Anyone have a Savage scout?
- Thread starter SIGarmed
- Start date
- Status
I have one, but I really haven't had a chance to put her through her paces yet. I've probably put through about 20rds just for functioning and to try out the ghost ring sight. I managed to hit an 6in steel plate every shot at 100yds. Once I save up enough for a good "scout scope", I'll really try to find how accurate it (I) can be. I don't know what kind of stock problems were happening with the 10FP, but the Scout stock seems to be pretty solid.
Savage Scout: The "Other " Scout Rifle
Savage Scout: The "Other " Scout Rifle
Robert inOregon
Member
I believe Jeff Cooper called them an abortion scout. 
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
I have one. For the money, its a good little rifle. Shoots under MOA with my reloads (165gr Ballistic Tips) off a bipod. I have a Leupold Scout scope on mine, along with a Galco Ching sling. The only thing about the stock that bugs me is the recoil pad. I hate the damn things and this one is "sticky" to boot. Other than that, I dont see anything wrong with it. I wish they would put the third swivel stud on it, or at least give you one, for the third anchor point for the Ching sling. No big deal really. The B-Square mount is a little chinzy, but it works. I would take it off and Loc-Tite it good before you use it though. Mine came with a nice trigger, and I'm pretty picky about triggers. The iron sights work fine once zeroed, I filed the front sight to a square post after the gold ball fell out. I like the square post better anyway. Savage makes a good, reasonably priced, accurate rifle. I think all the bitching comes from boys who bought high dollar rifles that dont shoot as good, or at least no better than the cheaper Savages. I got my rifle, with scope and sling for less than what a Remington Model 7 alone would cost. 
Fed168
Member
I had one for awhile, but got rid of it. I liked the gun overall and the concept, but just could not get used to an extended eye relief scope. My only gripes were the stock (felt cheap and unsturdy) and the trigger (lawyer's delight). I even tried adjusting the trigger, but with negative results. OTOH, it fired a 1/2 MOA group while rezeroing it and gave me two deer.
Even with my gripes I would probably still get another one, but replace the trigger and stock.
Even with my gripes I would probably still get another one, but replace the trigger and stock.
No4Mk1
Member
I am very happy with mine and will second the above comments on accuracy. For an out of the box sout at the price it can not be beat. I tweaked the factory trigger on mine and am very pleased with it now.
Abortion scout?
I wonder, has he ever shot one?
Mine will put three shots into an inch at 100yds. Maybe even better than that If someone else shot it.
So what if it doesn't have the little built in bipod. I have a Harris on mine, but I only use it for zeroing. Any other time, I just sling it and wing it.
As far as the trigger, I got no complaints. But I'm not really a trigger snob either. I could learn to use almost any trigger.
The stock does flex a little at the forearm, but it doesn't touch the barrel.
For your $450 or so, you will get a good little rifle that handles well, is very light and carryable, and just plain works.
Pardon me if I can't justify a Steyr when a "el-cheapo redneck special" will do the same job for way less.
If you have the $2000 (?) get the Savage and buy $1500 worth of ammo. I bet that after you shoot that $1500 worth of ammo, ol' Jeff won't be able to touch you.
I wonder, has he ever shot one?
Mine will put three shots into an inch at 100yds. Maybe even better than that If someone else shot it.
So what if it doesn't have the little built in bipod. I have a Harris on mine, but I only use it for zeroing. Any other time, I just sling it and wing it.
As far as the trigger, I got no complaints. But I'm not really a trigger snob either. I could learn to use almost any trigger.
The stock does flex a little at the forearm, but it doesn't touch the barrel.
For your $450 or so, you will get a good little rifle that handles well, is very light and carryable, and just plain works.
Pardon me if I can't justify a Steyr when a "el-cheapo redneck special" will do the same job for way less.
If you have the $2000 (?) get the Savage and buy $1500 worth of ammo. I bet that after you shoot that $1500 worth of ammo, ol' Jeff won't be able to touch you.
"I believe Jeff Cooper called them an abortion scout."
My guess is because he gets no royalties on it, like I assume he gets on the Steyr.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading the Colonels' columns. Just giving my interpretation of his comment.
My guess is because he gets no royalties on it, like I assume he gets on the Steyr.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading the Colonels' columns. Just giving my interpretation of his comment.
