Jump to content

Saiga vs mini-30 vs SKS


Recommended Posts

A month or so back I posted a question comparing the Ruger Ranch Rifle to a Saiga 223 and figured in the interest of thoroughness I should do the same with the Mini-30 and the Saiga 7.62. And since the SKS shares some qualities I'll throw that in too.

 

How would you all compare the Mini-30 against the Saiga in terms of reliability, ruggedness and accuracy? Price is a slam dunk at the moment for the Saiga but it seems to be going up as well along with everything else.

 

Have any of you had both the Saiga 7.62 and a Mini-30 and how would compare and contrast the two? The uses would be 100yd dear gun hunting, plinking, home defense/zombie control and hopefully some hog/javelina hunting some day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Price wise Saiga rifle $260 bucks, $140 in parts total $400 Mini 14 is like $600 at Walmart no idea what the 30 goes for, yeah it's a slam dunk. With that 140 bucks you bought exactly what you want, with a stock 30 or 14 you still have to customize it so your looking at even more money past the $200 extra bucks you spent at the Git Go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a Mini-30 years ago when they first came out. Of the 200 or so rifles I have owned in my lifetime, the Mini-30 holds top honors for the worst accuracy ever, bar none. Scoped, it threw 12" patterns at 100 yards with everything I fed through it. Later, the same ammo that I had tested in the Mini, I fired in a 7.62 AR-15 and it went sub-moa. I can't imagine they are all that bad, but that was my experience.

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the 10/22's shoot decent out of the box. My old skinny barrel 10/22 would shoot 3-4" groups at 100 yards. That's about 3 times better then my Mini-30.

 

hey thanks tony...the 10/22 does seem to shoot pretty well out of the box if I do my part

Link to post
Share on other sites

one of my friends was looking into buying a rifle a wile back, and he mentioned a ruger b/c he thought they were "top of the line" i just laughed and corrected his miss led mind.

 

 

but to answer the orgiinal question i would go with SAIGA or if you like it more an sks but the saiga is a better deal b/c an sks won't shoot that great eather

just my 2 pennies

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say a Saiga's main advantage over an SKS is that it can be converted to take AK mags and AK config. If you were planning on sticking with the factory mag, I would seriously consider an SKS, since it can be loaded faster ands cheaper twith strippers than a Saiga can with extra 10rd mags. But if you prefer a 16" barrel and can't find an old SKS paratrooper at a good price, and don't want to make a huge project out of shortening an SKS barrel, then a Saiga 16" sounds like the way to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DeGroaner don't sugar coat it tell me how you really feel

 

My first handgun was Stainless 6" Security Six and I still have a 10/22 and a Mark II that I've owned for over 20 years but that traitor never gets another cent from me. Not only that the Mini-14 I had 20 years ago was a royal POS and the P-85 that I owned for three days was even worse. But for his support of the Clinton AWB I will hate his guts and his company forever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DeGroaner don't sugar coat it tell me how you really feel

 

My first handgun was Stainless 6" Security Six and I still have a 10/22 and a Mark II that I've owned for over 20 years but that traitor never gets another cent from me. Not only that the Mini-14 I had 20 years ago was a royal POS and the P-85 that I owned for three days was even worse. But for his support of the Clinton AWB I will hate his guts and his company forever.

 

 

Ruger supported the Clinton AWB?

Link to post
Share on other sites

DeGroaner don't sugar coat it tell me how you really feel

 

My first handgun was Stainless 6" Security Six and I still have a 10/22 and a Mark II that I've owned for over 20 years but that traitor never gets another cent from me. Not only that the Mini-14 I had 20 years ago was a royal POS and the P-85 that I owned for three days was even worse. But for his support of the Clinton AWB I will hate his guts and his company forever.

 

 

Ruger supported the Clinton AWB?

 

 

William Batterman Ruger, Sr.

"Father" of the Clinton Administration's High Capacity Magazine Ban

As is common with any controversial issue, there's a great deal of misinformation floating about, and misperceptions held by those affected by the issue.

 

Nowhere is this truer than with 1994's infamous "Crime Bill," the second significant piece of federal firearms legislation passed that year. Aside from the "assault weapons" (whatever those are) provisions, a significant portion of that bill dealt with magazines (or "clips" by the unknowing, the lazy or the sloppy thinkers)... very simply, if one is a civilian (non-military, non-law enforcement), one may not legally possess any "high capacity ammunition feeding device" of more than ten rounds manufactured after that date. Centerfire, rimfire... makes no difference.

 

Now it would not be unreasonable for anyone in the firearms community to assume that the author of this particular provision was someone like then New York Democratic Congressman (now Senator) Charles Schumer, Ohio Senator Howard Metzenbaum, or one of the "Boxstein Senatorial babes" from California, Barbara Boxner or Dianne Feinstein, or any number of gun-grabbing legislators or appointees of the Clinton Administration.

