I have sporterized 4 Mod 98s into light weight scout rifles with 2 power scopes and self designed recoil compensators. The reduced recoil allows a quicker second shot with these light rifles if necessary.
Two are 8x57 with 23" barrels and two are 7x57 with 19" barrels. My eyes are such that it is slow and difficult to use open sights so I thought I'd see what a scout style rifle had to offer.

It maybe hard to believe but I found it is a faster off hand rifle than lineing up a front and rear metal sight. There is only one point of reference to line up with the target and only one point of focus as oppossed to three focal distances with the open sights;front sight, rear sight and target. It is quite similar to using a shotgun.Of course the 19" barreled rifles are somewhat faster than are the 23" barrels and easier to carry in the field.

One of the major advantages over an action mounted scope is the rapid pointing facilitated by the unimpared wide field of vision.

I'd like to hear what you have to say +positive or -negative. roger

bartsche,

If you like them, they are fine.

My problem with the scout concept is many fold:

1) Rapid re-loading a bolt action, what on earth for? Charging whitetails? For para-military use I'd rather have an accurized M1A.

2) The forward scout scope is better than irons yes, but offers no speed advantanges over a low mounted conventional scope. With a 1.5x5 set on 1.5 power I can also shoot with both eyes open, and have a wider field of view than a 2.5x scout scope.

3) If I want rapid pointing I'll use an over and under shotgun, thank you.

4) All in all a solution to a non-existant problem, IMHO.

Again if you like em', shoot it and enjoy it.

Regards,

Bob

ditto
plus I prefer the look of a full length barrel

I personally have a problem with LER/EER scopes. That is due to the conditions of MY eyesight but I think I could get the hang of it.

In some places I've been, semi-auto arms are forbidden or restricted in ways that bolt action rifles are not. In this situation the scout is good. It will also weigh less than a comparable semi-auto.

Rate of fire is often over emphasized. Effective fire is really fire on target.

Loading and unloading a bolt rifle is immensely easier (even without stripper clips/chargers) when the scope is not in the way.

Sometimes one needs to rapid point a rifle as it is the only tool available. Fit works wonders here with any firearm as does familiarity. I don't see this as a benefit of the scout rifle concept.

Form should follow function. When it does not that object will fail and Murphy's law will determine the timing of that failure. This is true in all aspects of life. These rifles were not designed for play but for a serious purpose. Their design has been influenced by manufacturing and the designers' personal considerations. But nothing is "pure".

I consider it a valid tool. However, I don't own one. Says something for my situation.

Thank you for your HO, Shadow, and your DITTO, Mikelravy,. Rapid reload, Charging White Tails???????? roger

I agree with everything Shadow said. Lawdog

I don't think the concept is all that bad. In fact, I'd like to own a Scout-type bolt-gun in .308 Win. IF I could find a custom riflesmith who could build one to my standard of quality and workmanship. So far no luck on that score, but I'm still looking! I'd want a short Model 70 action, a McMillan stock, first-rate custom barrel, good ghost-ring peep sights, and I'd want to make darned sure that the scope bases were really sturdy and secure.

The Steyr Scout leaves me feeling cold and hungry, and I think it's over-priced........

AD

I have two a 03 in 06 and a 95 in 7x57 because it was the fastest and cheapest way of mounting a scope on them. The both have 19 in barrels. They do come on target fast I belive a hair faster then my over the reciver mounted scopes.

If gunsmithing was cheap again I would have had them drilled and tapped , bolts bent and new safety installed. But I could put a Ashley scout scope mount on my self in couple of hrs and it worked out. I would say a prefer over the reciver mounts but then I wouldn't be afraid to take the scouts out hunting. I used the 03 on a hound bear hunt it worked out very well for that.

I take it that a 'scout rifle' is basically a carbine with optics? Here in Oz, our government considers us unfit to own semi's, and if you get amongst the pigs in thick brush, the rapid fire (and reload) aspect is useful. Many people use levers for this purpose, however I find them fiddly to reload. A mate has a cut down SMLE in 303Brit with open sights, and carries his ammo in stripper clips (he cops a lot of flak from us about that ). It is one of the fastest methods to accurately get rid of 10+ shots I've ever seen and used. It would be interesting to try it with one of those scopes on the barrel.