Johnny Guest
Moderator In Memoriam
I'd like a reference to some printed source, Robert - - -
I've read a couple of comments Jeff Cooper made about other "Pseudo Scout" rifles, but never anything like "abortion scout." If you review all the writings in "Cooper's Commentaries" since the introduction of the Steyr Scout, I think you'll find he was not 100% happy with their execution, either.
I decided to try the Savage, and have been pretty happy with mine. It comes with probably the best out of the box iron sight setup on any sporting rifle. Some military aperture sights are a little better.
Agree with AK103K in wondering why Savage didn't set the third sling stud. It would have been very easy to include--Took me about 15 minutes to mount one on my rifle. The Savage rendition of the rapid sling is not good. I did revise the web sling with one D-ring and a couple of rivets.
The stock doesn't bother me. I can go from "African carry" to slung up, sitting, and shot gone in about three seconds.
One basis of about 300 rounds fired, I am very happy with the shooting characteristics of the Savage Scout. Rifle, Leupold Scout Scope, rings, extra sling stud, Plano case identical to that furnished by Steyer, and one extra magazine--I think I have less than $800 in mine.
The forward mount scope is not for everyone. It requires a certain amount of practice to get accustomed to it. I adapted to mine in about ten shots, and like it very much. No, it is NOT a bench rest or sniper rifle, but it sure is handy and accurate within it's parameters.
Best,
Johnny
I've read a couple of comments Jeff Cooper made about other "Pseudo Scout" rifles, but never anything like "abortion scout." If you review all the writings in "Cooper's Commentaries" since the introduction of the Steyr Scout, I think you'll find he was not 100% happy with their execution, either.
I decided to try the Savage, and have been pretty happy with mine. It comes with probably the best out of the box iron sight setup on any sporting rifle. Some military aperture sights are a little better.
Agree with AK103K in wondering why Savage didn't set the third sling stud. It would have been very easy to include--Took me about 15 minutes to mount one on my rifle. The Savage rendition of the rapid sling is not good. I did revise the web sling with one D-ring and a couple of rivets.
The stock doesn't bother me. I can go from "African carry" to slung up, sitting, and shot gone in about three seconds.
One basis of about 300 rounds fired, I am very happy with the shooting characteristics of the Savage Scout. Rifle, Leupold Scout Scope, rings, extra sling stud, Plano case identical to that furnished by Steyer, and one extra magazine--I think I have less than $800 in mine.
The forward mount scope is not for everyone. It requires a certain amount of practice to get accustomed to it. I adapted to mine in about ten shots, and like it very much. No, it is NOT a bench rest or sniper rifle, but it sure is handy and accurate within it's parameters.
Best,
Johnny
Robert inOregon
Member
Johnny Guest
You're gonna make me surf late into the night aren't you.
Was looking for some information one night on the 376 Styer rifles and found this web sight with different scout definitions. Let me see if I can find it again.
You're gonna make me surf late into the night aren't you.
Was looking for some information one night on the 376 Styer rifles and found this web sight with different scout definitions. Let me see if I can find it again.
Robert inOregon
Member
Did a little surfing and found the sight. It was Graziano that called the Savage scout an abortion (Been over a year since I landed on this page. At my age sometime I scare myself that I can remember stuff that long.)
Its called scout rifle taxonomy
http://www.donath.org/Rants/ScoutRifleTaxonomy/
"I have yet to see more than half a dozen rifles that have been properly converted into Scouts. However, I have seen in excess of two dozen wannabe-but-have-no-idea-what-a-Scout-really-is rifles. I call these "abortion-Scouts." The several I have seen were cobbled together by people who have no idea of what it is they are trying to emulate. The overall results were so deplorable I was horrified to think that people might actually believe them to be Scouts. Two pet examples are the "Savage Scout" and "Brockman's Scouts." - Thomas K. Graziano
Same quote is at Jeff Cooper Commentaries at
http://www.molonlabe.net/commentaries/jeff8_12.html
Its called scout rifle taxonomy
http://www.donath.org/Rants/ScoutRifleTaxonomy/
"I have yet to see more than half a dozen rifles that have been properly converted into Scouts. However, I have seen in excess of two dozen wannabe-but-have-no-idea-what-a-Scout-really-is rifles. I call these "abortion-Scouts." The several I have seen were cobbled together by people who have no idea of what it is they are trying to emulate. The overall results were so deplorable I was horrified to think that people might actually believe them to be Scouts. Two pet examples are the "Savage Scout" and "Brockman's Scouts." - Thomas K. Graziano
Same quote is at Jeff Cooper Commentaries at
http://www.molonlabe.net/commentaries/jeff8_12.html
Scouts
I've been studying the perfect scout for a while now. I've learned quite a bit.
