Mini-14 relaibility with different lubes...

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bsmithwins

Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
514
Location
OR, USA
Some video we shot on the 4th of July.



TLDR version:
Mini-14 would not work dirty no matter the lube used or dry. Adding more oil got it running again.

BSW
 
Seeing that the mini 14 is basically a Garand system, they need to lube it properly. grease on the cam ways and such.

if one watches the vid, it always the same problem. bolt locks back while still rounds in mag. maybe they should try it on a garand or M1A
 
The second run was with the rifle greased on the bolt contact points and op-rod slide area. It worked even less well that way then when oiled.

BTW, the bolt wasn't locking back, it was getting stuck open.

BSW
 
What was the point? Plenty of guns are going to fail when you sift dirt all over them. Mini 14 isn't a military weapon. Never designed for adverse conditions. I would have been interested in what the AR would have done with the dust cover open.
 
Pretty much any gun that is designed for and sold to the commercial/civilian market is going to probably fail this test. Its based on the Garand, but a Garand it is not. It is a weapon notirious for being finicky sometimes, especially with mags. Im sure it could be made more reliable if you made the tolerances loose like the Kalashnikov family or some of those dead reliable GI 1911's that rattle like mad but never seem to jam due to dirt.
 
Originally Posted By: hatt
What was the point? Plenty of guns are going to fail when you sift dirt all over them. Mini 14 isn't a military weapon. Never designed for adverse conditions. I would have been interested in what the AR would have done with the dust cover open.
Originally Posted By: hatt
What was the point? Plenty of guns are going to fail when you sift dirt all over them. Mini 14 isn't a military weapon. Never designed for adverse conditions. I would have been interested in what the AR would have done with the dust cover open.


The point was, when under identical conditions, the Mini failed while the AR and AUG worked. Running it Dry, with oil, or grease didn't prevent the Mini from having severe stoppages.

BSW

BSW
 
Originally Posted By: bsmithwins
Originally Posted By: hatt
What was the point? Plenty of guns are going to fail when you sift dirt all over them. Mini 14 isn't a military weapon. Never designed for adverse conditions. I would have been interested in what the AR would have done with the dust cover open.
Originally Posted By: hatt
What was the point? Plenty of guns are going to fail when you sift dirt all over them. Mini 14 isn't a military weapon. Never designed for adverse conditions. I would have been interested in what the AR would have done with the dust cover open.


The point was, when under identical conditions, the Mini failed while the AR and AUG worked. Running it Dry, with oil, or grease didn't prevent the Mini from having severe stoppages.

BSW

BSW


I knew before I even clicked the you tube link that this test would be conducted with a 180 series mini. 180 series mini suck. They never were reliable and to make matters worse, it appears the guy had old parts. LOL look closely at the flash supressor!!!!. I could have told you from the start this gun would have problems with dirt. Ruger mini 14's were almost designed to not be reliable, on purpose.... The CEO Bill Ruger never wanted his company to produce a reliable "assault rifle" and he admitted this several times out loud, on TV and every where he possibly could. As soon as Bill ruger kicked the bucket, ruger was out to make the mini 14 come to be what it is now, a reliable carbine with enough durability to hold its own against the competition and be a viable option to most other semi auto rifles. You really cant compare an old min 14 to the new ones, in any respect.

The 580 series mini 14's are almost a completely different gun and much more reliable than the older 180 series tested in the vid. Almost all the parts, especially the gas operating system, have been redesigned and are now made with much better tooling and much better production processes.

I make two points here. 1. I think the outcome of this test would have been MUCH different if he used a new production mini 14, factory ruger stock and possibly American produced ammunition. 2. 180 series mini 14 are garbage, they had reliability problems even before you start dumping dirt into them. On a side note, the chances of dirt being dumped into any rifle like that in real life, VERY slim.

If you really are interested in the new mini 14:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Fk84KLiaa4
 
I could only test what I had access to, which was a 188 series Mini.

I'm going to try to get a newer Mini to test.

Might be doing mud next time.

BSW
 
No its closer to the Garand/M14 than the M1 Carbine, but since the Garand and the M1 carbine share some similarities it is easy to see influence from both. I only say it is closer to the garand especially if you look at the trigger/safety, sights, mag release ect.
 
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
No its closer to the Garand/M14 than the M1 Carbine, but since the Garand and the M1 carbine share some similarities it is easy to see influence from both. I only say it is closer to the garand especially if you look at the trigger/safety, sights, mag release ect.