 

But, sad to say, it was none of those, or anyone even associated with them. It was Bill Ruger, "one of our own" who, for whatever his motives (and you'll get a lot of heated opinions on just what those motives might have been), became a Vidkun Quisling¹ to Second Amendment stalwarts.

 

In view of what has transpired in the intervening years, few will remember 17 January 1989 as being being a critical juncture for American firearms owners, but just as the Miami Firefight of April 1986 was a catalytic moment in the development of handgun ammunition, drug-abusing drifter Patrick Purdy's malevolent depredations in a school yard in Stockton, California, was a milestone that galvanized anti-gunners and put the firearms community in a defensive posture from which it is still operating more than a dozen years later.

 

Purdy, a criminal in possession of a Kalashnikov (quickly identified in the news media as an "AK-47 deadly assault rifle" {sic}) and a Browning High Power pistol, went into a school yard in Stockton, California, and unleashed a hail of 7.62 X 39mm rounds at a bunch of grade school children, killing five of them before dispatching himself with a single 9 X 19mm round from the handgun. (Ahhhh!, but that he'd tried to reverse the process!)

 

This terrible event, seized upon by national broadcast and print media, played right into a scenario envisioned by HCI wunderkind Josh Sugarmann and privately circulated in November 1988, so the antigunners were thoroughly prepared to launch a well-coordinated propaganda campaign designed to confuse the general population and to fractionalize the firearms community ... the operative phrase being "assault rifle."

 

Gun people, and the author was no exception, were immediately put on the defensive, and were kept busy lamely pointing out that Purdy didn't have an "assault rifle," which type of firearm had been tightly regulated since the National Firearms Act of 1934, but that he had a perfectly legal (in most jurisdictions) semi-automatic weapon. (Not that it matters that much, but the long gun involved was a Norinco SKS-56, 7.62 X 39mm semi-automatic carbine.)

 

Sugarmann had devised a scathingly brilliant strategy, for all any of us wound up doing was getting the mainstream media to create the term "assault weapon," while on 5 April 1989 President Bush and his "drug czar," William Bennett (brother of President Clinton's attorney during the Lewinski scandal) temporarily suspended² further importation of a whole bunch of semi-automatic long guns by means of an Executive Order. And at the same time, a great many rank 'n' file gun owners began to rationalize that "Well, we really don't need those awful military-style assault weapons for hunting or target-shooting anyway."

 

William B. Ruger, Sr.

speaks on gun control

 

"A constant problem the industry has is that you can't compromise with gun prohibitionists."

 

June 1998 The American Rifleman, page 60, in a profile of the man who had just donated $1,000,000 to NRA.Bill Ruger's Dirty Little Secret

William Batterman Ruger, Senior is not a stupid man... he might be somewhat naive politically, but he's no dummy! Figuring that unless he took action, the jig was soon-to-be-up for a number of firearms, including his Mini-14 and perhaps even his extraordinarily popular Model 10/22 rimfire repeater. Unfortunately the lessons of Munich and Neville Chamberlain seemed to have been lost on the senior Ruger in the post-Stockton madness, for his creative approach was to toss the high capacity magazine "baby from the sleigh" in the desperate hope of appeasing the pursuing legislative wolves. Reasoning that the public was probably more concerned about the high volume of fire which Purdy was able to generate, than the speed at which he delivered same, Papa Bill proposed that Congress enact legislation limiting the capacity of magazines to fifteen³ (15!) rounds.

 

He had his Sturm, Ruger braintrust prepare model legislation centered around this high capacity magazine prohibition with the fervent hope that "the guns [would be] saved." He even consulted with some others about this approach, including Neal Knox who attempted to dissuade him in the strongest possible terms (for Neal, anyway) from his foolhardy initiative. Papa Bill slept on Knox' council... and then on 30 March 1989 had his proposed legislation delivered to selected members of the House and the Senate. A portion of his document read:

 

The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives.

Shortly thereafter, the Sporting Arms and Ammunitions Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI) endorsed the 15-round limitation in a position paper issued on 2 May 1989. It read, in part:

 

The possession of any "extra capacity" magazine in combination with the possession of a semi-automatic firearm, other than .22 caliber Rimfire, should be regulated. "Extra capacity magazines" are detachable magazines which hold in excess of 10(!) centerfire rifle cartridges or shotgun shells, or detachable pistol magazines which hold in excess of 15 centerfire cartridges.

 

"Semi-automatic firearms as such should not be the object of any legislative prohibition. It is actually the large magazine capacity, rather than the semi-automatic operation, which is the proper focus of this debate."

But then SAMMI and NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation, which shares quarters with SAAMI) were always little more than adjuncts of Sturm, Ruger anyhow.

