View Full Version : Scout Concept

October 16, 1998, 12:36 PM
I have no experience with the Scout rifle concept other than to respect Col. Coopers opinion greatly. I am a real fan of the .308. Why wouldn't I want to sell all my other guns and buy the Steyer Scout (which might even please the wife)?

Rob Pincus
October 16, 1998, 01:58 PM
I have a model 700 .308, with an 18inch barrel, synth stock, MER quick release 1.5X scope, ghost ring and tritum front site. This rifle cost me about $700. It is just a touch heavier than the scout rifle. I have a harris bipod for it, but I don't have it mounted most of the time.
The one thing I am really missing in that package is the detachable magazine.

Now, the same 'smith that built that gun has done a similar conversion on a standard Steyr SBS, it is still MUCH cheaper than a Scout rifle.

you should consider these very seriously before investing so heavily in one .308 rifle.

at leat that's my opinion.

October 16, 1998, 08:48 PM
I opted for the older Rem 788 Carbine in .308win. It's inexpensive; uses detachable, single-column box mags; has a very fast lock time and locks-up from the rear with multiple lugs. It's also accurate. It's topped with an old 2.5x Weaver wide-angle 'scope, though it is not forward mounted as it does not have a long eye-relief.

Rob Pincus
October 16, 1998, 08:52 PM
sounds like a great rifle Mykl, but It doesn't fit the description provided by Cooper of a "scout rifle".

October 16, 1998, 11:45 PM

You're right, on both points.

[This message has been edited by Mykl (edited 10-17-98).]

October 19, 1998, 09:17 AM
Looked at a Steyer Scout this weekend at the gun sho in Richmond. It had a big sign taped to the butstock that read "Don't Even Think About Touching This One!" I was not impressed by that attitude... but I was by the rifle. Looked like a gun you might seen on "Babylon 5" or "Starship Troopers" but not too far out as to be silly. The photos of one in a magazine are one thing - but next to a Remington 700 on the table it looked way different. Like it might fire an electro magnetic pulse driven projectile or something.

Rob Pincus
October 20, 1998, 12:12 AM
I agree, Kodiac, the Steyr Scout gets 12 points out of 10 for style.
But, Ouch, that price..... For an SBS with a couple little extra features and cool stock.. I can't justify it. (yet... It's growing on me... if the market would only cooperate....)

October 20, 1998, 10:16 AM
This is what prompted my original question. I haven't seen a real live one (the local shop here just laughed when I asked if they'ld ever get one in) or even fired a Scout "concept" rifle. I like the idea but I'd prefer to try one before buying. Just have to use the 700 again this year...

October 21, 1998, 10:54 AM
I had the opportunity to examine a Steyr Scout this summer while putting around the Black Hills of SD. FWIW here are my cursory observations:

1. Weight and balance were excellent. The appearance given by the thin, short, fluted, free-floated barrel led me to expect a butt-heavy weight distribution. I was pleasantly surprised at how the overall light heft and balance facilitated rapid mounting to the shoulder without having to make gross adjustments to bring the bore on target.

2. The integral forestock bipod arrangement seemed a little fragile, and less than easy to deploy and return to the stored position. However, I had the same observation of the light-weight plastic-tipped H&K bipod on my 91, but it is still very much in service 21 years later. I suspect the bipod is more than adequate in it's intended role and frequency of use.

3. The pull of the stock was comfortable for me, but would consider removing a strip or two from the buttpad/extension. The comb was also comfortable and well suited to quick sighting with the forward mounted telescope.

4. The butt-stock storage for the spare magazine is not a new concept, however, it is tastefully executed on this rifle. Since I did not have the opportunity to conduct a live fire operational test of the system, I've no basis for comment on the ease of accomplishing a magazine extraction and replacement drill under tactical firing postures and conditions. This should ferret out any ergonometric oversight of the design application.

5. My curiousity is piqued by the barrel configuration. I'd love to hear how well it retains its precision as it heats up under sustained firing. My experience with "whip thin" barrels reflects they are excellent for the first 2-3 rounds, then begin to drift as the barrel harmonics shift commensurate with heat expansion. Is there anybody out there that has any practical shooting experience with the Scout who would care to comment on their experience regarding this?

[This message has been edited by Mykl (edited 10-21-98).]

October 22, 1998, 12:49 PM
Ok since we are talking about the Scout....

what is the reason for the scope to be mounted so far forward?

