I'm interested in purchasing a .223 caliber rifle, preferably semi-auto, for home defense and social "What If" situations (urban breakdown, etc.). As far as I can tell the choice is a Ruger Mini-14, which has its supporters and detractors, and the AR-15 clones, with Bushmaster appearing to have the most fans. Is that it or are there any other options? I've considered a pistol caliber carbine but I can't see why, since I have handguns and shotguns, I really need that. I figure if I'm going to get a rifle I should really get a rifle. But now the question is which one? Any advice appreciated.
.223 defense/offense rifle--what choices?
- Thread starter longeyes
- Start date
Here are some other options, but more expensive than the Mini-14 or the AR-15 types.
Robinson Armament also sells the M96 EXPEDITIONARY RIFLE, and the VEPR .223 RIFLE.
Also, there are a few .223 FAL-type rifles around - I think they were imported by Springfield Armory some years back. You might be able to find one of these in a private sale for $1200 - $1600.
-z
Robinson Armament also sells the M96 EXPEDITIONARY RIFLE, and the VEPR .223 RIFLE.
Also, there are a few .223 FAL-type rifles around - I think they were imported by Springfield Armory some years back. You might be able to find one of these in a private sale for $1200 - $1600.
-z
Jeff Thomas
New member
Mini-14's seem to have a lot of bad press regarding magazines. Never owned one, but I passed due to all the comments I've seen on the 'net.
Bushmaster does indeed seem to enjoy the best reputation. For a .223 rifle, this is hard to beat. Check out the Shorty with the A3 flattop - see http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/weapons/pcwa3s16.htm . Think about it carefully before you get that AK brake model - a lot of guys comment on how loud that makes the rifle, and there seems to be relatively little use for the brake anyway.
You might also expand your view, and consider an AK clone. The Bulgarian's have a good reputation for current variants.
Spend some time at www.ar15.com and www.ak-47.net for lots more info.
Finally, you might also consider a Remington 870 for home defense. Generally, this is a more highly recommended choice for such duty.
Do a search in TFL under a number of these topics, and you'll find a wealth of data and comment.
Good luck. Regards from AZ
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited October 08, 2000).]
Bushmaster does indeed seem to enjoy the best reputation. For a .223 rifle, this is hard to beat. Check out the Shorty with the A3 flattop - see http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/weapons/pcwa3s16.htm . Think about it carefully before you get that AK brake model - a lot of guys comment on how loud that makes the rifle, and there seems to be relatively little use for the brake anyway.
You might also expand your view, and consider an AK clone. The Bulgarian's have a good reputation for current variants.
Spend some time at www.ar15.com and www.ak-47.net for lots more info.
Finally, you might also consider a Remington 870 for home defense. Generally, this is a more highly recommended choice for such duty.
Do a search in TFL under a number of these topics, and you'll find a wealth of data and comment.
Good luck. Regards from AZ
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited October 08, 2000).]
Thanks, Jeff Thomas. I looked at the link for the flat-top A3 shorty from B'master: seems to be the one to get from the description if I go .223. The Mini-14 receives too many cautionary remarks in forums on the Web for me to feel comfortable investing in it, especially for a difference only a few hundred dollars. I hadn't thought about an AK-47 but I'll examine that possibility. Advice appreciated.
Arizona Fusilier
New member
All in all, the AR-15 (and its clones) are the way togo. IF price were no object 
, consider a Galil. Its about the only thing I have ever I owned that hasn't failed one iota. A year ago, I would not have recommended it, as they were rare as hen's teeth. Recently, at least at the gun shows here in Phoenix, they (and their magazines) seem to be coming out of the woodwork (relatively speaking).
, consider a Galil. Its about the only thing I have ever I owned that hasn't failed one iota. A year ago, I would not have recommended it, as they were rare as hen's teeth. Recently, at least at the gun shows here in Phoenix, they (and their magazines) seem to be coming out of the woodwork (relatively speaking).I agree that the AR15 would be an excellent choice. This rifle is extrememly versatile and thus can be configured any way you desire. Parts and accessories are abundant and in fact the 223/5.56 cartridge is a very good self defense round. The high velocity and small bullet size actually causes fragmentation well before it travels through multiple walls or out to the neighbor's house.
There's quite a secure feeling about being able to grab a highly manueverable rifle with 30 rounds in the magazine.
CMOS
------------------
NRA? Good. Now join the GOA!
The NRA is our shield, the GOA will be our sword.
There's quite a secure feeling about being able to grab a highly manueverable rifle with 30 rounds in the magazine.
CMOS
------------------
NRA? Good. Now join the GOA!
The NRA is our shield, the GOA will be our sword.
I personally like the Mini-14 quite a bit.
It is small, handy and accurate "enough" within 100 yards. It also has a "politically correct" profile, which is a plus in some urban areas. It is also very reliable with stock magazines.