 

It is instructive to note that in addition to Sturm, Ruger & Company, SAAMI was then comprised of Winchester Ammunition division of Olin, Browning Arms, Federal Cartridge, Hercules, Hornady Manufacturing, Marlin Firearms, O.F. Mossberg, Omark Industries, Remington Arms, Smith & Wesson, Thompson/Center and Weatherby.

 

Serious mis-step by the "All-American" gun-maker

Within months of the Stockton schoolyard shooting, President George Bush, midway through his first year in office, had a proposed crime bill which contained the Ruger-inspired limitation on magazine capacity, but which did not find favor on Capitol Hill. As Executive Editor Joe Tartaro noted in his 7 July 1989 Gun Week column entitled "A Fistful of Cartridges:"

 

If the President's proposal had not included the 15-round magazine bite, the whole crime package would probably already be law.

In his final syndicated column of 1989, Neal Knox discussed the implications of Bill Ruger's actions the previous Spring, and addressed some remarks aimed at him by Steve Sanetti, Sturm, Ruger's general counsel and the only person other than Papa Bill ever authorized to issue statements for the company:

 

Steve Sanetti says "I know better" than to ascribe Bill Ruger's magazine ban proposal to business considerations. Maybe so; I don't think Bill is by any means "anti-gun," nor do I think he really wants a ban on either guns or magazines (after all, he got his start as a machine gun designer).

 

But I do think Bill Ruger is pushing a plan that would protect his business while affecting only his competitors, and I think he's damaging the efforts of those of us attempting to stop all proposed bans. Further, I don't think his actions on this issue, and other issues in the past, allows him to be described as "the strongest supporter of our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms."

 

What I know is that about 9 p.m. the night before Bill sent a letter to certain members of Congress calling for a ban on high-capacity magazines he called me, wanting me to push such a ban. His opening words, after citing the many federal, state and local bills to ban detachable magazine semi-autos, were "I want to save our little gun" -- which he later defined as the Mini-14 and the Mini-30. I'm not ascribing Bill's motives as "expedient from a business standpoint;" Bill did.

 

While I agree that a ban on over-15-round magazines would be "indefinitely preferable" to a ban on the guns that use them, that's not the question. Neither I, nor the other gun groups have ever believed that we were faced with such an either/or choice. Early last year the NRA legislative Policy committee discussed various alternatives to the proposed "assault weapons" ban, and wisely decided that magazine restrictions wouldn't satisfy our foes, but would make it more difficult to stop a gun ban.

 

I was particularly shocked when I realized Bill was talking about a ban on possession of over-15-round magazines, rather than a ban on sales (which is bad enough). I told him that such a law would make me a felon, for not only did I have standard over-15-round magazines for my Glock pistol (a high-capacity which has sharply cut into Ruger's police business), I have many high-cap mags for guns I don't even own, and don't even know where they all are. As I told Bill, after a lifetime of accumulating miscellaneous gun parts and accessories, there's no way I could clean out all my old parts drawers and boxes, then swear -- subject to a five or ten-year Federal prison term -- that I absolutely didn't have an M3 grease gun mag or 30-round M-2 magazine lying in some forgotten drawer.

 

Bill said (and all these direct quotes are approximate).

 

"No, there'd be amnesty for people like you. We have to propose a ban on possession before they could take us seriously."

He contended that the public's problem was with "firepower," which could be resolved by eliminating high capacity mags.

 

I told him Metzenbaum and Co. would gladly use whatever he offered, but they weren't about to willingly agree to eliminate high-cap magazines as a substitute for banning guns; that their intention isn't to eliminate "firepower" but "firearms."

 

Bill finally said, "Neal, you're being very negative about it." He got angry, then said "Well somebody's got to do it; by God I will." And the next day he sent his letter to the Hill; the evidence indicates a few weeks later he talked SAAMI into supporting undefined "regulation" of magazines over-15-rounds -- a vote that might have gone a little differently if any produced high-capacity magazines as standard for either rifles or pistols.

 

I suspect that Ruger and SAAMI's actions are responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Bush administration's proposal to ban high-cap mags, but that proposal has been ignored -- except as evidence that "the Bush administration and the American firearms industry recognize there's a problem -- that Americans shouldn't be allowed to have such guns."

 

Of course, that isn't what Bill Ruger and SAAMI are saying, but that's the message they're sending. Perhaps it isn't business expediency to propose banning only that which they don't make, in an effort to protect what they do make; but it sure can't be claimed to be in defense of the Second Amendment.

"Enjoy your retirement, friend."

 

"The legendary William B. Ruger has retired as chairman, treasurer and chief executive of Sturm, Ruger & Co. after 51 years at the company's helm.

 

He recently was honored by being unanimously elected as an Honorary Life Member by the NRA Board of Directors."

