Scout rifles-pro & con

[OrangePwrx9]

Hi,
I thought the Cooper's scout rifle concept was a good idea when I read about it in his book. Shortly thereafter I put a rifled barrel on my 870 that had a scope base on the barrel itself. Mounted a Burris Scout Scope there and thought I'd see if there was anything to the concept.

The shotgun was accurate with the right slugs, I'll give it that. Otherwise, you could keep it. Didn't like the balance. It seemed slow and cumbersome and a pain to carry. Thought it was hard to acquire the target through the scope. Often the FOV was just black until the head was wiggled around.

Shortly afterwards, Steyr's Scout Rifle came out. Read a review or two and they were less than glowing. Seemed like the reviewers didn't like it that much either. One thought it was a very hard kicker for its .308 caliber.

So, what is the state of the Scout Rifle these days? I see they're still around. Did the reviewers and I get it wrong? Have they improved? Have people determined which problem they solve? Or are they an acquired taste?

I'm thinking of setting up a Saiga as a Scout Rifle and wonder if it's worth the effort.
Thanks.
Bob

 

[Rshooter]

Have people determined which problem they solve?

I would use iron sights forever if my eyes had cooperated but my right eye is deteriorating. With that I have been told to move to scopes but I think scopes suck because they lead to tunnel vision. This is why I am looking at buying a scout scope, more likely in 8mm though, I already have the rifle.

 

[ArmedBear]

The Scout Rifle: the best-known rifle design that nobody actually uses for anything.

It does sound good in a book, though.

IER scopes have their merits, as Rshooter says. An IER scope does not a Scout Rifle make.

 

[rbernie]

I'm thinking of setting up a Saiga as a Scout Rifle and wonder if it's worth the effort.

The scout concept addresses both functional and ergonomic criteria. The functional stuff, like being chambered in 308 and having a box magazine, are driven by the martial slant of Col. Cooper and may or may not be useful to you. The ergonomic stuff, like the IER scope mount, are potentially useful regardless of the rest of the package.

The IER/forward mounting scope is useful when it lets you mount the scope really low on the action and point it like a shotgun. By moving the scope forward/down and reducing the FOV, you are forced to shoot both-eyes-open and swing-n-shoot it like a shotgun. And it WORKS, when you treat it like that. On the other hand, when you mount the scope up high (as you would on the Saiga), you lose the natural pointability that makes the forward scope mounting concept appealing.

Specifically - I have several Saigas and AKs set up with a scope mounted forward of the front trunnion. The presence of the gas tube necessitates a mounting offset from the barrel centerline that hurts the balance and swinging of the rifle, and requires a bunch of buttstock mods to get any kind of appropriate cheekweld.

I like the IER scope mounting concept for many kinds of rifles. Sadly, the AK platform isn't one of them.

 

[jr45]

I have a Mosin M38 that was converted to a scout. The scope has a long eye relief and the rifle is very accurate. I personnaly prefered iron sights or a scope mounted over the receiver however; after trying this one, I think it is a good concept. I can aquire targets just as fast if not faster with the forward scope and reloading is a breeze since there is nothing over the receiver.

 

[HorseSoldier]

I think the Scout concept was kind of hamstrung from the start by the fact that, with all respect to Jeff Cooper's contributions to handgunning, he was out of his mind when it comes to long guns. The "Scout Rifle" seems to have been pitched as something with military applications, which it most certainly lacks, and having been a cavalry scout I can only speculate that Col Cooper had Boy Scouts in mind as potential users when he named it because it simply does nothing we ever needed a rifle to do very well. The concept seems to remain much loved by the militia-fantasists who think a well handled bolt gun used by a manly, hairy chested minuteman would trump assault rifles but, well, whatever . . .

That leaves hunting applications, where I agree with previous posts that there is a viable role for low power IER scopes, and a rifle that is light enough to carry around comfortably all day. I don't think his overall recipe for the Scout Rifle is really the best solution to this problem either, though.

 

[pigmode]

Putting Cooper's intentions completely aside, I personally find the Steyr Scout to possess outstanding virtues as an all-purpose field gun. Its lightweight, handiness, and accuracy makes for a great platform for hunting or other usages. While not completely crazy about it, I find the scout scope concept to be a good one.

If I could go back in time, I probably would not elect to go through with my purchase of the Steyr due to its price/value and the availability of other options. OTOH, having already bit the bullet, the Scout occupies a valued and permanent place in my armory.

 

[Zundfolge]

I would use iron sights forever if my eyes had cooperated but my right eye is deteriorating. With that I have been told to move to scopes but I think scopes suck because they lead to tunnel vision.

This is why God gave us red dots.

 

[H2O MAN]

OrangePwrx9

I'm thinking of setting up a Saiga as a Scout Rifle...

