Show off your Scout Rifle

chicharrones said:

I still own an early Ruger GSR with a 17.25" barrel. I couldn't care less if it meets scout criteria these days, it's just a solid all around rifle no matter if it has a forward mounted optic on it or not. I've tried 2x and 4x forward mount scopes and receiver mounted 1.5-5x and 2-7x scopes. It currently wears no optic.

My favorite scout styled rifle is my shortened Zastava in .22 WMR, with storage for 18 cartridges in the self-made trapdoor. I went from a red dot, to a 2x scope, to the current 4x Weaver on that Zastava. 4x is well suited to that gun.

View attachment 1035455

View attachment 1035456

View attachment 1035457

Click to expand...

I somehow missed the Zastava in .22Mag. Again, I like the .22 concept, especially in .22mag. The only "problem" !!! I see with the WMR is that as far as I know, no one makes any really-very-low powered ammo for small game. I know there was some reduced loads, but nothing like the .22LR CCI "Quiets" where you can take rabbits and grouse, or squirrels with almost no noise. My long barreled "Hawthorn Warrior" shoots those .22 Quiets with about the same report as a good air rifle.

I realize that a non-expanding .22 mag will take small game cleanly with a well placed shot, but again I'm thinking situations where you want to minimize noise. If CCI made a .22mag "quiet" with a 750fps velocity, man I'd rush out and get me a .22 mag rifle. Might get another Little Badger in .22 mag anyhow.

I suppose you can shoot .22WRF in them, or so I've heard, but even those are louder/more powerful than a .22LR. You and Craig got it going on with the .22 Scouts.

Anyhow, yeah that is also a very cool rifle.

westernrover said:

It's always been a solution looking for a problem.

Conceptually, it's not that far removed from a carbine. In that sense, Cooper wasn't really engendering anything truly novel. In the ways it differs from a carbine, the original Scout concept is comprised of choices from among comprises that were available at the time. Since then, a lot of things have improved and the Scout concept as it differs from a carbine is obsolete in the sense that it offers no practical merit over the alternatives. Notice that anyone who tries to explain its purpose inevitably refers to it as some kind of "general purpose" rifle, in vague terms without ever being specific about its practical application -- because it has none.

Click to expand...

Yea, but marketing often trumps a good design. "Scout Rifle" just sounds way cooler and more masculine than a ho-hum "general purpose rifle."

Ugly Sauce said:

I somehow missed the Zastava in .22Mag. Again, I like the .22 concept, especially in .22mag. The only "problem" !!! I see with the WMR is that as far as I know, no one makes any really-very-low powered ammo for small game. I know there was some reduced loads, but nothing like the .22LR CCI "Quiets" where you can take rabbits and grouse, or squirrels with almost no noise. My long barreled "Hawthorn Warrior" shoots those .22 Quiets with about the same report as a good air rifle.

I realize that a non-expanding .22 mag will take small game cleanly with a well placed shot, but again I'm thinking situations where you want to minimize noise. If CCI made a .22mag "quiet" with a 750fps velocity, man I'd rush out and get me a .22 mag rifle. Might get another Little Badger in .22 mag anyhow.

I suppose you can shoot .22WRF in them, or so I've heard, but even those are louder/more powerful than a .22LR. You and Craig got it going on with the .22 Scouts.

Anyhow, yeah that is also a very cool rifle.

Click to expand...

Besides .22 WRF, there is .22 WMR made in a subsonic version. I have yet to buy any to try out, though.
https://winchester.com/Products/Ammunition/Rimfire/Super-X/X22MSUB



Speaking of .22 WRF, I like this old story. Just an excerpt referring to the gun, the entire read is much longer.

"Woods carried a small bolt action rifle....the barrel was very short...probably not legal, but no one cared in those days about barrel length....like that has anything to do with inducing criminal acts anyway. It was a single shot, I remember that, but not what brand or model. I’m sure it was a 22RF first and he opened it to the larger 22 WRF (45 grain soft lead bullet in a case a little shorter than today’s 22 Magnum RF)."

from - https://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/survival.htm

I started out doing this up as a scout,







but ended up swapping over to the red dot.








