Utility Scout Rifles

Scribe · July 29, 2005, 08:39 AM

I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has a Utility Scout on any action , along the lines of “The Poor Mans Scout Rifle”.

I have owned Mauser 98’s since 1985 and a couple of years back had one modified in line with Ashley Emersons blue print. It is 7.62/.308 Winchester and now has an 18” barrel, Timney Field trigger and a Ramline stock with an Uncle Mike‘s butt sleeve. I have fitted a third sling point, Uncle Mikes QD swivels and an English made Ching sling. The sights are XS ghost ring and forward scope mount with a Burris 2.75 Scout scope in low mount QD rings.

The costs came to about £550 plus the scope which was £125. The original barrelled action set me back a huge £50 from a friend. Truthfully I could have paid a couple of hundred more and had a Steyr Scout, but building my own held more appeal and my previous experience with a Steyr SSG was mixed.

I have only shot it on the range so far, but hope to hunt with it someday. I am getting 3 shot, 2-2 ½ inch groups at 100 yards with British Radway Green Surplus ammunition. (That’s the stuff that I have heard Americans refer to as Brit S**t) French Gevelot brings it down to around 1 ½ inches on a very good day , if I do my part and don’t let the rifle down.

I have been shooting for 26 years but consider my self an enthusiast rather than an expert. I would be very interested in hearing from any fellow travellers on the Utility Scout route on any tips at all. Handling , shooting at ranges greater than 200 - 300 yards, hand loading etc, better components on my next project as I plan to build a second one. Blunt honesty always appreciated.

UltimaThule · July 29, 2005, 04:54 PM

I see you joined today. Welcome to The Firing Line!

I don't own one and can't really comment on the scout thing, but your rifle sounds very much like what I would choose myself if I were to build one. I'll drop in on this thread again to see what those who actually know what they're talking about have to say...

Oh, one thing. If I ever build such a rifle, I would want a suppressor on it. I believe that's legal in your country too? Although a suppressor would make it difficult to put aperture sights on it, and I love aperture sights. Dang, why is life so complicated?

SR420 · July 29, 2005, 05:40 PM

Quote:

I would be very interested in hearing from any fellow travellers on the Utility Scout route on any tips at all. Handling , shooting at ranges greater than 200 - 300 yards, hand loading etc, better components on my next project as I plan to build a second one. Blunt honesty always appreciated.

I really like Jeff Coopers Scout rifle concept and I have built a rifle that
meets most and defiantly exceeds some of the original concept criteria.

I call it my Tactical Scout rifle.

PHOTO LINK

Length: 35/40 inches.
Caliber: 7.62 x 51 mm NATO.
Accuracy: <1.00 MOA at 200 yards.
Trigger: 4 1/2 lb. two-stage military match.
Stock: High strength aircraft grade aluminum.
Barrel: 18 inch medium weight CH 4 groove 1:10. NEW
Weight: 12 lbs. with scope, bipod and sling installed.
Sighting system: 2.5 x 28mm IER with reserve military iron sights.
Accessories: Detachable forward grip and bipod. EOTech holographic sight.
Action: Gas operated, air cooled, semi-automatic, magazine and stripper clip fed.

The Leupold scout scope is awesome and snap shots out
to three and four hundred yards are very quick and easy.

I have only shot Port ammo from this rifle.

NOTE: I am working on a second rifle that will be a few pounds lighter.

Dave R · July 29, 2005, 07:11 PM

I have a forward-mount scope on a rifle, but I would hesitate to call it a scout rifle. I basically put a forward mount scope on an otherwise stock Swiss K-31. So it is over-length and over-weight to be a scout rifle.

However, it has made me a fan of the forward-mount scope. Very fast target acquisition. Between that and the straight-pull K-31 action, I can sometimes break 6 (stationary) clay pigeons at 100 yards in under 10 seconds. Pretty good for an old guy. Groups at 100 yards and 200 yards seem equal to those from a higher-powered, traditional mount scope. As long as the target is visible.