Cooper receives no money from Steyr. A lot of people think he does. He does not. He has stated so. He is many things, but a liar, is not among them.
Running around the supplied website:
Cooper's commentaries December 1999 Vol. 7 No. 13
****
Colleague Paul Scarlatta, writing in Magnum magazine, implies that the Steyr Scout is the "Rolls Royce of Scout Rifles." The assumption here is that there is a whole class of rifles known as scouts, which is not clear to me. I have written up the evolution of the scout concept on several occasions, and it seems to me that at this time we have in existence the pioneer scouts (mainly constructed here at Gunsite), the Steyr Scout, and the Savage Scout, which last is simply an economy version of the general idea. Personally I would not select the Rolls Royce as an example of "getting what you pay for." One can get a better car than a Rolls Royce for less money - depending upon what he means by "better" - but one cannot buy a better rifle than a Steyr Scout for less money. If you build your own, you spend more and get less.
********
The summaries of what a "scout" is are generally poor. Even that on www.steyrscout.org is incomplete.
A "scout" is best learned about here:
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutconference.html
In many ways the Brockman custom scout is closer to being a true scout than the steyr scout witness:
***
"The main problem I have encountered with rifles currently called sporters is fragility. In modern design their extraction and ejection systems have been rendered less reliable in the interest of greater strength to support the high pressures of what may be called freakish cartridges. Such high pressures are by no means necessary in a weapon to be used in a combat role. (For that matter I have serious doubts about their utility in the hunting field as well--but I am in the minority on this point.) I am somewhat concerned about the sixty-degree rotation on the new bolt actions and about their general daintiness in operation, though they are obviously strong enough to withstand the high pressures of their cartridges. The new sporters are seldom easy to reload and we increasingly see heavily shrouded ejection ports which make the action hard to get at. [...] I am very nervous about the extractor on the Remington bolt action but I must admit that it has not failed me on either of the two examples I own. Of course, a failure to extract is the type of malfunction that may get you killed--and you don't want to have it happen even the first time. "
-Jeff Cooper Pages 148-149 "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth"
***
Using the REAL requirements of a scout rifle... the Brockman Scout, is more *true* than the Steyr. Cause it has controlled round feed. But in truth, both the Steyr, AND the Brockman break weight.
The Savage meets many of the scout requirements. It meets weight (as well as the Steyr anyway), length, iron sights, action-type (as well as the Steyr anyway), Caliber (in some ways better than the Steyr), and accuracy, as well as being very "friendly" and "handy".
It does fail notably, in the sling department, barrel material (so does the Steyr), and the bipod (so do most pseudo-scouts).
If I got a Savage scout, I'd replace the scope mount with one of the Ashleys. Add the ching sling, and a Leupold scope, and be happy as a clam.
For other cheap scouts that also don't suck, I've read good things about www.scoutman308.com
almost bought one of the Enfields, but then I found out about the Kimber 84M (coming out in left hand soon), fell in love, got married.... you know the story. The Kimber 84M, I believe will make the *real* weight limit of 3KG sighted and slung. The only thing I'm not sure about is whether it can be modified to feed from stripper clips. I wish I could get a stock with a built in bipod for it too. Too bad, I'll have to settle for wood. It also doesn't have a stainless steel barrel (neither does Steyr), but I think I'll get it Hard Chromed.
-Morgan
I've been studying the perfect scout for a while now. I've learned quite a bit.
Cooper receives no money from Steyr. A lot of people think he does. He does not. He has stated so. He is many things, but a liar, is not among them.
Running around the supplied website:
Cooper's commentaries December 1999 Vol. 7 No. 13
****
Colleague Paul Scarlatta, writing in Magnum magazine, implies that the Steyr Scout is the "Rolls Royce of Scout Rifles." The assumption here is that there is a whole class of rifles known as scouts, which is not clear to me. I have written up the evolution of the scout concept on several occasions, and it seems to me that at this time we have in existence the pioneer scouts (mainly constructed here at Gunsite), the Steyr Scout, and the Savage Scout, which last is simply an economy version of the general idea. Personally I would not select the Rolls Royce as an example of "getting what you pay for." One can get a better car than a Rolls Royce for less money - depending upon what he means by "better" - but one cannot buy a better rifle than a Steyr Scout for less money. If you build your own, you spend more and get less.
