I need to purchase an M14 so I can compare it to my favorite little military surplus weapons the SKS, first weapon I ever field-stripped and I was staggered to learn that it was all mechanical leverage spring tension and gas pressure that makes it function. And my AK-47, it's crudely simple, easier to field-strip than the SKS.

⁠@@bjolly8924you won’t find many weapons with more simple working parts than those two you just mentioned.

When does the copyright expire for the Ruger Mini-14? Wouldn't it be nice if dozens of other gun manufacturers like PSA started building clones and selling them at AR prices and then thousands of aftermarket companies flooded the market with all sorts of upgrade parts? Same for the M1A rifle too. The AR is nice but it really isn't all that.

What is your opinion of the trigger housing as I think the idea of putting a tool into the hole to release the housing can bend the trigger housing metal and snapping it back into place is a little difficult on the mini 30, as well. I am retired police and carried many weapons in my 33 years in LE and 11 years in the Army. Now I have a nice mini 14 as well as a mini 30 and find the mini 30 housing is very difficult to pop into position and will pop out easily if not secured tight.

That’s because he speaks from real experience like a wise no nonsense uncle. He is speaking to those who are here to learn.

@@the_watcher_abc 🤔Very insightful of you, I believe you are correct.

He has one more subscriber now.

2 more now

@@scroungyredneck936 Hell yeah!! Letereat!!!!

Except almost everyone disengages the safety in advance of being ready to fire. I’d never wait that long to take a safety off to where I’d have to disengage it and fire in the same instance. I like to think of duck hunting as an example. When I see ducks that look they they are working the spread to land, I generally have my gun up from its rest and loosely in my shoulder pointed the direction I anticipate to shoot. Safety comes off at that point too but my finger remains out of the trigger guard. If the ducks make the commitment all I have to do is raise the barrel a few inches and pull the trigger. Can’t do that with a garand style safety. And I challenge you to do it well with some nice winter hunting gloves on.

@@austincrowe5194 except the Garand is a combat rifle and not a waterfowl shotgun. I swear everybody just needs to have an opinion no matter how ridiculous

@@sgtstedanko7186 and only well trained military people should get to have combat rifles? It’s a subpar safety design for numerous reasons. It’s why it isn’t a common safety design. And it’s a legit complaint about the garand style rifle. Then again that’s one man’s opinion. But I’m not a gun writer. Just saying I think the garand is an elegant design. However I think the safety could be a better design. Doesn’t make or break the gun though.

@@austincrowe5194 is such a stupid argument. It's a very safe safety. There's no training required. When you're ready to shoot, you put your finger in the trigger guard, flip the switch forward, then put your finger on the trigger. I don't see what your point is. When the safety is on, it not only blocks the hammer but also blocks the trigger. Doesn't get any safer than that. Far more safe than a thumb switch or button. Like i said before, some just comment for the sake of commenting.

@@sgtstedanko7186 ok. Then work the safety with some winter gloves on. You’ve also ignored the whole part about when the safety is not properly functional… aka when the gun will fire when the safety is on. I’ve seen that happen before because mechanical stuff breaks from time to time. You’ve ignored any potential claims of problems and acted like it’s an infallible design. All I’m saying is that there are much better safety designs out there. In fact any of them that are generally ergonomic with a firing grip for the weapon are better. I’ve also said the weapon is good overall but that the safety design could be improved. It’s not the worst safety but it could be better. If you can’t see my point then you clearly didn’t read what I’ve written. But fortunately you don’t have to take my word for it… you can take the word of all the other countless gun designers that have seen the gun and did not incorporate that safety design into their weapons.

I agree. I shoot left handed and absolutely hate cross-bolt safeties as they are awkward to use unless you are right handed.

I have no experience with Garand style safety, my experience is shotgun related the Rem870 v Mossberg 500. Im a righty, my youngest daughter a lefty. The safety on Mossberg is easier for her, we have Mossbergs as a result. Nothing against the Remington. This Garand style seems like a great safety to me, right or left. Kinda wished more used it.