AK103K · July 29, 2005, 07:47 PM

I have a Savage Scout. I added the third swivel point and a Ching sling. I'm using a Leupold Scout scope on low QD rings. At 100 yards I get 2" groups or so with surplus GI ammo and at best, just under an inch using my reloads(165gr Nosler BT's over 4064). The Savage's B-Square scope mount is a little cheesy, but it works. It would be nice if they would have added a stripper cut in the receiver, as the forward mounted scope makes feeding it this way a big plus. Using the Mauser action is the way to go here. While not really a Scout type rifle, I also have a Springfield SOCOM with a Burris Scout scope on ARMS lever rings. The Burris is OK, but I like the Leupold better. Both could be a tad lighter in power and better yet, variable, like a 1x4 or 1.5x5 and while we're at it, lets throw in a lighted dot at the cross hair.(hey, i can dream, cant I

) The SOCOM while a little more compact than the standard M1A, is still a heavy gun and really doesnt fit the Scout criteria, if it really matters. The Scout scope does work well on it, but I like my Aimpoint better. I'm going to have to try to fit a Ching type sling to it at some point. Just havent got around to it yet. Since I got my Savage I'm sold on these type slings and have made a number of my own for my other rifles using my Galco as the pattern. They are cheap and easy to make and while the Galco is a real nice sling, it sure beats paying $50 a pop.

SR420 · July 29, 2005, 08:05 PM

Quote:

The SOCOM while a little more compact than the standard M1A, is still a heavy gun and really doesnt fit the Scout criteria, if it really matters.

How refreshing

It's a concept - run with what you have and call it what you like.

AK103K · July 29, 2005, 08:24 PM

Quote:

It's a concept - run with what you have and call it what you like.

Hey, whatever floats your boat....but the difference between the Savage and the SOCOM is pretty big, and a SOCOM in a Sage is about twice the weight and bulk. For something light and handy, the later isnt, but if you dont mind humpin it, hey, that dont befront me.

I do find the Savage is more natural to shoulder and shoot with, especially for snap shots, as the scope is lower and the cheek weld more along the lines of the iron sights. The SOCOM, even though the forward mount is lower than the rear mounted M1A scope mounts, is still a little to high, and its not as natural to shoot with. I find the Aimpoint is better than the scope and the iron sights are still the most natural to shoot with.

Big-Foot · July 30, 2005, 12:07 AM

I don't see how scout rifles should cost so much as the Steyr does. Jeff Cooper said the idea wasn't new, so get one of the originals that he mentioned and mount the scope foreward.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976598487.htm

You might find a Rem 600/660 in .308 for under $500 also.

PSE · July 30, 2005, 08:51 AM

the best one iv had was built off a remington 600. the worst was that lug o steel springfield. the steyr is nice though iv only owned the 223 cub scout.

Scribe · August 1, 2005, 06:55 PM

Oh, one thing. If I ever build such a rifle, I would want a suppressor on it. I believe that's legal in your country too? Although a suppressor would make it difficult to put aperture sights on it, and I love aperture sights. Dang, why is life so complicated?

Ultimathule, Thank you for your welcome!

Suppresors are legal in this country, though I believe they have have to be registered almost as a separate firearm. I don't if it is possible to get them off set to clear the aperture sights.

Magnum88C · August 1, 2005, 10:06 PM

First of all I think Col Cooper's scout concept is too narrowly defined. I don't have a problem if a rifle is a bit over a meter long, it doesn't have to be 6 pounds, etc. IMO a "scout" is any handy rifle that you wouldn't mind carrying all day, and can be useful from short to medium range quickly. Kind of the rifle version of John Taffin's "packin' pistol".

Only one I "scouted up" was purpose built as a utility (i.e. low-budget) scout is a Mosin M44. All I did was take the bayonet off (left the lug on) since hunting with a bayonet is not legal here, and replced the rear sight with a scope base and put on a 2.5x Leupold IER.

I originally hated "scout scopes", upon taking the advice of a friend, I found out why and fixed the problem. Problem was too high a power. The ones I'd seen were 4x or more, and that's just too much magnification differential between scanning terrain looking through the scope for my eyes.

I also prefer military bolt actions as they can still be loaded with strippers with the forward mounted scope.