The main problems with it, IMO, are two fold:
1. Scarcity fo reliable 10-, 20- and 30-round magazines. Even some of the vaunted PMI ones are prone to malfuction. It's real hunt to find ones that are malfuction-free.
2. Barrel over-heating. The stock barrel is too thin and is prone to over-heating after firing a magazine full (20 or 30). That begins to affect accuracy dramatically.
Still, for the money, I think that it is a decent home/ranch/"urban breakdown" rifle. Nonetheless, because of the above detractions, I bought a Romanian SAR-1 recently. AR-15, while a very ergonomic rifle, has to babied too much for my tastes.
Too bad Steyr AUG, IMI Galil and Daewoo K1/DR200 are no longer imported. They were (are) very reliable and rugged rifles in .223!
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
It is small, handy and accurate "enough" within 100 yards. It also has a "politically correct" profile, which is a plus in some urban areas. It is also very reliable with stock magazines.
The main problems with it, IMO, are two fold:
1. Scarcity fo reliable 10-, 20- and 30-round magazines. Even some of the vaunted PMI ones are prone to malfuction. It's real hunt to find ones that are malfuction-free.
2. Barrel over-heating. The stock barrel is too thin and is prone to over-heating after firing a magazine full (20 or 30). That begins to affect accuracy dramatically.
Still, for the money, I think that it is a decent home/ranch/"urban breakdown" rifle. Nonetheless, because of the above detractions, I bought a Romanian SAR-1 recently. AR-15, while a very ergonomic rifle, has to babied too much for my tastes.
Too bad Steyr AUG, IMI Galil and Daewoo K1/DR200 are no longer imported. They were (are) very reliable and rugged rifles in .223!
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
I'd also urge you to take a look at Daewoo's offerings. I can't recall the model numbers off the top of my head, but there are a handful of them, and even the bottom end ones are excellent rifles.
The only thing that would steer me away from them is parts availability.
Other than that, they are every bit the equal of the AR-15's in accuracy and maybe slightly better in reliability.
But if you're going to get an AR-15, get the Bushmaster. I don't see the need for a muzzle brake on a .223 rifle, and the extra noise is a pain in the backside. Get the 20" match barrel and be a happy, happy man!
The only thing that would steer me away from them is parts availability.
Other than that, they are every bit the equal of the AR-15's in accuracy and maybe slightly better in reliability.
But if you're going to get an AR-15, get the Bushmaster. I don't see the need for a muzzle brake on a .223 rifle, and the extra noise is a pain in the backside. Get the 20" match barrel and be a happy, happy man!
When all is said and done, I'd say an AR is the way to go for your purposes. Buy a postban Bushmaster or a preban Colt (those are the best in each category IMHO). Contrary to Vietnam-Era rumors (caused by bad ammo and lack of cleaning), they are very reliable and they are ergonomically much better than the Mini-14. More parts and mags available too.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Skorzeny:
Still, for the money, I think that it is a decent home/ranch/"urban breakdown" rifle. Nonetheless, because of the above detractions, I bought a Romanian SAR-1 recently. AR-15, while a very ergonomic rifle, has to babied too much for my tastes.
Skorzeny
[/quote]
I'll have to disagree with that. I have two AR15s and haven't babied them at all. Yes, I do clean them after a trip to the range, but they'll easily go hundreds of rounds without cleaning.
The key is reliability and you have to consider the entire system. My AR15s and their mags have been very reliable. It doesn't much matter how reliable the Mini-14 rifle is if your Mini-14 mags aren't reliable...
Regarding the reliability of the M16, that has improved greatly since the early days of Vietnam. For a firsthand account of what actually caused the reliability problems in Vietnam, check out:
http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/links.html
And scroll down to "The Saga of the M16 in Vietnam".
M1911
Still, for the money, I think that it is a decent home/ranch/"urban breakdown" rifle. Nonetheless, because of the above detractions, I bought a Romanian SAR-1 recently. AR-15, while a very ergonomic rifle, has to babied too much for my tastes.
Skorzeny
[/quote]
I'll have to disagree with that. I have two AR15s and haven't babied them at all. Yes, I do clean them after a trip to the range, but they'll easily go hundreds of rounds without cleaning.
The key is reliability and you have to consider the entire system. My AR15s and their mags have been very reliable. It doesn't much matter how reliable the Mini-14 rifle is if your Mini-14 mags aren't reliable...
Regarding the reliability of the M16, that has improved greatly since the early days of Vietnam. For a firsthand account of what actually caused the reliability problems in Vietnam, check out:
http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/links.html
And scroll down to "The Saga of the M16 in Vietnam".
M1911
No doubt the "switched" ammunition and its powder did play a significant role in the "unreliable M16" stories from the Vietnam era.