 

January 2001 The American Guardian, page 17.Five years later William B. Ruger Sr.'s model legislation served as the basis of the "high capacity ammunition feeding devices" section of the Clinton Administration's "Crime Bill," save one major detail... the 15-round capacity had been dropped to 10-rounds by the time it had passed and been signed into Law on 13 September 1994! (The antigunners not only stuck it to "us," but stuck it to their Quisling as well.)

 

Why were we not surprised?!

 

What was surprising was that within four years the NRA would celebrate the man so enthusiastically. For many, this is one wound which has not healed, and the author has not only not purchased a Ruger product since that time, but subsequently sold at distress prices, his Mark II pistol and prized Model 77/22 rifle.

 

Aside from his million dollar donation to the NRA Museum, William B. Ruger, Senior, should be remembered as the man who embraced the investment casting process very early on, and whose Pine Tree is one of the most respected investment casting enterprises in the world, the man who gave us the Mini-14, the 10/22 and the first American-made production firearm chambered in 7.62 X 39mm... and the man who told NBC News' Tom Brokaw that:

 

"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."

"I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock."

"I see nothing wrong with waiting periods."

And, sadly, that too must be part of the Ruger legacy.

 

Footnotes:

 

 

1.- Vidkun Quisling (1887-1945) was a twentieth-century Norwegian politician, an intelligent and hard-working head of Norway's home-grown form of Nazism, the Nasjonal Samling (National Unity) Party. While he also fancied himself a philosopher, he went so far as to urge Hitler to invade his country in hopes of becoming Norway's supreme leader.

 

On 9 April 1940 Hitler did just that. And Quisling got his wish... for precisely five days before being placed in a figurehead position while one of the Nazis own actually ran the country. Within months of the war's end, Quisling was tried executed by firing squad. And a new word entered the dictionary, not only in English, but in many other languages as well, synonymous with traitor.

2.- This ban became permanent on 7 July 1989, and affected virtually every Kalashnikov, H&K 90-series, Galil, Uzi, Valmet, SIG 550-series, etc.

3.- William B. Ruger Jr. stated in Spring 1989: "We now feel, due to the refocus of our thinking, it is probably not good to sell a high-capacity magazine to the general public."

 

This quickly led cynics in the firearms community to speculate as to Ruger's true motives, for one of the major competitors to his then new P-85 series of pistols was the Glock 17, the only pistol around (other than the scarce and unwieldy Steyr GB) with a greater than 15 round magazine capacity. Some are still convinced that this was at the root of his actions.

by Dean Speir, formerly famous gunwriter, (with

special thanks to TGZ's consigliore Robert P. Firriolo, Esq.)

Post questions or comments in The Gun Zone Forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
William Batterman Ruger, Sr.

"Father" of the Clinton Administration's High Capacity Magazine Ban

As is common with any controversial issue, there's a great deal of misinformation floating about, and misperceptions held by those affected by the issue.

 

Nowhere is this truer than with 1994's infamous "Crime Bill," the second significant piece of federal firearms legislation passed that year. Aside from the "assault weapons" (whatever those are) provisions, a significant portion of that bill dealt with magazines (or "clips" by the unknowing, the lazy or the sloppy thinkers)... very simply, if one is a civilian (non-military, non-law enforcement), one may not legally possess any "high capacity ammunition feeding device" of more than ten rounds manufactured after that date. Centerfire, rimfire... makes no difference.

 

Now it would not be unreasonable for anyone in the firearms community to assume that the author of this particular provision was someone like then New York Democratic Congressman (now Senator) Charles Schumer, Ohio Senator Howard Metzenbaum, or one of the "Boxstein Senatorial babes" from California, Barbara Boxner or Dianne Feinstein, or any number of gun-grabbing legislators or appointees of the Clinton Administration.

 

But, sad to say, it was none of those, or anyone even associated with them. It was Bill Ruger, "one of our own" who, for whatever his motives (and you'll get a lot of heated opinions on just what those motives might have been), became a Vidkun Quisling¹ to Second Amendment stalwarts.

 

In view of what has transpired in the intervening years, few will remember 17 January 1989 as being being a critical juncture for American firearms owners, but just as the Miami Firefight of April 1986 was a catalytic moment in the development of handgun ammunition, drug-abusing drifter Patrick Purdy's malevolent depredations in a school yard in Stockton, California, was a milestone that galvanized anti-gunners and put the firearms community in a defensive posture from which it is still operating more than a dozen years later.

 

Purdy, a criminal in possession of a Kalashnikov (quickly identified in the news media as an "AK-47 deadly assault rifle" {sic}) and a Browning High Power pistol, went into a school yard in Stockton, California, and unleashed a hail of 7.62 X 39mm rounds at a bunch of grade school children, killing five of them before dispatching himself with a single 9 X 19mm round from the handgun. (Ahhhh!, but that he'd tried to reverse the process!)