********
The summaries of what a "scout" is are generally poor. Even that on www.steyrscout.org is incomplete.
A "scout" is best learned about here:
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutconference.html
In many ways the Brockman custom scout is closer to being a true scout than the steyr scout witness:
***
"The main problem I have encountered with rifles currently called sporters is fragility. In modern design their extraction and ejection systems have been rendered less reliable in the interest of greater strength to support the high pressures of what may be called freakish cartridges. Such high pressures are by no means necessary in a weapon to be used in a combat role. (For that matter I have serious doubts about their utility in the hunting field as well--but I am in the minority on this point.) I am somewhat concerned about the sixty-degree rotation on the new bolt actions and about their general daintiness in operation, though they are obviously strong enough to withstand the high pressures of their cartridges. The new sporters are seldom easy to reload and we increasingly see heavily shrouded ejection ports which make the action hard to get at. [...] I am very nervous about the extractor on the Remington bolt action but I must admit that it has not failed me on either of the two examples I own. Of course, a failure to extract is the type of malfunction that may get you killed--and you don't want to have it happen even the first time. "
-Jeff Cooper Pages 148-149 "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth"
***
Using the REAL requirements of a scout rifle... the Brockman Scout, is more *true* than the Steyr. Cause it has controlled round feed. But in truth, both the Steyr, AND the Brockman break weight.
The Savage meets many of the scout requirements. It meets weight (as well as the Steyr anyway), length, iron sights, action-type (as well as the Steyr anyway), Caliber (in some ways better than the Steyr), and accuracy, as well as being very "friendly" and "handy".
It does fail notably, in the sling department, barrel material (so does the Steyr), and the bipod (so do most pseudo-scouts).
If I got a Savage scout, I'd replace the scope mount with one of the Ashleys. Add the ching sling, and a Leupold scope, and be happy as a clam.
For other cheap scouts that also don't suck, I've read good things about www.scoutman308.com
almost bought one of the Enfields, but then I found out about the Kimber 84M (coming out in left hand soon), fell in love, got married.... you know the story. The Kimber 84M, I believe will make the *real* weight limit of 3KG sighted and slung. The only thing I'm not sure about is whether it can be modified to feed from stripper clips. I wish I could get a stock with a built in bipod for it too. Too bad, I'll have to settle for wood. It also doesn't have a stainless steel barrel (neither does Steyr), but I think I'll get it Hard Chromed.
-Morgan
Last edited:
No4Mk1
Member
Robert,
I honestly don't know who Thomas K Graziano is, and frankly don't care what he thinks about the Savage. A little further down on the same page you cite, there is a reference to Cooper calling the Savage "simply an economy version of the general idea."
Doesn't sound like harsh criticism to me....
Have you tried the Savage personally? For the $500 or so that I have invested in the rifle, scout scope, ching sling, etc. I have been very pleased. As goon suggested, I am spening the balance of my money on ammo and training to hone my skills.
As Dave McC says, its the injun, not the arrow.... I think I'll keep my Savage and 5,000 rounds of Portugese 308 and spend the rest of my money workin' on the injun.
Respectfully.
No4Mk1
I honestly don't know who Thomas K Graziano is, and frankly don't care what he thinks about the Savage. A little further down on the same page you cite, there is a reference to Cooper calling the Savage "simply an economy version of the general idea."
Doesn't sound like harsh criticism to me....
Have you tried the Savage personally? For the $500 or so that I have invested in the rifle, scout scope, ching sling, etc. I have been very pleased. As goon suggested, I am spening the balance of my money on ammo and training to hone my skills.
As Dave McC says, its the injun, not the arrow.... I think I'll keep my Savage and 5,000 rounds of Portugese 308 and spend the rest of my money workin' on the injun.
Respectfully.
No4Mk1
Johnny Guest
Moderator In Memoriam
Wow, what a buy!
No4Mk1, you say $500 total inv in your Savage Scout--I must wonder where you got your rifle and scope. It is a couple of years, but I thihnk I gave a bit over $400 for rifle, 200+ for scope, and a bit for rings and extra mag. My sling is an adaptation of the Savage web sling. A good leather Ching sling goes for, what? Fifty bucks or so? I'm well under $800 in mine, and thought I was doing pretty well at that.