However, design-wise, the AR-15 does blow the gas straight back onto the bolt (hence the chamber as well), does it not?
This makes the action of the AR-15 more prone to fouling than another design (more widespread) that uses a system with gas being diverted to operate on a piston, no?
The AR-15 is reliable to the extent that the action is cleaned fastidiously. One cannot say the same about, say, an AK or a Mini-14.
That's what I mean by "babying."
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
However, design-wise, the AR-15 does blow the gas straight back onto the bolt (hence the chamber as well), does it not?
This makes the action of the AR-15 more prone to fouling than another design (more widespread) that uses a system with gas being diverted to operate on a piston, no?
The AR-15 is reliable to the extent that the action is cleaned fastidiously. One cannot say the same about, say, an AK or a Mini-14.
That's what I mean by "babying."
Skorzeny
------------------
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. Sun Tzu
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Skorzeny:
However, design-wise, the AR-15 does blow the gas straight back onto the bolt (hence the chamber as well), does it not?
This makes the action of the AR-15 more prone to fouling than another design (more widespread) that uses a system with gas being diverted to operate on a piston, no?
The AR-15 is reliable to the extent that the action is cleaned fastidiously. One cannot say the same about, say, an AK or a Mini-14.
[/quote]
Yup, it sure does dump the gas right into the action. Dumb design. And if you're in a firefight shooting thousands rounds of ammunition without having a chance to clean it, then maybe it will be an issue. But it's my understanding that the US military is not having any problem with their M16s. In fact, they're among the more reliable assault rifles being used right now (the new British Enfield being noted as a particular dog).
You don't have to be fastidious about cleaning your AR15. Really, I mean it, you don't.
Even in a defensive situation, how many rounds would you envision shooting before the police arrived? You can put hundreds of rounds through an AR15 without cleaning it. I know, because I've done it.
Yes, the AK is likely more reliable. But the AR15 is reliable enough. The AK also has terrible sights. Reliable AK mags are cheap and available. I don't like the push in and rotate design (shared by the Mini-14, M14, etc.), as I find it to be much more fumble-prone than the push straight-in AR design. The AR is certainly more accurate, but that's probably not an issue out to 100 yards or so. Beyond 200 yards, the AR accuracy is certainly an advantage, but I have a hard time envisioning a defensive shooting at that distance.
The AR sights are quite nice. Haven't seen the sights on the mini-14.
I've got two ARs and two AKs. I shoot the ARs. The AKs mostly take up space in the safe.
M1911
[This message has been edited by M1911 (edited October 10, 2000).]
However, design-wise, the AR-15 does blow the gas straight back onto the bolt (hence the chamber as well), does it not?
This makes the action of the AR-15 more prone to fouling than another design (more widespread) that uses a system with gas being diverted to operate on a piston, no?
The AR-15 is reliable to the extent that the action is cleaned fastidiously. One cannot say the same about, say, an AK or a Mini-14.
[/quote]
Yup, it sure does dump the gas right into the action. Dumb design. And if you're in a firefight shooting thousands rounds of ammunition without having a chance to clean it, then maybe it will be an issue. But it's my understanding that the US military is not having any problem with their M16s. In fact, they're among the more reliable assault rifles being used right now (the new British Enfield being noted as a particular dog).
You don't have to be fastidious about cleaning your AR15. Really, I mean it, you don't.
Even in a defensive situation, how many rounds would you envision shooting before the police arrived? You can put hundreds of rounds through an AR15 without cleaning it. I know, because I've done it.
Yes, the AK is likely more reliable. But the AR15 is reliable enough. The AK also has terrible sights. Reliable AK mags are cheap and available. I don't like the push in and rotate design (shared by the Mini-14, M14, etc.), as I find it to be much more fumble-prone than the push straight-in AR design. The AR is certainly more accurate, but that's probably not an issue out to 100 yards or so. Beyond 200 yards, the AR accuracy is certainly an advantage, but I have a hard time envisioning a defensive shooting at that distance.
The AR sights are quite nice. Haven't seen the sights on the mini-14.
I've got two ARs and two AKs. I shoot the ARs. The AKs mostly take up space in the safe.
M1911
[This message has been edited by M1911 (edited October 10, 2000).]
Re: AR-type rifles.
I don't understand this theory that questions about the designs' reliability stem from the bad ammuntion in the initial issue in Vietnam.
My issue service rifle was an A2. It was NEW and I always kept it clean. (for fear of having a certain Staff Sergreant discover it less than clean)
This rifle jammed AT LEAST one round per mag.
Other rifles in the squad faired no better.
Kodiac, who was used to special tuned and polished shorties whilst visiting South America, supported the AR=reliable theory.
Then he rotated back to CONUS and didn't have the special ones anymore. That's when he had to tap-rack-bang adnosium.
Re: Bad ammunition.