With my eyes (myopic with trifocals) I find that peep sights are just fine on those rare occasions when quick shooting is required. That may be partly due to the hunting conditions here in the California chapparal country. In other places careful, deliberate shots with a standard scope are more suitable. Under the circumstances, I find no use for the scout rifle. But . . . as the man said, if they work for you, have at it!

I was kind of hopeing to get a smattering of information pro and con from folks who have owned or do own scouts and have some experience using them in the field.

I can well understand the derogatory comments based on feelings or having somthing else that works for them. That's all interesting reading but is there anyone out there with the type of valid information for which I'm searching? roger

The good Col. Cooper has written he endorses peep sights on The Scout rifle. And you shave a fraction of a pound off the thing as well.

I guess I don't get your point. I do own two the them the pros are it is a cheap way to mount a scope on a milsurp rifle. They are a bit faster on target then over the reciver mounts how much is debateable. On very heavy recoiling rifles you don't have to worry about scope eye.


The cons are only low power scopes can be used. I like a bit more power available. I shoot variable on all my other rifles. I prefer over the reciver mounts.

I have used them for hunting they just are not as veristile as some of my other rifles. I like a bit longer barrels. I do not like the muzzle blast of the short barrels. They well work and have worked I just find that a longer barrel rifle with more scope is just more usefull to me.

Hey Roger, I've still got no use for them at all. Of course that has nothing at all to do with "your" liking them. Since they work well for you, I'm glad you have them available for your use.

http://www.accuratereloading.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB38&Number=575935&page=12&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=186&fpart=1

I like them, own a few guns set up that way, and they work well for me. I've used them in training classes from 25-yard snap head shots out to 400 yard bipod and sling-supported prone to good effect, and out to around 150 yards on game so far, from bright sun to dim dusk. I've made a successful two-second seated snap shot at 12 yards and a staff-supported 10-second standing shot at 150 yards. I prefer the heavy duplex for dim light situations.

Hot Core! Thank you. I must really be getting old because I completely forgot that thread and it wasn't that long ago. Sometimes we see things a little different but I really do like your postings. roger

I hunted with a Scout for many years. I wrote a paper on it in college, interviewed shooters who studied it under Cooper at Gunsite, and exchanged letters with Cooper and Finn Aagaard about it. I like the Scout a lot. It really is a step forward, but it�s not perfect yet. Having said that, I must admit that I no longer use one. I can best explain my position by describing what I now use and explaining why it prefer it to a Scout. But remember this is what I choose for my circumstances. It might not work for you.

The Rifle
My rifle is a pre-64 M-70 FW in a Rimrock stock with an M-8 Leupold 4x in Weaver rings & bases. It has a Latigo sling and the scope has a 4a reticle from Premier Reticle. Unloaded with sling it weighs 7.25 lbs. It happens to be a 308. The 308 is a good cartridge, but so is nearly everything between the 6.5 Swede and the 375 H&H. You could make a case for just about any of them, especially the 30-06.

This rifle also fits me and points better than anything else I�ve ever used, so it's very fast to use. The 22� barrel balances well for the offhand shots that are common where I hunt. It also helps with muzzle blast. Someone taller might like a longer barrel. Weight is about right, as I dislike recoil.

The Scope
I hunt blacktail deer in western Washington, where any buck is a trophy. After years of seeing only does, I finally found a buck feeding on the edge of a clearcut with several other deer that were not legal. Range was about 200m. I could see antlers in the binos but not in my Scout scope. I went back and forth several times to no avail. He and his friends faded into the trees as I fumbled with my rifle and binos, and my family ate a lot of beef that year. I tried a conventional 2.5x for a year but still had trouble with partly-hidden targets past about 150m. Research showed that Finn Aagaard and Jack O�Connor had met the same problem. I wrote Cooper several times about this, but he insisted that 2.5x was enough. The problem went away when I got a 4x scope.

The placement of the Scout scope is ideal on carbines because it helps them balance a little better. It�s also the best way I know to get non-folding peep sights and a scope on the same rifle at the same time. The Scout is also faster to load and unload than rifles with conventional scopes. For most hunting that makes no difference, but while control hunting for feral cattle and hogs, I have needed to reload quickly. Stripper clips would be ideal there. So would the 10-shot SMLE mag that rugeruser mentioned.