Well you might ought to read this thread. Member AMC seems to know lots about the origin of the Ruger Mini-14,-30 platforms. The relevant post is towards the end of the thread.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3009004&page=all

M-1 Garand mag release? Say what?
I thought the M-1 Garand was 8 round stripper clip fed. The M-1 Carbine however is mag fed, that I am sure of.

The way the Ruger Mini bolt rotates as it operates is exactly like the way the bolt rotates on my M-1 Carbine.

I myself don't see many similarities when comparing the M-1 Carbine or Mini-14,-30 to the M-1 Garand. Bolt operation- nope. Ammo feed- nope. Appearance- nope.

Ergo the operation of the Ruger Mini-14,-30 can be compared more closely to The M-1 Carbine. Ammo feed- yes, both magazine fed. Appearance- yes, match more closely in size. Bolt operation- yes. Sights? who knows I believe the M-1 carbine came with several different types of sights.

Member AMC gets into the origin and construction of the gas system, I admit this is a subject I have little or know working knowledge.

I'll be the first to admit that I am a novice in the gun knowledge department, and I guess I should apologize early for questioning anyone. But I do own a M-1 Carbine, and I am currently in the market for a Mini-30, so I have been studying up some.
 
Last edited:
Notice how I said Garand/M14 as the m14 is essentially based on the early M1 rifle.

I too have a M1 Carbine as well as a Garand, and the safety and mag release on my M1 Carbine is nothing like the Mini 14. Look how the trigger assembly drops out...very much like my Springfield Garand and not my M1 Carbine. Look at the safety.....garand. Look at the mag realease, very M14. Heck look at the NAME, Mini 14, not Mini 1.
 
Last edited:
Ok
So member AMC is in error when he states the mini is based on the carbine? And the gas system is copied from a Remington?
 
Last edited:
Ugh guys, you are debating a moot point. The first rifle in the series was in fact the garand. The 30 carbine, m14 and mini 14 ALL use the same rotating bolt design and basic operation.
When I said the mini-14 was based off the m1 carbine, I was talking about the overall form and function, being a small, light weight rifle. The gas piston or what ruger calls an "action slide" is almost a direct copy of the remington 742.
The reason the ruger mini 14 has a tough time with the dirt test done here is the fact that the hand guard is vented. This allows dirt to pack in between the gas piston and gas channel liner. Dirt also gets into the recoil spring, and jams things up. An ultimak or amega range hand guard solves (mostly) that problem.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: twentynine
Ok
So member AMC is in error when he states the mini is based on the carbine? And the gas system is copied from a Remington?


All I said it was closer to the Garand/M14 than the Carbine. Like many designs its an amalgam of previous platforms(like its competitor the AR15), but in terms of form, and function it gets a lot more from the garand based guns. Only so many ways to design a gas system and they have already been done in one form or another. And AMC makes a point, it is itself a carbine in that its compact, lightweight, and fires an intermediate round. The gas piston setup is Remington, all the other things I mentioned are very much Garand.
 
I have seen a 180 series be perfectly reliable despite the lube. It had just hopps oil, just clp, a combo of oil where it shoulb be and grease where it should be, it didnt matter, always shot fine. But they werent dumping dirt on it for petes sake!

The trick is the magazine, you can only use ruger mags if you want a reliable mini.
 
Originally Posted By: AMC
Ugh guys, you are debating a moot point. The first rifle in the series was in fact the garand. The 30 carbine, m14 and mini 14 ALL use the same rotating bolt design and basic operation.
When I said the mini-14 was based off the m1 carbine, I was talking about the overall form and function, being a small, light weight rifle. The gas piston or what ruger calls an "action slide" is almost a direct copy of the remington 742.
The reason the ruger mini 14 has a tough time with the dirt test done here is the fact that the hand guard is vented. This allows dirt to pack in between the gas piston and gas channel liner. Dirt also gets into the recoil spring, and jams things up. An ultimak or amega range hand guard solves (mostly) that problem.


There actually wasn't that much dust in the area under the handguard. Most certainly not enough to cause the stoppages. The recoil spring and guide rod were dusty, but again not exceptionally so.

The areas that retained dust and caused the majority of the stoppages were the op rod track in the receiver and the camming area of the op rod. Dust infiltration in the extractor clearance in the bolt may have been causing the FTExtract.

BSW
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Mikek13
What Keith at Dan Wesson said about 1911 rail lube.
2
Replies
26
Views
10K
wpod
A
iPhone 14 saves lives again
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
alarmguy
S
Which pistols etc should I select to shoot at the range?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
4K
Revving2Redline
Bailes1992
MG ZS
Replies
18
Views
508
Tikka
A
Stick with what works or change it up…
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
Rogueman2016s
Back
Top