FWIW, the guys with M1A SOCOMS or even 16" FAL carbines have perfectly good, serviceable scout rifles. Remember it's about what's handy for YOU to carry, not anyone else.

LAK · August 2, 2005, 04:48 AM

Quote:

First of all I think Col Cooper's scout concept is too narrowly defined

Then why doesn't someone else create a different criteria of their own, and call it something else?

Quote:

IMO a "scout" is any handy rifle that you wouldn't mind carrying all day, and can be useful from short to medium range quickly

This is rather broad - certainly far too broad to be seen as a distinctive concept. Under such a definition "any good deer rifle will do". That is not what Col. Cooper had in mind; hence some stricter specifics.

Thus he defined the Scout concept and assigned it a name for the purpose of distinction.

Magnum88C · August 2, 2005, 06:10 AM

LAK, ya got a point, but I'm free to disagree. Like I said, it's HIS idea of a scout rifle, and as HE said, it's not a new concept (meaning something was called a "scout rifle" before he wrote about it, so he, by his own admission doesn't own the title).

So, since HE took the title from elsewhere, so can I. So, my definition is ANY DARN RIFLE THAT DOES THE JOB FOR YOU.

SR420 · August 2, 2005, 06:53 AM

Well said Magnum88C.

Coopers concept is an open-ended list of suggestions and recommendations.

PSE · August 2, 2005, 07:26 AM

i once mounted a leupold scout scope on a #1 ruger mannlicher stocked 7X57 as far forward as i could get it in the rings. wasnt a "scout" but was GD fast to the shot.

Smokey Joe · August 2, 2005, 01:34 PM

So, exactly what IS the good colonel's definition of a "scout rifle?"

SR420 · August 2, 2005, 02:31 PM

Jeff Cooper's Scout Rifle Concept

An optimized general-purpose rifle concept by Jeff Cooper.

Weight-sighted and slung:
3 kilograms (6.6 lb). This has been set as the ideal weight
but the maximum has been stated as being 3.5 kg (7.7 pounds ).

Length:
1 meter (39 inches)

Barrel length:
.48 meter (19 inches)

Sighting system:
Forward and low mounted (ahead of the action opening) long eye relief telescope of between 2x and 3x.
Reserve iron sights desirable but not necessary.

Action:
Magazine fed bolt action. Detachable box magazine and/or stripper clip charging is desirable but not necessary.

Sling:
Fast loop-up type, i.e. Ching or CW style.

Caliber:
Nominally .308 Winchester (7.62 x 51 mm) or 7 mm - 08 Winchester (7 x 51 mm),
with .243 Winchester (6 x 51 mm) being considered for frail individuals or where "military" calibers are proscribed.

Built-in bipod:
Desirable but not mandatory.

Accuracy:
Should be capable of shooting into 2 minutes of angle or less at 200 yards/meters (3 shot groups).

Like I said "Coopers concept is an open-ended list of suggestions and recommendations."

Smokey Joe · August 3, 2005, 01:24 AM

SR40--Thanx! That website is REALLY comprehensive.

LAK · August 3, 2005, 04:12 AM

Magnum88C

Quote:

LAK, ya got a point, but I'm free to disagree. Like I said, it's HIS idea of a scout rifle, and as HE said, it's not a new concept (meaning something was called a "scout rifle" before he wrote about it, so he, by his own admission doesn't own the title).

He makes no claim to ownership, but I do not think it is unreasonable to attribute his term and definition exclusively with each other. I do not think the term "Scout rifle" was ever used by anyone but Col. Cooper; all he has said is that several (particular) rifles during the 19th into the 20th century could be seen as predecessors to the general purpose "Scout" concept.

His work on the subject has been rather unique - not a single work along his lines prior to him going to press. Had he not gone through the trouble, would anyone else have done so? I think not. But all of a sudden, since his personal prototypes, writings - and now the Steyr Scout - alot of folk are suddenly redefining and/or making "Scouts".

Quote:

So, since HE took the title from elsewhere, so can I. So, my definition is ANY DARN RIFLE THAT DOES THE JOB FOR YOU.

I own one of the Scout's "ancestors" - and it does "do the job for me". But it is not, and I do not call it, a "Scout".