Cross-bolt safeties placed behind the shooting hand are among the worst offenders because of their awkward location. Those placed at the front of the trigger guard are easier to operate if you are a northpaw. I'm a southpaw and I installed a cross-bolt safety in an 870 shotgun for my convenience, but I still visually check it because the rearward location remains awkward and pushing across (instead of forward) is not very intuitive. Tang mounted safeties are intuitive as long as pushing them forward disengages the safety. I've seen a few safeties that disengage by pulling them back. This is counterintuitive and awkward. I own one pistol with a frame mounted thumb safety that must be pushed up to fire and down to make it safe. I have no idea what the designer was thinking, but this feature is the clunkiest thing I've encountered on a pistol.

They need a cross-tongue safety..lol

Southpaw agreeing with you.

I always thought it was brilliant. It helps to be old enough to grow up with the generation that it was designed for. I’d bet my front teeth the safety haters are from a generation that caused a need for instructions on shampoo bottles

@@h.r.puffnstuff8705 And warnings on your coffee cups to not spill hot coffee all over yourself, it could hurt.

That position is perfect for the safety.

LOL As Forrest Gump might say....and just like that the armchair "experts" were quiet.

Here Here or is it hear hear!! As hear what these people are saying! Couldn’t agree more with you folks 😃 legit! (Is that what the kidz say nowadays legit?)

My thoughts exactly! Thanks.

@vettelover2009 YEP, an empty chamber is the only sure thing. But to all those people that just love safeties, would they allow me to point a loaded weapon to their head and squeeze the trigger ?

​@vettelover2009 You have fallen victim to the bad rhetoric of hand gun trainers. Rifles almost never have holsters and safety switches are essential. Especially on self loading / automatic rifles.

@vettelover2009 I believe EthosAtheos is saying while carrying a rifle the trigger is open and can snag on branches and other things. While a pistol is in a holster with a sheath over said trigger giving it protection from outside forces that are not controlled by handler of said firearm.

@vettelover2009 Talking about military applications running in the jungle with a hot weapon with no safety is asking for it. That is why they are on rifles.

@vettelover2009 I have no problems with loaded rifles. But gear snagging a trigger is real, I've seen it happen. I've seen people ND when picking up a rifle in a vehicle. I have no idea what your exp. is but mine is that safety's are your friend.

Thank you and God bless!

Not even good most of the time.

I would say, "sales clerks with below-average writing skills, but great familial or other connection to the publisher and/or the so-called *industry*." As of 2023, most firearms publications are at the Popular Science or Popular Mechanics level of technical honesty versus salesmanship. Which is to say, heavily biased in favor of a particular view, regardless of factual or mechanical accuracy in what's written.

@@seanoneil277 Gun Test is pretty good. They accept no advertising, so there is no incentive (requirement) to shill for the advertisers.

@@Paladin1873 I will take a look, never have before. I think print media are, at least for the next 50 yrs or so, on the sidelines at best. So many people use the internet versus newspapers or magazines. On the internet it's a lot of noise and very little signal. Some would say "this reflects the audience" but almost none of it feels organically created to inform, most of it seems to be selling either a product or a persona, and sometimes both. This is one of the main reasons our host Mr GB is such a treasure. I've never felt anything but the desire to share his accumulated wisdom and experience. If he mentions a manufacturer it's usually in the course of talking about a particular firearm, cartridge, or aspect of either. I see no favoritism other than favoring honesty.

@@seanoneil277 I agree.

...and the grip safety... ...and it's single-action trigger... ...and the half-cock notch on the hammer... It's almost like J.M.B. designed so that it's as "G.I.-proof" as possible and will not fire unless you intend it to fire. .

I will say honestly that when I chose my first handgun I chose polymer striker-fired simply to avoid the decock/safety-off step when learning. Now, however, after a couple years of training heavily, I could manage it with less stress. I don't think it's false to say it's one more step to train and think about, I would say instead that everyone should train with what they have, and learn the process until it becomes automatic. Regardless of whether it's a simpler striker-fired polymer pistol, or a dual-action pistol with a decocker or manual safety.

@@seanoneil277 "everyone should train with what they have" AMEN !!!

@@jupiterjunk It's genius!

@Steve Shooter you consider that genius?

