Yet another new Scout Rifle?

[Gewehr98]

Looking through my June 2006 edition of American Rifleman, when what should appear on Page 3 but a full-sized advertisement for Ruger's M77 Mark II Stainless Frontier Rifle.

Hizzoner Jeff Cooper would be proud, if one cannot swing the cash for the Steyr Scout, or wants an alternative to the Savage Scout, it looks like Ruger reached into the parts bin and came up with their own version.

They didn't reach very far, it appears. From the picture, it looks to be a standard M77 short action, with a 16 1/2" shorty barrel, and darned if that isn't the same quarter rib as found on my Ruger #1 rifle, perched on the barrel just forward of the receiver ring. The original scope mount bosses are still on the M77 receiver, if the intermediate eye-relief scope ain't your thang on a $900 MSRP rifle...

 

[Smokey Joe]

Pseudo-Scout

Heck, I did the same thing with a Mauser M-48, Timney trigger, Boyd's stock, somebody's mount-on-the-rear-sight 'scope mount, Ching sling, and a Leupold Scout 'Scope.

'Course, it's 8mm Mauser, not .308, and I didn't cut off the bbl. But it sure-as-heck didn't cost me any $900, even including the Leupold!

4" groups with 200 grain Accubonds at 200yd, ain't too shabby IMHO. It's not exactly driving tacks, but the feral pigs won't criticise too much, methinks.

Nine Hundred Bucks. Woo!

 

[Jeff]

No iron sights, no scout.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Here we go again...

 

[Smokey Joe]

Nope, no arguement.

Jeff (Cooper??)--Call it what you will; I'll call it what I will,

but the feral pigs won't criticise too much, methinks.

 

[Skofnung]

I've got a 77 Compact that is the same rifle as the one shown above, but with a standard scope mount. I've not had the chance to shoot it yet, ( ) but if it shoots as well as it handles, I'll be a very happy camper.

Perhaps down the road, I'll get a gunsmith to put a rib on it and try to fabricate some iron sights for it... hmm

 

[smince]

it looks to be a standard M77 short action, with a 16 1/2" shorty barrel, and darned if that isn't the same quarter rib as found on my Ruger #1 rifle, perched on the barrel just forward of the receiver ring.

One of the original Scout prototypes was a Ruger Ultralight with the #1 quarter rib. Nothing new. They put out the blued model two years ago.

 

[jotto]

I picked up a blued model in .308 a few months ago. I love it! With a Leupold 2.5x mounted on it its a great shooter. Plan on using it this winter during deer season. You could also mount a scope in the "normal" position as well.

 

[smince]

You could also mount a scope in the "normal" position as well.

I looked at one in a gun store in Huntsville right after they came out. It had a factory warning tag on it that said not to mount a scope in the regular positions, only use the forward mounts. Comparing it side by side to a Compact I couldn't see any difference. Anyone know the reasoning for the warning?

 

[rockstar.esq]

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd wager that the extractor/ ejector tuning wasn't as particular as a regular rifle thus the brass could bang off the scope tube.

 

[stevelyn]

Anyone know the reasoning for the warning.

I'm thinking it has to do with the short length of pull that increases the chances of the scope leaving a mark on ya.....especially with the .308 and the .300 WSM using heavier bullets.

I've always liked the Ruger Compact/Frontier concept. The only problem is they're not offered in a left hand version.
I guess I'll just have something similar built on a LH MRC 1999 action one of these days.

 

[Pork Fat]

Something I wondered about when Savage had a scout rifle, and now again with the Ruger concerning one of the things on Cooper's list- Would it be safe to have stripper clip guides milled into these civilian based receivers?

Aside from better peripheral vision and quicker target acquisition, an advantage of the forward mounted optic allows the use of stripper clips, at least in the .308 rifles. I was disappointed to see that these mass produced rifles don't include them, and was wondering if adding them later would pose any problems.

I know that there were versions of the Winchester Model 70 intended for high power competition that had them, maybe they were different in other ways as well to compensate for the metal removed?

 

[PAC 762]

-Turk M38- $55
-Clifton / AO scout base- $47
-Rear peep sight (ar15)- $10
-Sling swivels- $5
-Allumihyde 2 for metal and truck bedliner for stock- Leftover from other projects.
-Homemade ching sling - $10
-Timney sportsman trigger- $31
-Accuglas - $15
----------
-Grand total- $173

Chopped the stock to sporter length, trimmed and recrowned barrel at 19", added base and sights, floated barrel and bedded action, refinished, and added sling. Beats $900 any day, uses cheaper ammo, and takes stripper clips. It meets all of Cooper's criteria exept the weight, but the ruger will not meet the weight, either.

 

[Matt-man]

Would it be safe to have stripper clip guides milled into these civilian based receivers?

There are a ton of Winchesters and Remingtons that have been milled for clip slots with no problem. My slotted M700 started life as a 700VS and it's fine. I don't know about Rugers, but I've seen at least one gunsmith who mills slots into Savage bolt actions.