 

This terrible event, seized upon by national broadcast and print media, played right into a scenario envisioned by HCI wunderkind Josh Sugarmann and privately circulated in November 1988, so the antigunners were thoroughly prepared to launch a well-coordinated propaganda campaign designed to confuse the general population and to fractionalize the firearms community ... the operative phrase being "assault rifle."

 

Gun people, and the author was no exception, were immediately put on the defensive, and were kept busy lamely pointing out that Purdy didn't have an "assault rifle," which type of firearm had been tightly regulated since the National Firearms Act of 1934, but that he had a perfectly legal (in most jurisdictions) semi-automatic weapon. (Not that it matters that much, but the long gun involved was a Norinco SKS-56, 7.62 X 39mm semi-automatic carbine.)

 

Sugarmann had devised a scathingly brilliant strategy, for all any of us wound up doing was getting the mainstream media to create the term "assault weapon," while on 5 April 1989 President Bush and his "drug czar," William Bennett (brother of President Clinton's attorney during the Lewinski scandal) temporarily suspended² further importation of a whole bunch of semi-automatic long guns by means of an Executive Order. And at the same time, a great many rank 'n' file gun owners began to rationalize that "Well, we really don't need those awful military-style assault weapons for hunting or target-shooting anyway."

 

William B. Ruger, Sr.

speaks on gun control

 

"A constant problem the industry has is that you can't compromise with gun prohibitionists."

 

June 1998 The American Rifleman, page 60, in a profile of the man who had just donated $1,000,000 to NRA.Bill Ruger's Dirty Little Secret

William Batterman Ruger, Senior is not a stupid man... he might be somewhat naive politically, but he's no dummy! Figuring that unless he took action, the jig was soon-to-be-up for a number of firearms, including his Mini-14 and perhaps even his extraordinarily popular Model 10/22 rimfire repeater. Unfortunately the lessons of Munich and Neville Chamberlain seemed to have been lost on the senior Ruger in the post-Stockton madness, for his creative approach was to toss the high capacity magazine "baby from the sleigh" in the desperate hope of appeasing the pursuing legislative wolves. Reasoning that the public was probably more concerned about the high volume of fire which Purdy was able to generate, than the speed at which he delivered same, Papa Bill proposed that Congress enact legislation limiting the capacity of magazines to fifteen³ (15!) rounds.

 

He had his Sturm, Ruger braintrust prepare model legislation centered around this high capacity magazine prohibition with the fervent hope that "the guns [would be] saved." He even consulted with some others about this approach, including Neal Knox who attempted to dissuade him in the strongest possible terms (for Neal, anyway) from his foolhardy initiative. Papa Bill slept on Knox' council... and then on 30 March 1989 had his proposed legislation delivered to selected members of the House and the Senate. A portion of his document read:

 

The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives.

Shortly thereafter, the Sporting Arms and Ammunitions Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI) endorsed the 15-round limitation in a position paper issued on 2 May 1989. It read, in part:

 

The possession of any "extra capacity" magazine in combination with the possession of a semi-automatic firearm, other than .22 caliber Rimfire, should be regulated. "Extra capacity magazines" are detachable magazines which hold in excess of 10(!) centerfire rifle cartridges or shotgun shells, or detachable pistol magazines which hold in excess of 15 centerfire cartridges.

 

"Semi-automatic firearms as such should not be the object of any legislative prohibition. It is actually the large magazine capacity, rather than the semi-automatic operation, which is the proper focus of this debate."

But then SAMMI and NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation, which shares quarters with SAAMI) were always little more than adjuncts of Sturm, Ruger anyhow.

 

It is instructive to note that in addition to Sturm, Ruger & Company, SAAMI was then comprised of Winchester Ammunition division of Olin, Browning Arms, Federal Cartridge, Hercules, Hornady Manufacturing, Marlin Firearms, O.F. Mossberg, Omark Industries, Remington Arms, Smith & Wesson, Thompson/Center and Weatherby.

 

Serious mis-step by the "All-American" gun-maker

Within months of the Stockton schoolyard shooting, President George Bush, midway through his first year in office, had a proposed crime bill which contained the Ruger-inspired limitation on magazine capacity, but which did not find favor on Capitol Hill. As Executive Editor Joe Tartaro noted in his 7 July 1989 Gun Week column entitled "A Fistful of Cartridges:"

 

If the President's proposal had not included the 15-round magazine bite, the whole crime package would probably already be law.

In his final syndicated column of 1989, Neal Knox discussed the implications of Bill Ruger's actions the previous Spring, and addressed some remarks aimed at him by Steve Sanetti, Sturm, Ruger's general counsel and the only person other than Papa Bill ever authorized to issue statements for the company:

 

Steve Sanetti says "I know better" than to ascribe Bill Ruger's magazine ban proposal to business considerations. Maybe so; I don't think Bill is by any means "anti-gun," nor do I think he really wants a ban on either guns or magazines (after all, he got his start as a machine gun designer).

