Having worked one-on-one with Colonel Cooper on the Scout Rifle concept in the 1980's, and having a few of the original prototypes in my safe, here is what I believe Jeff would have said about the Ruger;
What they have managed to manufacture is a modern Lee Enfield Jungle Carbine with a forward scope mount, not a Scout Rifle as defined at Gunsite during the Scout Rifle conferences. It's close... but it's not a Scout Rifle.
Those who think that it should have a rear-mounted scope do not understand the Scout Rifle concept at all. Ditto those who favor the extended magazine.
Or the lack of a bipod.
Or the lack of a mid-mounted flush sling attachment point for a Ching Sling.
Or the presence of a conventional front sight, rather than one mounted on the forward edge of the front scope mount.
Hate to be a scrooge, and I am VERY sure it's a VERY nice rifle, but it misses being a true Scout Rifle by a mile.
BTW, the Enfield Jungle Carbine was one of the rifles that we studied when coming up with the concept. Ditto the Remington 660, and the Krag Jorgensen. Each had it's own strong points and weak points. They were all studied in detail. Jeff's own personal "proto-scout" had a short CZ action. ine was built on the Remington Model 7 action. Neither was perfect. Only the Steyr Scout is a definitive Scout Rifle as defined by the Colonel.
I understand Coopers design. I also disagree with many of his requirements.
-Forward mounted scope sounds great in practice, it is lousy in usage other than as a "red dot" type optic and it is inferior to that in my experience. If I am going to lose most of the magnification advantage, I might as well get the no parallax advantage/improved visibility of aiming point of the red dot. Besides, with a small magnified optic like a 2-7X33 you still have most of the peripheral vision of the forward mounted optic with a much better magnified view. Yes you lose stripper loading ability, but you have detachable magazines.
-Bipod. Why? It isn't going to be something that you are running round extended all the time, if you have time to deploy and set up a bipod, you have time to setup a good shooting postion on a rock, log, backpack, etc and you aren't limited by the height of the bipod.
-Load one, shoot one. Again, why? This was proven a useless feature in WWI, to the point of potentially being a liability if you had the cut-off engaged when you really didn't need it to be. With detachable mags, just swap to a new magazine when you run empty and keep a full magazine "in reserve" for an emergency. (Better continuation of training since magazines are changed all the time, magazine disconnect, probably not that often)
-Ching Sling. Neat concept. Not that useful in my experience. If I have time to "sling up", I have time to build a good shooting position using a conventional sling or move to a point that I can get a good rest. If I don't have time to sling up, I need to make a shot right now, which means I need to get a flash sight picture and pull the trigger not grabbing a sling and threading my arm through it.
I do like the light weight, bolt action, detachable magazine, fixed front sight features though, flash suppressor (I would prefer it was removable so a combo flash/suppressor mount could be substituted. Like an AAC Blackout)
I would want it with a rear sight that would allow the use of either a conventional or forward mount (fold down or pop up), semi flush fit detachable magazines, controlled round feed action, light weight polymer stock.
Like the Steyr Scout without the bipod, extraneous sling point, magazine cut-off although I do like the option of having a 2nd magazine in the stock. (Except the ridiculously high price)
But, I am just a shooter. I don't have the experiences that Col Cooper did, so he probably knows something that I don't.