WTH is this good for?

[Jose]

Nowhere near as accurate as necessary for benchrest.

Useless for NRA Highpower since its twist is too slow for the bullets necessary for anything beyond 300 yards and because it is nearly impossible to mount match iron sights.

Useless for NRA F-class prone due to twist rate.

The only American rifle manufacturer that has any limited amount of clue about what a target rifle should be is Savage.

 

[jhrosier]

Jose,
The "original" Mini was nearly useless beyond 50 yards because of terrible lack of accuracy.
This one is sort of accurate enough to shoot groundhogs out to 100 yards.
Ruger has never produced any rifle that would get you into the winners' circle in any seroius competition.
Who needs R&D or QC when you have marketing.
The bean counters are clearly in charge at Ruger.

Jack

 

[Scrivener]

But it LOOKS "trick!"

 

[Jose]

You know, Ruger really impressed me with the SR9. So I know they have talented engineers.

They just NEED a serious, industrial sized clue about rifle target shooting! Their M77 varmint is sooooooo close to being right for NRA Highpower. Give it a detachable 5 round mag, add a Redfield side mount to the mold for the receiver, turn the muzzle down to 3/4" dia by 1" long, add an adjustable comb and buttplate to the stock, and a handstop rail.

 

[PatMcD]

Ruger has come out with some really outstanding designs over the years. The 10/22 and MKI, just to name a few of the originals. His redesigns of originals such as the M77, the #1, the Redhawk, Blackhawk, are also excellent products.
I always thought the Mini-14 was a piece of junk and I always will. Their marketing team are geniouses, though, because there is a segment of "shooters" out there who will buy it because it looks accurate (or what they think accurate looks like).

 

[Executive]

There was a story in one of the firearm publications about this rifle a few months back. It began by stating that the Ruger employees used Ruger bolt actions in competition, rather than the Mini, even though they knew they would not be competitive against other semi-autos time wise. A scheduled shut down of the Ruget plant that makes the Mini allowed Ruger to re-tool and start producing this improved version of the Mini. The biggest improvement is the sliding barell weight that allows the shooter to tune the barell for minimal resonance. Accorcing to the article, while still not on par with a high end AR target shooter, the new Mini is vasty improved in accuracy. There must be a niche for a reasonably accurate semi-auto rifle with outstanding reliability (arguably superior reliability than the AR platform) and an inherent ruggedness of the design otherwise the Mini would not have continued production for the past 30 or so years. The biggest disappointment, though a moot point here in MA, is Ruger's refusal to market and produce high capacity magazines for this and other rifles.

 

[Executive]

Just to add, the only Ruger products I own are a 1959 Mk I pistol, a new SS Mk III, and a 77/22 rifle in 22lr that is as accurate as any .22 bolt action out to 100 yards. Perhaps my 77 is an exceptional specimen. Also note that the 10/22 makes a great platform for aftermarket accurizing products, that admittedly replace just about everything but the reciever, and allows for a pretty darn accurate semi-auto target rifle.

 

[Jose]

There was a story in one of the firearm publications about this rifle a few months back. It began by stating that the Ruger employees used Ruger bolt actions in competition, rather than the Mini, even though they knew they would not be competitive against other semi-autos time wise.

If these tools are talking about NRA Highpower, their statement that bolt actions are not competitive against semi autos (even in the rapid fire stages) is a joke and shows that they are either lying about their competition activities or they just plain suck and blame their rifle for it.

The NRA National Highpower championship has been won with a semi auto exactly twice in its history: 1997 and 2007.

 

[Jose]

If Ruger pays me $80/hr to consult, I will teach them exactly what they need to do to make a series of rifles based on their Model 77 that will be out of the box competitive in NRA Highpower (across the course, mid range prone, long range prone).

 

[bpm990d]

I think they gave it a go a few years ago with their donation of Palma rifles to the 92 team. However Larry Racine (92 team member and local gunsmith) told me about some of the serious flaws that the rifles had because they didn't really want any input from the team or experienced HP shooters. I think part of it had to do with the sight mount being too high to get a zero at 1000 yards and still have your face on the stock. I think only two or three were used in the match but they did shoot reasonably well despite their use of Green Mountain Barrels.

My overall opinion of them is that they certainly appeal to a segment of the market, but not really my cup of tea since none of their stuff is really usable for what I'm interested in. Like you said, so many missed opportunities on many of their designs. Same thing goes for Winchester & Remington but just not as bad. Although I don't have any Savages, I do respect their continued commitment to produce gear for what I like to do.

B

 

[bpm990d]

If these tools are talking about NRA Highpower, their statement that bolt actions are not competitive against semi autos (even in the rapid fire stages) is a joke and shows that they are either lying about their competition activities or they just plain suck and blame their rifle for it.

