Mini 14, Bushmaster or Kalashnikov...which makes the most sense for all around survival weapon?

Recently I have decided to invest in a good all purpose rifle that can be used for possible hunting as well as a defense weapon. I already own quite a few different hunting rifles, shotguns and hand guns, but I am interested in investing in one good all purpose weapon that can serve multiple means, my main focus being on practicality, accuracy and durability.

So far I have it narrowed down to three different makes and models that I like most -

1.) Ruger Mini 14 - extremely accurate 100-200 yds, fires .223 rounds, fairly expensive rifle, lots of after market add ons available, light, well crafted with American parts, but reliability under stress questionable

2.) Bushmaster Carbon 15 model 4 - very expensive ($1300+ for base model), comes with 30 round mag cap, only 5.5 lbs, proven to be accurate at distances of over 300 yards, reliability and practicality very questionable, top notch craftsmanship, fires .223 which is a common mid size round, would be very tough to maintain in a sit x situation

3.) Romanian SAR1 (Kalashnikov model) - very affordable $400-$450 USD, fires 7.62 very common round and easy to find but too large to hunt medium/smaller game, extremely reliable in even the worst conditions, extremely simple to break down, clean and maintain even in the field, has heating issues but will keep on firing, cheaper than US made SLR85 AK47, when sighted properly is proven accurate at up to 300 yds


Anyone with any first hand knowledge of these weapons please let me know what you think...pros and cons etc. I am leaning toward the SAR1 or the Mini 14, not sure if I should pay double or even triple to upgrade to a Bushmaster since they are extremely pricey and notoriously delicate under duress. I love the way the model 4 looks and I have fired them before and was very impressed, just not sure if it would be worth the extra $$

Also, any other models out there that would possibly fit what I am looking for, feel free to offer any suggestions.

[edit on 7/23/08 by BlackOps719]

Honestly the ammuniton for a Kalashnikov rifle isn't as easy to come by in the US as one might think. Also most of the ammo available I would catergorize as third world surplus and not the best ammo available. Out of the rifles you listed I would go with the bushmaster. I would look into any AR type rifle from any of the larger companies that sell AR's. I would look at one that has a piston upper. You can also buy a piston conversion kit for almost any AR on the market. With a piston kit you get the reliabilty of an AK with the accuracy of an AR. AR's are pricey but 5.56(.223) is much more widely available. Tons of aftermarket add-ons.
Another good option would be an M1 Garand. It's durable, accurate, and 30.06 is plentiful.

reply to post by THE-LURKER

---

Honestly, I have not had any issue finding non-surplus ammo for my AK and I live in the midwest. I can walk into any of the local gun shops and buy a 500rd case of Brown Bear FMJ, SP, or HP for 1/3 the price of the cheap .223 brands. There are cases upon cases in the shop and a pallet in the back.

BlackOps,

Based on your post, you seem to already be sold on the AK, if you are worried about ammo for it, you can get a civilian version of the AK-101 which is chambered in .223.

I would not get a romanian, go for something of a little better quality. The nice thing about AKs is no matter who makes it, it is guarenteed pretty much to go boom when you pull the trigger. The extra price for a better AK is all about accuracy, and added durability.

I've fired all 3 style of weapons, and I bought an AK. Due to price of the weapon, price and avaliability of ammo for stockpiling, and above all else durability. When I was in the Service (Army) I would have loved to trade in my M16 for an AK-47 or AK-74.

AKs have a high recoil force so i wouldn't really consider one for all around use


Get an M4 with scope

I have always admired the AK for it's simplistic design and for it's ruggedness and willingness to perform under the worst conditions. I have heard the horror stories about the M16, which is basicaqlly the same design as a Bushmaster. They are great guns, very light, very accurate, but it seems that they would be extremely tough to maintain properly in the field.

Im a huge fan of the Ruger mini 14 after having had the chance to fire one this past weekend. The great part is I will be able to buy the AK as well as the Ruger for around the same cost of a new Bushmaster with all of the gadgets and whistles.

