http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/PDF/NewProducts/KM77FRTG_MKII-A-S.pdf

It has the new trigger, has to be an improvement, maybe they are listening to it's customers, but seriously, how many people want a 16.5" scout rifle?

I think a barrel with same contour as the 350RM, cut at 20", in the same SS/Laminate without the quarter rib would suit me much better. I just cannot imagine looking through a scope mounted the way the ad has it. Is this just Jeff Cooper's dream gun or what?

Comments?

I would like to see Ruger make the RL (ultra light)in both those calibers and .260 as well.
I think in the scout rifle it would be usfull out to 200 yards max , but would be dandy for special purposes , stand hunting heavy timber, close cover hog & black bear hunting, of corse deer and such at short range.
Another use would be a fine surval rifle for a guy backpacking with it slung accros his back, I would prefer a 308 for that purpose.

The new Rugers will be interesting, I wonder if I can buy the steel bottom piece for my ultra light .257 roberts...tj3006

The barrels should be 20" minimum; 22" would be far better. You can always cut one to 16.5" if you need a pocket rifle, but you can't put the length back once it's gone.


Okie John

rugers new 350 rem mag has a 22" barrel i think...should be perfect!

like this one owned by rjm

boom stick,
Where did the open sights come from on that Ruger? Its the only thing missing from an otherwise excellent package on my Ruger 350RM.
Cheers...
Con

they look like negc...p.m. rjm for confirmation

I looked at a Ruger Scout rifle at the Reno gun show last weekend. FWIW, I am not impressed. I think that they should have used a matte finish with the laminate stock instead of the gloss blue; the barrel is way too short, however I like the 1/4 rib but would not mount a scope on it - I would still mount it on the receiver. If I bought one it would only be because it was chambered for 358 Win. I wish Kimber would chamber the 84 in 358. I'd be the first in line. Lou

I have no business with a such short barreled rifle...22" is a minimum

I have only handled the Ruger scout , have not shot it. The one I handled was in 308 Win.I felt the laminated stock made it to heavy for it' purpose. It seemed un balanced.I am unsure
if at a lighter wt the balance would be better , but it couldn't hurt. I also think that for what thje rifle is intended the 308 is ideal.

The "scout" rifle concept is for a light fast handling rifle. It has a short barrel with a forward mounted scope to take advanage of firing with both eyes open.
This works really good on moving targets, if this is what you are looking for then the "scout" type rifle is for you.
However, if you are looking for a light weight hunting rifle then it probably isn't.
The problems with the forward mounted scope is low magnifcation, and poor light gathering as the scope is far away from your eye.
I have never had a problem with the short barrel, but I guess this depends on what cartridge you are shooting.
I have a Steyr Scout in .376 steyr 19" barrel. I used it this year on black bear and found out real quick that I had the wrong scope set-up for late evening hunts. I was able to take a real nice boar, but I would definitly use a regular scope set-up with the scope close to the eye, before going back.

IMHO they need about 1/8" sanded off the sides of the stock and some backup iron sights, then they'd work as a decent truck gun.

Great feedback....I do like the new guns finish and the trigger should be better, NEVER want a barrel much under 20 but a decent weight in 18-19 in a higher expansion ratio round i.e. 358 would do but bring more blast a little closer to the ears, but it would handle great, laminate stocks are a good bit heavier and a scope at dusk i.e. scout or as I found using pistol scoped handguns can be tough.

I gather Ruger might have done better to do a gun like the one above, lighter stock, irons, with likely heavier barrel contour, and scoped traditionally.

Perhaps if the sales are lacking in the scout gun they will figure it out? I guess if running boar was the target.....then a 30-30 might do fine also!

I just wonder where the test marketing is done/with who....hunters.....bean counters....it took winchester a long time to come back to a crf and now Ruger awhile to get a better trigger.....I can betcha if I were running a business, I would not have had sales lacking for that long losing market share to foreign mfg's.

Well, I DO expect the 358 and 338F to come out in a 22" standard 77. We will see, have not seen either way but might get to Orlando Shot Show in January and find out.

I'm no fan of Rugers in general but rjm's rifle DOES interest me. Nice configuration in that caliber. Like the irons too.

I'm unsure of just WHAT the new .338 Federal was designed for, when the .338-06 goes up and down in popularity and IMHO offers more.

