m-1 carbine vs. Mini-14

Y

Yellowdog

Inactive
I noticed that IMI has come out with a "new" m-1 carbine that sells in the same price range as the mini-14. Anyone know how they stack up against each other with regards to reliability; accuracy; ergonomics; magazine and parts availability and cartridge effectiveness?
 
In theory, Mini14 has all those advantages. In practice, I got rid of my stainless Ranch model and replaced with with the IAI carbine and have been happy about the switch. Actually the IAI isn't really a good replacement for it, fills a different niche (an AR15 is the replacement). However, my IAI has been reliable and easy to use and I like it a good deal more than the mini14. As for finding 30-rounders: factory 20s and 30s run about $100 now. Aftermarket Mini mags suck. For the carbine, 15-rounders cost under $10 and they work.
 
I think the M1 Carbine isn't in the same class of guns as the Mini-14, but I'd love to own both. I give the edge to the M1 Carbine for magazine availability, they're pretty much equal for ergonomics and parts availability. As far as cartridge effectiveness, the .223 has it all over the .30 Carbine round. Accuracy would depend on the range, the M1 Carbine is probably best considered a sub-100 yard gun, but the Mini-14 has much longer range. I won't argue the point that some Mini-14's can't hit anything past 100 yards, that's another topic. :)
 
I think the .30 Carbine is more of a handgun cartridge than a Carbine cartridge...
The M1 Carbine is a great little weapon. Its a step up from handguns to be sure. But a step down from rifles and other carbines balistically speaking.
The .30 carbine hits like an overheated .357 Magnum and is very easy to hit with.
Ammo is harder to find.
If this is the type of weapon you want - cool. You'll be happy with it. Optional guns like this are the Marlin Lever Actions chambered for .357, or .44 magnums.

The .223 is a better cartridge for a rifle, as stated above by Master Shin Tao.
Optional rifle in .223? I'ld avoid the AR design personally but it remains quite popular to other shooters.
My 1st choice would be for the M-96 Carbine.
My 2nd choice would be for the HK SL-8 with the multi-gunsight carry handle.
If the Ruger could accept the regular GI mags - it would be the PERFECT rifle. Matched with a Holo sight - it would be a force.

Member: www.jpfo.org

[This message has been edited by George Hill (edited October 07, 2000).]
 
I like the Mini-14 better personally. I may have been lucky because the mini's I have bought have always shot fairly well. The 223 as stated earlier is a much better performing round than the 30 carbine at all distances. The only thing that I find the m1 carbine to be better in is the noise department. I find I can shoot the 30 carbine without hearing protection and not have my ears ring the rest of the day. Before all the retorts, yes I do wear hearing protection all the time except when hunting. Good Luck
 
WOOT! Something I can comment on :)

No one wil argue that the .223 is a better round balisticly than the .30 carbine. But the Carbin is a great gun and I would take it over the Mini14 or Mini30 any day. 90%+ 1 round mags are about 8 bucks and 30 rounders are 15-20.

The M1 Carbine is light and easy to handle. It can be fired one handed and without ear protecton. No the ammo is not as easy to get ahold of but UMC is cheap and easy to get. Remington makes a soft point forhunting and PD as well. And if you reoad there are a lot more options out there.

In case you couldn't tell I don't like the Mini14 and I love the M1 Carbine :)
 
The M-1 Carbine is a fun gun to shoot. Mags are cheaper than the Mini-14. I took mine out this spring (first time in maybe 8 years) and had a lot of fun shooting. I had a slam fire years back on this same rifle and that was an experience in its self.

I had a Mini years ago and it was a good shooter. A track driver NO but never had problems with it cycling.

There is no comparision between the two rounds would be like comparing apples to oranges. The 5.56 NATO round is vastley superior.

My personal opinion is to save a couple hundred more $$ and get a 16 clone. Mags are still relitively cheap. The 16 is battle proven. I've got an old Colt SP1 and would bet my life on it.

Turk
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flaim:
WOOT! Something I can comment on :)
The M1 Carbine is light and easy to handle. It can be fired one handed and without ear protecton.[/quote]

Any gun can be fired without ear protection, but it's not a good idea if you want to be able to hear in later life. The M1 Carbine is actually pretty loud, and certainly loud enough to seriously damage hearing with extended exposure without hearing protection! Why in the world would anyone want to take this chance???
 
I own both, I enjoy both, and I'm keeping both!

1) Reliability: As long as you get GOOD mags for the Mini 14, I'd rate them as about equal. I always suggest PMI mags for the Mini 14.

2) Accuracy: I'd give a SLIGHT edge to the Mini 14. As range gets longer, the Mini's edge increases.

3) Ergonomics: Definitely goes to the M1 Carbine. There's never been a more ergonomic semi-auto carbine built.

4) Magazine and parts availability: Give this one to the M1 Carbine. HOWEVER, except for hicap mags, these two guns are both known for reliability and durability.

5) Cartridge effectiveness: No question, this goes to the Mini 14.

Just my 2 cents,
Gino
 
Never had M1 Carbine, had several Minis. So I'll trust you guys about the reliability of the Carbine. I also hear they are quite inaccurate, but so are Minis. You can get parts for Carbine, you can't for Minis. Ruger won't make a factory 10rd mag (giving excuses how the tooling is obsolete - how much do dies cost?), just to make sure their rifle will be the last one to be banned in the future.

Some facts about Minis that I experienced. Each one that I owned functioned perfectly with factory mags (5, 20, 30rd). The aftermarket mags are generally ****. However, they can be made to work by messing with the lips (and you can replace followers and springs). For example, I have seen a guy fire several mag full bursts out of
AC-556 without a jam, using modified USA mags.

As pointed out previously, they realy fit into two different classes.

Between the two I'd take an AK clone.



[This message has been edited by glockgazda (edited October 09, 2000).]
 
So where do we find these $8 15-rounders for the M-1 carbine? And would they be new GI, used GI, or aftermarket? The "gun shows" we have around here feature new GI for $10-13 each.
 
I`d stick with the Mini. The ones I`ve shot were all "okay",not great but okay enough to get the job done. On the other hand I shot a few boxes of ammo through an M1 carbine last weekend and I was underwhelmed. Ergonomics were good,reliability was spotty, and accuracy was poor enough that I was able to outshoot it with my CZ-75 at 15,25,50 and 200yds. The carbine did slightly better at 100yds. Maybe it was just a poor example, I dunno. Marcus

[This message has been edited by Marcus (edited October 09, 2000).]
 
I don't like the Rugers.

I like my M-1 Carbine.

I'm not a big fan of the .223, either. I think it's only good for varmints...
 
Better to plug an assailant with a .223 than a 30 carbine. Now, what I`d like to see is the .22 Spitfire (30 carbine necked down to .22) revived. That should be hotter than FN`s 5.7 x 28mm.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shin-Tao:
Spectre!
You'd rather face BGs with .30carbine than 5.56? Are you joking?[/quote]

I would. If it were with in (accuarate) range of the .30 I would perfer it over the .223.
Given the choice between the two guns it would depend on what you plan to do with the gun???
I wouldn't mind having one of each.



------------------
Gunslinger

I was promised a Shortycicle and I want a Shortycicle!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top