One question though, what type of Kalashnikov is recommended? I have been led to believe that since a lot of the parts to the Romanian AK are crafted in the US that they were a step above Egyptian or Chinese made versions. From what I understand it is tough to find authentic Russian made rifles that are available for export.

Any suggestion?

The old M1's are great rifles and tougher than nails, but the load is just a tad bit larger than I am looking for in an all purpose rifle. An M1 woulkd be excellent for medium to long range sniping.

I have a couple of AK's, a couple of AR platform weapons including an M-4, and one Mini-30. I have buddies with Mini 14's and alot of experience with them.

If the world were about to be reduced to rubble I'd take my milled AK. If I were going to be inconvenienced for a few weeks I'd take my AR-10 or my all-weather mini 30. If I was going to shoot my way into or out of a building I'd take the M-4.

For all around end-of-world use nothing beats a quality AK. I stress QUALITY. None of this stamped receiver thrown together from a crate of miscellaneous parts crap.

none of the above. the Sig556 is a much better weapon or the Daewoo DR200 like I have. both rifles are basicly the same idea. they use a gas return system like the AK47. and both take standerd M16 mags. The Sig will cost more than the DR200(I bought mine for $500) both can fire 5.56mm rounds not just .223. the mini 14 or an AR15 are built for .223 not 5.56. the Sig and DR200 are milspec. yes .223 and 5.56 are the same size BUT the 5.56 creates more presure that can be deadly if fired in a civilian spec rifle. and in SITX you may need to pick up military rounds.

The choice is clear. Bury all three in the mud and then rinse after a week. One will work fine

I would recommend any from this group. All of them are built to good standards.

www.atlanticfirearms.com...

Beware anyone that says stamped or milled etc. There are just as many soft un heat treated milled recievers as stamped.

Milled is best from a reputable manufacturer but very heavy compared to stamped. Make sure you get a 1.5 or 1.6 thickness in stamped. This is 50% thicker than most and a good compromise between weight and strength.

A pistol is the best investment, unless you get a real russian,bulgarian or a norinco. Romys are the stamped tin can of aks but lots of folks like them.

If those were out of your price range here are a few cheaper ones but you better listen to the guy above these posts and figure out which manufacturer put these together before parting with your cash. About 20% of these may not be the good receivers you want. Most are just fine. Ask. The people selling them will answer the phone and know the good from the bad.

www.jgsales.com...

Go with the mini 14...Its got great fixed peephole sites i think are better then dove tail.Can be scope mounted.There is even deer loads you can buy for the .223.I never once had a misfire in rain,snow or any other weather.

You should probably choose which one your most comfortable with.

They are all great rifles.

And I think its mostly personnall preference.

So ask around see if you can find some people with these rifles(try the local gunstore/shooting range or get a membership to the nra and see if you can find some people there) then when your good engough friends see if you can go shooting with em or something.
Then the one you like the most get it.

Well thats my 2 cents.

[edit on 24-7-2008 by 5ealchris]

I have fired all three and I am somewhat familiar with the feel of each, I am just not that up top date on how they will function as a primary weapon under stressful conditions.

I checked out the link and I really like the Bulgarian AK so far, seems like a fair price for an honest to goodness high quality model. The only reason I am even considering the AR15 is its compact design, high quality craftsmanship and overall accuracy. Most seem to believe that these guns are far more accurate than the AK style weapon, but I have to believe it is the ability to sight the weapon properly that makes the difference.

Someone had mentioned a type of kit or some sort of add on to the Bushmaster upper that can increase its reliability in the dirt. Anyone know of ways to effectively enhance the AR model and make it more durable? Or is it pretty much a 50/50 chance that there will be lock ups, jams and cleaning issues no matter what?

Having much experience with all three weapons in question, I would suggest the AK-47. They are durable, inexpensive and will work in any environment. Here are my experiences with all three:

Mini-14's - I have had feed problems with every single mini-14 that I have owned or shot. Many have required modifications to the magazines in order for them to feel properly. They are one of the most fun weapons to shoot in my opinion, but I would not bet my life on one.