FN in MT

I think a lot of Ruger's current issues come from the company redefining itself after Bill Ruger's death. Change can come at a glacial pace in privately held companies, and when those firms prosper in the long term it's because the man at the top imparts a strong sense culture to the thing. Bill Ruger certainly did that, but the company could have used some other points of view.

But now they have proprietary cartridges, which I doubt would have seen the light of day under Bill Sr.'s commmand. They also make a Scout-type rifle, the 77 Hawkeye thing is in the works, the revolver lines got a shot in the arm with the Anniversary, New Vaquero, Bisley Hunter and Alaskan models, and they're making 358's.

It could be a lot worse.


Okie John

quote:

Originally posted by Con:
boom stick,
Where did the open sights come from on that Ruger? Its the only thing missing from an otherwise excellent package on my Ruger 350RM.
Cheers...
Con

...ok, I'm hear...

The barrel length of the Ruger I have is 18.25" from muzzle to the bolt face. The rifle balances perfectly with a regular eye relief scope mounted on the receiver. The front sight is a Williams. The rear a NECG. I didn't have the work done as I bought the gun as is off of Gunbroker.co. If you have one done put the NECG front sight on as it is easier to change the blades for height or type.

As to the Ruger Frontier...without a scope on the rifle the gun feels very muzzle light. Put an IER scope on the rib and the balance becomes almost perfect.

I wrote Ruger a detailed letter two years before the original blue Frontier came out about the bringing out a scout type rifle and why theirs would do well. I told them to copy the 18.5" limited edition carbine that was made for one of the big distributers in .358 Winchester but make it in stainless steel with their synthetic stock...that included their excellent banded front sight. For the scout mount, just copy the one off their #1 and INCLUDE THE FOLD DOWN REAR SIGHT!!! This way a shooter could quickly swap between a regular eye relief scope a scout scope and a flip up open sight...or buy a NECG clamp-on peepsight and fold down the rear sight. In addition those who didn't like the scout rib could just take it off and all there would be was 4 small filler screws... Having a regular barrel contour a buyer could also switch out to a laminated, walnut of aftermarket stock with ease....but apparently they only half listened.

This is my "Scout" rifle... Started off as a Remington M700 Youth synthetic in .308. A B-Square Scout Mount was added with a Leupold IER scope and a NECG peepsight on the rear Weaver base.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/030306RemingtonAll-Around004.jpg

By using a LimbSaver slip-on recoil pad over the Remington recoil pad the LOP becomes perfect for 3 season shooting and with the pad off perfect for heavy winter clothes.

By removing the peepsight one can also change over to a regular eye relief scope for long range hunting. This a Redfirld Widefield with the AccuTrac reticle and balistic drop knob..

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/030306RemingtonAll-Around010.jpg

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/030306RemingtonAll-Around011.jpg

...or just with a peepsight...

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/030306RemingtonAll-Around014.jpg

This is my travel, backup, rainy day, do anything ifle...it is what the Ruger Frontier could have been...

Bob

I'll be waiting for the 358 to come out in the new hawkeye M77.

358 it's a btdt round
338-08.. yeah.. less bullets, less bullet weights, and less velocity by bullet weight? GREAT CHOICE

I'm tire of it!!!!!!!!, if ya don't like it, don't buy it (the 338F) but quit badmouthing it.

Personally, I have a 338-08 and it works just fine on anything I hunt in Wyoming.

Myself, I don't like 243s but I sure don't badmouth the cartridge or someone who does like it.

quote:

Originally posted by Elkslayer:
I'm tire of it!!!!!!!!, if ya don't like it, ... but quit badmouthing it.

just cleaned up that quote a little.

Please take this in humor and with a friendly tone,
The man asked for OPINIONS on the 2 rounds, I provided mine.
I don't like the 338, I think it is as moronic to bring it out as a factory round, as the WSM and WSSM, and saums. It does NOTHING new, and is quite a bit less than existing things.

These are facts.. you can NOT, at the same pressure, in the same length barrel, run as heavy a bullet in the 338 as fast as you can the 358... certainly it's a small amount.. about 1/2 of the difference of how fast you can push a 220gr bullet in a 308 compared to a 358.

fact - there are NO cheap practice 338 bullets.

fact - there are no pistol bullets to shoot for plinking and varmiting..

and the 358 is one of the HOTTEST gunsmith requested cartridges, and was (is? will be?) a winchester custom shop round, due to demand.