Rich Lucibella
October 22, 1998, 12:59 PM
For what Jeff Cooper refers to as "the snap shot". One example is found in some of the more dangerous game hunts. It's been noticed that the quarry often appears as a blur by the time you index it in many normally mounted and/or high powered scopes...this do to the fact that it has already closed the distance and closed it's jaws around your weapon, scope and face (small exaggeration there).

The benefit of a 2+ power scope, forward mounted, is to allow for quick mounting of the weapon to the shoulder, rapid acquision and targeting. Makes sense for a mid range tac piece also, IMHO

[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited 10-22-98).]

October 22, 1998, 04:43 PM
I can see this.

A bit like a scope on a handgun.


Frank Norman
October 24, 1998, 07:59 PM

I think the Colonel has also mentioned that having the sight that far forward gives one a better view of the surrounding area/background. Better situational awareness.


Daryl Waldron
October 27, 1998, 07:24 PM
I like the Scout rifle idea and have been thinking it would make a nice rifle for my pickup truck. I have all kinds of wild beasts (deer, fox, hogs, coyote,alligator)on my pasture ,and sometimes unwanted human types.
After reading the article In Gun World, June 98, I have wanted to make a scout rifle out of my 91-59 Mosin-Nagant. Scope and mount would run about $200. I know $200 on a $5O rifle sound silly. But, life has to have some fun.
The question is has anyone here done this,, or have an opinion.

October 28, 1998, 12:37 AM
Need to go shoot a Steyr Scout, but have not got to it. When I was last at Gunsite visiting with Cooper, he had several guns that were in the scout concept. The one I remember best was a Krag in 30/40. If memory serves me correctly, the Smithy at Gunsite did some scout rifles with stocks that had a built in bipod and a sling system that Cooper designed/modified. I have shot/owned several Steyr rifles and have yet to find one that was not accurate -- if the shooter could shoot. GLV

October 28, 1998, 08:57 AM

The 30-40 Krag-Jorgenson was a fascinating late 19th century military piece. The unusual fixed magazine arrangement loaded from the right and fed the cartridges under the bolt and presented them for chambering on the opposite side. Used one as a kid for deer and razorback hunting, until the receiver ring finaly cracked. Pawned it for a .25 Brescia Galesi.

Richard Padgett
October 30, 1998, 05:42 PM
You folks forgot one more reason for the forward mounted scope... Stripper clips.

Initial Scout specs called for use of stripper clips in leiu of a detachable mag. Of the current bolt guns at the time none of the designs with detach. mags were able to make weight. rp

November 5, 1998, 01:11 PM
Guys, I have played with these things quite a lot and wanted to add my opinions. First, don't do this with the Mosin. The problem with all the forward mounts attached to the rear sight is that they put the scope too high. The Mosin comb height is set for iron sights. You'll only get handling speed if you are looking right through the center of the scope when you throw it up.The forward scope does several things: it allows you to grasp the rifle w/ one hand around the reciever and walk, it allows easy top loading, it gives some muzzle weight to a short whippy barrel for better balance, it allows faster and more sure bolt manipulation because your hand never hits your scope. That last is very evident when you do rapid manipulation side by side. I don't like the detachable mags with these. After much thought, I have concluded that they are nice sporting weapons but I would prefer a military weapon in a military context. Scopes are very fragile. I wouldn't pay the money for a Steyr. To try the concept, buy a wooden stocked blue M7 Rem. in 7-08 or .308. Get a Burris forward mount and find a good gunsmith. Have the mount installed and put a burris Scout 2.75 power on it. Install a 3rd sling swivel [just use an Uncle Mikes] ahead of the magazine aparatus. If you want the backup irons, you need to install some sort of small peep at the rear. Make sure ring height is proper for looking right down the center. I think mine has medium rings. Put an elastic ammo carrier around the buttstock. Now if you want a REALLY neat rifle, find a good gunsmith and attach one of these scopes to a pre-safety M94 Winchester or M336 Marlin. The big problem with the lever is getting the scope low enough. That last is ESSENTIAL. Burris makes a forward mount for M94's where one hole gets tapped into the barrel band. You need to get the top center of this mount milled out so you can use Leupold super low rings without the adjustment housing interfering with the mount. Now that is a nice rifle! I don't worry about a shooting sling with the lever action. There was a very good Finn Agaard article on a Marlin lever scout in a Rifle magazine [Wolfe Publishing] about three years ago. In general I love the scouts as hunting rifles. If I were an actual scout in the military, I wouldn't want something this fragile.

November 5, 1998, 10:32 PM
...or, if you're going to fork out the dough for a modern American-made rifle anyway, just wait until the Savage Scout comes out.