The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 5, 2006, 01:59 PM   #1
Mikkel
Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 81
Steyr Scout and scopes.

Well i have finally made up my mind to go out and get a Scout. Ill be getting a "demoed" 308 end of next week from my local gun shop. 1400,- USD for it and i thinks its a "fair" deal. Need an answer though... What kind o scope should i mount on it? I have a spare Schmidt & Bender 3- 12x 50. Would it do the job or should i upgrade?
Mikkel is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 02:13 PM   #2
hksigwalther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 1998
Location: NE OH, USA
Posts: 3,198
Is that S&B medium eye relief?
__________________
- Ron V.
hksigwalther is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 02:15 PM   #3
ClarkEMyers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2004
Location: PacWest
Posts: 454
I doubt you could upgrade from that but

I doubt you could upgrade from the scope you mention but I don't understand why anyone would want to totally defeat the Scout idea and yet buy a Scout base rifle. I have the Mannlicher Scout in .308 myself and the pseudo Mannlicher Scout in .376 Steyr. The .308 does have lever detach rings so I can mount a standard scope in the conventional position but mostly if I want a conventional scope I use another rifle. Steyr makes many fine rifles as do so many other makers which IMHO would make for a better fit with a larger scope. For a hunting rifle sight I see no reason to go beyond a 2X7 for a rifle used on the move - a moon scope for use from a fixed position in low light is a special case.

Your circumstances may be different - hunting driven animals or using a dog to being moose to a stand or hunting from a high seat - but for use with the scope you mention the Mannlicher Scout is underqualified and over priced. To say nothing of the necessity to mount a 50mm objective way too high for the Scout stock to be very useful.
ClarkEMyers is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 02:21 PM   #4
PSE
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2004
Location: stupids womb, SC
Posts: 475
here is the problem. i just went through this. W/O getting high mounts youl never get more than a 32mm recitcle scope on the rifle in a conventional setup. the reason is due to the rail not tapering like a bbl does. i have leupold PRW's, medium and a 40 will not fit no how no way. go w/ a high scope and your losing the proper cheek weld needed for accurate shooting. i suggest the sightron 2.5 X 10 X 32 in medium mounts. a lot of glass for the money. and when you drop $1400 for a rifle you gotta save somewhere.
PSE is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 02:22 PM   #5
Mikkel
Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 81
I appreciate the answers to my question, but then what scope should i go for, or... should i drop the scope i have and go for an aimpoint or sumthin like that? Im going to use it to hunt deer & moose and the range wont be more than a max of 100m. I do need some time to focus with the S&B scope to get a good shot and it aint exactly why im thinking bout the Scout. I need a fast focus scope for it i guess..

Maybe i should buy the Steyr SSG Sport .308W instead? or the Tikka Master SS 308?
Mikkel is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 02:44 PM   #6
ClarkEMyers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2004
Location: PacWest
Posts: 454
Then by all means go with the Steyr marked Leupold and Steyr rings.

Then by all means go with the Steyr marked Leupold and Steyr rings. As Colonel Cooper never tires of reminding us the Scout is rig, a combination of ingredients, not a rifle.

The proper scope is something such as the Leupold intermediate eye relief scout scope (fixed focus and fixed low power) - that's what normally ships with the Mannlicher Scout in the Cooper Package. It works beautifully.

Higher power scopes might be used from the bench for load testing but the Steyr furnished scope works well with practice on a proper aiming point - see Cooper or Fr. Frog. Moreover a different sighting arrangement is necessary if shots close to the sun - as a rising or setting sun from a stand - are expected.

The Steyr marked Leupold uses heavier cross-hairs than some other versions. The Steyr rings are very rugged but of course not quickly detachable. There is no need for any different scope for hunting at ranges up to 100 meters and no possible improvement in today's market.


