Savage scout


PDA






danweasel
November 26, 2008, 03:57 PM
Hi,

I just wanted to get some fresh opinions on the Savage Scout. I want a short rifle, I want a .308 and I want a rifle with iron sights (especially ghost rings). What's not to like? Would 600 bucks be fair price for one?

Thanks guys,

Dan

If you enjoyed reading about "Savage scout" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
woof
November 26, 2008, 05:40 PM
I seriously considered one myself. I was going to make it up for a young hunter and use managed recoil ammo in it. I think 600 would be a good buy and ghost rings would be great on that. I was thinking of the Burris 2.75X forward mounted scout scope though.

surfinUSA
November 26, 2008, 05:49 PM
Although I'm not a big fan of the scout concept. I made one one with an M48 mauser. I used a byod's stock and a Burris scout scope . It acutually turned out very nice and I and my son use it as a back up to our usual hunting rifles.

I find the scout concept an easy and relatively cheap way to sporterize a military surplus rifle that is easy to bring back to its original configuration .

However, I find the usual scope mounting method superior to the scout method for regular hunting use. As far as military uses go, the bolt action scout was used by the Germans and basicallly failed.

jackdanson
November 26, 2008, 05:52 PM
Yes they look nice if that's what you're looking for. A shop by my house has one for $539, it's been there for over a year, so you might be able to find one a little cheaper if you shop around.

woof
November 26, 2008, 06:19 PM
Saw this on gunbroker for $449 but does not seem to have accutrigger. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=116789222

LemmyCaution
November 26, 2008, 06:21 PM
The local shop here has had one for about a year and wants $585. MSRP is $648. The street price for savage bolt guns is generally 80% of list. I'd look for one at about $520.

Incidentally, I think it's a great rifle. I nearly bought one, but opted for an M1a scout/squad, instead. The 10FCM shoulders nicely, the sights are good quality, and the model 10 is a fine hunting action.

AK103K
November 26, 2008, 06:32 PM
I have an early Savage Scout, got it when they first came out. I paid around $450 for mine, NIB.

Mine doesnt have the accu trigger, but came with a very nice trigger all the same. It also has the removable, button release mag.

The iron sights do work OK, but I think are more of an afterthought on their part and kind of chintzy. The gold ball fell out on mine and I had to file it square, which actually was better for me, as I refer that type sight.

The B Square scout mount is also kind of chintzy, but it does work. I would suggest the Leupold Scout scope over the Burris. I have both, and prefer the Leupold. For some reason, that extra .25x makes a big difference to me. Then again, maybe its just the difference in the scopes.

My rifle is very accurate, and I have no complaints there. I've shot 20 round, 1-1 1/2" basically one hole groups, fired prone off a bipod, on more than one occasion, using my reloads.

Other than the issues with the sights, and the scope mount, my only other complaints are, they dont install, or at least include, the third sling stud (it is a Scout after all), and the rifle comes with a sticky recoil pad, and they dont offer a butt plate.(I hate recoil pads)

danweasel
November 27, 2008, 09:16 PM
Sounds good. I am most likely getting one. Just gotta get some money! I really appreciate all the insight guys.

Thanks,

Dan

Flashman
November 28, 2008, 01:04 PM
Although the Savage Scout has iron sights, they are really back up sights. The stock is not designed for iron sights and one has to scrunch down somewhat on the cheek weld. And that is fine if all of your rifles are similar but most rifles today are designed for use with a scope and to achieve a normal cheek weld. My point is this. If you shoot multiple rifles, it is better in my view that they are similar and I would put a scout scope on it.

I have a Savage Scout. I shoot it all of the time. It is very accurate and fits me very well.

If your goal is to shoot with iron sights, I might suggest a couple of options. One is to get a surplus rifle, Lee Enfield, etc., with a peep or receiver sight. Two, is to get what I can an "old technology" rifle like the CZ 550 with a European Stock (humpbacks; the FS model, a Mannlicher) and get a receiver sight for it. It works great and is a stock that is made for iron sights.

It all really depends on what your rifle is for. The SS is light, accurate and very ergonomic (for me) and is my go to rifle.

danweasel
November 28, 2008, 04:40 PM
Thanks Flashman,

I really only want the iron as back ups anyways. Also, I am probnably going to get the rifle a month before the scope (I do plan on scout scoping it) and I want to at least shoot it a little bit.

.38 Special
November 28, 2008, 06:48 PM
The flimsy plastic stock on mine is the only thing I really dislike about it, and despite careful looking I have never found an aftermarket replacement for this exact rifle. When fired from the bench, I could actually hear the forend slapping the barrel, and accuracy was pretty terrible. I eventually freefloated the forend to a gap of about half an inch, hogged out the plastic latticework from the barrel channel, and glassed in a length of heavy fiberglass fishing rod. This looks like hell, but has stiffened things up quite a bit and made a startling improvement in accuracy.

danweasel
November 29, 2008, 01:47 PM
.38, is that on a new or old model scout? Also, would you mind posting a picture of yours? It actually sounds like an interesting thing to see.