Not to mention the safety of the Mosin. 😃😄

The essence of a true improvement in mechanical engineering -- more efficient in use, no less dangerous, and possibly safer via the mechanical changes/improvements.

That’s my line of thinking on this. I made a post with my thoughts as well but I would liken it to having a two light switches side by side, one for hat turns off the lights and the other that turns on the oven or something. Make a mistake, be in the dark etc and you are right in the right place and doing the right physical action that would actuate the trigger. A separate and different action should actuate the safety. It doesn’t seem to be a problem in practical use but it’s also not a good idea to design features of safety like this.

Do you actually know what you’re saying? “ pushing” the trigger? You pull a trigger, an opposite action from taking the safety off in this family of firearms. Even better, you engage the safety from outside the trigger guard, no possibility of pulling the trigger while you’re pushing the safety on unless you have another finger in the trigger guard (think about that name for a minute) and at that point you shouldn’t even be allowed to touch a firearm.

@@tnzayatz6579 Never underestimate the stupidity and carelessness of people. The action of engaging the safety is the same action as pulling the trigger. You push back on a piece of metal that hangs from the bottom of the rifle. The trigger is maybe a couple of inches behind the safety and both are manipulated in the same exact way, you pull back on them. It is conceivable that someone not familiar with the rifle and just being careless could think that their finger is on the safety, when in fact it is on the trigger, and get an accidental discharge.

Great idea!!

I dont want to assume that, that's the case but I have an itching feeling that you may be right. There's so much "out with the old" mentality lately that these meat heads seem to think that its a righteous principle to get rid of anything that's old now. Functionality is functionality...no matter who used it or how long ago it was used. I think the writer who made that statement couldn't push the safety out of the way with his dainty little index finger so he immediately came up with a case for why it's stupid to have it there. Haha

@@nsob8897 and probably has no confidence in his own dexterity. So then it becomes unsafe for everyone in there own mind. I think this is what happens when we let schools, government, TV and social media raise our kids

@@nsob8897- It is a bias which is pervasive amongst the young, and perhaps for understandable reasons, that newer is always better. Their youth can be blamed, and the lack of life experience, for holding such an outlook. What is mysterious, though, is how so many older folks who ought to know better still subscribe to this tired trope. Maybe we ought to use the word "old" less, and substitute "time-tested" in its place....

It's the modernist "safety first" mentality

I get annoyed when stupid gun writers don't provide correct information to trusting people because they're not the experts that folks think they are. I didn't attend chef's college, so I don't try to teach people French cooking, and too many gun writers never were schooled in firearms and aren't qualified to be teaching about them. All that was ever needed to be a gun writer was a typewriter. Now, it's just a cellphone.

@@GunBlue490 Right again. KZfaq is full of them

Boy that’s a nice looking mini 14!

Gunblue, do you take Benny rabbit hunting? I believe rabbit season is on here in NH.

If it wins wars why is it not allowed at competitions? Unless soldiers are better trained than competitive shooters that is?

One action requires the finger be INSIDE the trigger Guard. The other, OUTSIDE . . .

@@fjb4932 Look at the video at the video 7:11 time, his finger is on the safety just like it would be on the trigger. It would be easy pull the trigger while thinking you are setting the safety. A similar finger movement is used to set the safety as it is to pull the trigger.

This right here. Same actions in close proximity is the kind of thing you try not to design into machinery for safety reasons. Mistakes and fumbles happen, try not to set operators up for failure.

Soldiers carried the M1 Garand across Europe in one of the worst winters recorded, and they wore gloves. There's plenty of room in that generous guard.

@@GunBlue490 Excellent point! However I doubt the military would tout any data of some GI getting shot in the bum from the guy behind him fumbling through the trigger guard.

@@chrishill1286 I received military firearms training. GIs are taught to not place their finger on the trigger until they can safely shoot at the enemy. The last person to shoot their buddy in the bum is someone who received military training.

It was common practice in armories for a rod to be passed through all the safeties and secured in gang fashion to the gun rack. Yes, the Mini-14 could be drilled, but I suspect such tough steel might require annealing and re-hardening.