I was just offered a Remington Mohawk in 222Rem for the cost of the action. Even at a very low price, I paused. I first thought about cleaning it up for my younger son but a peek down the barrel told me I would have to replace the barrel. Someone had left it in a sealed case as there are large pit holes in 3-4 places down the barrel. I love short-barreled bolt guns for their ease of use in brush country and getting in and out of a UTV. First off, I’m wondering how the group feels about these short carbines.

My second concern, since I’ll have the little 600 stripped down to the action, I’m thinking about rebarreling to either 223 or maybe a 6mm, 257, or 7mm wildcat. If I go that far, I thought maybe I’d go ahead and build a Scout rifle similar to Jeff Cooper’s first version of the Scout concept which he called Scout 1.

What do you think about all of this?

Rebarrel to 223 and leave well enough alone or go for a 223-based wildcat?

Go full Scout 1 or just put a normal 1-4 Leupold on it and go about my business?

Thank you for your input,

RC

This is just me, because I dont have one.....
I would barrel it to 221 fireball with a 20" barrel. Still keep the compact size, 221 is very efficient.
But..... I have a 6 TCU I built on a mini MK X. It works for varmints, and a dozen kids have used at as their first deer rifle. If I did it again I would do it in 6/223 and not bother with improved.

You're asking questions only you can answer, but it were mine it would have a new barrel in 223. It would be a fast twist to handle heavy bullets and be at least 21" long. Ammo would be easy to obtain and, in my opinion, just as effective as any wildcat round based on the 223 case.

If you're dead set on the scout rifle concept, make it a 350 legend. There could be ammo availability problems with this route. I'm not familiar with this round, but on paper it looks like a short range deer and hog round.

I used to use an original 600 in 308 as my primary deer rifle. I loved how handy that 18" barrel was, but the muzzle blast was obnoxiously loud. That's why I would suggest a longer barrel. Not really that much difference in handling between an 18" and a 21" barrel, but your ears will thank you.

I'd likely buy it, and see how it actually shot -
if god, leave it alone

if junk, rebarrel to 223 wylde

Make sure you clean the barrel good before passing judgement. I've thought barrels were rusted and it turned out to be oxidized globs of bullet jacket.

If the barrel is toast, the easiest conversion will be to .223. Just remove the .222 mag spacer. Ammo and spent brass plentiful. If you convert to a larger case diameter, the boltface will need to be opened up.

Go for the Scout if you desire. The receiver is D&T'd of course, so you can always go conventional. With quick release mounts you could switch back and forth depending on needs. You could have two scopes. A low power LER for the Scout mount and a higher power variable for the receiver mount.

Good hearing protection a must! Just like with short barreled AR's.

My Father had a 600 Mohawk in .308. Nice little gun. I was saving it for my Grandson, but that didn't work out.

My Grandmother's favorite deer (Montana Mule Deer) hunting rifle was a .222. We went on our last hunt together when she was 84 and she passed away the following year. Neck shot at around 100 yards. DRT.

Good luck on your project.

Now that is a great memory!

Thanks for your replies. I honestly wouldn’t have it as a 222. If the barrel were good, I would punch the chamber to 223. However, in researching the 222 chambering of the 600, it turns out they made them with 1:14” twist. That makes this rifle a 5.5-lb varmint rifle with the original barrel. I am going to rebarrel it with a Remington take-off 1:8” twist 223 barrel. I’ll throat it to take advantage of the longer magazine available in the 600 over the AR15 magazine.

I’m still on the fence about the scout concept. Maybe I’ll just rebarrel and shoot it a bit to see what I think about the rifle in standard configuration. The forward mounted scope still intrigues me…

Thank you,

RC

Easy: the Scout rifle concept by Cooper was the dumbest idea to hit the shooting community, ever, and was just developed by him so the could sell more articles to Guns and Ammo magazine. Mounting the scope forward does NOT make them faster, and certainly not easier, for target acquisition.
The Germans, in WW2, already had the concept in the ZF41 Sniper; a really bad idea then, and now.
As for the rife, get it and shoot it. I, personally, have a 600 in 350 Rem Mag; the smallest caliber I want in that small of a rifle/carbine.
But the scope is back on the receiver where it belongs.

284 on a 600
5-6 lbs of pure terror

I don’t think the scout concept is a dumb idea. I’m not a diehard fan of Cooper’s but I am of Finn Aagaard. He thought a lot of the scout concept and owned and hunted with a couple. I’ve never used a forward mounted scope but I have shot a lot of red dot sights mounted in the forward position for run and gun games. There is no question to me there is a less obstructed view of your surroundings when you move the red dot farther forward. But I can see how there could be issues with magnification.

Scout. Only did it so I wouldn't have to drill the receiver. bushy 2-6x, 19" barrel, ramline stock

Thanks for your reply. Do you run into issues using the scope at any of the higher magnifications like 3x and above?