The best place for a Scout scope may be on large medium bore rifles, say from 9.3x62 to about 404 Jeffrey, because they are rarely used beyond the scope�s range limits.

If the Scout scope worked in 4x, I�d get one in a flash. And no, pistol scopes don�t work � the eye relief is wrong.

The Sling
I shoot offhand a lot. I also get enough longer shots to need a sling, but the Ching swings under my rifle and disturbs the sight picture in offhand. Cooper would have me remove my sling, but anything as vital as the sling needs to stay on the rifle. Sometimes I sling a rifle diagonally on my back (riding a bike, changing targets, handling the boat, dragging game, etc.) The Ching, especially the Galco, is awkward there.

The Latigo snugs up for offhand. It�s only a bit slower than a Ching for longer shots, and it�s long enough to easily sling diagonally. Plus, I�ve had great luck with it on game.

The Bipod
I�ve only used a bipod on machineguns. If I hunted more open country, I might put one on my rifle.

From my experience with the Scout, I learned that you have to read almost everything Cooper ever wrote on it to see what he was doing with it. In some articles, he admits a Scout does not need a scope or bipod, that it need not be a 308, or even a bolt action. In the end, a Scout is a short, light rifle with a good trigger, a good sling and good sights. I think Cooper used the Scout to mock those people who would substitute gear for skill. A flyweight carbine is hard to use well, but it will do the job if you hold up your end.

After all, if you hit the target almost anything will do, and if you don�t, nothing will.

Hope this helps, Okie John.

The information you gave here would be hard to beat. Thanks John. You notice we got a lot of Johns on this forum. roger

I have 2 Steyr Scouts. 1 in 308 and the other in 376 Steyr. I like them both but especially the 308. Both shoot very well, the 308 will shoot 1/2 MOA at 200 yds with premium hunting bullets the 376 shoots as good as I can hold it -occasionally 3/4 inches at 100yds. The 375 is somewhat limited in bullet selection because the severe recoil in a rifle this light bashes the hell out of bullet tips in the extra magazine. You could leave them out but the extra weight is somewhat appreciated. I used 270gr swift A-Frames and their flat Meplat limits the damage.
I can't think of any big game animal I couldn't successfully hunt with this pair of rifles. I hunt with all sorts of different rifles because I'm a certified rifle-nut but this is a useful pair. I like the short compact rifles when hunting in stands since they are quick handling and don't get hung up on branches etc.
I like the "gadgetyness" of the stock with bipod, storage compartment, extra mag, flip-up sites etc.. I admit it's a different kind of appeal than a beautiful piece of wood and rust-blued metal but it has a personality of it's own, I enjoy both types of rifles for different reasons.
I have a forward mount scope but took it off and replaced it with a low powered variable on both rifles. I simply find the forward mount scopes to be far inferior optically. To gain eye-relief you give up field of view. A low powered scope set low can be used quickly and with both eyes open. If you have a longer shot usually you are more likely to havce time to crank up the magnification so I just leave mine on the lowest settings until needed.
It's interesting in how some people are mainly interested in one type of rifle i.e. Custom wood/blued, stainless/synthetic, black powder, cowboy, tactical etc.. My problem is that I like em all - gets darned expensive! The scouts to me are another viable category.......DJ

I fooled with one a couple years ago for a couple reasons. First, I cannot mount a scope on a bolt action far enough forward using the receiver rings. Period. Second, when hunting or climbing rough ground, the scope is exactly where I want to grasp the rifle! These two things the Scout mount I tried did well.

What I didn't like was how high I had to mount the scope to clear the receiver ring and one piece base. Secondly, and similar is that you're limited to small, low magnification scopes. That I'm left handed kinda limits your choices in rifles too!

The best compromise I found was to use a small, regular scope (a Vari-X III 1.5 - 5) and mount it so that the aft bell hovered above the ejection port, effectively placing the scope 3" forward of normal. You gave up the carryability aspect but could mount the scope low enough and forward enough to be useful. Try this - close your eyes and shoulder your scoped RemRugChester for a running shot as you would your 870. What happens? Right. You get proper stock position but you get bonked by the scope even before you fire. Why can't we keep that position and push the scope forward to accommodate it? Because the redesign would cost a jillion bucks, that's why.

