Patrol Rifle; Mini-14 or AR15... and why?

[jor-el]

I'm kinda new to this forum, so bear with me.

The NYPD in the past used a mix of shoulder arms. Ithaca 37 shotgun, H+K MP5 submachine gun, and Ruger Mini-14 in both semi and full auto versions.

For various reasons, the department is considering retiring most of these arms and standardizing on M16s in the M4 configuration. In the case of the Ithaca that may not be a choice as the company is now defunct.
There is a faction that feels we should retain only the Mini-14 and only in semi-auto.

So the question is; does your department standardize the patrol shoulder weapon, which one is it, what is your preference, and why?

I'll start. I'm in the M16 faction to take advantage of the training many of our officers received in military service.
Easier to teach what people were already taught.
There is also the matter that the NYPD conducts joint patrols with the National Guard and Coast Guard in sensitive areas. I need not remind you of what happened almost five years ago in my city.

[Bigugly]

I personally like the Mini-14. The cost savings is odvious. When I was in the military, every M-16 I ever had jammed, no matter how well I took care of it. I own a Mini and it has performed flawlessly.

[HolyRoller]

Either will probably do OK for regular patrol work and are way better than shotguns.

No AR-15 I have owned has ever jammed, no matter how poorly I took care of it. You will see a lot of ARs in service with tactical officers and others who know what they're doing and can pick any weapon they want. Funny how these types almost never pick Mini-14s. Our department has M4s and a few REAL M14s but no Minis.

Most Mini-14s are not as accurate as most ARs, especially after a few shots have heated them up. Mini-14s have the safety in the trigger guard, which is not too good under stress. Mini-14 magazines are slower to change, especially under stress.

ARs have better iron sights and are easy to mount optics on, and all kinds of accessory rails, if you're into that sort of thing. ARs can have just about any combination of barrels, stocks, grips, flattop or carry handle, flash suppressor, muzzle brake, and what not.

Go shoot a highpower rifle match and you will see almost no Mini-14s on the line and none in the hands of any serious competitor. Sure, you can MAKE a Mini-14 accurate--but for more than what you would pay for an AR that's already accurate. My DPMS DCM was $880, GTG from the box, and shoots just fine at 600 yards.

For some more reliable input, I strongly suggest you head over to www.10-8forums.com where keyboard kommandos are not allowed to post.

[Lawdawg132]

M-4's are easy to modify to the user and are very accurate. Mini's are pieces of crap and they are problematic. Loud as hell too.

[MartinR]

In the AR-15 vs. Mini-14 debate, I'd lean slightly toward the AR-15. (If using surplus M-16's, have them converted to semi-auto). Cost is obviously important, but the AR-15 style seems to be slightly more user friendly.

That being said, I like the idea of a carbine that uses the same ammo and magazines as your sidearm. Unfortunately there are not many options available, and I have very limited experience with any of them. The following are the ones I can think of:

Beretta Storm and matching pistol.

Kel-Tec Sub-2000 and matching Glock, S&W, Beretta, or Sig pistol.

Olympic Arms AR-15 style carbine with the Glock lower obviously with matching Glock pistol.

[jor-el]

I'd be real interested if anyone actually uses the Kel-Tec as a duty patrol rifle and can post experiences exceeding a year. It looks nice, but the handguard seems a little weak.

[dep4532]

They are more accurate, modular, and ergonomic. YMMV.