Dan

.38 Special
November 29, 2008, 03:22 PM
Didn't know there was an old vs. new. I got mine shortly after they came out, so I assume it's "old".

I'll snap a picture when I get a chance, but there's not much to see. From the outside it just looks like a Savage Scout that's been free-floated to within an inch of its life.

AK103K
November 29, 2008, 03:37 PM
I think the only real difference between old and new is, the new has the Accu Trigger, and the magazine release is different.


Other than the recoil pad, I never had any problem with my stock. Its nothing fancy, but its perfectly serviceable. Out of the box accuracy was, and still is, excellent. Considering the type of rifle it is, its probably a lot more accurate than you might expect.

This is what mine looks like....

http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27f5a69194600000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D550/ry%3D400/

This was fired prone off a bipod at 100 yards using my reloads. Thats a 20 round group, 165 grain Nosler BT's over 43.5 grains of 4064....

http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27f38f598db00000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D550/ry%3D400/

jmr40
November 29, 2008, 03:38 PM
The Scout's made in the last year or so have a much better stock as well as a steel triggerguard and steel bottom metal instead of aluminum and plastic. The magazines have been greatly improved as well. If yours has the accurtigger it is the newer model.

I bought one about six months ago and kept it for about 2 months before selling it. FYI you can remove the forward scope rail and mount a scope conventionally if you desire. I did this and mounted a regular rear sight in the hole drilled and tapped for the rail. Using Weaver rings and bases allowed me to use a scope conventually and remove it quicklly to have access to iron sights.

The down side of all of the steel and improved stock is that it weighs a lot more than Savage lists it in their catalog. I liked mine well enough but it was a lot heavier than my Tikka in .308 and a lot less accurate than the Tikka. Other than the iron sights, which I would probably never use, I did not feel it was as good as the Tikka. I put everything back on it the way it left the factory and sold mine.

Tarvis
November 29, 2008, 05:30 PM
Although I'm not a big fan of the scout concept.
What's not to like? I can't think of a downside, other than the requirement of having a low powered scope which is not ideal for long range shooting or varmint hunting.
However, I find the usual scope mounting method superior to the scout method for regular hunting use.
I guess it depends on how you look at it (no pun intended), but the idea of the forward mounted scope is to obscure as little of the scenery not visible through the scope as possible.

danweasel
November 29, 2008, 06:19 PM
Damn, that group has got me excited!

AK103K
November 29, 2008, 06:22 PM
The Scout concept is more of a general use rifle than a specialty rifle. It works fairly well across a broad spectrum of uses, but like the use specific rifles, it still lacks in some respects. Where it shines is, you can make snap shots on quick targets up close, and still make decent, well aimed shots at longer ranges. Its not a target rifle, nor is it trying to be, even though they are capable of very good accuracy. They are a great utility rifle. Something most other rifles are not.

I know there are some who just cant get used to, or just plain dislike, the forward mounted scopes. From the comments I've heard from people looking at, or shooting mine, most who disliked it, also were not iron sight shooters, and usually grew up shooting rifles with "proper" mounted scopes. I also noticed most of these same shooters didnt like short stocked rifles, preferred to shoot off a bench or rest, and were uncomfortable with shooting from field positions (a couple would have had troubles getting into one at all).

A lot of misconceptions are due to lack of knowledge or experience with a scout type rifle too. Most shooters have never handled one, let alone shot one. Like anything foreign or untested, it usually gets resistance from those who dont know them. Those that do and have embraced the concept, will understand what they have, and usually wont give it up. In fact, it will probably bleed over into other things. It has for me. Except for a couple of "use" specific rifles, most of mine that wear glass, have a low, forward mounted scope or dot on them, are short stocked and generally light weight. Whats not to like, you get rifles that all pretty much shoulder and shoot like the iron sights most of them also wear, and they are all very natural, comfortable, and similar to shoot with.

Damn, that group has got me excited!
Savage for some reason has always been the bastard child in the eyes of many. I've owned a few over the years, and while they were reasonably priced, and not quite as pretty as some of the others, they always seemed to shoot just about as well, if not better. Probably why the dislike and crying. :)

Mine likes that load, and will shoot like that with it all day long. It doesnt do to bad with good surplus, like Santa Barbara, or factory ammo like Federal Premium, just not quite that tight.

.38 Special
November 29, 2008, 09:55 PM
The Scout's made in the last year or so have a much better stock as well as a steel triggerguard and steel bottom metal instead of aluminum and plastic. The magazines have been greatly improved as well.

That's very good to know, and makes it a much better rifle, as far as I am concerned. I will look into the possibility of getting a replacement stock.

If yours has the accurtigger it is the newer model.

Ah. Then mine is definitely the older model. As for the group in the picture, I got mine down to consistent sub 2" ten shot groups and was satisfied. Before the stock "adjustment", it was about 7" average.

If you enjoyed reading about "Savage scout" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!