Sorry, I just don't get why federal didn't revise the 358 and have at it.

Sort of like the 8mm rem mag.. sure, it's got it's followers, but it's a dead duck in sales

jeffe

Just as yourself, I'll feel free to voice my opinion.

Jeffe,

it isn't quite useless...you can always run a reamer in and make it a 338-284Win out of it. Give federal a little slack, they are new at the "roll your own" cartridge business and it takes time to figure out something intelligent and gap-filling to market. Heck, in ten years they might come out with a series of short RUM's and surprise us all.

Rich

I think both cartridges are quite usfull.
I can't see how a .338 180 grain acubond would not be a great hunting cartridge, even if actual balistics come up well short of the 2800 federal claims. I would want a 22 inch tube on mine and as a matter of fact I would prefer a 338,06 or 35 whelen to either of the two,
But the .338 federal in my opinion is in no way inferior tho the .358 win.
I would take longer shots with the .338 but the .358 hits harder up close, I can think of no reason why I would shoot pistol bullets in a .358, mabye cast ones for cheap practice , but you can cast .338 rifle bullets too...tj3006

If you want a fast handeling, easy to carry, hard hitting hunting rifle out to 200yds.+ than either cartridge in the scout make up will do just fine. Yesterday ,with one of my 8mm x57 scouts, hiting deer size targets off hand at 300 yds. was difficult but doable after a little practice. roger

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

These are facts.. you can NOT, at the same pressure, in the same length barrel, run as heavy a bullet in the 338 as fast as you can the 358... certainly it's a small amount.. about 1/2 of the difference of how fast you can push a 220gr bullet in a 308 compared to a 358.

fact - there are NO cheap practice 338 bullets.

fact - there are no pistol bullets to shoot for plinking and varmiting..

Hey jeffe, all this are truly facts, but do you feel the same about the .338-06/.35 Whelen to?

Nice debate, having owned a 338 Win mag, and 338-06, I DO like the '06 version and would possibly buy one if something other than a fly weight barrel Weatherby were made, the 358 same thing, and to my knowledge ONLY the BLR was made in it till Ruger just made their announcement, and I may try one------now that my buddy had to take my 350 SS/SYN Ruger after slamming his buck in the dirt!

I prefer a bolt. On the WHY federal made it, hmmmmm my guess: Federal wanted to stamp their name on something, the '06 had Asquare, and they knew the WSM's attracted interest, albeit perhaps not a long term success, they knew people were interested in short action rounds, and efficiency, they KNEW the 338 had a great following in the win mag and the bullets were/are very effective, meanwhile not comparing it to any other round that is similar like the 358.

To me, Jeffoso, I see ALL your points as to what the 358 offers, and I LIKE the round, but I DO like the 338F also, as it may VERY well get the same job done on game up to elk, out to 300 yds, with a little less recoil, which is what many average hunters need/ LESS recoil to practice more, heck as an ammo company more practice means MORE ammo sold, but for the game it means better shot placement/clean kills.

I don't think there is any sufficient to knock the 338F even if there is an application overlap. Not everyone will/would want to load pistol bullets, or shoot a griz, but to me I would like to see any elk or deer that got hit with either a 210 partition from a 338F or a 225 partition in a 358 and tell me that the 338F hit them 'lighter' or that they are going to take longer to die with a 210 338 bullet through their vitals vs a 225 358.

I KNOW if you flat out compare the performance and option to use pistol bullets you are right.

BUT, I also know that there IS going to be a recoil reduction with the 338F, also going to be more factory loads available-hopefully lasting over time unlike perhaps the 260 which may fade like many. Also, you ARE still slinging a mid bore dia slug with good SD proven to penetrate/kill. I think it will do what a Win mag does minus 100 yds. I guess an equal analogy is the 338-06 vs 35 whelen debate, as the 270/280, same capacity, similar field performance.

Perhaps the biggest difference is in the owners perception. I say let the round's record do the talking when many hit the field by next season, as I think from an 'end field result' standpoint, it WILL be lethal and successful as a result. I think the thing will take LOTS of deer and other game for hunters with reliability. Will it do better than a 358? I do not believe so, but is or will it kill any less or be inferior on game? I really doubt it.

