Cooper's advice on the Scout Rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Delmar wrote;
"The esteemed Mr Cooper has talked his way into a corner more than once. At one time, the 1911A1 was dangerous for the user because of the dreaded grip safety which could get you killed.

The D&D 10MM was another well known item. The cartridge is a workhorse and will do likely most anything you want it to if you know how to shoot the weapon, but when the Bren Ten died, ole Coop took off for the 1911A1 camp and has been extolling its virtues ever since. The only thing that changed was his mind-not the 1911A1."

______________________________________________

Jeff Cooper was an advocate of the 1911 pistol, as a personal sidearm, LONG before the Bren 10 was even a blip on the radar. Way back in the 1960's, Cooper was so closely associated with the 1911 that I think he can be given the lion's share of the credit for its popularity today.

In the late 1970's/early 1980's Cooper became impressed with the CZ-75. He wrote glowingly of the pistol, but complained that it was only available in 9mm. Cooper came up with the concept of a slightly scaled up CZ-75 in a 10mm chambering. Dornaus and Dixon attempted to bring such an item to market and failed. There was no "taking off for the 1911A1 camp" by "ole Coop", as it was a camp he had never left. The 1911 was his tool of choice. The Bren 10 was intended to be a forward step from that standard.

As to the 1911's grip safety, Cooper has written several times about how he (and about 25% of his students) have trouble reliably depressing the grip safety when using a proper "high thumb" grip. He has noted that those who experience this difficulty shoudl deactivate their grip safety and that new pistol designs would do well to not include this dubious feature. He certainly has never luridly condemned the grip safety as being "dreaded".

Delmar; it really doesn't appear that you've read Cooper carefully, thoroughly, and over the many years he has been writing. What people THINK they know about Cooper's opinions is often not exactly what he wrote.

As to the Steyr Scout and the scout rifle concept in general; I do not think it is nearly as significant as the advances Cooper made in pistolcraft. Also, the scout is not a range rifle. Its positive attributes of light weight and compactness can best be appreciated when afield, in difficult terrain. They are not as noticeable when carrying the rifle from the range parking lot to the firing line.

The scout scope concept is being "proved" by its close cousin, the forward-mounted, no magnification red-dot sights being used by the US military. Running the "scope" well forward and shooting with both eyes open is working out well with the miltary's Aimpoints and EOTech sights.

Anyway, no one is forced to buy a Scout or to keep it if they try it and find it wanting. Cooper has given shooters another choice in weaponry that might well appeal to them. For that, he is to be congratulated.

Rosco
 
Scout snobbery...

Cooper knows his stuff, and on a lot of subjects other than guns. I go along with him on most of what he says, but we part company on .45's and 'scout rifles'.

He likes the 1911, I like the Sig 220. I carried the 1911 for decades and for a time I believed it was the best of the breed. I had maybe a dozen over 25 years and shot them all extensively. Out of the group, 2 were reliable without a lot of tinkering. I can recall 3 that were really good shooters, 4" or less at 50 yards. The bar-Sto Commander would crowd 2", but wasn't reliable.

Then I discovered the Sig 220- a 28 oz., roughly Commander-size carry gun with a decent 'right now' trigger, no safeties to fumble with, and accuracy under 4" @ 50 with good ammo- right out of the box. I honestly can't remember the last time I saw one jammed; this one never has. I could have bought a couple of these just with what I spent trading for all those 1911's, and getting them to a) work, and b) shoot well. I'm happy, and have no desire to go back to the '11. They are cool old guns, but for my nickel the Sig is a much better gun. Sorry Jeff, but it's time to move on.

Rifles? As long as your eyes will tolerate aperture sights, take any old 'post deer season' trade-in sporter in .270/.308/.30-06, put a decent aperture sight and a fine bead on it, and mount a good sling. Sight it in for about +2.5" @ 100 yards. Depending on the individual rifle, you might want to clean the trigger up a bit. Pick ONE load and shoot the devil out of it at 50-300 yards until you know where it hits. If you are grossly offended by a 22" barrel, bob it off at 19"-20", remount a front sight, & repeat above procedure.

The fact is, there's an old 7400 Remington in the corner that wears a set of Williams guides, and shoots almost as good as any bolt gun I ever owned. It has lived on a steady diet of H4895 reloads for the last 3 years and has never choked.