Robert, I am another who doesn't know who Mr. Graziano is. Should I? Is he some latter-day P. O. Ackley or Jack O'Connor?
Caesar1 wrote of the Savage:
FWIW - - - -
Johnny
No4Mk1, you say $500 total inv in your Savage Scout--I must wonder where you got your rifle and scope. It is a couple of years, but I thihnk I gave a bit over $400 for rifle, 200+ for scope, and a bit for rings and extra mag. My sling is an adaptation of the Savage web sling. A good leather Ching sling goes for, what? Fifty bucks or so? I'm well under $800 in mine, and thought I was doing pretty well at that.
Robert, I am another who doesn't know who Mr. Graziano is. Should I? Is he some latter-day P. O. Ackley or Jack O'Connor?
Caesar1 wrote of the Savage:
Sling, yes, but easily remedied. Barrel material? No specs that barrel be other than steel, though a steel lined, fiber wrapped barrel sure could do wonders for the weight. As I recall, the Scout Rifle "specifications" did NOT necessarily include a built-in bipod. I believe Col Cooper mentioned that it would be nice, but neither that nor clip loading is a requirement of the concept. The original scout rifles of which he wrote--The little Mannlicher, the aperture sighted Winchester carbine, the prototype Scout 1 - - - All wore iron sights, none had a bipod, and only one of the three had clip loading. The forward mount scope came later, and improved the system. The three point sling sort of topped it off.
FWIW - - - -
Johnny
Robert inOregon
Member
Don't know who he is and I'm not a follower of the Cooper either. Have seen the name come up several time with Cooper's and a couple of times mentioned as a relative. Just faintly remembered the particular page from a year ago.
No4Mk1
Member
Johnny,
Well, now that you make me do the math, it was probably closer to $600 all in. I got the rifle through a "buddy" FFL at wholesale for around $350 including an extra mag. Added scope and rings for around $200, and the sling was around another $50. All in all I am still very happy with the deal.
Guess it was more on the "or so" side of $500 or so....
Happy shooting!
Well, now that you make me do the math, it was probably closer to $600 all in. I got the rifle through a "buddy" FFL at wholesale for around $350 including an extra mag. Added scope and rings for around $200, and the sling was around another $50. All in all I am still very happy with the deal.
Guess it was more on the "or so" side of $500 or so....
Happy shooting!
Scout Rifle
"After discussion it was concluded that the barrel of a proper rifle should be made of stainless steel, for various reasons not necessarily involving its resistance to corrosion. Of the two alloys now being used for stainless barrels, both display a superior coefficient of friction, with attendant ballistic improvement." - First Scout Conference
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutconf-barrels.html
I referenced the website above in my earlier post.
Cooper references it in his book, "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth" in the section "The General-Purpose Rifle" on pages 139-140 in my book.
"The consensus at the first conference was that stainless was the proper material for barrels, not so much because it is resistant to corrosion but because it offers a better coefficient of friction. It is "slippier" than normal steel and therefore should provide slightly greater velocity for the same charge. In practice it has been found that stainless steel is very difficult to control as to quality, and that it differs from batch to batch. There are barrel makes now who will not attempt a light-weight stainless steel barrel, not because it could not be made but because they do not know that they could make it--since they do not make their own steel."
A scout should have a bipod, even if it isn't absolutely mandatory; to be 100% a scout needs to have one:
"The subject of the flush retractable bipod was introduced. What is needed is a bipod which is incorporated into the forend of the stock which, when not extended, retracts smoothly into the stock so that it has no extrusions, protruberances, or sharp edges. Something of this sort has been attempted by Mannlicher at the factory but abandoned for lack of success. It is a quite complicated engineering notion, and no one present at the conference felt qualified to attack it mechanically. The fact remains that a fluch retractable bipod is a great step forward and should be developed by those who have the talent for it. Current bipods are alternately a tremendous help and a frustrating nuisance. The idea is to produce one that is the first but not the last. Mike Horne of California is at work on this project now and we hope to have it to show the troops at the next conference."- First Scout Conference
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutconf-stocks.html
Further, Cooper mentions it in "To Ride, Shoot Straight and Speak the Truth" in the section "The General-Purpose Rifle" on page 143 in my book.
