So here's a question.. in TFL land, the M1A/M14 design seems to be almost univerally venerated. At the same time, Ruger's Mini-14 seems to get widely badmouthed. So my question is -- what's the actual **MECHANICAL** differences between the two that causes this?
It seems to me that given the popularity of the M1A, a "properly executed" 5.56/7.62x39 carbine on the same pattern would be much more widely regarded. And yet, it seems few civilian shooters like the thing, and I've yet to hear of a military unit going for it on a wide scale.
So -- is there anything that would sway the M1A lovers over to the Mini as a light carbine? Say... a heavier barrel and a magazine release closer to the original?
Or am I missing something here?
-K
It seems to me that given the popularity of the M1A, a "properly executed" 5.56/7.62x39 carbine on the same pattern would be much more widely regarded. And yet, it seems few civilian shooters like the thing, and I've yet to hear of a military unit going for it on a wide scale.
So -- is there anything that would sway the M1A lovers over to the Mini as a light carbine? Say... a heavier barrel and a magazine release closer to the original?
Or am I missing something here?
-K