Magnum88C · August 3, 2005, 06:10 AM

No problem, man, you're entitled to your opinion, just like the rest of us.
Perhaps we should refer to his idea as the "Cooper Scout"? Since I've noticed that not one of the production scouts actually meets all of his criteria, so I guess Steyr and Savage really shouldn't have called them "scouts"? 'Course calling them "Sorta Scout" or "Almost Scout" might have been marketing disasters. . .

Olaf · August 3, 2005, 09:43 AM

I do not wish to debate the Scout rifle concept...there are obviously many on both sides of the issue. I would say, however, to those "naysayers"...don't knock it 'til you've tried it. If you haven't tried it...how can you have a strong opinion, one way or the other ?

I can only tell of my experiences with this type of rifle. Some time ago, I converted a Remington 700, in .308, with a 20" barrel and the factory synthetic stock.... to the "Scout rifle" configuration. It was an experiment - to see if I liked the setup. Well, I must say that yes....I liked it very much. Very quick on target, nice balance to the rifle....and easy on the eyes (shooting with both eyes open). I used a 2x handgun scope for my rifle...and the 50 yard parallax setting never was a problem. I was able to get consistent 2" or smaller groups at 100 metres...no matter which ammo I used. The 2x magnification made it easy to use....and with both eyes open... I had a huge field of view. A very comfortable way to shoot. I would highly recommend this setup to anyone - at least to try.

As for the specifics of the Scout rifle "concept" (weight, length, etc.)..I never have been one to get too hung up on such details - these issues are not terribly critical to the successful operation of such a rifle... so I treat them as somewhat peripheral. If one can attain all of the specifications (and wishes to put in the effort to do so), then fine. If not, so what ? I think that these "requirements" are only guidelines, anyway. Perhaps Col. Cooper would not agree....but he doesn't sign my paychecks, after all.

It is an acquired taste - not everyone will like it. That is fine. As to the overpriced "Scout rifle" from Steyr...for me, it is a non-issue. I wouldn't buy one...but this does not cause me to have contempt for the concept.
I would say try the setup (it can be done on a number of rifles for a relatively modest investment).... then form an opinion. You might just find that you like it that way.

LAK · August 4, 2005, 05:30 AM

Indeed, Col. Cooper has stated that the Steyr Scout is "not perfect". His concept is the refinement of the idea of the general purpose rifle.

Along a similar line if you were to ask him whether "two inches of barrel" or "seven ounces of weight" would make "[your] rifle" less effective than a " true Scout" he would no doubt reply that the man carrying the rifle was far more important than the rifle itself - assuming that the rifle was at least adequate.

Cpl Punishment · August 4, 2005, 06:10 AM

I believe I read in Mr Cooper's writings that his real test of whether or not a rifle is of the proper weight for a shooter isn't based upon how much the rifle weighs, but rather to take a test. The test was to hold your hands straight out in front of you at arm's extension, have the rifle, fully outfitted they way you intend to carry it, placed on the backs of your hands. If you could hold it there for a minimum of 60 seconds, the rifle wasn't too heavy.

I believe Mr Cooper's Scout Rifle ideas were HIS idea of what such a rifle should be, I.E. what HE would want in such a rifle. I don't think he was setting hard and fast rules of what a "scout" rifle is. I think he'd say that of you can poerform the scout mission to acceptable standards with your given rifle, then it's just fine.

August 1, 2005, 06:55 PM	#10
Scribe Senior Member Join Date: July 29, 2005 Location: England Posts: 249	Utility Scout Rifles Oh, one thing. If I ever build such a rifle, I would want a suppressor on it. I believe that's legal in your country too? Although a suppressor would make it difficult to put aperture sights on it, and I love aperture sights. Dang, why is life so complicated? Ultimathule, Thank you for your welcome! Suppresors are legal in this country, though I believe they have have to be registered almost as a separate firearm. I don't if it is possible to get them off set to clear the aperture sights.

August 2, 2005, 01:34 PM	#16
Smokey Joe Senior Member Join Date: July 14, 2001 Location: State of Confusion Posts: 2,106	Col. Cooper's definition So, exactly what IS the good colonel's definition of a "scout rifle?"