"At the 1983 conference it was decided that a form of retractable bipod should be perfected which would not be offensive to the eye nor extrude from the stock. The Clifton system holds the most promise. There are those who claim that any sort of bipod is somewhat "cheating," but the purpose of shooting is hitting, and if a bipod increases the certainty of hitting it should not be scorned. "
Now I think the Savage is a fine rifle, and there's really nothing wrong with it. It's the only scout around that comes available in a left handed action. Something Cooper has criticized Steyr for. As fine as the Savage is, it does not meet all requirements, but then neither does the Steyr, and Cooper acknowledges this.
For people with Savage Scouts, this page: http://www.steyrscout.org/savscout.htm
has a lot of good information.
I wouldn't call the Savage an abortion scout, or anything else like that, it meets the vast majority of imporant scout requirements, and is a very affordable alternative. The Steyr's a better rifle, and closer to 100% than the Savage, that's all I'm saying.
I like stripper clip loading, and Cooper seems to think its pretty nice too. One of the problems I have with the Steyr is that it comes with an available 10rd magazine, which is great, but you can't fill that magazine up again quickly. You can't store the 10rd magazine in the butt like you can the 5 rd spare (I don't think you can anyway), and you can't fill it up fast with stripper clips cause the action is totally closed off. Stripper clips are lighter, and less bulky than magazines, and they don't have springs to fail. The scout rifle pictured in my full color version of "The Art of the Rifle" has a custom 10rd magazine on its Win Model 70 action. Way cool. Detachable magazines have two advantages, you can carry a spare in case one breaks, and you can use a double detente for single round loading. With internal magazines, if it breaks, you're pretty SOL, and your option for single feeding is a magazine cut off.
-Morgan
"After discussion it was concluded that the barrel of a proper rifle should be made of stainless steel, for various reasons not necessarily involving its resistance to corrosion. Of the two alloys now being used for stainless barrels, both display a superior coefficient of friction, with attendant ballistic improvement." - First Scout Conference
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutconf-barrels.html
I referenced the website above in my earlier post.
Cooper references it in his book, "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth" in the section "The General-Purpose Rifle" on pages 139-140 in my book.
"The consensus at the first conference was that stainless was the proper material for barrels, not so much because it is resistant to corrosion but because it offers a better coefficient of friction. It is "slippier" than normal steel and therefore should provide slightly greater velocity for the same charge. In practice it has been found that stainless steel is very difficult to control as to quality, and that it differs from batch to batch. There are barrel makes now who will not attempt a light-weight stainless steel barrel, not because it could not be made but because they do not know that they could make it--since they do not make their own steel."
A scout should have a bipod, even if it isn't absolutely mandatory; to be 100% a scout needs to have one:
"The subject of the flush retractable bipod was introduced. What is needed is a bipod which is incorporated into the forend of the stock which, when not extended, retracts smoothly into the stock so that it has no extrusions, protruberances, or sharp edges. Something of this sort has been attempted by Mannlicher at the factory but abandoned for lack of success. It is a quite complicated engineering notion, and no one present at the conference felt qualified to attack it mechanically. The fact remains that a fluch retractable bipod is a great step forward and should be developed by those who have the talent for it. Current bipods are alternately a tremendous help and a frustrating nuisance. The idea is to produce one that is the first but not the last. Mike Horne of California is at work on this project now and we hope to have it to show the troops at the next conference."- First Scout Conference
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutconf-stocks.html
Further, Cooper mentions it in "To Ride, Shoot Straight and Speak the Truth" in the section "The General-Purpose Rifle" on page 143 in my book.
"At the 1983 conference it was decided that a form of retractable bipod should be perfected which would not be offensive to the eye nor extrude from the stock. The Clifton system holds the most promise. There are those who claim that any sort of bipod is somewhat "cheating," but the purpose of shooting is hitting, and if a bipod increases the certainty of hitting it should not be scorned. "
Now I think the Savage is a fine rifle, and there's really nothing wrong with it. It's the only scout around that comes available in a left handed action. Something Cooper has criticized Steyr for. As fine as the Savage is, it does not meet all requirements, but then neither does the Steyr, and Cooper acknowledges this.
For people with Savage Scouts, this page: http://www.steyrscout.org/savscout.htm
has a lot of good information.
I wouldn't call the Savage an abortion scout, or anything else like that, it meets the vast majority of imporant scout requirements, and is a very affordable alternative. The Steyr's a better rifle, and closer to 100% than the Savage, that's all I'm saying.
