How well armed would you be with a Savage Scout rifle-red dot and side arm?

[Dogbite]

Lets discuss this. Savage 308 Scout rife. Capacity is 4 rounds. Iron sights or EO tech type sight on it. You are also armed with side arm of your choice. How well armed is this person?? Thinking about a melt down type situation. Also thinking about it as an all purpose HD weapon. Assume no apartments/neighbors to worry about.

 

[steveracer]

Well armed enough to do what? Take back Poland? Probably not. Get some hunting done and reliably defend himself? Yep.
It's not a bad rifle, but under the described circumstances, I'd go with a levergun over the scout. In .357 or .44 the lever will outperform the scout in a defense scenario, and will still kill deer.
Better still, get a good shotgun and learn to shoot slugs. Skip the optic.

 

[HorseSoldier]

Not a decent gun-fighting rig at all, but in a Katrina sort of situation would be adequate to keep looters at bay, I would think.

 

[millertyme]

If you're talking about having to survive in the wild and hope to come across the ammo you need by chance I imagine a .308 in anything with a 9mm hi-cap auto would be just fine. however, I think I'm with steveracer on this in a SHTF scenario. I'd look for something close quarters type reliable with enough punch to put food on the table reliably. a lever-action pistol caliber (i'll take mine in .44 mag, por favor) would give you 9 rounds in the tube, plus the six in the hand-cannon on myour side, should you choose to pack said heat. like a miarlin 1894 and a S&W 629 in a 4". even then, I'd still want my 870 with an 8 shot tube full of 00 buck in a scabbard in addition.

 

[Float Pilot]

A rifleman with an old 30-30 that he shoots enough to be super proficient, will always be more dangerous to his adversaries than an occasional shooter with an AK and 10,000 rounds

 

[jbech123]

certainly it would work, but not the best thing going by any stretch. A 30-30 lever gun or an AR would be much better.

 

[jmr40]

I'm not sure the 30-30 would be any advantage. The Savage bolt rifle is lighter, about the same length and more accurate at distance. Once you learn how to shoot a bolt gun there is virtually no difference in how fast you can operate the action. The scout rifle holds more ammo with the extended mags available for it and can be reloaded faster with extra mags.

There are other guns that would cost less, and may be just as good, but it would not be a bad choice.

 

[BADUNAME37]

It all depends on how proficient you are with the guns.

 

[Smith357]

Lets just say that with my Winchester .30-06 and S&W .357 I would not feel under gunned in any survival situation. And in a combat scenario I would make sure to keep my distance. I'm too old to fight with them young-uns, just put me in the rear with the gear. I figure if I really felt the need for an AK or AR I could pick them up off the ground.

 

[woodybrighton2]

if you get into any prolonged firefight against multiple opponents even a belt fed
isn't going to help you

 

[ArmedBear]

Not a decent gun-fighting rig at all, but in a Katrina sort of situation would be adequate to keep looters at bay, I would think.

Yeah, but that'd be true of just about any light long gun you could name, from a Beretta Silver Pigeon to a Weatherby Mark V Ultralight.

First off, a red dot is good for, and is very popular, for just about two things: CQB with a carbine, and timed/rapid-fire competition with a pistol. Some turkey hunters like them, too, and some brush carbine hunters, mainly due to low light conditions in thick vegetation and twilight.

So, the EOTech would just be excess weight. It doesn't gain you range, and if you are involved in CQB of any sort, you're going to toss your bolt-action and grab your handgun anyway.

An IER scope would gain you some range without losing "pointability". I like them, some people don't.

The Savage push-feed action is about the second-to-last thing you'd ever want in a firefight (ahead of single-shot, but behind all other common actions, including a CRF bolt gun).

So, what you end up with is a short deer rifle. You can just get a deer rifle instead. A higher-powered scope will gain you effective range for deer, or for shooting from cover (SHTF only -- it's hard to imagine self-defense in normal circumstances that involves 250 yards shots from cover). That's what I'd want if I carried a bolt gun around, since I'm not going to get into a close-range fight in the open with a bolt gun in my hands.

