Settled on a Mini-14 for my WTSHTF weapon.

[G-MAN]

For basically the same reason I decided to get my CWP and start carrying, I wanted to get a WTSHTF weapon for home defense. I toyed with the idea of getting a SKS, a Saiga AK, or one of the cheaper AR variants (like the Olympic). In the end, I settled on the tried and true Ruger Mini-14 in the Tactical version.

I looked at a few retailers around here, including the gun shop where I normally do business. Most didn't have the model I wanted, or their prices were out of line. Yesterday, the four MecGar mags I ordered for my Hi Power from CDNN came and they'd put their newest catalog in the box. I was flipping through it and on page 8 they had a full page Ruger Mini-14 "Blowout" sale. They had the Tactical model with the 20 round mag listed for $589.00 with free shipping. This gun retails in the Ruger catalog for $921.00. I called this morning to verify the price and that they had it in stock and placed my order.

Any suggestions for a decent scope that will be adequate out to 75 yards? I've heard that hunters around here use shotgun scopes on their Mini-14s.

[BillyMac]

I've hunted w/ my Ruger Mini-30 for 20yrs in upstate NY. It has the same action as the Mini-14. I've fired the 14 many times...never a failure and very accurate. I use a Bushnell Sportview 1.5 by 4.5 scope...Perfect for 75yds. It should fit nicely on the 14.

Bill

[Arkie_Lefty]

If you're gonna scope it you should have got the ranch version. Ranch comes with mounts. Regular Mini scope mount is a Rube Goldberg looking affair.

The three I've had were all minute of pie plate at 100 yards. That's why I still don't have them.

Bob

[G-MAN]

If you're gonna scope it you should have got the ranch version. Ranch comes with mounts. Regular Mini scope mount is a Rube Goldberg looking affair.

The three I've had were all minute of pie plate at 100 yards. That's why I still don't have them.

Bob

You need to read up on the improvements that were made to the Mini-14 a few years ago that significantly improved accuracy. 1.5 MOA at 100 yds is doable now.

The scope mounts are not different on the Tactical versus the Ranch. All Mini-14s use the same receiver that has Ruger's patented integral scope mounts machined in.

[Arkie_Lefty]

Believe it was Col Wheelen who said "Only accurate rifles are interesting".

I've been actively disinterested in Mini 14's for several years!

Ironically, my wife's Mini 30 is amazingly accurate for any out-of-the-box semi auto. Under 2 inch 5 shots @100 yards is common.

Bob

[steves]

It will do the job and then some.

[dnewton3]

I guess I'll ask why you'd want a scope for only 75 yards, for a WTSHTF gun? WTSHTF guns are not a "take your time and aim for the hunt" gun; you're supposed to be able to count on them, well, WTSHTF.

We use the mini-14 as our issue-rifle at the Sheriff's Office. Ours are stainless barreled with iron sights, and we have to qualify with them out to 100 yards (not that hard, really). Some of our officers have transitioned to AR-15s with vision aid scopes. Yet I qualify (and shoot) just as well with iron sights. Push out past 100 yards? Yes, scopes become a necessity. But limited to 75 yards or less; I believe scopes to be a hinderance at those distances. To me, iron sights are the best for 100 yards or less. The ultimate in reliability; nothing to break off or bump out of alignment.

Further, a true combat type weapon (which is what a WTSHTF gun is) should allow you both a good point-of-impact aim (achievable with iron sights), and ALSO provide a good periphial view (which a scope does not). I get tickeled when I see guys put very expensive RedDot sights on their ARs and such, and then I can out-shoot them in a combat style course, because they cannot attain the target (especially when the range distance varies greatly from target to target) quickly. Iron sights allow you to quickly ascertain the surrounding threats. MilSpec electronic sights do a moderate job, but true "scopes" just absolutely make that difficult.