.
ClarkEMyers is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 04:14 PM   #7
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Here's a clever idea: since it is a Scout rifle, why not use a Scout scope?
smince is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 05:52 PM   #8
PSE
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2004
Location: stupids womb, SC
Posts: 475
sightron 2.5-10X32 in leupold QRW medium rings.
PSE is offline  
Old March 5, 2006, 09:14 PM   #9
45-70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 23, 2005
Location: Dallas TX area
Posts: 310
Burris Scout Scope

I have a Leupold Scout scope (made in US), but Burris also makes one.

If you want the Steyr scout, but not the scout scope, you may be missing the boat on a better-suited rifle package. Just get a regular Steyr, and you can mount a regular scope on it with no problems.
45-70 is offline  
Old March 6, 2006, 12:49 AM   #10
Lawyer Daggit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2004
Posts: 1,181
Scout scopes

Why not have two scopes- one a scout scope and the other, a quality conventional variable for occasions when you want to take longer shots and need a bit of magnification
Lawyer Daggit is offline  
Old March 6, 2006, 04:15 AM   #11
ogion
Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2006
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 23
oh sorry wrong thread........
__________________
- Oz
ogion is offline  
Old March 6, 2006, 06:34 AM   #12
PSE
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2004
Location: stupids womb, SC
Posts: 475
2 scopes??? its not nessasary.
the fast sight aqusition afforded by the scout set up is not nessesitated by the long eye relief. it is a by-product of a low mounted and low magnification scope.
a 1.5-5 leupold or a 2-7 is just as fast and gives you the ability to take those surgical or lond distance shots that we wead about about but so often are not really presented with.
AND if you are the one who is afforded 250+ yard shots as regular habit then you should ...
A. work harded as a hunter to get closer to the animal.
B. consider why the heck you bought a scout rifle. a weatherby ultralight would be my choice.
PSE is offline  
Old March 6, 2006, 09:49 AM   #13
Mikkel
Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 81
I think ill be goin for the Steyr SSG 308 instead. Wont need a new scope (save a lot o cash) and the rifle is as good as it gets. Thanks for all the info.
Mikkel is offline  
Old March 6, 2006, 12:42 PM   #14
hksigwalther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 1998
Location: NE OH, USA
Posts: 3,198
Quote:
I think ill be goin for the Steyr SSG 308 instead. Wont need a new scope (save a lot o cash) and the rifle is as good as it gets.
Very good alternative.
__________________
- Ron V.
hksigwalther is offline  
Old March 17, 2006, 02:10 PM   #15
Mikkel
Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 81
Im back on the Scout bandwagon again. Have any of the Scout users and lucky owners used it with an Aimpoint?
Mikkel is offline  
Old March 20, 2006, 07:23 AM   #16
Mikke
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 30, 2000
Location: Ume?, Sweden
Posts: 154
I haven't tried a Aimpoint on my Scout, only on other rifles (mainly our Ak-4B), and on the scout I much prefer a proper scout scope (Leupold 2,5x in my case). I don't think the red dot is any faster, and it's slightly harder to shoot precisely with, plus it uses batteries.

