Mini-14 or AR-15 or AK-47 or ...

Ruger guy, glad you came back - TFL really is a friendly board, and the best I've found. Lots of great folks, from all over the world, and they freely share their experience and opinions. Your opinions are certainly welcome here.

AK's confuse the heck out of me as well - incredible price swings between different countries, versions and years of production. More than any other rifle, these seem to be one of those 'you pays your money and you takes your chances' kind of firearm.
 
After owning all three, here's my experiences:

2 Mini-14's - Good idea, putting the M-14 style in a .223 format. BUT... someting gets lost in the translation. As DC mentioned when the barrel heats up accuracy drops off. Your groups will really open up, in direct proportion to the amount of shooting you've done. I'm disappointed that Ruger has not upgraded the steel they use for thier barrels. Decent hi cap mags are hard to find. However if your looking for a "working" gun, the Mini-14/30 are great choices.

1 AK-47 - I had a Polytech AK. Extreme reliability about says all the good that I can say about it. I shot mine and never cleaned it other than a patch down the tube. Never malf'd. But talk about a stamped out rough piece. Ergonomics and balance were crap. It fills it's intended role very, very well, better than any other combat weapon out there. If you decide on an AK, go with the Eastern European versions. Much better quality than the Chinese.

1 AR-15 - I'm currently on my first personally owned AR. A Bushmaster Shorty AK. I love it. Accurate and very ergonomic. The .223 is an easy on the shooter round. And within it's envelope of performance (inside 200 yds) produces a nasty wound profile. I would not consider it an appropriate game taking round though. It works well for it's intended purpose (anti personell). The AR system offer great flexibility in that it's modular. You can have 1 lower reciever and a collection of different uppers for your different tastes.

Who am I kidding, you will end up with many, many ARs....

The downside to the AR system is it's gas systen. It redirects dirty gas directly into the bolt. Messy to say the least. Proper maintenance is a requirement. But that should not be a problem for a sport shooter, I doubt you will subject an AR to battlefield conditions.

After saying all this, the AR is the only one I own currently and I plan on more - they are addicting!

------------------
Dan

Si vis pacem para bellum!

Check me out at:
<A HREF="http://www.mindspring.com/~susdan/interest.htm" TARGET=_blank>

www.mindspring.com/~susdan/interest.htm</A>
www.mindspring.com/~susdan/GlocksnGoodies.htm
 
Ak 47 would be my first choice for two reasons: 1) Reliable. Will always go BANG when you pull the trigger. Eats all types of ammo and very crudely built but very rugged. 2) Simple. Field stripping is very simple, requires low maintainance, rifle does not have to be babied. Simple design for a battle proven rifle. My second choice would be an AR15, excellent rifle, lighter than an AK, better sights and more accurate, but not as reliable (IMHO) and tends to be fussy at times with certain ammo. Generally AR's need more maintainance than an AK. AK's tend to be cheaper in price than AR's. I own both so theres your real answer.
 
Ruger Guy,

Regarding your question about the cheap AKs, I think the best deals going are the Romanian SAR-1 AKs. I recently purchased two for about $320 each from AIM Surplus. They are also available from Century, Classic Arms, SOG, etc. (lots of adds in Shotgun news). Of course, this is the "base" price - you'll have to add shipping, FFL fee, DROS, etc. I think mine cost me a little under $400 each "out the door."

The really nice thing about these rifles is that they have an authentic "pre-ban" look (pistol grip rather than thumb hole stock, use all high-cap AK magazines). The SAR-1s look a lot like the Egyptian Maadis (same configuration), but they have some advantages, including:

1) Real finish on the metal instead of paint.

2) Enough U.S. parts to make it legal to use imported high-capacity magazines (the Maadi owners are supposed to replace the floorplate and follower on their imported magazines with U.S. parts).

3) An eastern-european scope mount on the side of the receiver.

4) A chromed barrel (I'm not really sure if the Maadis have this or not).

5) A little better workmanship (although neither is even close to typical sporting arm standards).

Watch out for the rifles with single-stack 10-round magazines (standard AK mags won't fit) and thumbhole stocks. These probably work fine, but should cost closer to $200.

Also, there are some problems with the front sight posts being mounted crooked. This appears to be much more common with the Maadis, but some Romanians have the problem as well. And don't be surprised if the stocks don't match at all and the metal is a little scratched and scuffed. As has been stated, they work fine (and are cheap and fun to shoot). Check out AK-47.net for a lot more info.

Doug
 
One of the first centerfire long-guns I ever owned was the Ruger Mini-14 with the factory folding stock. Why? Because MR.T used on on the A-Team!!!!! ;)

Frankly, the gun sucks. But I still have it and I still shoot it, and I do shoot better than this gun.

I have been an AR freak for a while. They are hard to beat in the accuracy department.
But then again I have a 69 dollar SKS that will shoot on par with my 24" Bushmaster VMatch.

I started getting into AKs recently, as can be attested if you've been to AK-47.net recently. Picked up a preban Polytech for a song. Instant love affair, but shoots horrible groups.

Moral: If you can afford it, get the AR15.
If not, pick up a Romanian AK.
Probably the best deal yet is theSKS.
Leave the Rugers to Mr. T.

"I Pity the fool...." :)
 
Am I the only one who's had a Mini-14 that's sub 2MOA? In the factory wood stock,
it shot a 3rd./1" group w/some old Win. 55gr. SP's that I had laying around, and 1.25" w/current red-box Fed. 55gr. HP's. Both w/issue military style sights as equipped.
After I installed a plastic Butler Creek stock, these groups opened up by about an inch. After mounting a scope, the performance can be duplicated. Just shows that stock-to-metal fit surely has some effect!
I'm told that bedding compound won't hold to the cheap plastic, as it's too slick. Anyone with any experience on that?
 
VictorLouis~

Don't get me wrong,besides my original mini I also have a Ranch model that I placed into a synthetic stock and she shoots approx. 2MOA handloaded. It prolly would shoot better if the trigger weren't so horrible.

No experience bedding a mini in a synthetic stock. I had an old Rem 600 bedded in a synthetic stock and it shoots wonderfully, but then again all of the extraneous stuff involved with the mini14 may make this a grueling task.

Peace out :)
 
cwalker3:

One gun has it all. Super accuracy, match barrels under a hundred that'll cut fantastic groups (from factory barrel) in half, loads of WORKING hi-cap mags at decent prices, non threatening profile when used with 10 round mags, scopes, mounts, accessories, good low priced synthetic stocks. Oh, and cheapest ammo of the lot.

Yes, it's the Ruger. I've 2 of them in Choate preban folding stocks assembled preban. But I'm NOT talkin mini14, mini30, Ranch rifle. I'm talking 10/22.

Bob's comments on the SKS are good, especially if you can find a preban one that takes ak47 mags., or can get a 20 round fixed mag.

Consider also the M1 Carbine if available at decent price.

I've tried and sold finnish, hungarian, and chinese AK's. For me they handle like a 2x6 board. With full auto capability, maybe worth the handling. Semi auto, I'd take the SKS.

If you do get a 7.62x39 gun, look to see if Ruger still makes the stainless/synthetic M77 bolt action in that caliber. Have fun.

------------------
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top