AR-15's - Accurate is the best way to describe one of these. Mine is the M-4 spec model and I absolutely love it. Problem is that the ammo is expensive these days and they tend to jam up after enough carbon build-up. Once again, would not bet my life on one.

AK 47's - I have fired close to 5000 rounds through my oldest AK, and it has misfired only once...and this was due to faulty ammo. A few years back I took all of my favorite rifles and handguns out to the range in -50F. Every single one of them except the AK malfunctioned after a few rounds were fired through. All I will say is that there is a reason that it has been used since 1947 til' present.

If you are absolutely stuck on one of these, just pick whatever one best suits you and your lifestyle. If you are open to suggestions, I would purchase a nice .22LR weapon for survival. If I could only take one weapon out into the field, it would have to be my Ruger 10/22.

Best of luck!

The AK is a good weapon, and so is the M4. Both have their pluses and minuses.

I don't know about the mini14, tho. I don't think you could hit anything with them at all; the A-Team sure couldn't!

A good, cheap alternative, would be the Kel-Tech SU-16A. It's chambered in .223 AND it can use standard clips for the m-16/m-4. It holds two 10 round clips in the stock as well. It's as accurate as the ruger mini-14 as well. However the SU-16 can use the 100 round clips that they make for the M-16. It's a really good gun.

I have the carbon 15 model 4. Its a great gun . reliable, accurate and fast handling.
I picked mine up for $900, the $1300 is the MSRP and not what you will pay at a dealer.
AKs are great but I prefer ARs.
Mini 14 would be a good truck gun with the right mags.

They carry all types of ARs too but you need to do a lot of research as many of the brands are not true mil spec and only two are inspected for govt standards. The rest are on the honor system to make parts that interchange and hold up.



They are what they are. Many soldiers in Iraq carry both the M-4 and captured aks.



Your almost there. It is not the rifle and it is not the person. It is the skill of target acquisition. It is working at the pace of the tool.

The tool is like buying a pr of gloves or boots. You know when it fits. Try on several and if none fit go shopping another day.

A champion speed shooter will tell you the same thing you know when the trigger comes back and the hammer falls the bullet has already left the gun and you should already have acquired the next target as your ears hear the report. If you have 5 targets they should all be acquired in 6 seconds and then a once over to ensure they all have been. You should be practiced enough to know where every bullet hit.

This is the skill that makes or breaks. Wins over losing. A bullet hose is just a cheap toy. Its the shooter who can acquire every target and hit every time that is the champion.


A simple exercise with cans is to set one to roll downhill and one underneath it holding it in place. set three of these and shoot the support cans out from under all three and then hit the three rollers right after that. 5 cans rolling is a good set for practice.

So what is the significant differences between the AK47 and the 74, apart from one firing 7.62 and the other firing a smaller round?


The 74 is supposed to be an upgrade to the prior Vietnam era model, but has anyone seen an increase in accuracy with the smaller load? Seems to be the same basic style and features, Im just wondering what the reall fundamental improvements are.

The AK is known for its reliability. It will fire, and keep on firing. My own experience is that it is satisfactory accuracy-wise. It was built as a simple, reliable firearm, and it's probably the most tolerant of abuse -- mud, snow, grit in the receiver, etc.

Myself, among those you listed, I favor the mini-14. I put thousands of rounds through mine, and never had a problem. Zeroed in and in the right hands, it's perfectly accurate, or at least mine was. I now live in a country where I'm not allowed to have it, and I like to think it misses me. , along with everything else left with relatives in the U.S. The .223 round is flat and fast and recoil/recovery time is really very minimal. Another consideration in favor of the Ruger is it's light weight. If you've ever packed a rifle for hours, the mini-14 is easy to heft and it scabbards well if you're a horseman.

I have a Garand also. It is or was near perfect. I miss it most of all. Ammo cost is a consideration if you're stocking up. If you're a reloader, all the better.