You won't cach AK type actions jamming because of dirty propelant.
I don't understand this theory that questions about the designs' reliability stem from the bad ammuntion in the initial issue in Vietnam.
My issue service rifle was an A2. It was NEW and I always kept it clean. (for fear of having a certain Staff Sergreant discover it less than clean)
This rifle jammed AT LEAST one round per mag.
Other rifles in the squad faired no better.
Kodiac, who was used to special tuned and polished shorties whilst visiting South America, supported the AR=reliable theory.
Then he rotated back to CONUS and didn't have the special ones anymore. That's when he had to tap-rack-bang adnosium.
Re: Bad ammunition.
You won't cach AK type actions jamming because of dirty propelant.
I have two .223 rifles.
One is the Bushmaster 24" heavy barrel target rifle. It is accurate, dependable, and looks great. I can find no flaws in this rifle, although I am still working on finding a really accurate handload for it. It is easy on brass, and a LOT of fun to shoot.
The other rifle is a Romanian SAR-3, which is the AK74 in .233 caliber. I didn't even know that it existed until I found it a a show. I got it for a little over $200. It too is a lot of fun to shoot. It is not very accurate at longer ranges (even with the Kobra dot sight). It also destroys about 70% of the brass that goes through it (puts a H**L of a dent in the side of the brass, so bad that it can't easily be taken out).
For a house gun (I live in the country), I use the SAR3. It is shorter and easier to handle. It is not a reliability issue with me, but I don't need the 100+ yard accuracy for a home defense issue.
Casey
One is the Bushmaster 24" heavy barrel target rifle. It is accurate, dependable, and looks great. I can find no flaws in this rifle, although I am still working on finding a really accurate handload for it. It is easy on brass, and a LOT of fun to shoot.
The other rifle is a Romanian SAR-3, which is the AK74 in .233 caliber. I didn't even know that it existed until I found it a a show. I got it for a little over $200. It too is a lot of fun to shoot. It is not very accurate at longer ranges (even with the Kobra dot sight). It also destroys about 70% of the brass that goes through it (puts a H**L of a dent in the side of the brass, so bad that it can't easily be taken out).
For a house gun (I live in the country), I use the SAR3. It is shorter and easier to handle. It is not a reliability issue with me, but I don't need the 100+ yard accuracy for a home defense issue.
Casey
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I've had four Mini-14s. Zero problems with reliability. On average, as-is, 2" groups at 100 yards; 1-1/2" with K4 scopes. No magazine problems, but I didn't buy junk...
, Art
, ArtFor home defense, I would get a 16" barrel - the gun will be much easier to handle indoors. The Colt Lightweight post-ban carbine is a good choice in fixed handle models. It does not have a muzzle brake.
Bob wrote:
"But if you're going to get an AR-15, get the Bushmaster. I don't see the need for a muzzle brake on a .223 rifle, and the extra noise is a pain in the backside. Get the 20" match barrel and be a happy, happy man!"
Bob wrote:
"But if you're going to get an AR-15, get the Bushmaster. I don't see the need for a muzzle brake on a .223 rifle, and the extra noise is a pain in the backside. Get the 20" match barrel and be a happy, happy man!"
I have to agree with Art. I have a stainless mini 14 with a butler creek stainless folding stock. I have never had any problems with it. It is far more reliable than my partners Colt AR 15 after being dropped in the dirt, sand, etc...(training class) I didn't buy it for a sniper/counter-sniper weapon. I bought it for defense purposes. It is more than accurate for tactical shooting scenarios. Anyone remember what happened in Miami? Now, if where talking tack driving accuracy lets go with what the SWAT guys use. But, thats another topic.
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
In my opinion there are 2 choices for a new .223 thats worth the price.
The M-96
and
The SL8-1
There are pros and cons to both of them... Neither are Perfect.
Perfect I think is the Galil.
IF YOU CAN FIND ONE!
The M-96
and
The SL8-1
There are pros and cons to both of them... Neither are Perfect.
Perfect I think is the Galil.
IF YOU CAN FIND ONE!
the mak 90 was made in 223 and you can still find them.. magazines are more expensive than your average ak ($30-40) and MAN is it LOUD. Nice rifle though. Tough as hell.
That DAEWOO someone mentioned used ar magazines so that could be a plus.
I always wanted a shorty AR but never had the bucks.. Minis are definitely good enough for the designed task, but truthfully.. rifles are not as good as shotguns and pistols when it comes to home defense.
Buy a mini and an 870 for the price of an AR.
That DAEWOO someone mentioned used ar magazines so that could be a plus.
I always wanted a shorty AR but never had the bucks.. Minis are definitely good enough for the designed task, but truthfully.. rifles are not as good as shotguns and pistols when it comes to home defense.
Buy a mini and an 870 for the price of an AR.