craig110
06-13-2010, 07:55 PM
The GP Mini-14 Shooting Event happened today!
Short background to this event: In another thread that was hosting the traditional ribbing about the Mini-14's accuracy, http://www.glockpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11886, I offered to give the Mini-14 a checkout if someone would lend me one. Jawja offered, but I found another member of my club that offered to let me shoot his as a test and so I took him up on it to avoid all the shipping and transfer costs. (Thank you again, Jawja, for offering up one of your Mini-14s for this test.)
Why was I a good candidate to do the test firing? A list of reasons:
- I've never owned a Mini-14,
- it isn't on my "must get one some day" list,
- it also isn't on my "never get one of these" list,
- I like target-level accurate guns but I also own an AK variant (so I am neither a mandatory sub-MOA person nor am I a "spray and pray" type person),
- I shoot both the T/C Encore and an AK variant in .223 so I'm used to that caliber in terms of recoil, etc.,
- I'm not considering buying a Mini-14, and,
- I've never shot one before.
Basically, besides only having held one to my shoulder once or twice in a gun store, I have no first-hand impressions with that gun that would get in the way of an honest shooting review. So, to help settle the issue of whether the Mini-14 is a good shooter or whether it is only sub-minute-of-barn-door as in the jabs, I undertook the test.
The Gun
Here is a picture of the rifle I shot for over two hours today:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic1.jpg
The owner isn't sure of its exact age, but since he bought it used more than three years ago, it isn't the current model. Nor, on the other hand, is it an early model with real wood.
The scope is nothing to write home about. He just put it on today as a favor to me and it is from his pile of old scopes that happen to not be sitting on a rifle. It is good that it isn't sitting on another rifle. Oh, the scope gave me a nice clear view and didn't seem to be moving around, but as you'll see below, I ran into a problem with it that was, thankfully, only an annoyance to this test. Just in case the problem was caused by something easily fixed, I'm not going to mention the scope's brand. Besides, I was testing the rifle; not the scope.
Wikipedia lists the weight of a Mini-14 at 6 pounds, 6 ounces. I believe it as it is very light. The gun did recoil more than I'm used to from either my T/C Encore or AK variant (Saiga .223), but more on this later.
The Ammo
I'm sure you'll understand that this was done purely for scientific purposes and also to avoid shooting my reloads in someone else's gun, but I actually went out and purchased commercial ammo for this test. (Forgive me. It did feel very weird going into a store and instead of chuckling at the prices of the commercial ammo, actually picking up some of the boxes and buying them. <shudder>) Besides, since I wouldn't have access to this Mini-14 long enough to work up a load, I didn't want to have the results of today's test skewed way off by shooting a load that works nicely in my other .223s but might have been terribly wrong for this gun.
I bought three kinds of ammo to try to cover a spectrum of types: Black Hills, Remington UMC, and some M193 5.56 ball ammo.
Initial Sighting Shots
It might be odd to include sighting shots in a review, but besides having the only ejection failure (a stovepipe with a Black Hills round), I quickly learned that the Mini-14 does a fantastic job of ejecting brass a long, long way at high velocity pretty much at a 90-degree angle to the direction of shooting -- in other words, right at the folks shooting down at my right. Too bad I was using the 50 and 100 yard distances and they were shooting at the 200 and 300 yard targets or else it would have made sense for me to move to the furthest right shooting position. As is, after many apologies I constructed a shield out of the box that I brought the ammo and my "eyes and ears" in. Even being about six inches away from the ejection port, that box didn't stop all the brass. I was amazed that at the end of shooting a known quantity of rounds that I'd generally only find 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the brass.
Well, enough background. Lets get into some target pictures.
50 yards, Black Hills, 10 rds, slow fire using rest
Started off by shooting 10 rounds of Black Hills at a target using the rifle rest for support. This was still at 50 yards since the sighters showed that the scope must be off to the left, and I wanted to get it more zeroed in before moving to 100 yards. I did 10 rounds as a decent test and also to better fit the pattern of how the other shooters were shooting. (They were doing CMP practice.) The results:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic2.jpg
Yup, the scope was definitely off to the left, so I gave it 6 clicks right and ignored the vertical so that it would be decent for the 100 yard distance. (Ignore the tear at the edge of the paper. The shots were close enough to the clip holding the target that it tore the paper.)
That is about a 2 3/4 inches spread at only 50 yards which certainly puts it closer to my AK variant than to a tack driver. But, certainly not what I'd consider to be "half minute of barn door" level of inaccuracy.