I do love the concept of the forward mounted optic, and the good field of view it gets me, but with the very small level of magnification the traditional scout scopes give, the speed, and forgiving eyebox of the red dot just makes a lot more sense. If (and I did try) you go with a variable scout scope, you just end up changing your face around too much chasing the right relief anyhow. Of course, this old war horse doesn't exactly make weight if we're trying to keep with the original specs, nor is the .303 British as easy to find these days as would be the recommended .308Win, but I just love the classic lines of the old No4 rifles. I love the looks so much, I tried my best to keep them, even though this thing was shortened to 16.5". In fact, after replacing the buttstock with a more modern stock to get a more comfy grip, I even thinned, and reprofiled the ass end of it to fit the original brass buttplate to it. As she sits right now, she handles very fast because of both the quick Lee Enfield action, and the "nothing is faster" red dot sight. I would be confident taking anything in North America with this rifle were I in range. Hell, I would almost be comfy taking it to battle, not that I ever want to do that again...

@Space Ghost Every time you post your rifle I say to myself, "I need to find a Enfield to replicate that," that looks like about the handiest rifle out there.

What did you do/use for your pic mount?

There has also been such a thing (and it's a growing trend) as a "lever scout" where people use the forward mounted optic on lever guns. Here also, I went with the red dot as my optic of choice because of the speed of engagement. This gun is not a long distance one being a .44 magnum, but the concept could be used on a 30-30. It is still great for scouting around though. Light, fast, and easy to carry all day, plus anything within 100 or 150 yards of me can be made dead quick, fast, and in a hurry.

Space Ghost said:

I started out doing this up as a scout,

View attachment 1035977





but ended up swapping over to the red dot.


View attachment 1035978





I do love the concept of the forward mounted optic, and the good field of view it gets me, but with the very small level of magnification the traditional scout scopes give, the speed, and forgiving eyebox of the red dot just makes a lot more sense. If (and I did try) you go with a variable scout scope, you just end up changing your face around too much chasing the right relief anyhow. Of course, this old war horse doesn't exactly make weight if we're trying to keep with the original specs, nor is the .303 British as easy to find these days as would be the recommended .308Win, but I just love the classic lines of the old No4 rifles. I love the looks so much, I tried my best to keep them, even though this thing was shortened to 16.5". In fact, after replacing the buttstock with a more modern stock to get a more comfy grip, I even thinned, and reprofiled the ass end of it to fit the original brass buttplate to it. As she sits right now, she handles very fast because of both the quick Lee Enfield action, and the "nothing is faster" red dot sight. I would be confident taking anything in North America with this rifle were I in range. Hell, I would almost be comfy taking it to battle, not that I ever want to do that again...

Click to expand...

They say: "beware of the man with one gun", but I say: "beware of the man with THAT gun!

chicharrones said:

Besides .22 WRF, there is .22 WMR made in a subsonic version. I have yet to buy any to try out, though.
https://winchester.com/Products/Ammunition/Rimfire/Super-X/X22MSUB

Click to expand...

With the sub-sonic craze, I bet there is some .22mag sub-sonic out there. When they brought out the reduced loads some years back, I heard a lot of complaining about it. "If you want .22LR ballistics, just use a .22LR". ! Yeah right. Just carry two rifles around. Anyhow...

Most sub sonics loads I've noticed are usually right around 1000fps, maybe a bit less. I'd like to see some loads reduced way below that. However, I suppose one could just outfit the rifle with a suppressor, and be more "quiet" yet with the sub-sonic loads. I've been wanting a suppressor for my .22 Hornet anyhow, I could use one for both. If my snowmobile sells, I could certainly finance a rifle like yours or Cliff's, and a suppressor to fit both it and the Hornet. That's my story anyhow, and I may or may not stick to it.

Space Ghost said:

but ended up swapping over to the red dot.

View attachment 1035978

Click to expand...

Space Ghost said:

There has also been such a thing (and it's a growing trend) as a "lever scout" where people use the forward mounted optic on lever guns. Here also, I went with the red dot as my optic of choice because of the speed of engagement.

View attachment 1035984

Click to expand...

I agree. Red dots work better for me when shooting quickly, compared to a fixed 2x scope. At least from my own experience using both types on bolt and lever guns.

Ugly Sauce said:

I like it and the concept. Nice and quiet. I've often thought that something like that in .22Mag would be a little better for anti-people use, and maybe taking down a small deer, although there is some nice and hot .22LR on the market. I like the Aguila .22LR "Interceptors". I carry both those and the CCI "Quiet" when out exploring with my Little Badger in .22LR. The "Quiets" for small game, and the Aguila for Wolf repellent.

Anyhow nice rifle and set-up nicely. And in either caliber, pair it with a good combat pistol that one could shoot well out to 100 yards, and plenty spare high capacity magazines, and I would not exclude it as a "scout rifle" because of it's caliber.

Click to expand...

I can see a lot of utility in either one. My .22Mag version is the "Go Wild" and it does not have iron sights. It 'could' kinda do dual duty with the Winchester 45gr subsonics that are tackdriver in this rifle but they're not cheap. The new 15rd mags certainly don't hurt either.

