I plan to send my Mini-14 to Accuracy Systems...what can I legally have them do?

[Rocky Mosasaurus]

Hello fellow forums-goers,

I am planning to send my Mini-14 into Accuracy Systems in Colorado.

Background: I am having trouble getting my Ruger Mini-14 from '86 to run smoothly. Originally I had some 30 round aftermarket magazines which led to a broken firing pin, the rifle was safely removed from the firing line and was repaired by a gunsmith. The 'smith replaced the firing pin, extractor, and some other relevant internals. All said and done, the mini ran decently well afterwards with 30 round Ruger factory magazines, but even with a thorough cleaning with tetra oil I still have run into failure-to-extract errors and jammed rounds. I have heard that 20 round magazines are the way to go. I am going to purchase some in October, but if this doesn't work I want to try one more thing before putting the Mini-14 away and keeping it as a collector's item.

The Problem: I do not know what is going on with the Mini-14, as I am a relatively inexperienced new gun owner. I just got my license to carry last December, and I do not have the experience to diagnose the problem myself. I am strongly considering sending the rifle to Accuracy Systems in Colorado so they can once and for all figure out the problem. My only issue is that I do not know the legality of modifying this rifle out of state and then returning it to MASS, especially since it is preban and has a folding stock.

I was hoping some people with more experience and knowledge of this subject would be able to help me understand which modifications I can make and, before throwing the baby out with the bath water, recommend diagnostics I can do myself to try to get to the bottom of this before I shell out major dough trying to figure out the problem. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this matter.

 

[JNewell]

my Ruger Mini-14 from '86

Basically, anything you want done - it's pre-ban so it's legal to make any modifications that would have been legal prior to the federal AWB in 1994: folding stock, pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. It's legal for the rifle to be returned to you from out of state, whether that's AS or Ruger or anyone else. What you (obviously) cannot do, or in some cases cannot do without a lot of state and/or federal paperwork, is shorten the barrel below 16" or convert it to selective fire; you also cannot make modifications that would otherwise be illegal (install a bump stock, for example - or even possess one).

I would consider calling Ruger and talking the problem through with one of their techs (not the CS rep who you'll get on the phone). They know these rifles and would probably fix it for free.

 

[whalerman69]

.

 

[Uzi2]

I'm perplexed here.....how could a faulty after market magazine contribute to a broken firing pin?

Faulty mags cause feeding issues.

Your failure to extract issue is a chamber, ammo, bolt, extractor or gas system issue.....not a mag issue.

I hope you post the results of their findings and the costs involved. Personally, I'd drive or send the gun up to Ruger in NH and have them look at it and do the repairs.

 

[mrmike7189]

There is wealth of knowledge on the Min14's on several websites I know of. PerfectUnion and The Highroad are two of them. I cannot fathom how a pre ban 30 round mag would cause a broken firing pin?(If so, I'd better sell mine quick!). I have heard that it is not common, but also not unheard of to break a firing pin in the Mini 14 , usually from hard primers, that are prevalent in the cheap ammo business . I would research the issues a little more, or contact Ruger Customer Service. They will most likely fix it for FREE....all you'd pay is shipping one way(approx. $30 ). Unless you've got a pile of cash to burn, I would NOT send my mini to a custom gunsmithing co. my .02

 

[daekken]

Basically, anything you want done - it's pre-ban so it's legal to make any modifications that would have been legal prior to the federal AWB in 1994: folding stock, pistol grip, flash suppressor, etc. It's legal for the rifle to be returned to you from out of state, whether that's AS or Ruger or anyone else. What you (obviously) cannot do, or in some cases cannot do without a lot of state and/or federal paperwork, is shorten the barrel below 16" or convert it to selective fire; you also cannot make modifications that would otherwise be illegal (install a bump stock, for example - or even possess one).

I would consider calling Ruger and talking the problem through with one of their techs (not the CS rep who you'll get on the phone). They know these rifles and would probably fix it for free.

Not technically correct. This only applies if the firearm was in preban configuration prior to the ban. You cannot take a Mini-14 that was always in a fixed stock with no threaded muzzle, etc. and then "do whatever you want." One could argue this would be hard to prove in court (i.e., unless you had one previous owner willing to state he bought it in like 1985 and kept it stock until 2010), but nevertheless, that's the ATF's opinion regarding "really preban."

So, the first question is was the rifle ever in true "preban" configuration (i.e., folding stock, pistol grip, etc.). If so, then yes, do whatever you want short of making it an SBR or other federal no-nos.