If you want a multi-purpose manually-operated carbine, get a 7600 in .308, or a lever action. If you want self-defense capability, don't carry around a bolt rifle. I'd probably rather have two handguns than a handgun and a bolt gun. You shed weight, keep your hands free, and still have a backup.

The last serious recommendation for a bolt-action military rifle was from Elmer Keith (who worked for the US during WW II). And that was only because he'd been shooting pre-production prototype Garands at Camp Perry. They had REALLY BAD problems with POI shift. He liked the rapid fire, but only in a gun that could hit the enemy reliably. Of course, the Garand was fixed, and he spent much of the war working with the things.

Coopers Scout Rifle Conference was a fun little circle you-know-what for gun writers. I'm sure they had a good time. Does anyone know of a single military contract that looks remotely like the "Scout Rifle"? But even if you buy into all of what they wrote, the Savage doesn't meet the criteria for capacity or action design.

I happen to like IER scopes. I might get one at some point, for hunting. But that's all it'd be for.

 

[C-grunt]

Ive always thought that a good light bolt gun with iron sites in .223 or .308 would be a good survival weapon. Should be reliable, rugged and those two calibers are stockpiled in the millions all over the country.

Ive had my eye on the CZ .223 carbine for this weapon. That or one of the .308 Mausers.

In a big SHTF situation I want to be discrete and my tactics would be escape and evade. A good rifle with irons will still grant me good shots out to several hundred yards. If I need to engage it will be from the woodline at distance.

 

[JShirley]

Dogbite, you have to consider what your most likely or important use for a firearm is, and (if you have the option) get the firearm that meets that need.

If you have the funds, you want your usage/tactics to dictate your arms, not your tactics be forced upon your by your weaponry.

If you want very close-range defense (call it 1-49 meters), and that's your only priority, a .308 bolt-action isn't your best choice. Since you mention a red dot, you seem to be thinking of up close and personal. At those ranges, a slide action ("pump"), lever action, or autoloading rifle would be preferred.

If you want a short to medium (call it 1-125 meters) range tool, your choices are wide open. Any rifle type is accurate enough for those distances, so you have to consider your other priorities.

If you want a rifle with long-range capability that's also useful for short distance, you probably want a bolt-action with a 2x or 1.5-4x scope. There's a lot of variance- something like the Savage Scout you mention would be okay, if you want to cover the 1-450 meter envelope, but not with a short-range red dot sight. (I DON'T feel a sturdy bolt-action is much of a disadvantage in most situations, unless you are trying to stop an entire team of thugs inside your house. That doesn't seem like the most likely scenario to me.)

Do you plan to also hunt with this rifle? If so, what?
Do you see the potential need to make very accurate (less than 3") shots?
Is speed or accuracy more important to you?
How robust should this platform be?
How much power do you need or want?
Will ammunition availability be a major issue for you?

Is taking ethical taking of deer-sized game important to you? If so, you probably want a little more than .223.
Is penetration through hard materials important to you? Do you want this ability, or not? If so, you probably want something more powerful than 7.62x39mm. (.303, 7.62x51mm, .30-06, 7.62x54mm)

Personally, if I wanted a general purpose/disaster rifle, I'd get something like a CZ 527 in 7.62x39mm. You can use this to cleanly take deer out to 140 meters or so, and carrying it around in the woods will give you familiarity that will serve you well in an emergency. A good 2x scope will give you additional accuracy, and still be fast for closer ranges.
If you want a dedicated close-range defensive carbine, and have the funds, an AR-15 16" carbine or M-1 Carbine would be my first choice. If you don't have the funds, any lever-action carbine in at least .357 Magnum will work fine out to 100 meters or more. An SKS, with practice, could also be a good choice.
If you want a hunting rifle that could also be used defensively, any sturdy hunting rifle in at least .243, with a 1.5-4x scope would be a fine choice.

Examine your priorities before you do anything else. Do you want a dedicated close-range warfighter, or more of a general purpose arm? How sturdy do you want?