Sorry, rant mode off.

Redial

The scout rifle was concieved as a battle weapon and therein lies its virtues, in certian (wartime) situations I would rather have a more powerfull scout rifle than an anemic 223.. Consider the value of the ability to penetrate an engine block or structure or numerous other things in a battle situation. I would also consider the scout superior to the Garrand and the Springfield in the battlefield because it is fast feed, fast focus, powerfull, accurate, and lightweight. It is a good concept, but Ill stick to my 3X9V for hunting.

I made a couple on Mauser actions, and a friend has one of the Steyr-Mannlicher scouts. To me, the mid-length scope placement makes balance "weird", is very clumsy, and makes handling worse, not better, than having the scope where it should be, on the top of the receiver! NO THANKS!!

I like the scout concept, particularly without the military accessories. The older I get, the more I realize that I carry the thing more than I shoot it I hunting. I can't remember feeling recoil when shooting at game. Here in Colorado, either hunting on the plains in the river bottoms or in the mountains, I really appreciate it. With a forward mounted 2.5x scope on one of the old Remington carbines from the '60s, I have a poor man's scout that is pleasant to carry, quick to use and I can hit anything I can see well enough to justify shooting. ( just bought another one )

I made one many years ago from a Chilean Mauser in 7X57. Chopped the bbl to 19", put it in a Ramline stock, filed the rear sight base down flat and mounted a Weaver scope base on it. Topped off with a Tasco 2X pistol scope with a big 8 minute dot reticle, you can pick up a running deer in the thick stuff instantly. The Hornady 175 gr RN loads I use in it flatten deer quickly. So far it is 6 for 6 on running whitetails, all one shot kills.

My scout is ideal for what I use it for.....stalk hunting deer in heavy cover where shots are fast and close. I hunt with a lot of different rifle types and never carry the scout except when hunting under the above conditions. The whole thing was an experiment to see how a 'poor man's scout' would work. I have very little money in the thing. But, it works as advertised. Then again, a lot of other rifle/sight configurations work just as well under similar conditions, and are probably more versatile under other conditions.

For me, it gave me another reason to buy/make a gun. Some like it, others don't (shrug)! So what, if you want to see if the concept appeals to you, get or make you one and use it. Don't worry if some like to spend their time trying to discredit or lowrate the concept. I bet that you could find something in their arsenal that you'd have no use for, either!

I like mine and won't ever get rid of it. Course, I've got a lot of other rifles I say the same about.

Useful Scout sites:

http://www.steyrscout.org/project.htm

http://pw2.netcom.com/~chingesh/

I used a Savage Scout in 7-08 for a couple of years and it was fine, despite a lack of aesthetic appeal.

However, in a true hunting situation where you are considering the pros and cons of compactness and light weight, the objective of a quick handeling rifle is better met by a light single shot, IMHO. So, I went to an Encore Rifle in 223, 243, 270 and 45-70. I had in mind to cut the bbls on the 223 and 45-70, but even with the 24 inchers, the rig is only 38.5 inches long and they carry like nothing else.

All have long eye relief scopes with the eye piece flush with the base of the chamber. After a while, you get quite used to reloading for a 2nd shot, and this is done easily without taking your eyes off the game. Unless you are one that cycles the bolt with the rifle on your shoulder, there is no practical speed advantage to a bolt gun in the field anyway. If one needs a third shot, you are better off sitting down and waiting a full 20 minutes before tracking anyway.

So, its not that I don't appreciate the Scout type rifles...its just that once I went to compactness, light weight and overall quickness I wound up with a single shot, 4 bbls and no muzzle blast.

The scout setups are fast and easy to use. My only complaint is that the scope setup on a scout is not good for low light conditions.

I have no direct experience with a scout rifle, but have several that resemble the concept to varying degrees. One a Mod 94 Trapper with Williams receiver sight that has yet to miss a running shot(made 3) but has led me astray(or vice versa) in poor light conditions. My second is a SS 77/44 with a Millett SP-1 red dot. What I like about the sight, and why I think it would transfer to the Scout Concept is that it has no parallax, no field of view limitations, and shoots easily with two eyes open AND in poor light. In fact, it's so good in poor light it's almost scary. If you can see a silhouette, you can do the deed. Also, it is very light and unobtrusive. No magnification is no worse than a little in my experience. 1.5X won't let you count horns at 125 yards in twilight hours, nor will 2.5X, so what's the difference? From a rest it will shoot 300 gr paper patched rounds sub MOA. That's all I know.