 

[SKumar]

Since it’s pre-anything, you’re good to go. Put a folding stock, bayonet, flame thrower, super soaker, whatever you want on it.
The 30 rnd mags are terrible in my experience. Stick with 20 rnd mags...and they look way cooler too.

 

[daekken]

Since it’s pre-anything, you’re good to go. Put a folding stock, bayonet, flame thrower, super soaker, whatever you want on it.
The 30 rnd mags are terrible in my experience. Stick with 20 rnd mags...and they look way cooler too.

Not true, per above. ATF has ruled on this.
Edward M. Owen, Jr., former Chief of the Firearms Technology Branch of the BATFE,
"The fact that the receiver may have been manufactured prior to September 13, 1994, is immaterial to classification of a weapon as a semiautomatic assault weapon."

 

[greencobra]

ATF has ruled on this.

yeah, interesting. i was of the school of thought pre 9/13/1994 you're really good to go. i do own one colt h-bar i bought new in early '94 but have never taken it out factory original configuration. damn!

 

[daekken]

yeah, interesting. i was of the school of thought pre 9/13/1994 you're really good to go. i do own one colt h-bar i bought new in early '94 but have never taken it out factory original configuration. damn!

It's come up a few times but I think a lot of people are unaware of this distinction. I think most people assume "pre-94 is good to go" which is basically the case for magazines, but with rifles there's the additional criteria of what configuration it was in. For built ARs (not just stripped receivers) this is probably unlikely to be an issue since I think pistol grip + threaded barrel (and maybe telescoping stock) was nearly universal even in the "old days" and thus they met the configuration rule. For rifles that are overwhelming produced in "non-AW config" as the default, this is a trickier proposition.

Someone on here, maybe Len, maybe someone else, said they had a Mini 14 from pre-94 but knows it was never in AW configuration before the date and thus can't technically be legally converted to folding stock, etc. Proving it in court is of course a different matter, but people should be aware that the date of manufacture alone isn't sufficient to permit you to make any desired changes to the rifle.

 

[Len-2A Training]

It's come up a few times but I think a lot of people are unaware of this distinction. I think most people assume "pre-94 is good to go" which is basically the case for magazines, but with rifles there's the additional criteria of what configuration it was in. For built ARs (not just stripped receivers) this is probably unlikely to be an issue since I think pistol grip + threaded barrel (and maybe telescoping stock) was nearly universal even in the "old days" and thus they met the configuration rule. For rifles that are overwhelming produced in "non-AW config" as the default, this is a trickier proposition.

Someone on here, maybe Len, maybe someone else, said they had a Mini 14 from pre-94 but knows it was never in AW configuration before the date and thus can't technically be legally converted to folding stock, etc. Proving it in court is of course a different matter, but people should be aware that the date of manufacture alone isn't sufficient to permit you to make any desired changes to the rifle.

I agree that per the Feds it had to be in some sort of AW configuration to earn the "pre-ban status". Since the Mass legislature lifted the Fed Law and inserted it into MGL, one can "assume" that the same holds true (and I'm sure that our AG would never make it easier for us) but TTBOMK there has never been a direct Mass Marsupial Court ruling on this subject.

You have my statement somewhat incorrect. I bought a Ruger 10/22 Deluxe back ~1989, but it never had a folding stock prior to 1994 and thus has no evil features to make it a legit "pre-ban". I've never owned a Mini-14 on purpose, they weren't very accurate when they hit the market and my preference was for the AR-15 instead.

 

[greencobra]

Proving it in court is of course a different matter.....

in the example of the mini 14, i would imagine whoever was prosecuting would go to ruger with a court order to find out what configuration the rifle left the factory in.

 

[daekken]

I agree that per the Feds it had to be in some sort of AW configuration to earn the "pre-ban status". Since the Mass legislature lifted the Fed Law and inserted it into MGL, one can "assume" that the same holds true (and I'm sure that our AG would never make it easier for us) but TTBOMK there has never been a direct Mass Marsupial Court ruling on this subject.

You have my statement somewhat incorrect. I bought a Ruger 10/22 Deluxe back ~1989, but it never had a folding stock prior to 1994 and thus has no evil features to make it a legit "pre-ban". I've never owned a Mini-14 on purpose, they weren't very accurate when they hit the market and my preference was for the AR-15 instead.

Yeah, I'm not too surprised a case/ruling hasn't happened for this scenario.