But, I will wait for the results to come in as that will be the best tests of all. Perhaps it will cut into 358 sales or rebarrel jobs. But that is not the debate. Heck I may buy and try both come next year. I do shoot pistol bullets in my Marlin 357, but I doubt I would shoot a lot for practice in a 358.

Dry firing is even cheaper for practice, and then there is always my 6BR shooting 70TNT's for about the same price as a 358 pistol bullet, but it does 3400fps, MUCH flatter, and I'll bet more accurate down range on varmints.

Ok, I am not trying to start any flames but present my thoughts and logic on the subject. I have no stake in the 338F, but I do like the round. Arguments well made about how it lacks what a Win mag does etc. etc., but I hate to take the beating I get from one, if I can get the job done without it! Seriously I would fire VERY few rounds with my Win mag, at the bench, MANY more of the '06, and the 338F would get even longer range sessions. That should be worth something?

I think for the reloader, a reasonably priced 200gr hornady will be a good deer bullet with similar down range trajectory and plenty of energy to 300 yds that will penetrate and destroy alot of tissue in its path just as a 225 would do in a 358.

Those 338 bullets are less expensive than 358 Sierra's if you want to talk economy, and better BC/SD than 200gr 358's, not sure if 225 Hornady's are made in 358, overall I see a perhaps small advantage to a 358 in overall mass and frontal area but IS it going to kill any quicker is the 64,000 dollar question.

Less bullets? I only need a 200 hornady for deer and a 210 partition or a 185 x for any larger animal I would shoot up to elk in the 338F.

Less weight, true, but still much more lead than a 7/08 or 308 as well as frontal area, LESS velocity=well for same bullet weight, but if you run two similar bullets of equal BC/SD than the playing field seems leveled, so OVERALL ALL things considered I think there may be less 'difference' in the two rounds.

I applaud Federal for commercializing a round that was never used much, and Sako/Tikka/Ruger and perhaps Remington and others for mfg rifles so there is a faster less expensive way for hunters to acquire a mid bore with factory ammo that has reasonable recoil allowing more practice but a solid level of killing power for the ranges most game is dropped, this side of 300 yds.

If enough people try it, and the ammo companies keep supplying ammo, then this might have a better long term future than say the 260. I hear 260 ammo is scarce.

Personally, I think for deer the 260/6.5x55 and 7/08 are great, and when I go over that, I could be just as happy using a 338F/358, but losing the ability to connect with varmints at further ranges if you desired a versatile rifle.

I think if I only hunted varmints thru deer, the smaller rounds would be fine, but if I mainly hunted deer to elk, the 338F and 358 would be fine. I guess it depends on what you hunt most often.

If I hunted where I needed long range capability often and large bears were common, I might step up to the '06, Win mag, or Whelen just for some added measure.

Let's suppose Jack Oconnor touted the 280 most of his career and then say in today's time the 270 Win came out. Does that mean because it is new, similar it is less effective? I don't think so. I think it is a good round in itself but yes the 280 can put out slightly heavier slugs, but I hear the 150 partition and even 160 partition has taken many LARGE animals, i.e. Elk, Moose, and bears.

I think the 338 F can and will stand on it's own based on success in the field, time will tell, but I strongly believe it will on game under 300 yds. I never heard a 338Win mag not delivering at 400 with shot placement.

I rest my comparison there.

quote:

Originally posted by 6.5BR:
I rest my comparison there.

A nice piece of pros I must say and I buy into it except for the stand on its own comment. It will probably generate sales for a short number of years and as the ripple disapates it'll be relagated to the interest level of the .348 and .35 Rem. or at best the dieing .358. There is just to much cartridge choice out there today and it looks like most of it is flash in the pan or as necessary as tits on a bore hog.

You asked for opinions ; well if you buy one in .338F you'll be able to hand down a collecters piece to your kids and grand kids roger

Aw Hell!

[Rant on]

With the opinions expressed against this cartridge (338Federal) let's just scrap them all because no one can present an argument that we ever need anything more than a good 30-06.

It has a wide vareity of bullets to select from, readily available ammo, every gun manufacure makes them in many different configurations, it has a long history of proven performance, etc., etc.

Personally, I like vareity!

At my age I have accumulated a bunch of firesticks.