 

But I do think Bill Ruger is pushing a plan that would protect his business while affecting only his competitors, and I think he's damaging the efforts of those of us attempting to stop all proposed bans. Further, I don't think his actions on this issue, and other issues in the past, allows him to be described as "the strongest supporter of our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms."

 

What I know is that about 9 p.m. the night before Bill sent a letter to certain members of Congress calling for a ban on high-capacity magazines he called me, wanting me to push such a ban. His opening words, after citing the many federal, state and local bills to ban detachable magazine semi-autos, were "I want to save our little gun" -- which he later defined as the Mini-14 and the Mini-30. I'm not ascribing Bill's motives as "expedient from a business standpoint;" Bill did.

 

While I agree that a ban on over-15-round magazines would be "indefinitely preferable" to a ban on the guns that use them, that's not the question. Neither I, nor the other gun groups have ever believed that we were faced with such an either/or choice. Early last year the NRA legislative Policy committee discussed various alternatives to the proposed "assault weapons" ban, and wisely decided that magazine restrictions wouldn't satisfy our foes, but would make it more difficult to stop a gun ban.

 

I was particularly shocked when I realized Bill was talking about a ban on possession of over-15-round magazines, rather than a ban on sales (which is bad enough). I told him that such a law would make me a felon, for not only did I have standard over-15-round magazines for my Glock pistol (a high-capacity which has sharply cut into Ruger's police business), I have many high-cap mags for guns I don't even own, and don't even know where they all are. As I told Bill, after a lifetime of accumulating miscellaneous gun parts and accessories, there's no way I could clean out all my old parts drawers and boxes, then swear -- subject to a five or ten-year Federal prison term -- that I absolutely didn't have an M3 grease gun mag or 30-round M-2 magazine lying in some forgotten drawer.

 

Bill said (and all these direct quotes are approximate).

 

"No, there'd be amnesty for people like you. We have to propose a ban on possession before they could take us seriously."

He contended that the public's problem was with "firepower," which could be resolved by eliminating high capacity mags.

 

I told him Metzenbaum and Co. would gladly use whatever he offered, but they weren't about to willingly agree to eliminate high-cap magazines as a substitute for banning guns; that their intention isn't to eliminate "firepower" but "firearms."

 

Bill finally said, "Neal, you're being very negative about it." He got angry, then said "Well somebody's got to do it; by God I will." And the next day he sent his letter to the Hill; the evidence indicates a few weeks later he talked SAAMI into supporting undefined "regulation" of magazines over-15-rounds -- a vote that might have gone a little differently if any produced high-capacity magazines as standard for either rifles or pistols.

 

I suspect that Ruger and SAAMI's actions are responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Bush administration's proposal to ban high-cap mags, but that proposal has been ignored -- except as evidence that "the Bush administration and the American firearms industry recognize there's a problem -- that Americans shouldn't be allowed to have such guns."

 

Of course, that isn't what Bill Ruger and SAAMI are saying, but that's the message they're sending. Perhaps it isn't business expediency to propose banning only that which they don't make, in an effort to protect what they do make; but it sure can't be claimed to be in defense of the Second Amendment.

"Enjoy your retirement, friend."

 

"The legendary William B. Ruger has retired as chairman, treasurer and chief executive of Sturm, Ruger & Co. after 51 years at the company's helm.

 

He recently was honored by being unanimously elected as an Honorary Life Member by the NRA Board of Directors."

 

January 2001 The American Guardian, page 17.Five years later William B. Ruger Sr.'s model legislation served as the basis of the "high capacity ammunition feeding devices" section of the Clinton Administration's "Crime Bill," save one major detail... the 15-round capacity had been dropped to 10-rounds by the time it had passed and been signed into Law on 13 September 1994! (The antigunners not only stuck it to "us," but stuck it to their Quisling as well.)

 

Why were we not surprised?!

 

What was surprising was that within four years the NRA would celebrate the man so enthusiastically. For many, this is one wound which has not healed, and the author has not only not purchased a Ruger product since that time, but subsequently sold at distress prices, his Mark II pistol and prized Model 77/22 rifle.

 

Aside from his million dollar donation to the NRA Museum, William B. Ruger, Senior, should be remembered as the man who embraced the investment casting process very early on, and whose Pine Tree is one of the most respected investment casting enterprises in the world, the man who gave us the Mini-14, the 10/22 and the first American-made production firearm chambered in 7.62 X 39mm... and the man who told NBC News' Tom Brokaw that:

 

"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."

"I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock."