50 yards, Black Hills, 10 rds (2 x 5 rds), rapid fire using rest
I've read that many Mini-14 groups really open up when shooting through a hot barrel, so the next test was two sets of 5 rounds (the magazine size on hand) done as rapidly as I could reacquire the target and/or load the magazine. I wish I had an infrared thermometer to check the barrel temp, but I certainly wasn't giving it much time to cool off.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic3.jpg
The group was better than I expected: Opening up to 3 1/4 inch was only a half inch wider than what I got with very slow and deliberate fire. Either this particular Mini-14 doesn't have the issue of firing through hot barrels or else I wasn't firing a long enough string to get it hot enough. Seeing this result from 10 rapid shots, though, if I was hunting with this gun I wouldn't be concerned that my second or third shot would be off by a mile.
I still wasn't satisfied that the scope was zeroed (understatement), so I turned it another 6 clicks to the right.
50 yards, Remington UMC, 10 rds, slow fire using rest
I still wasn't satisfied that the gun's scope was zeroed nicely plus with the size groups I was getting I decided to stay at the 50 yard distance for a bit longer. (I had a target up at 100 yards, but with the cycle that the CMP shooters were in it wouldn't be convenient to go change targets every 10 or 15 shots or so.)
Given where the other shots were landing relative to the bullseye, I was comfortable using the lower left target on the paper for this next set. Oops, mistake.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic4.jpg
Yes, that was 10 rounds. I've double-checked my notes and counted the rounds I brought back home, and half of those shots missed the page. That was disappointing since I can't give a resulting group size.
And yes, and this point I double-checked to make sure I've been adjusting the scope in the right direction. I had been. In an attempt to finally get the shots near the bulls-eye, I gave it another 10 (!) clicks to the right.
50 yards, M193 5.56, few rds, slow fire using rest
Nope, no picture for this. I had planned on shooting the regular set of 10 shots, but after two or three decided not to shoot it any more. The recoil was way too much in this light gun and it was unpleasant to shoot.
50 yards, both Black Hills and Remington UMC, 5 rds each, slow fire, not using the rest
The rifle rest I was using was nice for getting nice steady shot pictures before squeezing off the round, but it wasn't comfortable: I wasn't getting a good cheek weld nor was the gun's butt fully engaged in my shoulder. Just in case this was getting in the way of having good shot groups, I took the gun off the rest, got into a comfortable bench-supported position and shot 5 rounds each at two targets. I didn't take pictures of these targets since now we're getting into the shooter-ability aspects, but I will say this: Each ammo's group was only modestly bigger than what I got off the rest. The good news, though, was that this test showed that the discomfort associated with the rifle rest wasn't turning a tack driver into something else.
100 yards, Black Hills, 10 rds, slow fire using rest
Even after 22 total clicks right on the scope up to this point, the shots were still as left as when I started the morning. I suspect - and the owner concurred - that the horizontal adjustment on the scope wasn't working. However, by this point I felt confident that I could keep them on the paper at 100 yards, so while the CMP shooters were wrapping up I did this one final test. (Besides, I walked down to the 100 yard line first thing in the morning to post a target and didn't feel like walking back there two hours later to fetch it without having shot at it.)
The result:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic5.jpg
The group came out pretty much as I expected. It was 4 1/4 inches which compared favorably (given the statistically very low number of shots) with the 2 3/4 inches I got at 50 yards.
The Brass
This aspect was a disappointment. Perhaps lighter handloads would incur less brass damage (as is the case with my AK variant), but a rather high percentage of the recovered case mouths were so dented that I wouldn't reload them. This pic is from the Black Hills ammo and is so representative of what happened to the Remington UMC that I'm not posting a redundant picture.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic6.jpg
That doesn't bode well for brass longevity. Adding those to the roughly third that I never did recover (they could be in orbit for all I know), the Mini-14 rates "down there" with my AK variant as a brass eater.
Overall Impression
Am I going to run right out and buy a Mini-14 from the results of this test? No, it didn't make my "must buy some day" list. Did it get added to my "never buy one of these" list? Also no. Was it a tack driver? Nope. Could I keep it on the paper at 100 yards? Yup. (Would it probably benefit from hand-loading? Of course; what gun wouldn't?) Now, the two important ones:
- Does it deserve the "minute of barn door" kidding? Nope.
- Was it a fun shooter? Absolutely! With the exception of the few M193 rounds that felt like the ammo was overpowering the weight of the gun, I had a really good time shooting today.
I mentioned earlier that the recoil was stronger than what I get from the T/C Encore and my AK variant. In anticipation of getting into larger calibers, I bought the best recoil absorbing stock from Encore so it is easy to see why it would recoil less than the Mini-14 did. As to the AK-variant, here I think that weight comes into play. I'm not sure what it weighs, but the Mini-14 felt light in comparison and so the few extra pounds (perhaps) on my AK helps absorb recoil. Now, was the Mini-14's recoil bad? No, but if someone is recoil sensitive they need to remember that there is a trade-off for shooting a very light gun.