Either of the above rifles will do anything I'll ever need to do. I couldn't care less if they don't meet some idealized standard of weight or configuration, or cost more than Joe's rifle down the road. All it's gotta do is SHOOT, and if it does that cheaper, it's just icing on the cake. The Savage Scout is about perfect by my standards, but I personally wouldn't give a rat's a$$ for a pistol scope on a rifle. Makes about as much sense as having S&W revolver sights on a 700 Remington to me.

I don't have a thing against gun writers, and they have kept me well-entertained for years. Jeff Copper is an old favorite, and we should treasure him while he's with us. However good he is, I don't need him to do my thinking for me. I made it a point to try to spend as much time shooting/hunting as I have reading about it, and the opinions I have formed are based in experience. What works for Coop don't necessarily work for me.

Writers, by protocol, sell guns. This is a good thing to remember when you're reading the most recent iteration of anybody's work- except mine, of course. I ain't selling anything at this particular moment in time.

Take care-
 
Rosco Benson


I've been reading Jeff Cooper since the late 1950's-how far does your library go? I still have some printed articles from the early 60's so don't assume I am leaving things out or am adding things in.
 
Quite frankly, I find the Scout concept, and its application by Steyr, to be somewhat lacking from a sheer practicality stand point.

I'm not sure why the good Col. has carried this on for the past 20 or so years, but I really think it's just a minor joke on his part.
 
I think the basic scout concept has validity, with a few caveats.

I concluded years ago that it was unlikely one could find a rifle that could address multiple close threats with alacrity, while also being able to neutralize very long range or obscured targets well...and still having the capability to drop very large game responsibly. I believe the Scout Rifle is a different name for the "Ranch Rifle" mission: a handy platform to deal with occasional threats or targets of opportunity. It does a great job of a few tasks, and an okay job of many.

I do have a modified 12 GA Mossberg with GR sights, tritium front dot, Teflon finish, light rail, and forward-mounted scope. I also have a 6mm "Cub Scout" built on an 1891 Mauser action...unfortunately, the gunsmith buggered it up. I expect to pay somewhere in the 400-500$ neighborhood to repair the deficiencies.

I shot Glamdring's SS a few years ago. It was obviously an extremely accurate rifle, just way overpriced and ugly as homemade sin.


John
 
Does anyone else fail to see a reason a light, short barreled rifle of moderate accuracy needs to be expensive?


I guess weight issue can always drive costs up, but the Scout isn't that light.

This thing would be no big deal if mass produced, as long as 1.5 MOA is okay. The Steyr is neat, but is really taking a GP/survival rifle too far.
 
I really like the scout concept, so I got a pseudo-scout. It's based on a large-ring Mauser, is in .308, has a 19" barrel, a Leupold scout scope, and a Parker-Hale trigger. At the moment it's at the smith's getting a threaded muzzle, stripper clip guide, and conversion to use FAL magazines. I'd put about 50 or 60 rounds through it before the smith got it, and I really like it. It's fast, light, and much more potent than my Daewoo. Shooting 100-yard snapshots at paper plates was no big deal. Better yet, it's got bolt-action reliability, which is a big plus over a semi (try clearing a double-feed in a FAL and a Mauser, and you'll see what I mean:) ). After it's finished (should be soon) I plan to take it through as many classes as I can afford (which isn't many, unfortunately) and get to be really good with it. It should make an excellent take anywhere, do almost anything rifle.
 
Delmar wrote;
"Rosco Benson
I've been reading Jeff Cooper since the late 1950's-how far does your library go? I still have some printed articles from the early 60's so don't assume I am leaving things out or am adding things in."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have Cooper articles and books going back to the 1960's. Since you do as well, I must assume that your recollection of what you read is in error or that you are just inaccurately paraphrasing what you did read. Cite for me any instance of Cooper refering to the 1911's grip safety as "dreaded". I also think that any objective reading of his writings will show that he has remained steadfastly in the "1911 camp", though he did consider the Bren 10 a forward step. Cooper considered the CZ-75 and HK's P7 as forward steps too...limited by their 9mm chambering. He also favorably commented on a couple gas-operated prototypes from Husqvarna (though these were chambered for 9mm, Cooper saw the potential of the action of these pistols being used to contain the pressures associated with driving a hard, small bullet to rifle-like velocities. In this sense, he anticipated FN's FiveSeven pistol).