August 2, 2005, 02:31 PM	#17
SR420 Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 3,343	Kinda, Sorta, Almost Scout Concept Jeff Cooper's Scout Rifle Concept An optimized general-purpose rifle concept by Jeff Cooper. Weight-sighted and slung: 3 kilograms (6.6 lb). This has been set as the ideal weight but the maximum has been stated as being 3.5 kg (7.7 pounds ). Length: 1 meter (39 inches) Barrel length: .48 meter (19 inches) Sighting system: Forward and low mounted (ahead of the action opening) long eye relief telescope of between 2x and 3x. Reserve iron sights desirable but not necessary. Action: Magazine fed bolt action. Detachable box magazine and/or stripper clip charging is desirable but not necessary. Sling: Fast loop-up type, i.e. Ching or CW style. Caliber: Nominally .308 Winchester (7.62 x 51 mm) or 7 mm - 08 Winchester (7 x 51 mm), with .243 Winchester (6 x 51 mm) being considered for frail individuals or where "military" calibers are proscribed. Built-in bipod: Desirable but not mandatory. Accuracy: Should be capable of shooting into 2 minutes of angle or less at 200 yards/meters (3 shot groups). Like I said "Coopers concept is an open-ended list of suggestions and recommendations." Last edited by SR420; August 3, 2005 at 07:18 AM.

August 3, 2005, 01:24 AM	#18
Smokey Joe Senior Member Join Date: July 14, 2001 Location: State of Confusion Posts: 2,106	Thanx! SR40--Thanx! That website is REALLY comprehensive.

July 29, 2005, 08:39 AM	#1
Scribe Senior Member Join Date: July 29, 2005 Location: England Posts: 249	Utility Scout Rifles I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has a Utility Scout on any action , along the lines of “The Poor Mans Scout Rifle”. I have owned Mauser 98’s since 1985 and a couple of years back had one modified in line with Ashley Emersons blue print. It is 7.62/.308 Winchester and now has an 18” barrel, Timney Field trigger and a Ramline stock with an Uncle Mike‘s butt sleeve. I have fitted a third sling point, Uncle Mikes QD swivels and an English made Ching sling. The sights are XS ghost ring and forward scope mount with a Burris 2.75 Scout scope in low mount QD rings. The costs came to about £550 plus the scope which was £125. The original barrelled action set me back a huge £50 from a friend. Truthfully I could have paid a couple of hundred more and had a Steyr Scout, but building my own held more appeal and my previous experience with a Steyr SSG was mixed. I have only shot it on the range so far, but hope to hunt with it someday. I am getting 3 shot, 2-2 ½ inch groups at 100 yards with British Radway Green Surplus ammunition. (That’s the stuff that I have heard Americans refer to as Brit S**t) French Gevelot brings it down to around 1 ½ inches on a very good day , if I do my part and don’t let the rifle down. I have been shooting for 26 years but consider my self an enthusiast rather than an expert. I would be very interested in hearing from any fellow travellers on the Utility Scout route on any tips at all. Handling , shooting at ranges greater than 200 - 300 yards, hand loading etc, better components on my next project as I plan to build a second one. Blunt honesty always appreciated.

July 29, 2005, 04:54 PM	#2
UltimaThule Senior Member Join Date: September 16, 2001 Location: Norway Posts: 458	I see you joined today. Welcome to The Firing Line! I don't own one and can't really comment on the scout thing, but your rifle sounds very much like what I would choose myself if I were to build one. I'll drop in on this thread again to see what those who actually know what they're talking about have to say... Oh, one thing. If I ever build such a rifle, I would want a suppressor on it. I believe that's legal in your country too? Although a suppressor would make it difficult to put aperture sights on it, and I love aperture sights. Dang, why is life so complicated?