If I need to use a varmint rifle I have at my disposal: 22LR, 22WMR, 17MKII, 17HMR, 17 Mach IV, 221 Fireball, 223 rem, 22-250, 250 Sav., 6mm Rem. An '06 could replace all of these with either or bullet selection or reduced loads.

Need a deer rifle? 250Sav., 6mm Rem, 270win, 280Rem, 7x57, 7 RemMag, 308win, 30-06, 338-08, 338-06, 358Win, 35 Whelen, 350RemMag, 44Mag Marlin 1894, 45Colt Marlin 1894, and a 47-70 or two. Any argument that a '06 couldn't replace all of these?

Elk? 270win, 280Rem, 7x57, 7 RemMag, 308win, 30-06, 300WinMag, 338-08, 338-06, 358Win, 350RemMag, 35 Whelen, 375H&H, and a 47-70. Again, many elk have fallen to the '06.

Really big game? Africa? American bison? 338-06, 300WinMag, 358Win, 350RemMag, 35 Whelen, 375H&H, 45-70. Hmmm, '06 again has BTDT.

Tell me why any of the above are necessary when I could just shoot a 30-06?

[Rant off]

Elkslayer..

we totally agree... and i'll go back to saying why do we NEED anything but a 7mauser

just kidding and happy thanks givings
jeffe

quote:

why do we NEED anything but a 7mauser

i know you meant 45-70

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

why do we NEED anything but a 7mauser

i know you meant 45-70

ah, no.. talking about turnbolt guns, with nitro loads ...

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

why do we NEED anything but a 7mauser

i know you meant 45-70

..if the .45-70 was .452 instead of .458 and could shoot all the pistol bullets made it would really be something, especially in a Ruger #1-S...but without that it is just a 100+ year old hasbeen...

Bob

Elkslayer I agree that the 30-06 is still the Cats Meow when it comes to getting the job done. Yep, just pick the right bullet and the deer, moose, elk or big bear will be pushing up flowers from the grave.

My varmint rig is an old Remington shooting the .222 caliber, nothing fancy but it gets the job done to my satisfaction.

My big gun is a .358 caliber and I plink with those cheap pistol bullets down at the gunstore. My serious shooting with the .358 puts a 250 grain bullet sailing out the barrel at 2835fps and that ain't just whistling Dixie.
Good Hunting.......TONK

I think this prety much brings us back to the good old 30,06. I don't call myself tj3006 for nothing, I started my currant collection with a 30,06 , and every shot I have taken at a game animal since then , (shamfully few) could well have been done with the old springfield, So why do I need the 20 some other rifles I have ?
I don't ! But I just love the darn things, so Il'' keep and enjoy most of them and probably buy quite a few more before some prety nurse pulls a sheet over my face, in I hope at least 30 years. Then my daughter can sell them and put one of my grand kids,(1st is on her way through school) ...tj3006

The Scout rifle is like many other things in life. Like a Ferrari or a Mooney, not for most people.

Jeff Cooper built a 35 Whelen Scout, but continued to prefer his 308 Win Scout.

A Scout takes training and field use to appreciate. Something that won't happen at a gun show table, inside a gun store, or a few visits to the shooting range.

At Old Gunsite, was fun watching the best in the class shoot double traps with their Scout, then immediately shoot Xs at 400 yards with the same rifle, ammo, and without adjusting their sights.


Was on Cooper's Babamkulu Trek where everyone had been trained on the Scout rifle. We took 48 animals ranging from kudu, wildebeet, zebra, mountain reedbuck, klipspringer, warthog, bushbuck, etc. Distances ranged from 10 yards (wildebeest) to 400 yards (kudu). Never saw so many one-shot stops. Was that due to the rifle ? Or due to the high level of training and competency of the shooters/hunters ? We can debate that. But might try similar hunt with conventional rifles with equally trained and prepared folks to obtain real data. Good excuse for an African trip.

Specifically, have built similar rifles to what Ruger is offering now on their left-hand action. Like mine.

Again, the Scout is not for most people or even many people. Would never try to convince someone to buy one or use one. Each of us finds what we like and enjoy.

With regard to Ruger triggers, was lucky and found a gunsmith who could tune them to whatever was needed years ago.

i thought jeff had a 350 remmag scout... the lion scout... wasn't aware of a 35 whelen

jeffe

Think he referred to his 350 Rem Mag as a 360 Fireplug. Was built on a slightly longer than necessary action to allow the bullet to be seated out further and increase case capacity a little.