Cooper writes clearly, but different readers may interpret a given article differently. Still, I stand by my original comments that Cooper has never abandoned the 1911 for the next big thing and then run back to the 1911 camp, as you contend. Likewise, he has objectively reported on the problems that some users have with the 1911's grip safety and noted how to deal with same...but I have never seen him carry on as if it were a death trap to ensnare the unwary (his scorn of the slide-mounted safety/decocker of various DA/SA pistols...the "dingus"...has been much more emphatic! Don't get caught with your dingus down, being the watch-word).

If we recognize that Cooper was an experimenter and that his grasp of the subject of weaponcraft grew throughout his active career, then I can think of no instances wherein he "talked his way into a corner". By the way, his active career is not over. When I last saw him in February at the SHOT show, he was looking for a publisher for a new manuscript and, although his body is somewhat broken down from 80+ years of living, his mind is still incisive, inquisative, and busy with his life's work.

You are, of course, free to form whatever opinions you wish about Cooper's work. Though I've read most all of his writing, I have yet to encounter the inconsistancies that you seem to contend it is rife with. Perhaps you would care to point them out to me, with actual quotations and citations of where these things were written....or perhaps not.

Rosco
 
I gotta weigh in on Roscoe's side on this one, although I haven't been reading the Colonel's writings as long. Mr. Cooper has always been a 1911 proponent, even saying that all the 10 MM gives you is more power and range.

Michael
 
Sarge, I've never messed with any 1911 newer than a Series 70. I've had (ain't sure) maybe a couple of dozen, in my gunshow horse-trading and such, over the last 40 years. I've yet to have a 1911 not work quite adequately for a self-defense type of usage: Relatively short range, to 15 or 20 yards; hit within a 4" or 6" target area.

Reliability has never, ever, been any sort of problem. Not in plinking, not in IPSC back in the early 1980s. Not with box-stock guns, nor with my "tweaked" critters.

I dunno. Some folks maybeso have a little black cloud, or they've made an enemy of Mr. Murphy. :(

But whatever works is good...

Art
 
Art...

I think the Sig has spoiled me on both the issues of reliability and accuracy. I want the gun to virtually never jam, and shoot 'minute of noggin' to 50 yards- right to the sights. I guess it all comes down to what we each consider 'reliable' or 'accurate' enough.

If you've never had anything newer that a 70 Series that means you missed the '80 Series' which probably contributes greatly to your high opinion of the product. If I had never owned any of those, my opinion of them would probably be a lot higher, too.

In the end, I agree with you entirely. 'Whatever works' truly is good..
 
The "grapevine" word I heard about the Series 80 was that quality control went all to garbage.

Wasn't it the Series 70 that first came out with that weird four-fingered collet bushing? I always made those go to the scrap bin. Otherwise, they always worked okay. My preference is the old stuff, and I'm happy if they're sorta rusty and boogered up. Cheaper to buy, easy to fix up.

I've never minded working over a 1911 to make it "just right" for me. Sorta like tweakin' a small block Chevy: It's just way too easy. :)

Come to think of it, I don't guess I've ever seen a factory anything that didn't look like to me it needed a bit of help. :D

Art
 
"Wasn't it the Series 70 that first came out with that weird four-fingered collet bushing? I always made those go to the scrap bin."

The collet bushing was known for being prone to failure. Mac Scott, of Scott McDougal, once told me he had a small bin of broken collet bushings. When one of the fingers broke off, as often as not it cause a difficult to clear jam. He always replaced them with a solid bushing.
 
What if I bring a "Scout Striker" into it? Do we have a "hand rifle" section? :)
 
To get back to the topic, one of the things that Cooper doesn't like about the Savage Scout is that it doesn't fit the criteria for being called a "Scout" rifle, but Savage still calls it that. A real "Scout" rifle as defined by Cooper is supposed to be 3 Kg or less in weight - complete with scope, sling , magazine and bipod (the bipod is optional); but without ammo. The Savage Scout is 1/2 lb too heavy to fit Coopers criteria, so he doesn't like that Savage even calls it a "Scout" rifle. Most "psuedo-Scouts" are also too heavy, I don't know of any standard rifle actions that allow a true "Scout" rifle to be built other than Remington's titanium bolt action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top