"I see nothing wrong with waiting periods."

And, sadly, that too must be part of the Ruger legacy.

 

Footnotes:

 

 

1.- Vidkun Quisling (1887-1945) was a twentieth-century Norwegian politician, an intelligent and hard-working head of Norway's home-grown form of Nazism, the Nasjonal Samling (National Unity) Party. While he also fancied himself a philosopher, he went so far as to urge Hitler to invade his country in hopes of becoming Norway's supreme leader.

 

On 9 April 1940 Hitler did just that. And Quisling got his wish... for precisely five days before being placed in a figurehead position while one of the Nazis own actually ran the country. Within months of the war's end, Quisling was tried executed by firing squad. And a new word entered the dictionary, not only in English, but in many other languages as well, synonymous with traitor.

2.- This ban became permanent on 7 July 1989, and affected virtually every Kalashnikov, H&K 90-series, Galil, Uzi, Valmet, SIG 550-series, etc.

3.- William B. Ruger Jr. stated in Spring 1989: "We now feel, due to the refocus of our thinking, it is probably not good to sell a high-capacity magazine to the general public."

 

This quickly led cynics in the firearms community to speculate as to Ruger's true motives, for one of the major competitors to his then new P-85 series of pistols was the Glock 17, the only pistol around (other than the scarce and unwieldy Steyr GB) with a greater than 15 round magazine capacity. Some are still convinced that this was at the root of his actions.

by Dean Speir, formerly famous gunwriter, (with

special thanks to TGZ's consigliore Robert P. Firriolo, Esq.)

Post questions or comments in The Gun Zone Forum.

 

This is very informative. Did you write this or copy paste from an article? If you did write it, may I have your permission to repost it in a couple of other forums? If you did not write it, could I get the link to the publication it came from so I can properly quote it?

 

Again, thanx for the informative post. I had no idea this is what took place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So who wants to buy a mini-14!

 

I would if the price is right. I have a Mini-14 and it's a good rifle for the money (at the time $172 in 1978). It's a shame that Bill Ruger's technical innovations didn't spill over to his political views. I'm not happy that Ruger will only sell hi cap magazines to law enforcement only. Fotunately Pro Mag and a few other companies make good magazines for the Mini-14. Unfortunately many aftermarket magazines are total garbage and won't work out of the box or give out after use.

 

The Saiga would be my first choice followed by the Yugo SKS as the second choice. The Yugo prsesently is low cost and very reliable. It's also a good tack driver at 100 yds. The Mini-30 is too expensive compared to the Saiga or SKS but if you can get one cheaply and some good Pro Mag magazines for it the you have a good rifle.

 

The Saiga is my first choice as it can be converted and customized and still cost less than a Romanian commercial AK for a Russian rifle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, I've owned 3 Mini-14s (a standard model, a SS ranch rifle, and a very nice SS GB), plus 2 ArmaLite ARs (a standard length barrel model, and a carbine). Again, FWIW, I currently prefer AKs.

 

IMO you get more for your money - most of the time - with AKs than you do with Mini-14s. I have seen at least one complete POS Chinese AK (I'm sure there are more out there, whether Chinese or not), and I will admit that I was, over all, satisfied with the Rugers (although I had a bunch of PMI mags - try to buy those today!): but I still prefer the AKs.

 

The ArmaLites were wonderful examples of precision machining, produced by a company absolutely dedicated to quality & service, and I continue to believe that ArmaLite produces the best AR on the market. For me, though, they just weren't right - Mr. Stoner wasn't thinking about cleaning the dang things (or dropping them in the mud) when he designed them. And, once again, I think you can get more for your money with an AK.

 

In other words, and absolutely no offense to the Ruger & AR fans here, but for me, personally, I (so far ;>) still prefer AKs.

 

(Obviously 'your mileage may vary' ;>)

 

(And if I had a lot more free cash than I do, I might consider a 5.56 FAL - I do love FALs! ;>)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

DeGroaner don't sugar coat it tell me how you really feel

 

My first handgun was Stainless 6" Security Six and I still have a 10/22 and a Mark II that I've owned for over 20 years but that traitor never gets another cent from me. Not only that the Mini-14 I had 20 years ago was a royal POS and the P-85 that I owned for three days was even worse. But for his support of the Clinton AWB I will hate his guts and his company forever.

 

 

Ruger supported the Clinton AWB?

 

 

all the "foreign rifle" clauses in the AWB musta made ruger a crapload of money.

 

it's kinda sad that a <200 dollar SKS outshoots the crap out of a 600 dollar ruger.

 

anywho, SKS or saiga, can't really go wrong. the SKS is better than the saiga in many ways, in stock form anyway, though waaaay too long for any home defense (especially the yugos). if you do a little work to the saiga, i'd say that's the way to go.