I do have another scope for my Scout as well, a 4,5-14x44 Zeiss Conquest, that I use on the range (better for testing loads) and amateurish BR shooting.
Mikke is offline  
Old March 20, 2006, 08:56 AM   #17
444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,727
I don't own a Styer Scout rifle, so take this for what it is worth.
I have read about the scout rifle concept since the beginning. I always thought it was a very practical idea. IMO the rifles normally used to hunt with in the US are way overkill in terms of optics, weight, etc. It is also my opinion that most hunters spend far too much time worrying about shooting sub minute groups on paper from a benchrest and not nearly enough time worrying about placing rapid shots in the vitals of an animal from practical field postions.
I am a big fan of the AR15 and own several along with several Aimpoints, both ML2 and ML3s. It occured to me at some point that the Aimpoint sort of fits into to the scout rifle concept. When Cooper came up with the scout rifle idea, red dot optics such as the Aimpoint wern't available. There were red dot optics out there, but they wern't as practical and reliable as what were have today.
Contrary to internet misinformation, the red dot optic is quite capable of giving more than adequate accuracy for the practical nature of the scout rifle. For some reason, a lot of people zero the dot optic so that their point of impact is covered by the dot. Then they complain that they cannot produce fine accuracy. IMO, the correct way to zero the dot is exactly the same way you would zero with iron sights. With iron sights, you don't cover your point of impact with the front sight. Your point of impact is right at the tip of the front sight. Likewise, your point of impact with the dot is right at the tip of the top of the dot. If the range is short and very fine accuracy is not an issue (running deer at 50 yards), just placing the dot on the desired point of impact is plenty good. If you need to make a more precision shot, you then focus on the very tip top of the dot. Using this zero, I have been able to fire some decent groups off the bench at 200 yards, on paper.
As I understand it, the scout rifle is designed to be a practical rifle to make realistic field shots at realistic ranges. To me, a dot optic like the Aimpoint ML3 would be perfect for a scout rifle and would seem to me to be fully in line with the original intent of the scout rifle.
In fact, I couldn't help imagining a scout rifle with a rail on the receiver like a flat top AR15. You could then have a conventional scope, a dot optic, and a scout scope all in quick detach lever mounts: you could switch between them in seconds while maintaining their zero. And, since Cooper also had a "Leopard Light" for the scout rifle, you could have a small rail under the foreend for a modern tac-light that also could be added or removed in seconds. IMO, the picatinny (sp ?) rail is a huge step forward in firearms. Instead of this crazy idea of every rifle manufacturer having their own scope base, scope rings etc. you have one standard. You can mount any scope on any rail. Or any other accessory on that same rail. In addition, you could mount back-up iron sights on the rail, just like what is commonly done on AR15s. The sights can fold down and be out of the way. Your scope or other optic goes down, you simply flip up the back up irons. If you are using an Aimpoint, you don't even need to fold the iron sights out of the way. You can shoot just as well with them up as with them down. You don't even notice them.
For many years we had rifles like the Winchester 94 that were more like tools than hobbiest's toys. You used the buckhorn iron sights and didn't worrry about it. You shot it at realistic ranges within the limits of the rifle/cartridge/sights and didn't worry about it. You went down to the hardware store and bought a box of ammo and didn't worry about handloading to get the last possible 1/64" off the group size at 100 yards off the bench. The rifle wasn't designed for that and people just accepted that. IMO, the scout rifle is a similar rifle. It is designed as a tool. It was designed with realistic expectations of what a rifle is REALLY used for in the field. It seems to me that the scout rifle is an improvement on rifles like the old '94 but with the same purposes in mind. However, it seems obvious to me that the American shooter just can't seem to get away from trying to make it into a bench gun. They can't grasp the idea of low power magnification and thick reticles. They really, really, really want to mount a great big giant scope on it and shoot it off a bench so they can brag about their group size. Instead, they should be shooting steel reactive targets from field postions. This would be more fitting for a scout rifle IMO.
I do quite a bit of defensive type shooting and am a gun school junkie. At these schools they tend to seperate "precision rifles" from "practical rifles". With a precision rifle, you are shooting from a good solid position. Normally you would have far more time to make your shots. This is the classic "sniper" type shooting. For defensive purposes or a rifleman in the military, you are concerned with speed. You need to shoot faster than the guy trying to shoot you. But, you can't shoot any faster than you can get good hits. You need to get rapid hits on the target with enough accuracy that you are placing your shots in the vitals of the target. The rule of thumb in this type of shooting is that you want "hand span" sized groups (groups the size of your hand). If this group is in a human's "center of mass", you have made a good solid hit (with a rifle) that is likely to stop his aggressive actions directed at you. Shooting a tighter group isn't going to make anything any better. It won't be any more effective, but it will be slower. The idea is to shoot as fast as you can, while maintaining handspan sized groups. If the groups spread out, you need to slow down. If the groups get tighter, you should be shooting faster. Again, the idea isn't to shoot your adversaries third shirt button and then place four more shots right on top of the first. It is to hit him in the chest as fast as you can (before he hits you). This type of accuracy vs. speed is exactly the way I envision the scout rifle. You are trying to place shots in the vitals of man or beast as quickly as possible. It doesn't matter if the shot is 1/2" this way or that way or even 2"-3" this way or that. All that matters is that the shot is in the vitals in the short time that the target presented itself. Again, this is what the Aimpoint is all about.
__________________
You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.