July 29, 2005, 07:11 PM	#4
Dave R Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2000 Location: Idaho Posts: 6,073	I have a forward-mount scope on a rifle, but I would hesitate to call it a scout rifle. I basically put a forward mount scope on an otherwise stock Swiss K-31. So it is over-length and over-weight to be a scout rifle. However, it has made me a fan of the forward-mount scope. Very fast target acquisition. Between that and the straight-pull K-31 action, I can sometimes break 6 (stationary) clay pigeons at 100 yards in under 10 seconds. Pretty good for an old guy. Groups at 100 yards and 200 yards seem equal to those from a higher-powered, traditional mount scope. As long as the target is visible.

July 29, 2005, 07:47 PM	#5
AK103K Senior Member Join Date: May 1, 2001 Posts: 10,223	I have a Savage Scout. I added the third swivel point and a Ching sling. I'm using a Leupold Scout scope on low QD rings. At 100 yards I get 2" groups or so with surplus GI ammo and at best, just under an inch using my reloads(165gr Nosler BT's over 4064). The Savage's B-Square scope mount is a little cheesy, but it works. It would be nice if they would have added a stripper cut in the receiver, as the forward mounted scope makes feeding it this way a big plus. Using the Mauser action is the way to go here. While not really a Scout type rifle, I also have a Springfield SOCOM with a Burris Scout scope on ARMS lever rings. The Burris is OK, but I like the Leupold better. Both could be a tad lighter in power and better yet, variable, like a 1x4 or 1.5x5 and while we're at it, lets throw in a lighted dot at the cross hair.(hey, i can dream, cant I ) The SOCOM while a little more compact than the standard M1A, is still a heavy gun and really doesnt fit the Scout criteria, if it really matters. The Scout scope does work well on it, but I like my Aimpoint better. I'm going to have to try to fit a Ching type sling to it at some point. Just havent got around to it yet. Since I got my Savage I'm sold on these type slings and have made a number of my own for my other rifles using my Galco as the pattern. They are cheap and easy to make and while the Galco is a real nice sling, it sure beats paying $50 a pop.

July 30, 2005, 12:07 AM	#8
Big-Foot Senior Member Join Date: December 3, 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 404	I don't see how scout rifles should cost so much as the Steyr does. Jeff Cooper said the idea wasn't new, so get one of the originals that he mentioned and mount the scope foreward. http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976598487.htm You might find a Rem 600/660 in .308 for under $500 also.

July 30, 2005, 08:51 AM	#9
PSE Junior member Join Date: July 23, 2004 Location: stupids womb, SC Posts: 475	the best one iv had was built off a remington 600. the worst was that lug o steel springfield. the steyr is nice though iv only owned the 223 cub scout.

August 1, 2005, 10:06 PM	#11
Magnum88C Senior Member Join Date: May 18, 2004 Posts: 309	First of all I think Col Cooper's scout concept is too narrowly defined. I don't have a problem if a rifle is a bit over a meter long, it doesn't have to be 6 pounds, etc. IMO a "scout" is any handy rifle that you wouldn't mind carrying all day, and can be useful from short to medium range quickly. Kind of the rifle version of John Taffin's "packin' pistol". Only one I "scouted up" was purpose built as a utility (i.e. low-budget) scout is a Mosin M44. All I did was take the bayonet off (left the lug on) since hunting with a bayonet is not legal here, and replced the rear sight with a scope base and put on a 2.5x Leupold IER. I originally hated "scout scopes", upon taking the advice of a friend, I found out why and fixed the problem. Problem was too high a power. The ones I'd seen were 4x or more, and that's just too much magnification differential between scanning terrain looking through the scope for my eyes. I also prefer military bolt actions as they can still be loaded with strippers with the forward mounted scope. FWIW, the guys with M1A SOCOMS or even 16" FAL carbines have perfectly good, serviceable scout rifles. Remember it's about what's handy for YOU to carry, not anyone else.

August 2, 2005, 06:10 AM	#13
Magnum88C Senior Member Join Date: May 18, 2004 Posts: 309	LAK, ya got a point, but I'm free to disagree. Like I said, it's HIS idea of a scout rifle, and as HE said, it's not a new concept (meaning something was called a "scout rifle" before he wrote about it, so he, by his own admission doesn't own the title). So, since HE took the title from elsewhere, so can I. So, my definition is ANY DARN RIFLE THAT DOES THE JOB FOR YOU.