Exactly

I mounted a 2.5 Leupold scout on an 870 for turkey hunting and to try the concept in general and despised it. Light transmission was lousy and a real liability first thing in the morning. I can't say if it was just that scope, but I have hunch that the placement of the scope is most of the problem. When I went to a 1.75-6 mounted in the conventional position, things started looking up.

I agree with the proponents of the system that you can make almost any shot with a 2.5X, but if you can't see the target, you have no chance.

Gabe

I read Jeff Cooper, got excited and made a 7x57 scout on a BRNO Mauser action. The moment I lopped the barrel off to about 17 inches I knew I had made a mistake. Possibly turned a fine rifle into the ballistic equivalent of a 7mm-30 Waters. Should have left it at 22 inches.

Put a LER scope on it and found it was not much good in poor light when most game appears. It was then that I knew I'd been had.

I made another 458 half scout with what I think was a 21 inch barrel but it might have been 19 inches. Wanted short barrel for sleeping in lion blinds. When suspicious or roaring lion walking around blind in dark like to be able to follow him around with rifle without accidentally hitting blind with rifle barrel and making noise. Don't want lion getting excited by suprise noises in dark when just a few feet away but like to keep barrel pointed at him in case he decides to push head into blind.

Put two sets of EAW rear bases on it both working off one base on front reciever. One base in reverse on barrel is for LER scope and one on rear reciever bridge is for normal 30 mm Swarovski 1.5-6X42 for poor light. Works good.

I use the LER scope on 458 for clients who have lost their rifles in transit but who want to shoot a buffalo. During sight in tests they do not get hit on head by scope during recoil and so they develop no fear of the rifle. They shoot well on buffalo. If they get cut and punched by the scope during sight in they get afraid of the gun, flinch and shoot poorly. I have had several 110 pound women bowl buffalo over with this rifle. No problems.

I like the 458 rifle alot but do not like the original scout design at all.


VBR,

Ted Gorsline

this debate is like most others on this site. it depends on what one likes and what the primary use will be. i made a poor man's scout using a savage "sierra" in .308,a leupold 2.5 scout scope. it suits my purpose perfectly. i use it here in florida as my "buggy gun" where most of your shots are snap shots at moving targets. i also use it from time to time as a stand gun in heavy cover.
the differences of opinion is why we have fords and chevrolets and vanilla and chocolate!!!!!

I built one on a 30-40 Krag.Cut bbl.,crowned,etc.,jeweled entire interior of action,lapped bolt in action,rebuilt to adjustable trigger,decreased weight of stock through extensive sanding sessions to schnabel foreend.Extremely quick target aquisition,action like glass,very rapid reloading capability.All that said,it was a fun project.For rapid firing it is faster than conventional in low light cond.Not for charging deer of course,but for hog hunting.And yes,they will charge you + sometimes more than one at a time.I've had it happen twice.And yes one could use a Socom 16 W/ Trijicon sights for 4 times the price.Personally,I would find that very unsporting.But to each his own.I intend to shoot one this year with a cast load in my 470 N.E.

I grew up deer hunting with this type of rifle - Model 94 30-30 that was a top eject so dad had a 2x Redfield forward on the barrel.

I still shoot & hunt with it off and on.

It was great but I think I learned bad habits - creeping forward on the stock.

A cut over my eye and I may have busted my nose on my Dad's 30-06 the first time I shot it at a deer - Yes I learned the hard way when I was 13!

I think they are fine but like I said, they may teach bad habits. Stock crawling hurts!!

I know, I'm the only one who ever did that.

I have used scout rifles for hunting and other shooting applications. Below is a quip from a previous post on another thread regarding scout rifles. I also use traditional scoped rifles. The choice of rifle depends on the type of hunting/shooting. I like them, I use them but I do say everyone should have one or use them. I think the good colonel is "over the top" when he says the scout obsoletes all other rifles. Had he not said that and maintained a more realistic viewpoint I doubt the scout rifle concept would have it's detractors.