Cooper had a 35 Whelen built on a Springfield '03 action. Soon after Cooper's was built, my brother built a similar one.

My brother was also along on the Bamamkulu Trek. On that trip, he carried a '95 Chilean Mauser in original 7 x 57 converted to Scout configuration by Gayl Wiegand.

Hot Core !!Are you taking all this in? roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Hot Core !!Are you taking all this in? roger

Ahhh...yes!
---

quote:

Originally posted by Hammer:
Was on Cooper's Babamkulu Trek where everyone had been trained on the Scout rifle. We took 48 animals ranging from kudu, wildebeet, zebra, mountain reedbuck, klipspringer, warthog, bushbuck, etc. Distances ranged from 10 yards (wildebeest) to 400 yards (kudu). Never saw so many one-shot stops. Was that due to the rifle? Or due to the high level of training and competency of the shooters/hunters? We can debate that.

So..., what do you think Roger? I'm fairly certain I know the answer.
---

Hey Roger, You really need to go to wherever they tell you how to post flicks on this Board and show these folks your "Scout".

The Colt 1911 is not for most people.

Takes training. Takes practice.

Even then, not all will appreciate it.

So most folks should stick with DA revolvers or Glocks.

And the folks who appreciate the 1911 should not concern themselves with people who don't appreciate them.

The same can be said of the Colt SAA Peacemaker.

Many consider the Peacemaker unsafe in untrained hands, which is true. Those folks should stick with New Model Rugers, which ain't bad in their own right.

To each his own in America.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:
Hot Core !!Are you taking all this in? roger

Ahhh...yes!
---

quote:

Originally posted by Hammer:
Never saw so many one-shot stops. Was that due to the rifle? Or due to the high level of training and competency of the shooters/hunters? We can debate that.

So..., what do you think Roger? I'm fairly certain I know the answer.

When someone is really familiar with their rifle and has a lot of experience with it , be it scout or not, the perfomace usually is exemplary. ---roger

quote:

Originally posted by Hammer:
Think he referred to his 350 Rem Mag as a 360 Fireplug. Was built on a slightly longer than necessary action to allow the bullet to be seated out further and increase case capacity a little.

Cooper had a 35 Whelen built on a Springfield '03 action. Soon after Cooper's was built, my brother built a similar one.
My brother was also along on the Bamamkulu Trek. On that trip, he carried a '95 Chilean Mauser in original 7 x 57 converted to Scout configuration by Gayl Wiegand.

Hammer,
not being a jerk, but the 350 remmag scout was the "lion scout"

quote:

Cooper also commissioned "Lion Scout," chambered for the .350 Remington Magnum cartridge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_rifle

but's it's easy to become confused from his writing

quote:

As a long and satisfied advocate of the cartridge commercially referred to as "350 Remington Magnum" I am somewhat unsatisfied with the prevailing terminology. At the behest and advice of John Gannaway, we now load it with a 250-grain semi-spitzer bullet slightly extended, permitting a 2½-grain increase in powder capacity in cartridges to be fed through actions slightly longer than the parent Remington 600 and 660. This combination shows a starting velocity of 2500 foot seconds from the 19-inch barrel of the Lion Scout, which is based upon the ZKK 601 short action. These ballistics duplicate those of the 35 Whelen, but are obtained in a much more compact weapon, which has proved itself to me as "the Lion Scout." Therefore, I intend to refer in the future to this cartridge as the "360 Short," as a slightly improved version of the original "Fireplug" cartridge. This avoids a lot of unnecessary explanation.

though from hsi writing's, cooper never endorsed the 1903 as a scout rifle, though his daughter had a "pseudo-scout"

quote:

We were somewhat startled recently to see a "Springfield Scout" proclaimed on the cover of the American
Rifleman. We investigated immediately and found to our relief that the piece referred to bore no resemblance
either to the production scout now about ready for release in Austria, or to daughter Lindy's Springfield
"pseudo−scout," which distinguished itself recently in Africa. Certainly no one owns a copyright on the term
"scout," but I do my best to keep the concept consistent.

http://www.dvc.org.uk/jeff/jeff4.pdf