Please watch: "Barnett Crossbow Cocking Crank Installation ( raptor fx crossbow ) Never Never Safari"
   • Barnett Crossbow Cocking Crank Instal...  
~~~~~~~~~

By Dave Anderson, GUNS Magazine

The Ruger Mini14 was an instant success when it appeared in the mid1970's. To understand why, you kind of had to be there. In 1976 if you wanted a semiautomatic .223 your choices were a Colt AR15 ($300), Armalite AR180 ($300), or HK93 ($330).

The Mini14 was priced at $200. Now $100 or so doesn't seem like much today, but in 1976 the national average wage index was roughly $9,200. Compared to the increase in wages, the price difference of $100 or $130 is like a difference of $500 to $650 today.

The military M16 (and by extension its semiauto version, the AR15) was widely criticized at the time. Dozens of articles, both in gun magazines and in the popular press, castigated the M16 for perceived failings such as unreliability and mediocre accuracy.


There was much speculation on what sort of rifle would replace the M16. If you had said in 1975 the M16 would still be America's military rifle 40 years later you'd have been laughed out of the room. And if you suggested the day would come when an AR would consistently shoot 1/2MOA groups…

I had one of those early Mini14's, made in 1976, as well as a Colt AR15 of the same era. In terms of accuracy and reliability there was little difference. Groups of around 6 MOA seemed to be about the norm with either. The one undeniable Mini14 advantage was cost. A Cnote saved is a big deal when you're making $200 a week.

I liked the balance, feel and overall handling of the Mini, but its lack of accuracy made it seem more like a bulky, hardtoconceal pistol than a rifle. Moreover the lack of accuracy seemed inherent in the design, not due to any lack of quality in materials or workmanship.

Any semiautomatic rifle using an operating rod along with a gas block on the barrel is handicapped in terms of accuracy. As the operating rod is jolted into motion and separates from the gas block, the barrel gets a little (and inconsistent) tweak added to its normal vibrations. Careful hand fitting of parts helps, especially in combination with a heavier barrel.


The barrels on those early Mini14's were certainly not heavy, quite the opposite. Add the operating rod factor to an already light, whippy barrel and accuracy problems were almost inevitable.

Regular readers may recall a column on the Amega MiniScout sight base for the Mini14 in the September 2010 issue. Not just a sight base, the Amega system acts as a strut to stiffen the light barrel. With a forwardmounted Leupold Scout scope attached, the Amega base transformed my old Mini. It's still no tackdriver but at least it seems like a rifle rather than a big pistol.

Ruger has made a number of changes to the Mini14 over the years. The amazing developments in AR accuracy, versatility and aftermarket components have occupied my semiauto rifle interests for some decades now, while the Mini14's have been relegated to the back row of the gun safe. To see how they've changed over the years I purchased a current (2014) production Ranch Rifle at a local store.

The current model has a heavier, stiffer barrel, better iron sights, it accepts Ruger rings for mounting a scope over the receiver, the upper forearm is synthetic instead of wood and it has a recoil pad that sticks to your shoulder rather than sliding around the way the old slick plastic would.

The original was marked Mini14 and .223 Rem on the receiver, and the barrel had a 1:10inch twist. The current model is marked Ranch Rifle and 5.56mm, the barrel has a 1:9 twist. A set of Ruger rings come with the rifle. A Picatinnystyle rail is also included and can be attached to the receiver for more sightfitting options.

I used the Ruger rings to fit a Redfield Battlezone 39×42 to the receiver. Comparing out of the box accuracy, my current production Ranch Rifle is far superior. With handloads using the Hornady 55grain VMax bullet it consistently produces 5shot, 100yard groups between 1.5 and 2 inches, averaging around 13/4 inches. Groups were nice and "round" with no tendency to horizontal or vertical stringing even when the barrel heated up.

These groups were shot while dealing with an atrocious factory trigger. A semiauto trigger, in order to be safe and reliable, needs a bit of takeup and overtravel, as well as a good margin of sear engagement. Even making those allowances, this trigger needs work.

Weight of pull is 61/2 pounds. Takeup and overtravel are acceptable but the actual sear break is long, creepy, and with detectable "steps." Shooting for accuracy from the bench was a chore.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/12/the...