Space Ghost said:

There has also been such a thing (and it's a growing trend) as a "lever scout" where people use the forward mounted optic on lever guns. Here also, I went with the red dot as my optic of choice because of the speed of engagement. This gun is not a long distance one being a .44 magnum, but the concept could be used on a 30-30. It is still great for scouting around though. Light, fast, and easy to carry all day, plus anything within 100 or 150 yards of me can be made dead quick, fast, and in a hurry.
View attachment 1035984

Click to expand...

I went that route for a short-range deer & hog lever carbine in .45-70 (18" Marlin SBL):



Optic is a Burris 2.75x Scout; 2-pt MS1 sling; old Eagle stock pak.

Ugly Sauce said:

With the sub-sonic craze, I bet there is some .22mag sub-sonic out there. When they brought out the reduced loads some years back, I heard a lot of complaining about it. "If you want .22LR ballistics, just use a .22LR". ! Yeah right. Just carry two rifles around. Anyhow...

Most sub sonics loads I've noticed are usually right around 1000fps, maybe a bit less. I'd like to see some loads reduced way below that. However, I suppose one could just outfit the rifle with a suppressor, and be more "quiet" yet with the sub-sonic loads. I've been wanting a suppressor for my .22 Hornet anyhow, I could use one for both. If my snowmobile sells, I could certainly finance a rifle like yours or Cliff's, and a suppressor to fit both it and the Hornet. That's my story anyhow, and I may or may not stick to it.

Click to expand...

This reminds me of one of my other side interests: English Rook and Rabbit Rifles. Before the .22 LR became the small game king, the Brits had a number of smallish-bore centerfire cartridges with ballistics that roughly correspond with small-bore pistol cartridges. While more expensive to shoot per round than the small rimfires (at least in normal times!), the approach lends itself to heavier bullets at subsonic velocities, providing a reasonably quiet alternative to suppressors. I eventually put together my own dedicated small game rifle of this sort by having a custom-bored .38 Super barrel mated to my NEF SB2 single shot:



I also considered this idea with my Mauser Scout rifle project, and bought my first 'auxiliary chamber' for shooting .32 ACP in .308. This was one of the Marbles-type design, like this one for 30-06:



The idea was that one could put the adapter and a dozen or so rounds of .32 ACP into a pocket for sniping small game targets of opportunity out to around 20 yards or so, with one rifle serving for both tasks and with less chance of spooking big game.

I never got around to actually trying this idea in the field, but more recently I've been experimenting with chamber adapters in old milsurp bolt guns and single shots at my local indoor range with fairly good results. This range only offers a maximum distance of 19 yards, but with tailored handloads the groups appear adequate for squirrel or rabbit. With the right bullets, accuracy is surprising -- the groups shown in this short video were shot through oversized 7.92x57 barrels:



It would be interesting to compare the 'poot' noise of one of my .32 H&R wadcutters from a 20"+ rifle barrel against a suppressed .22LR. Sadly, I live in the wrong state to find out.

Using the platform of a semi-auto to build a 'Scout rifle' (SR) is also a thing, despite that most, when finished, won't 'make weight' under Cooper's strict poundage requirement (which changed over the years). The trade-off of incurring more weight with the semi-auto action over the bolt-platform is arguably worth it in terms of resulting field-performance.

Brain Sheetz, currently Editor-in-Chief of Am. Rifleman, makes exactly that argument:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2017/4/20/the-self-loading-scout-rifle-worth-its-weight/

Having tried both types of 'Scout' platforms, I tend to agree with Sheetz.

Among the possible semi-auto platforms out there to serve for a Scout build, I've used the M1 Garand action. And while there are many examples of full-size M1s set-up in 'Scout' fashion, I prefer them 'chopped' to either 18.25" 'Tanker' length or Shuff's 16.1" Mini-G for three reasons: first these shorter M1 variants are lighter, always a good thing among SR philosophers. Second, for the hunting ranges in my neck of the woods, shots on game are rarely over 150-yds and typically inside 100-yds. So essentially that's 'bush gun/brush gun' range, exactly where a handy, easily maneuverable, quickly pointed, punchy carbine shines.

.30-06 Tanker Scout:



.308 Mini-G in the field:



The third reason is that the M1, not having the feature of an evil detachable box magazine, remains 50-states legal. And where a particular state's hunting regs restrict the magazine capacity of an otherwise legal semi-auto, 5-rd 'hunting' clips are available.