August 2, 2005, 06:53 AM	#14
SR420 Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 3,343	Well said Magnum88C. Coopers concept is an open-ended list of suggestions and recommendations.

August 2, 2005, 07:26 AM	#15
PSE Junior member Join Date: July 23, 2004 Location: stupids womb, SC Posts: 475	i once mounted a leupold scout scope on a #1 ruger mannlicher stocked 7X57 as far forward as i could get it in the rings. wasnt a "scout" but was GD fast to the shot.

August 3, 2005, 06:10 AM	#20
Magnum88C Senior Member Join Date: May 18, 2004 Posts: 309	No problem, man, you're entitled to your opinion, just like the rest of us. Perhaps we should refer to his idea as the "Cooper Scout"? Since I've noticed that not one of the production scouts actually meets all of his criteria, so I guess Steyr and Savage really shouldn't have called them "scouts"? 'Course calling them "Sorta Scout" or "Almost Scout" might have been marketing disasters. . .

August 3, 2005, 09:43 AM	#21
Olaf Senior Member Join Date: June 12, 2005 Location: not from Svalbard Posts: 346	I do not wish to debate the Scout rifle concept...there are obviously many on both sides of the issue. I would say, however, to those "naysayers"...don't knock it 'til you've tried it. If you haven't tried it...how can you have a strong opinion, one way or the other ? I can only tell of my experiences with this type of rifle. Some time ago, I converted a Remington 700, in .308, with a 20" barrel and the factory synthetic stock.... to the "Scout rifle" configuration. It was an experiment - to see if I liked the setup. Well, I must say that yes....I liked it very much. Very quick on target, nice balance to the rifle....and easy on the eyes (shooting with both eyes open). I used a 2x handgun scope for my rifle...and the 50 yard parallax setting never was a problem. I was able to get consistent 2" or smaller groups at 100 metres...no matter which ammo I used. The 2x magnification made it easy to use....and with both eyes open... I had a huge field of view. A very comfortable way to shoot. I would highly recommend this setup to anyone - at least to try. As for the specifics of the Scout rifle "concept" (weight, length, etc.)..I never have been one to get too hung up on such details - these issues are not terribly critical to the successful operation of such a rifle... so I treat them as somewhat peripheral. If one can attain all of the specifications (and wishes to put in the effort to do so), then fine. If not, so what ? I think that these "requirements" are only guidelines, anyway. Perhaps Col. Cooper would not agree....but he doesn't sign my paychecks, after all. It is an acquired taste - not everyone will like it. That is fine. As to the overpriced "Scout rifle" from Steyr...for me, it is a non-issue. I wouldn't buy one...but this does not cause me to have contempt for the concept. I would say try the setup (it can be done on a number of rifles for a relatively modest investment).... then form an opinion. You might just find that you like it that way.

August 4, 2005, 05:30 AM	#22
LAK Junior member Join Date: May 14, 2002 Posts: 2,251	Indeed, Col. Cooper has stated that the Steyr Scout is "not perfect". His concept is the refinement of the idea of the general purpose rifle. Along a similar line if you were to ask him whether "two inches of barrel" or "seven ounces of weight" would make "[your] rifle" less effective than a " true Scout" he would no doubt reply that the man carrying the rifle was far more important than the rifle itself - assuming that the rifle was at least adequate.

August 4, 2005, 06:10 AM	#23
Cpl Punishment Senior Member Join Date: August 3, 2005 Posts: 179	I believe I read in Mr Cooper's writings that his real test of whether or not a rifle is of the proper weight for a shooter isn't based upon how much the rifle weighs, but rather to take a test. The test was to hold your hands straight out in front of you at arm's extension, have the rifle, fully outfitted they way you intend to carry it, placed on the backs of your hands. If you could hold it there for a minimum of 60 seconds, the rifle wasn't too heavy. I believe Mr Cooper's Scout Rifle ideas were HIS idea of what such a rifle should be, I.E. what HE would want in such a rifle. I don't think he was setting hard and fast rules of what a "scout" rifle is. I think he'd say that of you can poerform the scout mission to acceptable standards with your given rifle, then it's just fine.