article about the mini 14 by Ruger employee

[eveled]

I just found this article on another forum, I don't remember seeing it before. So I figured I'd post it here. If it has already been posted and I missed it here, sorry. It is about the acuracy issues found with some rifles. http://www.icehouse.net/fgrig/gun/mini14.htm

 

[Sugar River]

Good old Ed. He's forgotten more about guns/ballistics than most of us will ever know. Many folks might recognize his gun writer pen name, C. E. Harris. Also inventor of "Ed's Red".

 

[DGW1949]

I would argue with Mr Harris that modifying the gun so's the "right lug" stops the forward-motion of the op-rod would probably lead to premature wear, or even worse...componant failure. I say that because I know for a fact that unless there is clearence between the "cam area" and the at-rest bolt-lug on an M1A/M14, the roller will break. There's a "bit" of clearence designed-in that particular spot on an M1 Rifle also, and the M1 Carbine...even though they, like the Mini, aint got no roller either. Has to be a reason for that, eh?

Yeah, I'm sure of it.....when you're dealing with a rifle than can have it's group size cut in half just by having some sort of vibration dampener clamped onto the barrel (or as Ruger did, stuck out on the end), ya got's more problems on your hands than whacking-on the gas block can fix. I suspect that Ruger knows that too.....After all, it was their p*ss-poor barrel that they finaly decided to do something with, was it not?

Just sayin'.

DGW

 

[dfletcher]

Why do so many Ruger rifle models seem to have a "fatal flaw" (or flaws) with respect to accuracy? The Mini has its barrel, the Ruger No1 has the forearm/hanger and the 77/22 line (to include Hornet and 44 Magnum) has that darned two piece bolt. I happen to have all three and as much as I like them, when I consider buying a Ruger the "will it shoot" worry always wanders through my mind.

When I buy a CZ 527 instead of a Ruger 77 I don't have to worry about design issues affecting accuracy. Same thing goes for a Winchester 1885 or T/C Encore in single shot. And instead of another Mini I picked up a Benelli MR1.

When shooting I have to wonder about my skill or reloads being the cause of not so good accuracy - tossing in the equipment as a cause is another factor I'd rather avoid.

 

[DGW1949]

I don't know much about most of the guns you mentioned, so I don't know the answers to your questions. I've sometimes had simular thoughts about their Mini though. About all I could come up with is that they looked at a couple of existing designs, kept some features, modified others, threw in some of their own....and then set-about seeing just how cheaply it could be made and still function reliably....which seems to have been the main criteria. Well that, and how it looks...because people do buy what they see, eh?....and after all, it IS a cute little rifle.
Unfortunently though, accuracy never really entered the equasion. Leastways, not untill lately. Still though, as accuracy 'n constency goes, even with it's new "tapered barrel", what the consumer is getting could best be termed "an OK rifle", not so much a "good rifle".

And that's coming from a guy who owns one....a 582-series in fact....which I consider to be "closer to good"...but still..."no cigar".

DGW

 

[wunbe]

My 77 VBZ 22LR shoots the lights out -- and has since I bought it in the 90s. Any fodder, any time. BUT my VHZ Hornet was a mess and did not group worth a damn until I had it K'ed. The new round was a wonder after the factory's sloppy chamber was done away with. Neither bolt had to be modified so I have always held the 2 piece bolt grumbling with some suspicion.

As for #1s, don't get me started. Ol Bill cast the original design in cement and despite the all too well known litany of flaws, the factory has done zero to address #1 shortcomings since its introduction. They do not forget to hike the MSRP each year.

wunbe

 

[dfletcher]

I'm a pretty good shot and attentive reloader. Still, when you're reloading for a 22 Hornet, or a 44 Magnum out of their 77 model and the groups open & close, or wander, you have to wonder if it's operator error, reloading error or a load that just "doesn't work". Or the scope. To throw in a design flaw of the gun is just an additional factor that takes a day of shooting from fun to aggravating. I can deal with correcting my shooting or switch reloads - powder, bullet weight or style. But when we get into having to shim bolts, tweak forend pressure and such, it's a pain.

If I'm not buying something odd like a 1918 BAR, or HS target rifle in 378 Weatherby, I lean towards either Ruger or CZ. They each seem to put out a similar "blued steel and walnut" product. But I always have to worry about "will it shoot?" when looking at the Ruger. That never enters my mind when I look at a CZ.

I really wish Ruger would do better on this sort of thing.

 

[RJ556]

I agree with all of your posts. I have many Ruger rifles, and pistols. Better than half of them, required some to "much" work to get them shooting to my satisfaction. Yes, this should not be. You can buy a Tikka, Browning, Winchester, CZ and many other brands that shoot extreamly well, out of the box. Ruger firearms are not inexpensive. I will not get rid of the Rugers I own. I will probably not buy any more. I like everything about them, except the "Is it going to shoot" part.

 

[Kyhunt]

I just looked up that MR1. I never heard of it. Looks like an interesting rifle. For several years I have thought about a mini14 but then always talk myself out of it after I start re-researching them as there are so many mixed reviews on them.

 

[Leucoandro]

I just looked up that MR1. I never heard of it. Looks like an interesting rifle. For several years I have thought about a mini14 but then always talk myself out of it after I start re-researching them as there are so many mixed reviews on them.

From what I have heard, the MR1 is about as accurate as the Mini-14, but more expensive. I just checked Benelli's page, and do not see it listed anymore, they have changed the webpage a lot though, and it is a bit difficult to navigate.


Charlie