't require a long recoil spring behind the action
No bullet button required
Top-loading possible without removing the magazine
Cons:
Whippy barrels
Substandard accuracy potential
Proprietary magazines
Proprietary optics mounts
Over-gassed
So here's my question? Why doesn't anyone make a revised Mini-14 that addresses the "cons" while leaving the "pros" in place? It's based on the Garand action, so it's not like Ruger has a patent on the design. You could fix all the issues with a minimum of development and have a nice little rifle. It would be a scaled-down M1A, in essence. Nobody complains that those aren't accurate enough, right? (Okay, people do, but I think you get my point.)
Here's what I think would be a nice, commercially-viable rifle:
*Garand/Mini-14/M1A-like action
*Uses standard AR mags
*18" or 20" barrel, maybe .750" at the reciever end tapering to .625" at the muzzle (just an idea, that might be over-doing it)
*Uses M1A sights
*Smaller gas port for reduced ejection issues
*offered in 5.56 or 7.62x39
This would give you a rifle that looked like the classic action, could better accommodate a sporter stock, use people's existing high-cap mags, etc. Another advantage would be that, in California, you could add pistol-grips and other features. Since you can load the magazine from the top of the action, a bullet button wouldn't be such a hassle. Maybe make it work with stripper clips?
I would think that something like this would be a viable contender in the $1000-$1200 range. Seems to me like it would be a logical line extension for Springfield. If they don't want to, aren't there American brands making nice-quality rifles in Turkey, or something? Winchester has a history making a similar rifle that may have inspired the Mini-14.
I'd buy that rifle.
Another bit: I have a Mini-14. It's a stainless 185 series. I'll make no claims for it's accuracy, it's reliability, or anything like that. But I do like it. I like the way it looks, feels, and sights. I think a lot of other people do, too, which is why they are still made.
Having said that, there are some shortcomings of the platform, and even die-hard Mini-14 lovers will probably agree to that. From my own experience, and reading most every Mini vs AR thread out there, I think the lay of the land is like this:
Pro:
Classic stock layout
Quick handling
Reliable action
Reasonable accuracy
Nostalgic action
Gas system doesn't require a long recoil spring behind the action
No bullet button required
Top-loading possible without removing the magazine
Cons:
Whippy barrels
Substandard accuracy potential
Proprietary magazines
Proprietary optics mounts
Over-gassed
So here's my question? Why doesn't anyone make a revised Mini-14 that addresses the "cons" while leaving the "pros" in place? It's based on the Garand action, so it's not like Ruger has a patent on the design. You could fix all the issues with a minimum of development and have a nice little rifle. It would be a scaled-down M1A, in essence. Nobody complains that those aren't accurate enough, right? (Okay, people do, but I think you get my point.)
Here's what I think would be a nice, commercially-viable rifle:
*Garand/Mini-14/M1A-like action
*Uses standard AR mags
*18" or 20" barrel, maybe .750" at the reciever end tapering to .625" at the muzzle (just an idea, that might be over-doing it)
*Uses M1A sights
*Smaller gas port for reduced ejection issues
*offered in 5.56 or 7.62x39
This would give you a rifle that looked like the classic action, could better accommodate a sporter stock, use people's existing high-cap mags, etc. Another advantage would be that, in California, you could add pistol-grips and other features. Since you can load the magazine from the top of the action, a bullet button wouldn't be such a hassle. Maybe make it work with stripper clips?
I would think that something like this would be a viable contender in the $1000-$1200 range. Seems to me like it would be a logical line extension for Springfield. If they don't want to, aren't there American brands making nice-quality rifles in Turkey, or something? Winchester has a history making a similar rifle that may have inspired the Mini-14.
I'd buy that rifle.