This guy uses a 2X Aimpoint mounted out front on an UltiMAK AK gas tube optic rail for hog hunting.
He claims excellent results. There are others that use the Leupold 2.5 X Scout scope on their AKs.

 

[Mr_Pale_Horse]

Scout bolt guns are excellent for close work in cover for nominally non-dangerous game. I prefer a 1.5-~5X standard eye relief for dangerous game.

There is an example a fielded sniper configuration of the K98 that is scoutish.

 

[uvausmc]

I have a Ruger Frontier .308 with a Leupold 2.5x Scout scope on it which is close to Col Cooper's concept (though I realize it doesn't meet all his criteria). I've hunted with it for several seasons and taken a few whitetails with it. It is by far one of my favorite rifles to hunt with. I prefer stalking rather than hunting out of a stand. The balance of the rifle makes it very comfortable to carry all day; the short length makes it easy to manuever in the deer woods; and the forward mounted low-power scope is super fast on target. Last season I got two does within a few seconds of each other because the Frontier allowed me to shoot, cycle the action, and get back on target fast. Both shots were in somewhat thick hardwoods at about 25yds and both deer dropped on the spot. I haven't gotten the opportunity in the field to take long shots but on the range it's not hard to make 100, 200, and up to 300 yd shots unsupported or kneeling.

The scout rifle isn't for everyone but i think a lot more people would like them if they actually got out and had a chance to appreciate its strengths. If you ever see any of the video's of the Gunsite Academy's rifle course, with proper training the scout can be very handy.

 

[ArmedBear]

I really like the now-defunct Ruger Frontier, for the reasons you said.

I'm not sure about what I think of .308 in that little barrel, but to 300 yards it should be all right.

However, it's really not much like Cooper's spec, which as I recall, includes iron sights, a detachable mag and/or stripper guide, and a built-in bipod (optional), weight significantly less than the total weight of a scoped Frontier, but with a longer barrel.

Realistic, especially the weight? Probably not. But it is what it is.

 

[travellingJeff]

I've decided to build my own, the price for the Steyr is just ABSURD. Robar said that they'd turn a M1903 receiver into a "pseudo scout", to my exact specs, coated with NP3 internally, free floated, glass bedded match barrel, the exact sights I want, the exact stock I want, all for about $2900. That's cheaper than the Steyer, admittedly it lacks glass. Something like that I'd rather put together myself, frankly.


http://www.scoutrifle.org/index.php?topic=39.0


I really like the looks of that rifle. Perhaps I'll use an Enfield receiver and built it up around the .308 so the recoil is a bit more appropriate for the shorter barrel and light weight stock. Neat ghost ring as well. I'd like to have a lighter caliber one with just the ghost rings, no scope, possibly a nice can.

 

[Offfhand]

Actually, the "scout" concept, or whatever you want to call it, predates Cooper's Scout by several years. Back in the 1960's gun writer Pete Brown showed such a rifle in an article in Sports Afield magazine. At least one scope manufacturer bought in on the idea with Redfield offering a long eye relief 4x rifle scope called the Front-IER. Obviously the idea didn't catch on back then and was all but forgotten until Cooper pitched it to Steyr. I expect the concept will be reburied for a few decades until some future gun writer digs it up again.

 

[OrangePwrx9]

I've got a Remington 788 carbine in .308 that would "look nice" done up like that 700 you linked to, Jeff. But I can't imagine the 788 being any handier that what it is. Having the weight between the hands, being able to jack up scope power, and having a wider FOV for a given power would seem to offset the advantage of using both eyes....especially if you're swinging toward a target on your strong side. But, what do I know? I'm not J.C.

Doesn't Cooper's spec call for controlled feed instead of push feed?

 

[travellingJeff]

Yea, if I ALREADY had a specific rifle that I felt was a handy enough field gun, I wouldn't modify it into a Scout rifle. That said, I'm thinking that a thirty caliber Scout rifle would be quite handy, especially in the style of that svelte Rem 700. IIRC, the Enfield holds either eight or ten shots of .308Winchester. That's a serious amount of firepower to come from a highly accurate Robar-built Scout rifle. I'm imagining being able to bust up anything from prairie dogs to a small cow moose with a rifle set up like that, from a distance of 4-500 yards. A rifle like that would, almost certainly, shoot better than I could.

 

[Reid73]

The shotgun was accurate with the right slugs, I'll give it that. Otherwise, you could keep it. Didn't like the balance. It seemed slow and cumbersome and a pain to carry. Thought it was hard to acquire the target through the scope. Often the FOV was just black until the head was wiggled around.

Yep, that pretty much sums up the inherent problems with the 'scout' concept. It is an awkward solution in search of a problem.