Sheetz seems to agree on the suitability of the 'modernized' M1-platform for typical Scout rifle usages, but also appears unaware of the shorter variants, either of which when set up identicallly would be lighter on the weight scale than a full-size M1.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/building-a-modernized-m1-garand/

Ugly Sauce said:

They say: "beware of the man with one gun", but I say: "beware of the man with THAT gun!

Click to expand...

That "one gun" quote is what I was thinking about when I had it done up... lol. My Lee Enfield Scout is the last gun I'd ever give up. Even after my ARs.

I will admit though, after the last shoulder surgery on my left side, it's getting rather difficult to hold the heavy beast up compared to lighter guns like my levergun or my ARs. I have to raise, shoot, and lower it. At this point, I'm pretty much keeping it because I love it, and so my son will get it when I get dead.

Also had his Mosin done up similar...

Space Ghost said:

That "one gun" quote is what I was thinking about when I had it done up... lol. My Lee Enfield Scout is the last gun I'd ever give up. Even after my ARs.

I will admit though, after the last shoulder surgery on my left side, it's getting rather difficult to hold the heavy beast up compared to lighter guns like my levergun or my ARs. I have to raise, shoot, and lower it. At this point, I'm pretty much keeping it because I love it, and so my son will get it when I get dead.

Also had his Mosin done up similar...

View attachment 1036164

Click to expand...

Well that SMLE is something else. Being a true, dedicated, long time SMLE fan and kind of a "collector", it got my attention. Best of all, I have a gun show special Longbranch No.4 that the barrel has been chopped, that I was going to make into a "Jungle Carbine". But no luck finding the kits. But, while searching for a No.5 "kit", I see there is plenty of wood and hardware for the No.4 rifle on the market at reasonable prices. I believe I can make something much like yours for not too much $$$. And, I already have a "bogus" JC that I made from another "sporterized" No.4 gun show special.

A man with such a rifle, four or five spare loaded magazines, and a bandolier or two of ammo on stripper clips would be no joke, regardless of how fancy of an AR or AK his enemy had. Sure, on a one-way shooting range, engaged in a timed contest under controlled conditions, the AR/AK/ would win. In "real life", be careful how much you bet! And beware of the man behind the rifle, not the rifle it's self. !!!

I like the M44. It's my favorite for a truck or "trunk gun" for when I plan to stray or wander more than 50 miles from home. The FR8, Jungle Carbine, and the M85 Styer Carbine I also like for that, but for some reason the M44 is usually in the ready-to-go slot or position for that duty.

Dave DeLaurant said:

This reminds me of one of my other side interests: English Rook and Rabbit Rifles. Before the .22 LR became the small game king, the Brits had a number of smallish-bore centerfire cartridges with ballistics that roughly correspond with small-bore pistol cartridges. While more expensive to shoot per round than the small rimfires (at least in normal times!), the approach lends itself to heavier bullets at subsonic velocities, providing a reasonably quiet alternative to suppressors. I eventually put together my own dedicated small game rifle of this sort by having a custom-bored .38 Super barrel mated to my NEF SB2 single shot:

View attachment 1036149

I also considered this idea with my Mauser Scout rifle project, and bought my first 'auxiliary chamber' for shooting .32 ACP in .308. This was one of the Marbles-type design, like this one for 30-06:

View attachment 1036146

The idea was that one could put the adapter and a dozen or so rounds of .32 ACP into a pocket for sniping small game targets of opportunity out to around 20 yards or so, with one rifle serving for both tasks and with less chance of spooking big game.

I never got around to actually trying this idea in the field, but more recently I've been experimenting with chamber adapters in old milsurp bolt guns and single shots at my local indoor range with fairly good results. This range only offers a maximum distance of 19 yards, but with tailored handloads the groups appear adequate for squirrel or rabbit. With the right bullets, accuracy is surprising -- the groups shown in this short video were shot through oversized 7.92x57 barrels:



It would be interesting to compare the 'poot' noise of one of my .32 H&R wadcutters from a 20"+ rifle barrel against a suppressed .22LR. Sadly, I live in the wrong state to find out.

Click to expand...

For all practical purposes, I think the poot-noise would be fine. But I would guess that with a .22 sub-sonic load, or the CCI "Quiet", and a suppressor, that all one would hear would be a "click". ? Funny you should mention it, but my hunting partner's dad used to use the auxiliary chamber to take grouse successfully while hunting big game. He said it fired .32 Special, but I thought most of those were in .32acp. ?

Those groups you got are certainly "minute of grouse/rabbit/squirrel. My question is: how far off is POI off from POA when sighted in for the full power cartridge?