Last edited by 444; March 20, 2006 at 09:52 AM.
444 is offline  
Old March 20, 2006, 11:33 AM   #18
PSE
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2004
Location: stupids womb, SC
Posts: 475
"It is also my opinion that most hunters spend far too much time worrying about shooting sub minute groups on paper from a benchrest and not nearly enough time worrying about placing rapid shots in the vitals of an animal from practical field postions."
the NRA test showed that the only thing as fast as a semi auto was a pump. while i agree w/ your statement, in theory, id have to say that as fast as i can aquire a kill zone @ 100 yards i can work a bolt.
year before last i had a 10 pt 200lb whitetail @ 40 yards. the first round, 30 cal 165 hornady SP, punched through behind the shoulder and out the 4-5 rib section. textbook. the deer reeled and took off running while i worked the bolt. when he heard the bolt he actually stopped and turned to look at me and , i guess, see what that noise was. thats when i put one in his neck and dropped him. fast enough? he'd say so.
PSE is offline  
Old March 20, 2006, 11:51 AM   #19
FirstFreedom
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2004
Location: The Toll Road State, U.S.A.
Posts: 12,451
Well, in truth, the red dot you mention would be far more in tune with the scout concept than a standard eye relief scope like your schmidt & bender. I think it will work quite well for your purposes. It has the proper eye relief for the scout setup (being unlimited ER), is low powered and thus very quick. That's what I'd do if you didn't want to spring for the Leupold M8 IER fixed 2.5. The drawback of the red dot is batteries of course. Also, you get what you pay for with red dots. Cheap ones are not parallax-free like they're supposed to be, and like the good ones are. And what PSE and 444 both said. I now see he covered the red dot issue. 444, thank you for the info about aiming with the red dot top point like irons rather than covering the bullseye - that makes good sense and I hadn't thought of it.
FirstFreedom is offline  
Old March 20, 2006, 06:22 PM   #20
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
The MODERN Aimpoints cost as much or more than the Leupold Scout. More rugged and battery life isn't that much of a problem with the newer dots, except for cost. I agree with 444 on 99% of what he said. I like the Picitinney rail on rifles idea, but it wouldn't ever work because it is TOO PRACTICAL.
I remember Cooper telling of someone showing up at Gunsite with an Aimpoint forward mounted on a Marlin 30-30. It didn't work out, but that could have been because of both poor mounting and the older type dot sight.

One of the coolest Steyr Scouts I've seen had a black stock and an EOTech sight on it.

PSE, many don't use the recoil of the rifle to work the bolt(Or lever) during follow through to be ready for the next shot. Most I've seen still take the rifle off the shoulder, or at least lower it, while cycling the action. This does slow follow-up shoots quite a bit.
smince is offline  
Old March 20, 2006, 10:20 PM   #21
444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,727
"The drawback of the red dot is batteries of course."

"New technology called ACET allows 50,000 hours of operation on one battery" http://www.aimpoint.com/o.o.i.s?id=144&product_id=116 if that is a problem, carry a spare. By my calculations the battery problem would surface in 5.7 years: IF you never turned the Aimpoint off. If you did turn it off, it might be good for the rest of your natural life.
__________________
You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.
444 is offline  
Old March 27, 2006, 08:22 AM   #22
Mikkel
Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 81
Hi 444 and thanks for your comments on the Aimpoint. I have been sold on the idea Scout+ Aimpoint for a while now and this has convinced me.
Mikkel is offline  
Old March 27, 2006, 01:42 PM   #23
444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,727
Well let us know how it works out for you.
__________________
You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.
444 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12120 seconds with 7 queries