All in all, it was a fun day.
Short background to this event: In another thread that was hosting the traditional ribbing about the Mini-14's accuracy, http://www.glockpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11886, I offered to give the Mini-14 a checkout if someone would lend me one. Jawja offered, but I found another member of my club that offered to let me shoot his as a test and so I took him up on it to avoid all the shipping and transfer costs. (Thank you again, Jawja, for offering up one of your Mini-14s for this test.)
Why was I a good candidate to do the test firing? A list of reasons:
- I've never owned a Mini-14,
- it isn't on my "must get one some day" list,
- it also isn't on my "never get one of these" list,
- I like target-level accurate guns but I also own an AK variant (so I am neither a mandatory sub-MOA person nor am I a "spray and pray" type person),
- I shoot both the T/C Encore and an AK variant in .223 so I'm used to that caliber in terms of recoil, etc.,
- I'm not considering buying a Mini-14, and,
- I've never shot one before.
Basically, besides only having held one to my shoulder once or twice in a gun store, I have no first-hand impressions with that gun that would get in the way of an honest shooting review. So, to help settle the issue of whether the Mini-14 is a good shooter or whether it is only sub-minute-of-barn-door as in the jabs, I undertook the test.
The Gun
Here is a picture of the rifle I shot for over two hours today:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic1.jpg
The owner isn't sure of its exact age, but since he bought it used more than three years ago, it isn't the current model. Nor, on the other hand, is it an early model with real wood.
The scope is nothing to write home about. He just put it on today as a favor to me and it is from his pile of old scopes that happen to not be sitting on a rifle. It is good that it isn't sitting on another rifle. Oh, the scope gave me a nice clear view and didn't seem to be moving around, but as you'll see below, I ran into a problem with it that was, thankfully, only an annoyance to this test. Just in case the problem was caused by something easily fixed, I'm not going to mention the scope's brand. Besides, I was testing the rifle; not the scope.
Wikipedia lists the weight of a Mini-14 at 6 pounds, 6 ounces. I believe it as it is very light. The gun did recoil more than I'm used to from either my T/C Encore or AK variant (Saiga .223), but more on this later.
The Ammo
I'm sure you'll understand that this was done purely for scientific purposes and also to avoid shooting my reloads in someone else's gun, but I actually went out and purchased commercial ammo for this test. (Forgive me. It did feel very weird going into a store and instead of chuckling at the prices of the commercial ammo, actually picking up some of the boxes and buying them. <shudder>) Besides, since I wouldn't have access to this Mini-14 long enough to work up a load, I didn't want to have the results of today's test skewed way off by shooting a load that works nicely in my other .223s but might have been terribly wrong for this gun.
I bought three kinds of ammo to try to cover a spectrum of types: Black Hills, Remington UMC, and some M193 5.56 ball ammo.
Initial Sighting Shots
It might be odd to include sighting shots in a review, but besides having the only ejection failure (a stovepipe with a Black Hills round), I quickly learned that the Mini-14 does a fantastic job of ejecting brass a long, long way at high velocity pretty much at a 90-degree angle to the direction of shooting -- in other words, right at the folks shooting down at my right. Too bad I was using the 50 and 100 yard distances and they were shooting at the 200 and 300 yard targets or else it would have made sense for me to move to the furthest right shooting position. As is, after many apologies I constructed a shield out of the box that I brought the ammo and my "eyes and ears" in. Even being about six inches away from the ejection port, that box didn't stop all the brass. I was amazed that at the end of shooting a known quantity of rounds that I'd generally only find 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the brass.
Well, enough background. Lets get into some target pictures.
50 yards, Black Hills, 10 rds, slow fire using rest
Started off by shooting 10 rounds of Black Hills at a target using the rifle rest for support. This was still at 50 yards since the sighters showed that the scope must be off to the left, and I wanted to get it more zeroed in before moving to 100 yards. I did 10 rounds as a decent test and also to better fit the pattern of how the other shooters were shooting. (They were doing CMP practice.) The results:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic2.jpg
Yup, the scope was definitely off to the left, so I gave it 6 clicks right and ignored the vertical so that it would be decent for the 100 yard distance. (Ignore the tear at the edge of the paper. The shots were close enough to the clip holding the target that it tore the paper.)
That is about a 2 3/4 inches spread at only 50 yards which certainly puts it closer to my AK variant than to a tack driver. But, certainly not what I'd consider to be "half minute of barn door" level of inaccuracy.
