OT - Any Mini-14 experts on board??? Question...

[RSY]

I have a first civilian year (1976) 180-series rifle and have always wondered why the receiver and bolt catch were re-designed for the 181-series and beyond. What were the shortcomings/deficiencies of the original design?

Gracias, amigos,
Scott

[AJMD429]

Two changes I know of:

1. the 'hold-open' part was simplified, so it was an easy-to-use 'button' instead of the exposed metal plate thing, and the mechanism was covered by a sliding metal guard that maybe made manufacture easier, and allows side-mounts like the B-Square.

2. the bolt 'roller' was replaced with a simple protrusion, I suppose because it was cheaper and the roller deemed unnecessary, although it could be the roller actually caused problems.

I used to have an older one, but had to sell it for college money. Fortunately, I soon replaced it with a Ranch Rifle in the 'new' series.

[pwl44m]

CMIIAW, I thought the early models could be made full auto. I have an early model.Definitely NO full autos in My Stable.

[firefuzz]

The changes were made to reduce production cost and a lot of people complained about the hole in the side of the receiver for the bolt hold open. The roller bolt was actually a better design, the full autos still have them.

Rob

[RSY]

Well, I completely forgot that I have Duncan Long's book on the Mini-14 on my shelf. Here's what he says:

1. 180-series has a thinner gas piston.
2. Stamped metal for the forward sling swivel.
3. The external bolt-catch proved to be "prone to jamming in a dirty environment."

There it is.

Scott