 

i have one of each :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

B)-->

QUOTE(G O B @ Jan 15 2007, 08:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
1. Saiga.

 

1a. any AK

 

2.SKS. cheap,reliable, cool gun, too many parts/heavy.

 

3 Bill Ruger can go to hell.

 

 

I'm not sure if I agree about the SKS having too many parts; it doesn't have a lot more than the AK.

 

I will say this, though: I have owned Saigas, SKS's, and a mini-30.

 

 

I no longer have my mini 30 :devil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I would sell my left kidney for a vintage bisley vaquero with ivory grips (in .45LC), Bill Ruger can join the ranks of the dinosaur monopolists in heaven.

 

IMHO, the saiga's only real competition is with from the Kel-Tec SU16 carbine. Those were the only two guns I considered for a time-wasting truck gun plinkomatic. I personally like the SKS in spite of its heft. I just might order a shooter grade and refinish it on my next break from work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will probably get flamed for breaking up this Ruger bashing party but, bringing Bill Ruger into a comparison between the Mini 30 and Saiga is nothing more than verbal masterbation. It might make you feel better but accomplishes nothing.

 

Some of us might be mature enough to remember that the Mini 14 was used in a number of high profile shootings and mass killings in the 1980s. Gun companies, and Ruger in particular, were under assault by the press, anti-gunners and lawyers alike. If Bill Ruger threw one lamb to the wolves to save the flock, I am sure he did what he thought was right at the time. Regardless, both he and the AWB are dead so it doesn't really make any difference.

 

Those of you who can't let go, feel free to continue wearing your pomposity like a crown of thorns.

 

In regards to the original topic. I have a bunch of SKSs, AKs, ARs and Saigas. I also have a Mini 30. The Mini 30 was intended to be sporting rifle not a armchair commando's wet dream. If it doesn't meet your expectations in that regard then by all means use a clunky, crude, slave labor, communist, and/or peasant made rifle. As I said I have a bunch of those but that's what they are.

 

My Mini 30 is sleek, high quality, reliable and American made. I've killed a bunch of deer with it over the many years I've had it so is apparently accurate enough.

 

The 30 does what it is intended to do and so do the Saigas and SKSs.

 

Flame away kids.

Edited by mac66
Link to post
Share on other sites
Some of us might be mature enough to remember that the Mini 14 was used in a number of high profile shootings and mass killings in the 1980s. Gun companies, and Ruger in particular, were under assault by the press, anti-gunners and lawyers alike. If Bill Ruger threw one lamb to the wolves to save the flock, I am sure he did what he thought was right at the time. Regardless, both he and the AWB are dead so it doesn't really make any difference.

 

 

And Ruger still won't sell Mini-14 hicaps, intentionally, to the public, and has never made a Mini 30 hi cap

 

 

In regards to the original topic. I have a bunch of SKSs, AKs, ARs and Saigas. I also have a Mini 30. The Mini 30 was intended to be sporting rifle not a armchair commando's wet dream. If it doesn't meet your expectations in that regard then by all means use a clunky, crude, slave labor, communist, and/or peasant made rifle. As I said I have a bunch of those but that's what they are.

 

Both minis are intended to be perceived as scaled down M14's, hence "Mini"14. I have never seen a 5 rounder for the M14. Other than bolt actions, other "sporting" rifles offer 10 rounds, even Ruger's own 10/22. They are American made, over priced POS's

 

My Mini 30 is sleek, high quality, reliable and American made. I've killed a bunch of deer with it over the many years I've had it so is apparently accurate enough.

 

The gas system (which is NOT a copy of the M14's) in the Minis is nearly as bad as that of a AR. It must be cleaned thoroughly after every so many shots, and that doesn't mean you can just field strip it, either. You must remove the gas block and all of its internal parts and start scrubbing. Needless to say, I sold my mini 30 off a few months ago and bought some Saigas.

 

Flame away kids.

 

Oh, you can stop with that kids shit, or just GTFO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Top Five Reasons why some people think the Mini 30 is a POS.

 

1. It doesn't have hi-cap mags so it is a POS.

2. Bill Ruger is a SOB which makes the Mini 30 a POS.

3. It should be an assault rifle but it isn't so it is a POS.

4. Someone on the internet said it was a POS so it is.

5. It is a POS which makes it a POS

:devil:

 

And Blenderwizard, don't take the kid comment personal unless of course it fits. :rolleyes:

Edited by mac66
Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm....

 

To my recollection... whenever I saw mini's of any kind being used by the "A-TEAM"... all chromed up, with folding stocks... I dont think I EVER SAW even ONE person get killed... and they shot off untold THOUSANDS OF ROUNDS....

 

I have no idea how this fits into this thread... I just thought a little bit of surrealism would be just as appropriate as the rest of the comments here. :up: :up:

 

 

:smoke:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...