As I try to distract myself from the Wisconsin game I find myself thinking about scout rifles. I really like the idea, however everytime they are mentioned the only thing that comes out is how much the ruger scout rifle isn't a true scout rifle. Why is that? What makes one better than the other?
It's not really a question of better, just different.
A scout rifle is supposed to be light.
A Ruger GSR, is not light for a 308 carbine, especially in the laminated stock version. The barrel contour is also rather heavy.
A scout rifle is supposed to be handy.
Handiness is widely misunderstood, possibly because it's not quantifiable and because some guys only carry their rifles from the truck to the stand. It means that the rifle is easy to grasp and carry. A Scout rifle enhances handiness because the scope is out of the way, allowing the rifle to be grasped with one hand at the point of balance.
This is from an article in the 1984 Gun Digest,
The Scout Rifle Idea by Jeff Cooper, and it illustrates the concept clearly.
The Ruger detracts from handiness by having the magazine project far from the stock, putting the magazine exactly where the hand should be able to wrap around the stock. IMO, the long magazine and the flash hider were added to make the rifle resemble an M14. This has proven to be very popular and was no doubt a shrewd marketing move, but it detracts from being a good Scout rifle.
While the Ruger GSR is a useful rifle for some applications, it's a poor representation of Jeff Cooper's idea of a Scout. This has had two unfortunate consequences: Ruger, who is perfectly capable of building a
good Scout rifle, now won't and secondly, a lot of people now think the Ruger marketing department's offering is what a Scout rifle is supposed to be. If only they'd called it the "Tactical Thunder Bolt" or the "Truck Buddy" or something else.
Anything else.