I like stripper clip loading, and Cooper seems to think its pretty nice too. One of the problems I have with the Steyr is that it comes with an available 10rd magazine, which is great, but you can't fill that magazine up again quickly. You can't store the 10rd magazine in the butt like you can the 5 rd spare (I don't think you can anyway), and you can't fill it up fast with stripper clips cause the action is totally closed off. Stripper clips are lighter, and less bulky than magazines, and they don't have springs to fail. The scout rifle pictured in my full color version of "The Art of the Rifle" has a custom 10rd magazine on its Win Model 70 action. Way cool. Detachable magazines have two advantages, you can carry a spare in case one breaks, and you can use a double detente for single round loading. With internal magazines, if it breaks, you're pretty SOL, and your option for single feeding is a magazine cut off.
-Morgan
here's my "seven scout".
http://www.angelfire.com/nv/fixer/scout.html
makes weight and length, so nothing "pseudo" about it IMHO.
the barrel and action still need some paint.
the Savage's barrel seems to be a bit on the heavy side.
http://www.angelfire.com/nv/fixer/scout.html
makes weight and length, so nothing "pseudo" about it IMHO.
the barrel and action still need some paint.
the Savage's barrel seems to be a bit on the heavy side.
Johnny Guest
Moderator In Memoriam
And the beat goes on - - -
Caesar1--thanks for the references and reminders–
My copy of To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth went astray at some point.
My memory of the listing of "Scout Rifle Characteristics" was that a lot of things were mentioned as "nice to have," but that most of 'em were secondary. The real essentials were handiness (including length and weight,) adequate power, and speed of use. EITHER a proper iron sight system, a forward mount scope, or, better still, a combination of these.
My first recollection of the SR discussion is that it almost always included some illustration of the item Jeff Cooper termed "Scout II," IIRC. A Remington 600 with a forward mount scope and a CW sling. No bipod, no clip loading, and certainly no stainless barrel.
I'd very much like to have a good, stiff-but-lightweight Clifton stock with integral bipod on a scout rifle. Maybe the major point that has stuck in my mind was Jeff's
Oh, yes--I did have an H&K light bipod on an HK91, and it folded (almost) out of the way.
One thing I do NOT understand is the necessity, or even desirability, of high capacity magazines in the SR. Some pretty nice pseudo scouts have been made up on the SMLE platform, which includes the ten shot mag. Riflemen the world over have appreciated the Enfield for a century. But, it originated as a BATTLE rifle, while the SR is an all around piece. Short, compact, lightweight. Adding a lengthy magazine at the balance point of such a piece impedes one of the most comfortable (non-slung) modes of carry. Please recall, with the long barrel and hand guards, the SMLE, the 1888 Mauser, and some other MILITARY rifles had a balance point rather further forward.
The SR is NOT a piece for a sustained battle. If used in an anti-personnel role, the discussion USED to be one shot, maybe two, then relocate and reload. The military or guerilla scout's main job was to look, see, return and report, NOT to engage in patched battle. MIGHT he get cornered, trapped, wounded? Sure--But he has thereby failed in his mission, and it is unlikely an extra five shots in the magazine would change the eventual outcome.
The way I understand the origin of long magazines for bolt action rifles was for aerial use in WW-I. And a balloon observer or backseater in an aeroplane really didn't have to carry his rifle very far.
I like having reserve ammo right with the rifle. The sliding-lid ammo box, just ahead of the rear sling stud, is excellent for the "shoot one, load one" practice. Come to think of it, Clifton offered this as an option on his retractable bipod stocks. (Is he still in operation? Glad you mentioned his name--I couldn't recall it before.)
I use a nine-loop butt cuff on my Savage, and it is okay but could be better. Man I know has made up two SRs for himself, and he did a beautiful job of machining clip slots into the actions. Gonna see if I can get him to modify my Savage that way, and then I'd carry one stripper clip and perhaps four separately looped cartridges on the butt cuff.
This is an interesting topic, Morgan and others. Please accept my comments as they are intended--General discourse and respectful exchange- - Not argument, and certainly not personal reflections.
Best,
Johnny
Caesar1--thanks for the references and reminders–
My copy of To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth went astray at some point.
My memory of the listing of "Scout Rifle Characteristics" was that a lot of things were mentioned as "nice to have," but that most of 'em were secondary. The real essentials were handiness (including length and weight,) adequate power, and speed of use. EITHER a proper iron sight system, a forward mount scope, or, better still, a combination of these.