I like the scout concept and find it useful for a wide range of applications but I do not find it the “end all†that Cooper suggests it is. From the get go (late '70s or early '80s?) I disagreed with the "committee's" restrictions on caliber, weight and OAL length and barrel length. I also have not cared for the integral bipod.

Over the years I have used a Steyr scout, a Savage scout and several other rifles configured to a general scout configurations. I have also hunted with them over a wide range of scenarios. I also just returned from a year in Iraq where I had an EOHtech mounted low in front of the handle of my M16A2 ala scout style. It was a very useful sight. I have used bolt actions, lever actions and semi autos (M16 and M1As) in scout configuration. Calibers range from the .38 super through the 30-06 and included the .223, the 6.5x55, the 30-30, the 308/7.62, the 7.65x53, the 8mm and the 45-70.

I also have handled numerous other suedo scouts most of which have the scope mounted way to high with the use of commercial mounts for military sight bases. These are not very functional and draw a lot of criticism to the scout concept. If a scout scope is used it must be mounted as low as possible with the ocular lens over the front receiver ring, not mounted way high and out over the middle of the barrel as is often seen. Unfortunately we many times see the scout concept criticized instead of the poor execution of the scout concept with such rifles.

I also agree with Cooper that the scout rifle does not need to be scoped. They are very functional with a good aperture rear sight. The smaller carbine bolt actions and lever guns fit the bill here including the Marlin '95s and guide guns. HunterJim (in his SC review) is correct in his assessment that the trophy hunter is better served with a traditional scope of more power. I do not believe the humongous crew served scopes that are the rage these days are needed. I however have not had anymore problems with "yellow light" from a low hanging Sun in a scout scope than I have in a traditional over the action scope. I have hunted in some pretty dense and dark forests and have not had any problems with target acquisition using a scout scope vs traditional scope in low light dense vegetation conditions mentioned. He also criticizes the lesser field of view of the scout scope for running game. However, if the scout scope is used correctly with both eyes open the field of view is limited only by your own eyes, not that of the scope. Used correctly, field of view is a non issue.

For a big game trophy hunter the scout may not serve the best. However to a big game hunter it will do nicely for 90% or so of their big game hunting. Do I need define the distinction between the two? I really like the scout concept and currently have 5 rifles configured as scouts. I do however, use them within their limitations and thus find them entirely satisfactory.

Larry Gibson

My review on Sniper Country. A bit dated, but the facts have not changed.

http://www.snipercountry.com/InReviews/ScoutConcept.asp

I still use the Steyr Scout, but with a low-power variable mounted over the action. This is a more effective general-purpose hunting configuration.

The main virtue of the scout concept is its short length and light weight. The main weakness of the scout concept is the forward mount scope: too weak and not enough light gathering power. It does work well on the square range from 8:00a to 5:00p because this is a high-contrast target environment.

Allen,

Jim Brockman can make you one.

jim

My father-in-law made a gift of a Manlicher-Schonauer scout to me several years ago. The barrel is a replacement in stainless steel and has an integral scope mount machined in it. Caliber is 6.5 M-S. The work was done by Fred Wells.

Around a hundred yards it's a great rifle (that's a statement about my abilities), very easy to point and find aim. For some reason I always feel like the scope is more vulnerable to damage hanging way down the barrel when I carry the rifle.

I have two scout rifles. the Styer and a jungle carbine 303. They both work great. I think though, if you mounted the ACOG 4 power set up for the 308 on the steyer you may just have the best of all worlds. Now where the hell do I find $1000 to buy an acog?

!!! Hey, Hot Core; talk about a resurection.

Thanks for the input ,guys. keeproger

I really enjoy my Steyr Scout (308). It works great on jack rabbits. Should do fine on deer or elk.

I will build one on a mauser in 7x57 one day.

Low scope, low sights, and a stock designed for that type set up is nice to use. It fits and mounts like a shotgun (i.e. "fast").

I believe the sub text of Colonel Cooper's writings is, "get your ass out in the woods and walk some of that lard off".

LD

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
I will build one on a mauser in 7x57 one day.LD

And you will not regret it. roger