Ugly Sauce said:

Those groups you got are certainly "minute of grouse/rabbit/squirrel. My question is: how far off is POI off from POA when sighted in for the full power cartridge?

Click to expand...

I too am interested in this, I'm always game for harvesting some "hunting pot" meals while big game hunting.

@Space Ghost would love to take a tour of your gun safe, you sir have great tastes on how to bring these old warhorses into the 21st century while maintaining their historical functions.

Ugly Sauce said:

My question is: how far off is POI off from POA when sighted in for the full power cartridge?

Click to expand...

Well, since I haven't had either rifle to the outdoor range or chronographed yet, I can't give you an answer. Both are currently zeroed for indoor distances. My gut feeling is that the two POAs won't be that far off, since both scopes are mounted pretty low over the bore.

In the case of the ZF-41, it has a BDC of sorts that moves the reticle vertically using a graduated ring. The zeroing idiosyncrasies of this scope are so frustrating that I don't really care whether the elevation is correct, as long as I've finally got the windage about right. If that means the reticle is positioned too far up or down at 200 yards with full power ammo, my plan is to just to learn how much to hold off. I understand that's how the Germans usually used it too.

As for the Husqvarna, the elevation will also be a surprise once I'll get to shoot it at any real distance. When that happens I'll re-zero for 200 and then learn the hold for closer range. FWIW, I took this scope off a vintage 30-06 Mauser that was zeroed at 200, and after remounting it just happened to be dead-on at 19 yards without any adjustment -- what are the odds?

I guess the thing to do is find one load that groups well for each purpose and then memorize your respective zeros. So far I've just got my subsonic .32 H&R load worked out.

My go to hunting rifle.

Dave DeLaurant said:

Well, since I haven't had either rifle to the outdoor range or chronographed yet, I can't give you an answer. Both are currently zeroed for indoor distances. My gut feeling is that the two POAs won't be that far off, since both scopes are mounted pretty low over the bore.

In the case of the ZF-41, it has a BDC of sorts that moves the reticle vertically using a graduated ring. The zeroing idiosyncrasies of this scope are so frustrating that I don't really care whether the elevation is correct, as long as I've finally got the windage about right. If that means the reticle is positioned too far up or down at 200 yards with full power ammo, my plan is to just to learn how much to hold off. I understand that's how the Germans usually used it too.

As for the Husqvarna, the elevation will also be a surprise once I'll get to shoot it at any real distance. When that happens I'll re-zero for 200 and then learn the hold for closer range. FWIW, I took this scope off a vintage 30-06 Mauser that was zeroed at 200, and after remounting it just happened to be dead-on at 19 yards without any adjustment -- what are the odds?

I guess the thing to do is find one load that groups well for each purpose and then memorize your respective zeros. So far I've just got my subsonic .32 H&R load worked out.

Click to expand...

I suppose POI and POA wouldn't be much different. Probably no issue with windage. Back when I used to hunt with the 7.7, I got pretty good at taking the heads off of grouse by holding the cross-hairs about an inch over said grouse's head. I imagine I was getting pretty good at scaring off any deer within a quarter mile too. Had a few friends that didn't know the "trick", and would try putting the cross hairs on the head, and of course blow the bird to smitherenes.

Dave DeLaurant said:

I never got around to actually trying this idea in the field, but more recently I've been experimenting with chamber adapters in old milsurp bolt guns and single shots at my local indoor range with fairly good results. This range only offers a maximum distance of 19 yards, but with tailored handloads the groups appear adequate for squirrel or rabbit. With the right bullets, accuracy is surprising -- the groups shown in this short video were shot through oversized 7.92x57 barrels:

Click to expand...

Where I live/hunt/explore, I've found that 99% of the small game I see or take are right around 15 yards, so 19-20 yards is just fine for load development and sighting in, for small game loads.

Ugly Sauce said:

Where I live/hunt/explore, I've found that 99% of the small game I see or take are right around 15 yards, so 19-20 yards is just fine for load development and sighting in, for small game loads.

Click to expand...

Yeah, true dat -- the last time I did much shooting at things with a pulse was back in the mid-1980s, when I tried to thin the ground squirrel (a.k.a rats with a press agent) population in an almond orchard my dad and I were tending. Trees were in rows about 6 yards apart, and three rows was my maximum distance to reliably hit the half of a squirrel sticking up out of a hole.

It's not a Scout rifle, but the Ruger Hawkeye Compact in stainless steel with a laminate stock is a gun I would certainly buy (in .308 Win) if it were available left handed. I'd throw a compact 2-7x on it and be a happy camper. It'd be nicer with an 18" barrel vs the 16.5" but nothing's perfect.