Samson Manufacturing is Bringing Back the Mini-14 GB Side Folding Stock

Courtesy – Samson Manufacturing

Samson Manufacturing of Keene, New Hampshire has been making AR and AK accessories for a long time. Now it appears they’re getting into Ruger Mini-14 accessories. Specifically, a modern production version of the GB Folding Stock.

Courtesy – Samson Manufacturing (Facebook)

They’re showing off a modern take of the ever-classic Ruger Mini-14 GB Side Folding Stock of A-Team fame (Click Here for more Mini-14 facts) on their Facebook page.

As a Mini-14 owner. I can say that it’s about damn time someone stepped up to the plate. I own a factory Ruger stock for my stainless GB Rifle and they are not cheap these days.

Courtesy – A. Valdes TTAG

The stocks alone easily go for about $800 a pop. Falcon Arms and Ramline made a similar stock in the past, but they aren’t easy to find or inexpensive, averaging about $300 these days.

Everyone I know who owns a Mini-14 wants a GB folder. The prospect of a new production Ruger GB pattern side folding stock for current production Mini-14s is awesome, especially since that means there would be industry support. Let’s compare Samson’s stock to my factory folder.

From the images, the Samson stock appears to be based off the Ramline aftermarket stock since it uses a standard AR-15 A2 grip. Also I think this is a prototype since it appears the folding mechanism is simply grafted to a standard 581 series wooden stock. The A2 grip is a little too far back and you still see the narrowing of where the shooter would grab the stock with his/her firing hand.

The buttstock itself appears to be a pretty close to the OEM one all in all. I think they may have a winner on their hands with a little bit of fine tuning with increased demand for everything ’80s and nostalgia kicking in heavily in the firearms market.

Watch this space for more information about pricing and release date.

comments

  1. avatar John Boch says:

    Sure, for people who don’t know any better. There’s a reason the A-Team couldn’t get anybody on the TV show. You couldn’t hit the side of a barn with one of these even if you were standing inside it.

    And that’s assuming your mini 14 didn’t fall apart as you were trying to shoot.

    No, I got rid of my mini 14 for a lot of reasons. I pity the fools who still have them .

    1. avatar Mike V says:

      Ok, you are a master hyperbolist.

      My Mini never fell apart in use.

      Mini isn’t a tack driver, but It’s sufficient at close, intermediate range.

      And a scripted TV show is hardly evidence of the Mini not being effective or useful.

      Would I take it over an AK or AR, no. For a variety of reasons, but it is hardly the paperweight you describe.

      1. avatar napresto says:

        I don’t have any problem hitting steel at 200 yds with mine. No folding stock though. That turns it into a baby-killing death machine here in NY.

        1. avatar PLO says:

          In NY, thanks to Gov. Cuomo, the true baby killing machines are wielded by doctors.

    2. avatar dwb says:

      it is minute of person out to 200 yds or so, which is all it was ever meant to be.

      1. avatar john says:

        Yes, watch the new Paul Harrell video ‘mini 14 vs ar’. He pretty much came to the conclusion that they are equals until you go over 200 yards then the AR wins the accuracy cake. Which means for most everyone that shoots both they will never tell a difference, most shooters cant even hit stuff at 100 yards accurately forgot 200.

    3. avatar Specialist38 says:

      Puh-leez!

      Minis are not benchrest accurate, but they damned sure don’t fall apart.

      All I want is 100 yard accurate with irons…..check.

    4. avatar gene says:

      Funny how folks will dump on the Mini-14 while having a 2-3 MOA AR with a 2+ MOA red dot on it and say that 4-5 MOA combination is “more accurate”. The ranch and tacticals aren’t target rifles and work well for their intended purpose – a solid rifle to handle issues in the field/pasture and kick around a can in front of a berm. They’re just plain fun to shoot, too.

    5. avatar That Jason says:

      The most realistic thing on the A-Team was the episode where they were more accurate with a cabbage cannon than they ever were with those mini-14s they had.

    6. avatar Me says:

      Well, I love mine. Happy to be a pitied fool.

    7. avatar Jeff McLeod says:

      HaHa you so funny John Boch

  2. avatar GS650G says:

    And this will soften the prices on the original folder.
    I’d like to get a mini 14 but the gun and mags are a bit expensive. If it had a heavier barrel I’d consider it since that would improve it’s accuracy.

    1. avatar WI Patriot says:

      Being Ruger proprietary, they got you by the nutz…the Mini-14 would’ve been better served by the AR magazine, NOW, if someone came out with a mag conversion, that would be it…

      This place does GREAT Mini-14 work…

      https://www.accuracysystemsinc.com/index.php

      1. avatar Edward Franklin says:

        The Mini-14 was designed in the late 1960’s, an era when the singular AR-15 on the market was the Colt SP-1 and it had minimal market penetration. It’s unsurprising the Mini-14 uses a proprietary magazine and it simply been a case of economics that Ruger hasn’t redesigned the thing to use other magazines, it would require a complete redesign of the stock and lower half of the receiver and I doubt Ruger could recoup that investment in any reasonable period of time.