I couldn't remember 10/22 vs. Mini-14. I just knew it was a rifle that "usually" wasn't in AW style configuration and thus would probably have to be converted intentionally prior to the ban in order to reach evil config.

All of my "pre-94" rifles when I lived in MA were bolt action or fixed mag, so it wasn't an issue .
Now I'm actually looking in going "the other way" and potentially de-banning AWB-era AKs.

 

[daekken]

in the example of the mini 14, i would imagine whoever was prosecuting would go to ruger with a court order to find out what configuration the rifle left the factory in.

Hard to say, might depend on how astute the prosecutor was and what other avenues they might have.
In the case of the guy ratted out by Northshore, they tried to claim the preban AK mag he had was illegal because the defendant didn't personally own it prior to 1994. The age of the mag was not in question, simply that the person charged didn't have it in his possession on the date. He was initially convicted but it was overturned when his lawyer argued the jury didn't get to hear evidence that it was "lawfully owned" (i.e., by anyone) prior to the magic date. Mags and rifles are obviously not quite the same, but I would guess the whole "what config was it" argument would only come up as a fall back strategy. I don't know what the burden of proof would be to show that it never was in AW config, barring, as I have mentioned, someone "yakking" and collaborating with the authorities to confirm they never turned it into AW configuration.

 

[Len-2A Training]

All of my "pre-94" rifles when I lived in MA were bolt action or fixed mag, so it wasn't an issue .
Now I'm actually looking in going "the other way" and potentially de-banning AWB-era AKs.

I've now possessed 4 AR lowers for a number of years prior to the AG's rant. I had the parts but didn't build them up as I was plotting to escape the gulag and wanted collapsible stocks on them. Now that they are safely out of state, I'll build up 3 of them and contemplating selling one lower to someone still behind the wire before giving up MA as a legal resident.

Hard to say, might depend on how astute the prosecutor was and what other avenues they might have.
In the case of the guy ratted out by Northshore, they tried to claim the preban AK mag he had was illegal because the defendant didn't personally own it prior to 1994. The age of the mag was not in question, simply that the person charged didn't have it in his possession on the date. He was initially convicted but it was overturned when his lawyer argued the jury didn't get to hear evidence that it was "lawfully owned" (i.e., by anyone) prior to the magic date. Mags and rifles are obviously not quite the same, but I would guess the whole "what config was it" argument would only come up as a fall back strategy. I don't know what the burden of proof would be to show that it never was in AW config, barring, as I have mentioned, someone "yakking" and collaborating with the authorities to confirm they never turned it into AW configuration.

The BS about the person having to possess them IN MA ON 9/13/1994 was the brainchild of a former EOPS attorney, even to the point that she insisted that the words were actually in MGL. So the BS with that poor guy on the North Shore doesn't surprise me.

 

[straightshooterjake]

This is for the OP regarding the failures to function with his Mini-14.

I actually like mini-14 rifles. I think they do quite well as a carbine rifle with accuracy and overall expectations comparable to an AK-47. I hear a lot of complaints about mini-14 rifles from people who expect them to be more than a medium range carbine, but very few of those complaints are about functional issues.

If your mini-14 won't run reliably, I strongly recommend getting a Ruger made 5 round magazine and American made brass cased ammo. Even if 5 round mags are not useful to you, they tend to work the best, and using the best mags with quality ammo helps eliminate factors in testing.

Then if you are still having problems, I agree with the posters above who have said to contact Ruger. I do not know if Ruger will work on your rifle, but it is cheap to ask. And if they will work on it, shipping and turn around time will both be very reasonable.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

If I may offer up some experience based advice...don't waste your time and money on a rifle trying to make it something it's not.

I played this game years ago sinking money into an M14 making it into a MK14 EBR, and all I really did was waste a ton of money making it into a rifle that is basically useless to me. I spent close to $4k on it like 8 or 9 years ago and since then I have shot maybe 300 rounds through it. It is ammo picky, mega heavy, not nearly as accurate as it should be after all that money and work, and I will never get what it's worth to me if I tried to sell it even though it is a legit pre-94 rifle.

I am not sure how MA works anymore, but I would sell the Mini14, and spend all the money you were going to spend on it on a preban AR15. It will be easier, WAY more accurate, much more reliable, and likely cheaper in the long run.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

I think they can legally throw it in the trash. IANAL

I kid...