So, what is the state of the Scout Rifle these days? I see they're still around. Did the reviewers and I get it wrong? Have they improved? Have people determined which problem they solve? Or are they an acquired taste?

They are still around, but not in large numbers. Good to know that most shooters have not fallen for the hype ... there's hope for humanity yet!

 

[Robert Wilson]

I like my Scout a great deal. It is very light but balances very nicely and comes to my shoulder as quickly as anything. Yes, it kicks more than the typical .308, but that is only because it weighs less than the typical .308. The forward mounted scope is very fast and encourages shooting with both eyes open, and it also allows the Mauser action to be clip fed, the way Peter Paul intended.

The only real complaint I have with it is that it is very ugly. That may well be why it has not caught on.

 

[Balrog]

I think that Aimpoints and Eotechs sort of accomplish what Jeff Cooper was trying to accomplish with the forward mounted optics on the scout.

 

[Robert Wilson]

Cooper's opinion was that battery powered optics are interesting and perhaps useful, but that "batteries are usually dead when you need them".

Speaking only for myself, the dot sights don't accomplish anything that the low power IER scopes can't.

 

[H2O MAN]

I like Cooper's concept and have used it on a few different rifles.

Example: EOTech out front on my Crazy Horse MK14 SEI Mod 0




I am currently setting up my Marlin Guide Gun with a forward mounted Leupold Scout scope.
I'm also considering a 2x Aimpoint for the .45-70.

My 7.62 AKM has a forward mounted Micro T-1 and that's about as good as it gets.


It's just a concept, try it - you might like it.

 

[Balrog]

Cooper's opinion was that battery powered optics are interesting and perhaps useful, but that "batteries are usually dead when you need them".

I have a lot of respect for the Colonel, but the batteries on an Aimpoint will last for 8 years of continuous use. Certainly even the Colonel could remember to change batteries every 8 years.

 

[Molasses]

I seem to be an exception to the general run of things here:

I read Cooper's articles extolling the Scout concept from the start and thought it sounded totally STUPID from the get-go.

At the very best, I thought it might just possibly compare to what I was hunting with at the time; a Model 70- FWT in .270 with a conventionally mounted 2-7X compact scope. Even after having several times over the years where deer in the brush got away scot-free because of the limitations of that setup at short range, even with the scope at 2X.

Years later, I ran into one of the Ruger Frontier models all set up with the cardboard tube "dummy display scope" in the rings and tried shouldering it a couple of times while pretending to sight on some of the stuffed animal heads up on the walls of the Cabelas I was at. I was sold <that> fast on the forward mounted optics. After using that rifle for awhile, some of the features that the Steyr came with started making more sense and I decided to sell the Ruger and get one.

IMO, there are a number of reasons why so many folks are disparaging of the whole idea. It does seem stupid at first glance. In my case, it took until actually trying a short, light(ish) rifle that was PROPERLY set up for forward mounted optics to get a clue. I suspect that it'd take a similar experience to make an impression on most folks. The second big thing is that it's completely intended to be a compromise. It's not going to be superlative at any one thing. That's a major failing in most folks' eyes; they look at it the perspective of their personal preference for shooting and it comes up short versus what they normally use for that specific purpose: It's a pretty good brush gun, but I've got an old Savage 99H carbine in .30-30 with a receiver sight holding an oversized brass-rimmed insert that's faster for me. But. I can ding 400yd gongs at the range with regularity with the Scout off the integral bipod and I'm wasting time and ammo with the Savage even attempting it without bags and massive sight adjustments. OTOH, my varmint rigs make the Scout's groups look sorry. Take 'em in the brush, though... Specialty rigs are going to be better at their specialty than a Scout. No contest. But, when you compare a Scout to a specialty rig in an area outside of its' specialty...

I think it makes a great "catch-as-catch-can" gun that won't be hopelessly mismatched for whatever general shot I'm likely to encounter hunting in the areas I go, which is why I'm happy with mine.

 

[ArmedBear]

400 yards? .308 drops a fair amount at 400 yards. Scout or no, you have to know that drop.

.30-30 drops a LOT more, of course.

But the "Scout" configuration, for better or worse, has nothing to do with that.

 

[Molasses]

400 yards? .308 drops a fair amount at 400 yards. Scout or no, you have to know that drop.

.30-30 drops a LOT more, of course.

But the "Scout" configuration, for better or worse, has nothing to do with that.

I made a neat discovery about the scope I've got on mine: with it sighted 3" high at 100yds with Fed GM308M, the roughly triangular bit where the plex reticle tapers from thick to thin below the crosshair intersection is on at 400. And besides not needing to resight, one of the features of the Steyr Scout rifle does help immensely in doing this with a minimum of fuss and muss: push button in forend, unfold integral bipod legs, set on bench, go.