My first recollection of the SR discussion is that it almost always included some illustration of the item Jeff Cooper termed "Scout II," IIRC. A Remington 600 with a forward mount scope and a CW sling. No bipod, no clip loading, and certainly no stainless barrel.
I'd very much like to have a good, stiff-but-lightweight Clifton stock with integral bipod on a scout rifle. Maybe the major point that has stuck in my mind was Jeff's
My main experience with sporting rifle bipods has been with the Harris product. Very nifty for the dedicated varmint rifle, surely, but also heavy, noisy, clumsy, and constantly getting hung up on foliage. Not at all up to Jeff's specs.
Oh, yes--I did have an H&K light bipod on an HK91, and it folded (almost) out of the way.
One thing I do NOT understand is the necessity, or even desirability, of high capacity magazines in the SR. Some pretty nice pseudo scouts have been made up on the SMLE platform, which includes the ten shot mag. Riflemen the world over have appreciated the Enfield for a century. But, it originated as a BATTLE rifle, while the SR is an all around piece. Short, compact, lightweight. Adding a lengthy magazine at the balance point of such a piece impedes one of the most comfortable (non-slung) modes of carry. Please recall, with the long barrel and hand guards, the SMLE, the 1888 Mauser, and some other MILITARY rifles had a balance point rather further forward.
The SR is NOT a piece for a sustained battle. If used in an anti-personnel role, the discussion USED to be one shot, maybe two, then relocate and reload. The military or guerilla scout's main job was to look, see, return and report, NOT to engage in patched battle. MIGHT he get cornered, trapped, wounded? Sure--But he has thereby failed in his mission, and it is unlikely an extra five shots in the magazine would change the eventual outcome.
The way I understand the origin of long magazines for bolt action rifles was for aerial use in WW-I. And a balloon observer or backseater in an aeroplane really didn't have to carry his rifle very far.
I like having reserve ammo right with the rifle. The sliding-lid ammo box, just ahead of the rear sling stud, is excellent for the "shoot one, load one" practice. Come to think of it, Clifton offered this as an option on his retractable bipod stocks. (Is he still in operation? Glad you mentioned his name--I couldn't recall it before.)
I use a nine-loop butt cuff on my Savage, and it is okay but could be better. Man I know has made up two SRs for himself, and he did a beautiful job of machining clip slots into the actions. Gonna see if I can get him to modify my Savage that way, and then I'd carry one stripper clip and perhaps four separately looped cartridges on the butt cuff.
This is an interesting topic, Morgan and others. Please accept my comments as they are intended--General discourse and respectful exchange- - Not argument, and certainly not personal reflections.
Best,
Johnny
This definition, when you stay with the iron sights, can be filled by the 30/30 lever actions (Winchester 94 & Marlin 336). This idea is not original to me but comes from a conversation I had with the late Bruce Nelson. He brought it up to the Colonel and told me Cooper got irritated at the slight to his concept. Bruce thought the tried and true "30/30" did everything Cooper wanted and I tend to agree with him.
PS: I got a chance to handle and shoot Cooper's original (the 600 with the Leupold 2X pistol scope) in 1978 and built one on a 600 a couple years later. I wasn't all that taken with the idea after playing with it for a while but I think it is a matter of personal tast and preference. YMMV.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Winchester 94's with forward mounted pistol scopes are really the first Scouts, the first one I saw was in the 60's. It was necessary due to the top eject. You either had to forward mount or side mount. The forward mounted scope is not new or even Coopers idea, the Germans used this type of scope set up on some 98's in WWII.
hate to bring up a dead thread but...
Hey ya'lls
Just wondering if anyone knew who make the scope mount for savage on the 10fcm. I'm looking to get a 10fcm and thinking about switching out the mount if it's a cheap one for an XS mount. Also, anyone know who's got a good price on one of these? I've heard of people getting them for around 400, but the best I seem to find it 450 before s&h and transfer fee, which puts it at about 500. How hard is it to put on a third sling swivle (sp?)?
Thanks,
Nismofun
Hey ya'lls
Just wondering if anyone knew who make the scope mount for savage on the 10fcm. I'm looking to get a 10fcm and thinking about switching out the mount if it's a cheap one for an XS mount. Also, anyone know who's got a good price on one of these? I've heard of people getting them for around 400, but the best I seem to find it 450 before s&h and transfer fee, which puts it at about 500. How hard is it to put on a third sling swivle (sp?)?
Thanks,
Nismofun
- Status