 

[hminsky]

When you say failure to extract, do you mean the round is still stuck tight in the chamber? if so, when the round fails to extract, is it difficult to pull out of the chamber? I've had a couple of rilfes now where polishing the chamber with a brass brush and steel wool, connected to an electric drill, has fixed extraction issues; it fixed it for an AR15, a Remington 870, and recently for a 22 magnum rifle. Other than that I have to agree about not putting good money after bad on a troublesome rifle. They say the only interesting rifle is an accurate rifle, I would add also it's only interesting if it's reliable...

 

[daekken]

If I may offer up some experience based advice...don't waste your time and money on a rifle trying to make it something it's not.

I played this game years ago sinking money into an M14 making it into a MK14 EBR, and all I really did was waste a ton of money making it into a rifle that is basically useless to me. I spent close to $4k on it like 8 or 9 years ago and since then I have shot maybe 300 rounds through it. It is ammo picky, mega heavy, not nearly as accurate as it should be after all that money and work, and I will never get what it's worth to me if I tried to sell it even though it is a legit pre-94 rifle.

I am not sure how MA works anymore, but I would sell the Mini14, and spend all the money you were going to spend on it on a preban AR15. It will be easier, WAY more accurate, much more reliable, and likely cheaper in the long run.

This is how I plan to approach my FAL and how I approach my AKs. They are meant to drop bad guys at reasonable distances. Rather than trying to shoehorn a new purpose onto something designed for a different function, just accept the thing you have for what it is and then find something purpose built for your other objective.

 

[Rocky Mosasaurus]

My naivety here: I think going by the serial number it is fairly straight-forward to show that it is a preban, and it does not have a pistol grip and is completely unmodified from what I can tell. The man who sold it to me took good care of it, it was oiled and lubed properly when he sold it to me, but I used some aftermarket magazines to save a buck or two that may have led to some problems because of the feed lips. The firing pin snapping was no fault of the seller's: It's just an old rifle that happened to have issues when I was putting 100-180 rounds of 5.56 Winchester through it in one trip. (I know this is sad in comparison with some ARs that can eat thousands of rounds during one torture test but it's an old Mini and I managed my expectations and got it because I wanted to learn how to properly upkeep a rifle and for the coolness factory with the folding stock, and because I've always like Mini-14s.)

To answer the question regarding the extractor error, there are two different kinds of extractor errors occurring.

1. The bolt does not open and stays locked until I remove the magazine and rack the slide to eject the jammed cartridge which is COMPLETELY INTACT.
2. The bolt opens and a round is fed and JAMMED by another round and the cartridge is bent either completely sideways or at an angle, ruining the bullet completely and making me sweat a ton on the line from frustration.

I've gotten some good suggestions from mrmike and squib saying to call Ruger and look into sending it in, also to switch to .223 ammo instead of 5.56 because that could be putting unnecessary stress on the extractor. I like all your suggestions about not putting more money into it at the moment. I will try the following in order:

a. Switch to .223 and lower cap. mags.
b. Calling Ruger and seeing if they could troubleshoot the rifle, and send in my factory ruger mags along with it via UPS or FedEx.
c. If this all fails, save my money for a sexy preban AR and grab a storage locker for it so my girlfriend never finds it and flips shits LOL.
d. If I really am feeling the mini and a or b has worked then I would have no issue sending it into accuracy systems to make the thing slap even more. I just want to put more than 100 rounds down range and feel confident as hell about the performance of the rifle, because I've been running different Basic Training drills (mostly Mozambique and double tap stuff) and have been feeling really good about the accuracy of the rifle. [Note this is at Manchester Firing Line which only goes up to 60 yards].

If I may offer up some experience based advice...don't waste your time and money on a rifle trying to make it something it's not.

I played this game years ago sinking money into an M14 making it into a MK14 EBR, and all I really did was waste a ton of money making it into a rifle that is basically useless to me. I spent close to $4k on it like 8 or 9 years ago and since then I have shot maybe 300 rounds through it. It is ammo picky, mega heavy, not nearly as accurate as it should be after all that money and work, and I will never get what it's worth to me if I tried to sell it even though it is a legit pre-94 rifle.

I am not sure how MA works anymore, but I would sell the Mini14, and spend all the money you were going to spend on it on a preban AR15. It will be easier, WAY more accurate, much more reliable, and likely cheaper in the long run.

An urge I've had and actively fought against, the impulsive f*** within me has tried to make it so lmao, is to grab a Burris Fast Fire 3 red dot and Picatinny rail and installed them on my Mini. In that regard, I feel like taking the rifle to accuracy systems without solving these initial problems would be a waste of time. I want to feel great about the thing in factory settings before I spice it up with custom-razzle-dazzle.