My disaster/general purpose rifles are a sporterized 1903 with scope, and an unscoped sporterized 1917. My dedicated defensive carbine is a 16" AR-15 with a 1.5-4x AccuPoint illuminated reticle. My precision rifle/long distance hammer is a highly customized FAL-type rifle, but I'm not really feeling the need for multiple fast shots at 600 meters, these days...

John

 

[ReadyontheRight]

I think I would go with an AR15 and a .45. Or an M1A or a Garand and a .45.

I like the Savage Scout for wandering in the woods and deer hunting, but it does not have the ability to use stripper clips - which it should. And the small box magazine does not lend itself mechanically or cost-wise to carry a bunch of loaded magazines.

Great rifle, but there are better for a societal melt-down. I also like the lever actions or shotguns mentioned above - mostly because they wouldn't freak non-gun people out as much as someone carrying an AR or AK.

 

[dom1104]

I agree. there is very little reason not to use an autoloader these days.

Magazines are just too much of an advantage to lose.

 

[Mr_Pale_Horse]

To well armed for cotillion, but not well armed enough for some promenades?

 

[Loggerlee]

Do you know how to shoot? does the thing ever jam? I hear lotsa racket about how this or that is a piece of crap cause' it ain't a pre 64' Model 70,my 700 has never jammed,neither has my Savage,if it's reliable and you are good with it,and know what it and you are capable of then you'll be fine,like Woody said,a prolonged firefight against multiple baddies you are toast anyway,better just make sure you have a partner.

My SHTF is a SP101 and my Mini-14,there are better weapons,but these have NEVER let me down.
Given more space and the ability to carry more I'll take all mine with me.

 

[bestseller92]

I think the guy would be pretty darn well armed, if he could shoot.

 

[Z-Michigan]

How well armed is this person

How well trained is the person? Or, in an attempt to quote Jeff Cooper, "Thinking that owning a gun makes you armed is like thinking that owning a piano makes you a musician."

Beyond that it all depends on the anticipated scenarios. A good set of equipment for wilderness survival and hunting, and dealing with the occasional 2 or 4 legged hostile critter. Not a great setup for Mogadishu.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I'd say very well armed (until you run out of batteries), assuming a high level of training. As has been mentioned, it's more about the training/practice than the gun selected.

 

[wheelgunslinger]

To well armed for cotillion, but not well armed enough for some promenades?

lol, that's funny right there.

 

[ArmedBear]

I'd say very well armed (until you run out of batteries), assuming a high level of training. As has been mentioned, it's more about the training/practice than the gun selected.

Any better armed than with a handgun and a Handi-Rifle with a buttcuff full of cartridges? Not much, IMO.

 

[JShirley]

Again, the big issue with me would be mission.

If you're so close that you need a red dot for right damn now addressing targets, a 5-shot bolt-action wouldn't seem to be indicated.

OTOH, if you want a versatile arm, a SS or any number of other sturdy rifles (I like Mausers, I admit) with a low-power fixed scope or low-to-mid power variable, will do most of what anyone might want a rifle to do...which is the idea behind the "Scout Rifle" after all.

 

[Dogbite]

Great replies guys. Excellent discussion. My thoughts run along the lines of many who posted. I think a person would be reasonably well armed, but would fall a bit short in an all out confrontation with a group of men with their own weapons. It never hurts to be armed with a good AR, AK, or a good 308/30-06 battle rifle, and know how to use it. Thanks to all.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Before you dismiss the scout rifle and handgun indicated above, consider Alvin York, and maybe Jeff Cooper being armed with same. One shot, one kill. If people who rely on semi-autos could employ them, one shot, one kill, then a 30 round magazine ought to be enough to bring down a couple squads of combatants. When you have fewer rounds, you have less of a tendency to waste them. Alvin York made the best of his five round bolt action rifle, and I'm glad he wasn't after my butt. I would not have wanted to go mano y mano with Col. Cooper, either. If a Scout rifle is what you have, and you know how to REALLY use it, you will not be undergunned. The man is the weapon.