To each his own, though. If you're dead set on getting a scope, and your pratical limit will be 100 yards or less, I'd consider a "scout" type scope, such as a fixed 4x power with a long eye relief. There's no need for more than that in a combat duty type weapon, which is exactly what a WTSHTF weapon is. I guess the reason I'm nit-picking here is because a WTSHTF weapon is, by definition, a life saving tool. It's not to be a toy; it's to be ultra reliable and perform to a stated criteria. You've defined the job and picked a very reliable action. Now you need a sight system to match that same "no frills, get the job done with zero failure" mentality.

This is just my opinion, obviously. Your choice is no more right or wrong than mine. I just wanted to offer some conceptual challenge to the choice of a scope for such short distances.

[G-MAN]

I guess I'll ask why you'd want a scope for only 75 yards, for a WTSHTF gun? WTSHTF guns are not a "take your time and aim for the hunt" gun; you're supposed to be able to count on them, well, WTSHTF.

We use the mini-14 as our issue-rifle at the Sheriff's Office. Ours are stainless barreled with iron sights, and we have to qualify with them out to 100 yards (not that hard, really). Some of our officers have transitioned to AR-15s with vision aid scopes. Yet I qualify (and shoot) just as well with iron sights. Push out past 100 yards? Yes, scopes become a necessity. But limited to 75 yards or less; I believe scopes to be a hinderance at those distances. To me, iron sights are the best for 100 yards or less. The ultimate in reliability; nothing to break off or bump out of alignment.

Further, a true combat type weapon (which is what a WTSHTF gun is) should allow you both a good point-of-impact aim (achievable with iron sights), and ALSO provide a good periphial view (which a scope does not). I get tickeled when I see guys put very expensive RedDot sights on their ARs and such, and then I can out-shoot them in a combat style course, because they cannot attain the target (especially when the range distance varies greatly from target to target) quickly. Iron sights allow you to quickly ascertain the surrounding threats. MilSpec electronic sights do a moderate job, but true "scopes" just absolutely make that difficult.

To each his own, though. If you're dead set on getting a scope, and your pratical limit will be 100 yards or less, I'd consider a "scout" type scope, such as a fixed 4x power with a long eye relief. There's no need for more than that in a combat duty type weapon, which is exactly what a WTSHTF weapon is. I guess the reason I'm nit-picking here is because a WTSHTF weapon is, by definition, a life saving tool. It's not to be a toy; it's to be ultra reliable and perform to a stated criteria. You've defined the job and picked a very reliable action. Now you need a sight system to match that same "no frills, get the job done with zero failure" mentality.

This is just my opinion, obviously. Your choice is no more right or wrong than mine. I just wanted to offer some conceptual challenge to the choice of a scope for such short distances.

Very well stated, and I agree with you 100%.

The only reason I'm going to put an [inexpensive] scope on the Mini-14 is for target shooting at the range. As I said in another post, the range I use is not set up for iron sights. You have to shoot from the bench through a long, dark concrete pipe. The targets are anywhere from 50 to 200 yds in an open field, fully illuminated by sunlight. Trying to pick out a small bullseye that is in full sunlight while looking through that dark pipe with iron sights is very difficult for my half-century old eyes.

The nice thing about Ruger's scope rings is that they are quick detach, so when I bring the rifle back home and it assumes its home defense role, the scope will come off.

[JSharp]

Dnewton - I'm not sure of your age, but suspect you have good eyesight. I'm 53 and cross eye dominate.

I've noticed as my age has progressed I've had more and more problems with open sights. That's especially true in less than ideal light. For that reason I decided to try an Aimpoint on the carbine I just purchased.

I bought one of the Chinese copies to see how I like it before I pop $450 for the real deal. I have the sight mounted and it does seem like it'll take some acclimation.

In just handling the gun, it seems far easier to pick up the dot quickly than the irons. I won't know for sure until we get some weather and I can shoot. But that's my first impression.

[dnewton3]

Well, it seems as though you both have reasonable objections to my suggestion. And truly, I can see your point in both scenarios. As I said, we're all "right" for our own applications. That in mind, iIf you can get your WTSHTF weapon properly outfitted so that it functions as needed, when needed, without failure, that is all that matters.