The NRA National Highpower championship has been won with a semi auto exactly twice in its history: 1997 and 2007.

Jose,

I think some of the industry people get together for their own competitions (their own rules and probably not particularly well designed to challenge the shooter or the equipment). It most likely is not something that you or I would recognize.

I think it's sort of like the American Hunter's and Shooters competitions that they sponsor.

B

 

[Jose]

Brian, I do remember now the failed Ruger Palma rifles. It figures these Fudds thought they knew better than people like Larry. Larry probably shook his head at the dumbassery he witnessed. Green Mountain Barrels? Who the hell are they? With Krieger, Obermeyer, and Hart around, why use some no-name outfit?

I hear you on the industry ego-stroking "competitions". I'd like to see some of these posers step up to the 1000 yard line and sling up. But I doubt it will happen. They'll whine that they can't use a 30X scope and a 300 lb concrete bench.

 

[rscalzo]

A friend had one of those Ruger Mini-14's.. He kept it for about six months and dumped it at a loss. No one was particularly impressed with the firearm. For the money, he could have done better.

 

[bpm990d]

Brian, I do remember now the failed Ruger Palma rifles. It figures these Fudds thought they knew better than people like Larry. Larry probably shook his head at the dumbassery he witnessed. Green Mountain Barrels? Who the hell are they? With Krieger, Obermeyer, and Hart around, why use some no-name outfit?

I hear you on the industry ego-stroking "competitions". I'd like to see some of these posers step up to the 1000 yard line and sling up. But I doubt it will happen. They'll whine that they can't use a 30X scope and a 300 lb concrete bench.

I've probably told this story before, but in 94 I was working at a camp and just so happened to be there with a historian that worked for Colt. She was handing out stickers to everyone that said Colt Shooting Team; and of course it was all pistol stuff. I just mentioned in passing that it was too bad that Colt didn't sponsor a rifle team (94 was the first year that the ARs won the National Champ. and also preformed very well in the Trophy matches. LTC Stark won the Mountain Man Trophy that year with an AR). She looked at me like I had two heads and made a face like I was putting pencils up my nose and acting like a moron. She told me in a confident tone that "Colt didn't make anything suitable for rifle competition." Ya right.

I gave up a long time ago wishing that companies would pay attention to one of the largest shooting dicipline in the country. Hell our own sponsoring association wont pay attention to us.

B


EDIT: BTW Green Mountain Barrels make Black Powder barrels that have a pretty good reputation with the black powder guys but WTF that has to do with Palma I have no idea. I sort of remember Bill Ruger stomping around in a huff because all the guys shot their own guns in 92 and Mid let them.

 

[Executive]

From the December 2006 Guns and Ammo, page 45: "Even Ruger's own staffers who compete in a yearly industry shooting match were using the firm's bolt actions instead of the Mini 14 because of the latter's lack of accuracy, despite the fact that in this particular match there is no way you can shoot fast enough with a bolt gun to compete."

 

[Executive]

My guess is that the manufacturers have a trade show type get-together and do a little shooting. This hardly makes them "posers". It seems no different than the guys who make golf clubs getting together to shoot a round or the guys who make fishing equipment wetting a line or two. Not everyone is an expert like you, Jose. Sometimes guys just want to have a good time.

 

[Jose]

My guess is that the manufacturers have a trade show type get-together and do a little shooting. This hardly makes them "posers". It seems no different than the guys who make golf clubs getting together to shoot a round or the guys who make fishing equipment wetting a line or two. Not everyone is an expert like you, Jose. Sometimes guys just want to have a good time.

When a company markets a TARGET rifle that is completely UNSUITABLE for anything commonly accepted as competitive target shooting, I think the label POSER fits quite well.

 

[Jose]

I sort of remember Bill Ruger stomping around in a huff because all the guys shot their own guns in 92 and Mid let them.

He strikes me as the kind of man who never thought he could be wrong.

"No honest man needs anything more than 10 rounds".

- William B. Ruger, Sr.

 

[bpm990d]

When a company markets a TARGET rifle that is completely UNSUITABLE for anything commonly accepted as competitive target shooting, I think the label POSER fits quite well.

After years of frustration an the nomenclature used by companies like Ruger to describe their rifle I simply let it go. To them and a reasonably sizable market segment, a target rifle is one that is used to shoot targets. What ever that means I'm not entirely sure. At one time Colt really jumped on the bandwagon and were marketing a Colt - Match Target rifle to describe some cluster f**k that they cobbled together (although I do remember hearing that they were very accurate 1/9 twist rifles) . All they needed to do was use the word Distinguished and it would have been a true home run.

To me, a target rifle it is a rifle that is set up for some type of recognized competition. Sort of like the old Winchester Marksman or the Remington 40X.

B