An affordable alternative to an AR (which is why they sold so many in decades past)?? Not anymore.
The only "assumption" I made regarding the Mini, is that it has transitioned from a "cheap" plinker to an "expensive" plinker. Perhaps it is "competitive" with Springfield Armory's M1A's. If YOU somehow "assume" that it is a match grade target rifle, a long range varmint rifle, or a viable modern law enforcement weapon, I'd say there are plenty of folks who'd disagree with you.
I never said or implied any of the above. The mini is in no way a direct competitor to the AR. As for the assumptions, yours are not so much about the accuracy or reliability (although that's an issue with more to the story) as they are about the people who buy them.
Back to the OP.
Ruger has been guilty of employing customers as beta testers, of late (I guess "employing" would actually imply some payment. More like "volunteering" in this case) . I have no intention of filling that role. But if or when the S9 demonstrates reliability on par with the Glock or M&P line, they may be on to something, and I'll have to give it a look.