50 yards, Black Hills, 10 rds (2 x 5 rds), rapid fire using rest
I've read that many Mini-14 groups really open up when shooting through a hot barrel, so the next test was two sets of 5 rounds (the magazine size on hand) done as rapidly as I could reacquire the target and/or load the magazine. I wish I had an infrared thermometer to check the barrel temp, but I certainly wasn't giving it much time to cool off.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic3.jpg
The group was better than I expected: Opening up to 3 1/4 inch was only a half inch wider than what I got with very slow and deliberate fire. Either this particular Mini-14 doesn't have the issue of firing through hot barrels or else I wasn't firing a long enough string to get it hot enough. Seeing this result from 10 rapid shots, though, if I was hunting with this gun I wouldn't be concerned that my second or third shot would be off by a mile.
I still wasn't satisfied that the scope was zeroed (understatement), so I turned it another 6 clicks to the right.
50 yards, Remington UMC, 10 rds, slow fire using rest
I still wasn't satisfied that the gun's scope was zeroed nicely plus with the size groups I was getting I decided to stay at the 50 yard distance for a bit longer. (I had a target up at 100 yards, but with the cycle that the CMP shooters were in it wouldn't be convenient to go change targets every 10 or 15 shots or so.)
Given where the other shots were landing relative to the bullseye, I was comfortable using the lower left target on the paper for this next set. Oops, mistake.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic4.jpg
Yes, that was 10 rounds. I've double-checked my notes and counted the rounds I brought back home, and half of those shots missed the page. That was disappointing since I can't give a resulting group size.
And yes, and this point I double-checked to make sure I've been adjusting the scope in the right direction. I had been. In an attempt to finally get the shots near the bulls-eye, I gave it another 10 (!) clicks to the right.
50 yards, M193 5.56, few rds, slow fire using rest
Nope, no picture for this. I had planned on shooting the regular set of 10 shots, but after two or three decided not to shoot it any more. The recoil was way too much in this light gun and it was unpleasant to shoot.
50 yards, both Black Hills and Remington UMC, 5 rds each, slow fire, not using the rest
The rifle rest I was using was nice for getting nice steady shot pictures before squeezing off the round, but it wasn't comfortable: I wasn't getting a good cheek weld nor was the gun's butt fully engaged in my shoulder. Just in case this was getting in the way of having good shot groups, I took the gun off the rest, got into a comfortable bench-supported position and shot 5 rounds each at two targets. I didn't take pictures of these targets since now we're getting into the shooter-ability aspects, but I will say this: Each ammo's group was only modestly bigger than what I got off the rest. The good news, though, was that this test showed that the discomfort associated with the rifle rest wasn't turning a tack driver into something else.
100 yards, Black Hills, 10 rds, slow fire using rest
Even after 22 total clicks right on the scope up to this point, the shots were still as left as when I started the morning. I suspect - and the owner concurred - that the horizontal adjustment on the scope wasn't working. However, by this point I felt confident that I could keep them on the paper at 100 yards, so while the CMP shooters were wrapping up I did this one final test. (Besides, I walked down to the 100 yard line first thing in the morning to post a target and didn't feel like walking back there two hours later to fetch it without having shot at it.)
The result:
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic5.jpg
The group came out pretty much as I expected. It was 4 1/4 inches which compared favorably (given the statistically very low number of shots) with the 2 3/4 inches I got at 50 yards.
The Brass
This aspect was a disappointment. Perhaps lighter handloads would incur less brass damage (as is the case with my AK variant), but a rather high percentage of the recovered case mouths were so dented that I wouldn't reload them. This pic is from the Black Hills ammo and is so representative of what happened to the Remington UMC that I'm not posting a redundant picture.
http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w46/craig110/0613pic6.jpg
That doesn't bode well for brass longevity. Adding those to the roughly third that I never did recover (they could be in orbit for all I know), the Mini-14 rates "down there" with my AK variant as a brass eater.
Overall Impression
Am I going to run right out and buy a Mini-14 from the results of this test? No, it didn't make my "must buy some day" list. Did it get added to my "never buy one of these" list? Also no. Was it a tack driver? Nope. Could I keep it on the paper at 100 yards? Yup. (Would it probably benefit from hand-loading? Of course; what gun wouldn't?) Now, the two important ones:
- Does it deserve the "minute of barn door" kidding? Nope.
- Was it a fun shooter? Absolutely! With the exception of the few M193 rounds that felt like the ammo was overpowering the weight of the gun, I had a really good time shooting today.
I mentioned earlier that the recoil was stronger than what I get from the T/C Encore and my AK variant. In anticipation of getting into larger calibers, I bought the best recoil absorbing stock from Encore so it is easy to see why it would recoil less than the Mini-14 did. As to the AK-variant, here I think that weight comes into play. I'm not sure what it weighs, but the Mini-14 felt light in comparison and so the few extra pounds (perhaps) on my AK helps absorb recoil. Now, was the Mini-14's recoil bad? No, but if someone is recoil sensitive they need to remember that there is a trade-off for shooting a very light gun.
All in all, it was a fun day.