I have two rifles with scout scopes and like them a lot. Just throw the gun up with both eyes open, put the crosshairs in the 2.5x circle where you want the bullet to go and press the trigger. But a conventionally mounted low power variable is just as good.
Don’t get too wrapped around the sighting system and concentrate on a short, light, handy and accurate rifle.

If I bought that rifle it would get a barrel in .300 HAM’r and basically be a .30/30 boltgun.

I have a model 660 in .308 with a 20 inch barrel and love it. So does my wife who occasionally lets me shoot it. Two more inches of barrel do make a difference in muzzle blast at least to me.

Considering how few 600 and 660s were made I swear half of them ended up in the PNW. Very common at one time here.

As far as the scout concept is concerned it never did anything for me but if you like it go for it.

I like the 600 in .222 great nephews and great grandsons have taken several deer with mine. Shoot it and see if it shoots okay and if so leave it alone.

I’ve had several 600 and 660’s over the years in 222, 308, and 6mm and to this day, I don’t know why I got rid of them. The only bad thing about them was the plastic bottom metal. It tended to warp.

small field of view. I don't use 2 eye's.

quote:

Originally posted by Wildcatter:
Thanks for your reply. Do you run into issues using the scope at any of the higher magnifications like 3x and above?

If you don't want it, I'll take it for a 6x45mm conversion.

Uncle Grinch--Agreed the plastic bottom does warp. I replace that with metal and add a bolt release to all of mine, That plastic use to be a few bucks now even the plastic is several dollars. I had extra stock so I have a shorter version for youth that I can switch back to full length when needed.

Scout concept is flawed and a misconception of target acquisition; sure, you keep both eyes open, but you pay for that with a much smaller FOV; realize that you do the same thing with a rearward mounted scope, and have a far greater FOV. I would rather see the target with magnification than with none; why use a scope at all?
Yes, forward mounted scopes are a solution to a nonexistent problem and create more issues than they solve.
Good only in theory; poor in practice.
Short fast rifles; good. Scout scope concept: bad.i
But as with anything, use it if you want to. There are probably dumber rifle and hunting ideas out there but right now I can't think of one.
Oh, yes, I do have one so I know how they work. And I actually shoot it. It's a 375 Flanged Magnum.

Dpcd,
Are you saying you have a forward mounted IER on a 375 flanged? What type of rifle and optic?

Yes; I build them on Mosin actions and Ruger Barrels; note the quarter rib. One is a 45-70 and one a 375 FL Mag. I used Bushnell LER scopes. I do not like shooting them; just building them. I built them because I can, not because it's a good idea.

With the advent of the LPVO, I think there isn’t much use for the scout scope. Most are not that good optically, and while if you have a rifle that fits you so well that you always get your eye in the right spot it can be very effective, a LPVO with illumination makes it effectively a red dot sight, which is faster.

That being said, the scout scope isn’t even the central part of Cooper’s scout concept.

A scout rifle is supposed to be capable of handling larger animals, like elk, so a .22 doesn’t go with that idea.

I think a light, handy carbine is a good thing.

If you want a light, handy, smaller game rifle (deer on down) then the .223 is probably a good choice.

If the barrel is shot by shooting results, then rebarreling makes sense.

I’d probably consider either .260 or .223 as the choices.

I’ve got a 673 in .350 rem mag. I did put a scout scope on it and put a bunch of rounds through it, but consider the scope combined with the recoil to be a reason I’ve never hunted with the thing. I’ve also got a 6.5 rem mag, which has a conventional scope and I’ve shot coyotes with that, but the muzzle blast is unpleasant and it’s not really that much faster than a .260 given the short barrel.

What is LVPO? And why did every Scout rifle shown by Cooper have the scope half way down the barrel? To correspond with his, Two eyes open, theoretically faster, (it's not), theory. As I said, all he wanted to do was sell magazine articles. I can't fathom why anyone would promote such a thing, now.

Low power variable optic.

Autocorrect does strange things.

If you had read Cooper more, you might have found that he did not consider the scout scope definitive… he did want it as an option, and I don’t recall him saying it was faster, but rather it preserved peripheral view. I don’t really see the advantage he claimed there-

It also kept the action open from the scope. Again, he had his reasons that he listed that as a positive… not that I found them all persuasive, but his reasoning was there.

I don’t think the scout scope works as well as he claimed it did… but it’s not as bad as you are implying, either, IMO. I do think Cooper understated how much work you need to do to be able to use a scout scope instinctively- I tried, and while I got better at it, it never became second nature for me.

It works after a fashion. It can be both fast and accurate- I’ve seen folks who it works for, I’m just not one of them.

You have to admit, they were exciting articles.. i read everything about them, back in the day --

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
I built them because I can, not because it's a good idea.

I'm adding this one to my personal library...

Mounting an EER scope in a forward position can be a valid option at times.
After using open sights on my Mauser 404 to take several buffalo I experimented with a red dot sight which back in the days was a Single Point sight of the Vietnam war era. I fitted a Weaver bridge mount to the Mauser spanning the receiver ring and the rear lip of the safari sight dovetail. The Single Point sight attached using two standard Weaver rings and while it worked well enough taking a few deer and feral goats I found this early occluded eye sight hopeless for target shooting. Taking time to get a good shot when trialling loads off the bench causes the eyes to 'let go' the dot.