 

[Rocky Mosasaurus]

This is how I plan to approach my FAL and how I approach my AKs. They are meant to drop bad guys at reasonably distances. Rather than trying to shoehorn a new purpose onto something designed for a different function, just accept the thing you have for what it is and then find something purpose built for your other objective.

I'm a big FAL fan, that's what I used in Call of Duty MW2 when I was a wee teen all the time lmao. Definitely want to grab a FAL and AK when I get older that's for darn sure.

 

[daekken]

I'm a big FAL fan, that's what I used in Call of Duty MW2 when I was a wee teen all the time lmao. Definitely want to grab a FAL and AK when I get older that's for darn sure.

I am hoping mine arrives soon. The builder received my parts three weeks ago, hoping the completed riFAL returns soon. I blame @C. Stockwell. Don't try his FAL or you are in for an expensive endeavor once you get hooked.

 

[Rocky Mosasaurus]

I am hoping mine arrives soon. The builder received my parts three weeks ago, hoping the completed riFAL returns soon. I blame @C. Stockwell. Don't try his FAL or you are in for an expensive endeavor once you get hooked.

Please send pics when it comes I am definitely curious to see your build.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

An urge I've had and actively fought against, the impulsive f*** within me has tried to make it so lmao, is to grab a Burris Fast Fire 3 red dot and Picatinny rail and installed them on my Mini. In that regard, I feel like taking the rifle to accuracy systems without solving these initial problems would be a waste of time. I want to feel great about the thing in factory settings before I spice it up with custom-razzle-dazzle.

I'm telling you, if you sink ~$1k into a mini14 that you could probably sell for $1k+ (because preban), you will be sorely upset once the novelty wears off that you didn't sink that ~$2k into an AR15 that you will actually enjoy shooting. I wish someone had told me to not be a retarded when I was all gay about my M14, and sunk that $4k into a good bolt rifle with good glass, I would be 5x the shooter I am now, and still have a rifle that I actually shoot, instead of a boat anchor sitting in the back of my safe.

 

[milktree]

yeah, interesting. i was of the school of thought pre 9/13/1994 you're really good to go. i do own one colt h-bar i bought new in early '94 but have never taken it out factory original configuration. damn!

Um.. Are you sure about that? I'm *certain* I saw you put a telescoping stock on it to try it out, but didn't like it, so you swapped back the OEM one.

 

[Rocky Mosasaurus]

Man it would be incredible if all it ended up being was the .223 /5.56 discrepancy and the mini ran flawlessly with .223 ammo. I would be happier than a pig in slop.

 

[straightshooterjake]

yeah, interesting. i was of the school of thought pre 9/13/1994 you're really good to go. i do own one colt h-bar i bought new in early '94 but have never taken it out factory original configuration. damn!

Does it have a threaded barrel? If so, then threaded barrel and pistol grip makes two "features" and is an "assault weapon." And if there is a bayonet lug and a flash hider, that is even more features. So there are many ways for a fixed stock rifle meet the assault weapon definition. In my experience, most pre-1994 AR-15 rifles do have more than two features. However, the same does not apply to many other models. Many mini-14 rifles left the factory with a wood stock and no assault weapon features.

 

[straightshooterjake]

Man it would be incredible if all it ended up being was the .223 /5.56 discrepancy and the mini ran flawlessly with .223 ammo. I would be happier than a pig in slop.

I am not an expert, but here is my best understanding.

.223 and 5.56 are not interchangeable. Rifles marked 5.56 can safely use either, but rifles marked .223 are not necessarily safe with 5.56 ammo, even though it will fit and may seem to work acceptably.

Mini-14 rifles are an exception to the above rule. Even though they are marked .223, all mini-14 rifles are actually chambered for 5.56, and can safely and reliably use either one.
​

You should do your own research on the above info. But I am not optimistic that using 5.56 ammo is the sole cause of the issues you have described.

 

[Rocky Mosasaurus]

Does it have a threaded barrel? If so, then threaded barrel and pistol grip makes two "features" and is an "assault weapon." And if there is a bayonet lug and a flash hider, that is even more features. So there are many ways for a fixed stock rifle meet the assault weapon definition. In my experience, most pre-1994 AR-15 rifles do have more than two features. However, the same does not apply to many other models. Many mini-14 rifles left the factory with a wood stock and no assault weapon features.

No threaded barrel but I think theres a pistol grip. Definitely know its marked for 5.56 just because its run a lot of 5.56 without blowing out the barrel but I think .223 will be less hard on the extractor.