        1. avatar WI Patriot says:

          Considering that the mini-14 was designed between ’67-’73, and it went into production in ’73, and the M16 was designed in ’59 and went into service in ’64, everything you said was incorrect…

          The reason that Ruger wants to be proprietary is that want to have complete control…Ruger doesn’t play well with others, and they’ve proven this time and time again…

        2. avatar Edward Franklin says:

          You’ve clearly got a chip on your shoulder about Ruger and a lack of brain power. When the Mini-14 entered initial development in early 1967 the singular AR-15 available on the civilian market was built by Colt and at that point in time there were no more than 8500 examples in circulation. The early 20rd magazines were relatively finicky and fragile, an AR-15 magazine generally requires some sort of magwell and most importantly, the manual of arms of a Mini-14 so built would be different than the M-14 it was intended to mimic, blame can’t be laid at the feet of the designers because I’m certain Jim Sullivan could have designed a Mini-14 with an AR magwell if he so desired but that wouldn’t have suited a rifle intended to function like a scaled down M-14. Jump forward to 1973, Colt had produced a little over 24000 examples of the semi-auto AR-15 in total and the M16 had a pretty nasty reputation that it took years to shed, it’s also not unusual for the Mini-14 to use a proprietary magazine given the time of it’s design. The Beretta AR-70, HK-43/93, and even the AR-18/180 all used magazines that were not directly compatible with the AR-15 and amazingly no one ever seemed to harp that they were incompatible with the Colt. The idea of it being done for control is equally idiotic given the still born Ruger XGI used unmodified M-14 magazines and was designed nearly a decade later, clearly if Ruger had some machiavellian scheme to control the flow of spi-magazines they wouldn’t have designed the XGI in such a manner.

    2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “And this will soften the prices on the original folder.”

      That actually helped my ass out during a tough time. I had a 70’s Ranch Mini-14 with the factory folder. When life melted down, I got $300 for just the folder itself.

      I’m kinda psyched about this. The current 14’s are supposed to be more accurate, and I still have a small mountain of 30 round mags put away…

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        EDIT – Life melted down in the late 90’s, and $ 300 was the going rate back then on the factory folder…

    3. avatar Todd says:

      I got into guns in the early 1990s. Only in the last 10-15 years has an AR been significantly cheaper than a Mini-14. For many years a $300 used Mini-14 was the budget choice compared to a $800 basic AR-15.

  3. avatar RA-15 says:

    I’ll take 2. One for my 583 series 5.56 nato ranch rifle. And 1 for my 581 series 6.8 spc chambered. All the mini haters out there ?? I’ve never had a problem with mine. And the 580 and up have the heavier barrel.

  4. avatar HEGEMON says:

    The Choate Mini-14 stock was the best.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      The ‘sterile’ factory folder was seriously cool-looking…

  5. avatar Shiffrod says:

    Uhh…..why?

    1. avatar Specialist38 says:

      Cause…..

  6. avatar AlanInFL says:

    Cue the A-team intro music

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

  7. avatar George from Alaska says:

    Like RA-15 I’ll take two. One for my stainless Ranch Rifle in 5.56 and another for my Mini in 7.62 x 39.
    I have earlier Mini-14″s in 223/5.56 that were 4-6 MOA accurate at 100 yards and pretty known across the US for that kind of inaccuracy. Later versions I have seem to be able to do about half of that… plenty good enough for minute of pie plate at 100. Best as a house or back yard gun to me… If the zombies are coming I have plenty of head shooters and can start at about 400 yards. I know that others do much better but my gear and I are only upwardly middle class.

  8. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    I have owned half dozen Mini-14s over the years including a Ranch Rifle and a stainless GB with factory folding stock. Most had AK accuracy except the GB. It would drive tacks. Ruger folding stocks are ok, but unless you’re going to have on a boat or plane stick with fixed. The best folding stock is the FN FAL pattern.

  9. avatar DD says:

    At close range the mini 14 can be devastating…platt/matix/1986/ florida.

  10. avatar Specialist38 says:

    I am just waiting to see a price. Hope it’s not where the originals are today.

  11. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Really cool, I personally have two mini14s, one with & one with a collapsible stock I traded a SKS for. Hard to beat the Ruger. Lifetime guarantee & all. I’ve got a few Ruger’s , pistols & long guns, never had a prob with any of them… good stuff.

  12. avatar Edward Franklin says:

    I’d wager they will probably slot in somewhere between the 125-150 walnut stocks and the 450-500 dollar Sage International chassis. Something like 250 would still put them massively under the going rate for factory folding stocks. Luckily from answers on various social media outlets it looks like this indeed is a prototype and the finished version will have contours more akin to the original as well as a pistol grip that will fill that unsightly gap.

  13. avatar adlib says:

    “Everyone I know who owns a Mini-14 wants a GB folder.”
    …unless they live in MD.

    1. avatar Specialist38 says:

      They still want it…..just cant legally have it.

  14. avatar CA_blows says:

    What a coincidence, I spent a great deal of time yesterday wondering why nobody has done this yet. Definitely picking one up after I leave CA

  15. avatar JR_GUNSMITH says:

    I own 5 Ruger Minis. Three in 6.8spc. Two of those customized with .750 barrels and spec2 chambers….tac drivers indeed! They are ALL super dependable (with their short stroke piston system that is fairly self cleaning). If a dire situation were to arise, you can trust them with your life. I have wanted a company to build this folder for years. THEY SHOULD ALSO MAKE AN ALL-WEATHER SYNTHETIC STOCK VERSION BUT, SHOULD FOLD ON OPPOSITE SIDE AWAY FROM SLIDE ASSEMBLY (the action)!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email