Sniper Country Duty Roster collective wisdom
All right guys, I'll never bring up the subject again IF you gimme
your best shot on this one last time.
Mini-14's. Now, what if I said I could get one:
that weighed within 1/2 pound (+/- half pound) of a M-4
has a 16.25" barrel + flash hider, and printed 4 to 6" at 400 yards
and totally reliable, with a good (spelled aftermarket) trigger.
Made by the same guy that supplied them to the SEAL FAC team that
lead the way into Kuwait, among many other odd teams and groups.
Spoke to the guy in detail last night (hour or so), and he sounds
like a smart cookie. Brought up the fact that the guy that designed the
Mini was on the design team that came up with the M-14 from the Garand,
so the design is sound, but the execution sucks.
I'm gonna check his references, he says Clint Smith would welcome
one of his rifles since he's had plenty of first hand experience with this
individual's work, but turns away all other Mini's in a heartbeat.
Or, failing that, taking a rack grade M1A to the CQB class ;-)
the banana republic formerly known as the, USA - Tuesday, August 01,
2000 at 17:51:06 (ZULU) (your host address: 18.104.22.168)
Bravo. damm dude you are killing me with this Mini 14 thing. I said
what I thought of them. You buy and show up with what ever you like. I
would try and teach you to get the most out of a sling shot. The SEALs
using Mini 14? You make a mistake maybe? Last I heard the work out gods
used M4 and M14's for the most part. I would like to see the thought process
that suggested any Mini 14 was half as good as a M4 or M14. Must be that
great gas system or captured recoil guide rod, oh sorry the Mini 14 has
neither. Even if you get one to work fairly well, magazines are slow to
change and the good magazines are hard and expensive to find.Last bit of
advice never try and make something out of nothing. You will end up with
a mini 14 that cost morte than a good AR. Just get an AR/CAR and you wont
Mike Miller <Tactical@tacticalintervention.com>
Calif, USA - Tuesday, August 01, 2000 at 18:49:12 (ZULU) (your host
Mini-14 as a tactical rifle?? Puuullleeze.
THere is no reason to look anywhere else than the flat top AR15A2
varients for the best 5.56 assault type rifle PERIOD.
USA - Tuesday, August 01, 2000 at 22:28:31 (ZULU) (your host address:
Last year the smith at Gunsite told me that a mini-14 has never
finished the carbine class without a mechanical failure. That's a LOT of
If you feel lucky, take your paycheck to Las Vegas. And buy a nice
USA - Tuesday, August 01, 2000 at 23:05:36 (ZULU) (your host address:
Mini 14's SUCK. Owned one for a whole hour one day. Sold it to the
guy beside of me for less than I paid. The next week he had sold it again
for less than he paid me. I have shot well over a dozen of them and all
of them had malfunctions and none could group 5 shots in a bull's ass.
I did hear of one police special one, whatever the hell that is, that would
group 1", geez nothing to brag about there. Gitchersef a good Bushmaster
and have a blast.
USA - Tuesday, August 01, 2000 at 23:52:01 (ZULU) (your host address:
As for Mini 14s, I been aroud a number of them and, while they certainly
rank right up their with the AKM as a benchrest rifle, they have always
functioned very well. What is breaking on all these guns in the tactical
schools? The only one I ever actualy saw with something broken on in my
time in the gunsmith biz was a Ranch Rifle with a busted rear sight.
Tom Simpson <email@example.com>
Colatown, SC, USA - Wednesday, August 02, 2000 at 03:38:40 (ZULU) (your
host address: 22.214.171.124)
Mini 14's; not quite as bad as some say here or as good as most
of us would like. The clip is indeed slow. IT's no better physically but
much more reliable to feed than a M-16 when it's seated ;in place. That
gas system is plenty reliable and good as anything else as far as shooting
all day or next month without cleaning if need be. That bolt doesn't break
but the rear sight on a Ranch Rifle is indeed a bit flimsy. It is now...
a "Ghost ring" and works but just as a sub. in case the scope or Aimpoint
fails. The scope mount (RR) is as good or better than most especially that
flat top variant Colt or Bush or it's crappy handle made for god knows
what except to mount that sorry ass sight. The weight is much more portable
than the Colt as far as effeciency goes. Unless you want to use that piece
of sewer pipe they call a collapsable. IT (Mini-14) doesn't bend in the
middle, flop around or break as often as M-16's do. The standard Mini 14
is unsuitable as a place to mount a scope as are most rifles like the M-14
M-1 M-1 Carbine and BAR AK-47 and variants or LAR's for that matter. The
safety is right there where you can feel it if you screw up and it is positive
as the M-14 or anything else.. It's easy to take down and doesn't have
any little springs or screws that fall out and get lost.
The trigger group is easy to get too and clean disassemble or whatever
IT doesn't dig a hole in your back when you carry it and you can
get down in the grass as opposed to using the hand guard for rear pod.
The Ranch Rifle is not accurate as some if you go by bench standards but
we just had one down here that had been customized with a new barrel and
would shoot with anything (auto) you have. We dumped it because it was
a brother to Ken's towed. I have no use for heavy guns like that but it
would do 1/4" all day. The receiver had standard Weaver bases and that's
reasonable to expect to have to drill and tap a semi auto. The trigger
is superior in a lot of ways to the M-16's and others like G-3s or ....
The Mini needs custom work for accuracy as do most of your 700 Remingtons
but it's not as good as I would like or as bad as most of you say. I've
owned and shot many AR-s and Mini's and it's a matter of taste. I've never
been overwhelmed with the Mini or the AR either. But that's the truth as
I know it. I wouldn't equip my army with one probably but you could do
worse. I wouldn't use a M-16 either.
Seals? I dunno, but I doubt if they used them much cause SEALS like
to be cool above all else and they ain't cool these days. Wasn't too many
years ago a fella took the SOF match with one (14)I believe it was stock
except for the barrel. Bill Ruger is a machinist not a gun smith and just
gets lucky and finds something he can copy once in a while. If he'd put
a barrel on it you'd all be shooting one probably. Tom's right they don't
break very often but often they are chosen by those not too much in the
know about what is cool at the moment. They ain't cool but they won't fail
you. Wish I could say that about a AR. Been there and done that somewhat
or I'd not say anything. I have one because they are light, and usable
in any kind of weather anywhere and don't break and jam like my AR's did.
Mine might be exceptional but it will put em all in a foot circle at 500
with a Aimpoint sight and an old blind man shooting it or at least it did.
I've seen worse.
I'm not scolding you here men just adding a little opinion. I don't
know how many have actually shot them and how many are repeating gun show
or range gossip but that's my story and I'm stickin to it.
USA - Wednesday, August 02, 2000 at 04:37:49 (ZULU) (your host address:
Guess I'm gonna load up some blasting 5.56 ammo in preparation of
the CAR type's return. Another name to come up with. Now you guys know
why I've been selling off stuff. Is the 55 FMJ all right, or should I step
up to the SS109 for about double the cost (hey, it's CLOSE quarters, right?)?
Oh, and one last thing. I don't recall the difference between the A1 and
A2 stocks besides seeming like the A1 was about an inch shorter. What's
the differences on these? I've decided to take Geoff's advice and go with
a fixed A1 stock with A2 buttplate over the telescoping, since I figure
that I won't remember to pull it out when my feet hit the ground. Feel
free to give me a hint or two on the buttstocks (and opinions on the tele-pipe).
reno and the "rule of law". What a farce, USA - Wednesday, August 02,
2000 at 23:41:37 (ZULU) (your host address: 126.96.36.199)
Back to Hot Tips & Cold Shots