A Leupold 2x EER pistol scope fitted in the same rings solved this issue and provides a far more precise sighting platform for both fast game shooting and slow target shooting.
A modern dot type sight could also be fitted on the same Weaver bridge mount.

The advantage in my case of going for a forward mounted sight was that no radical alteration was need on the original Oberndorf sporter, the original bolt handle and safety are retained. As a lefty the thumb slot and magazine is still mostly open and loading rounds into the magazine easy.

I have always used both eyes open when doing the extensive shotgunning I have and the setup on my Mauser works well in this mode. The EER scope can be used with the off eye closed like any other scope.
Has worked well for me, the little Leupold giving no problems over decades of use and I wouldn't hesitate to use it on DG. My eyes cannot accommodate iron sights now.



View 'thru' Weaver bridge mount to safari rear and front sight - mount profile matches Safari wide V blades.


View through Leupold 2x EER scope approximating view when rifle butt on shoulder.

I could never adjust to the scout concept or Cooper in general. We didn't agree on much, but to each his own.

I have a 600 in .308 and I like it. It is very light and easy to carry. I use a leupold 2z7x33 scope mounted low to preserve the handling. I am always on the look for one in 350 RM. That would be a great gun too.

quote:

Originally posted by richj:
Scout. Only did it so I wouldn't have to drill the receiver. bushy 2-6x, 19" barrel, ramline stock

I have done two a lot like this for the same reason. I used the Ashly scout mount. Cheap fast and effective.

I prefer conventional scope mounting.

That is the way I would go with the 600

I love my first year model 600 in 222. Stock has seen some use, but I adjusted the trigger, put new aluminum anodized rib and bottom metal, one of the best shooting rifles I own. And I have yet to reload for it. To each his own,I love funky older guns and cars just a tad different from the usual.
Cheers
Rick

I have never used a scout set-up but am not against the concept, esp. on rifles for dangerous game. I have found that the black ring we call tunnel vision really does represent country covered up. It may not matter much at high powers because magnification obscures so much FoV but, in low-power scopes for DG, that tunnel vision can really be a danger, possibly hiding a belligerent companion to the animal you're aiming at.

At least having the scope so far away slashes the danger of that 'hidden field' in this age of constrictive field stops. (Nickel Marburg used to make pistol scopes and if those were as good as the larger Supralyts, their field blending could have been analogous to a ghost-ring peep.)

So, why use a scope at all, did I hear you ask?

Well, ghost-rings are OK but express sights can shoot high when in a hurry and by the time many of us can afford a safari our eyes may not be what they were.

Compact reflex sights might seem the answer but I wouldn't trust batteries or any sight that needed them when you need utmost reliability.

I think I would rather have open sights, or maybe even an AR with a red dot. I just dont see the appeal with the scout concept. Seems to me there are better options.

Not a fan of the forward scope idea, but Eagle's 404 is an example of a happy hunter that, in the bargain didn't have to alter the bolt or safety

quote:

So, why use a scope at all, did I hear you ask?

The best reason is.

Those with not the best eye sight.

Get to see their aiming point.

Well, I screwed off the old 222 barrel installed the new Remington takeoff in 223 with 1:8” twist. I finished it at 19” and installed a skinner peep on the rear action ring. I have a front sight base and a variety of inserts coming this weekend.

I went ahead and bought a Burris scout scope to try out. I’m going to machine a mount to direct solder to the barrel and cut for Talley mounts. If I hate the foreword scope position, I’ll take it off and sell it then go with Talley bases in the regular position and a 2.5x Leupold ultralight scope. I really like how it is turning out.

Thank you for all of your input on the subject.

RC

quote:

Originally posted by Wildcatter:
Well, I screwed off the old 222 barrel installed the new Remington takeoff in 223 with 1:8” twist. I finished it at 19” and installed a skinner peep on the rear action ring. I have a front sight base and a variety of inserts coming this weekend.

I went ahead and bought a Burris scout scope to try out. I’m going to machine a mount to direct solder to the barrel and cut for Talley mounts. If I hate the foreword scope position, I’ll take it off and sell it then go with Talley bases in the regular position and a 2.5x Leupold ultralight scope. I really like how it is turning out.

Thank you for all of your input on the subject.

RC

Out of curiosity, which skinner sight did you use and how did you attach it? The 600 only came with one screw hole in the rear bridge and not a lot of real estate there. Pictures would be great if possible.

I used the skinner lo-pro.

http://skinnersights.com/lo-pro_sight_7.html

I used the one threaded 8-40 for a little added durability. I opened the screw holes on the top of the action to 8-40 for a bit of added ruggedness with any future scope mounting I’ll do on the receiver.

I’m just using a streamline marbles front sight with 1/4” wide sight inserts for the front. Base trimmed and soldered on. The forward scope mount will just be a simple arrangement with dovetails suited for Talley rings and a forward stop for the front ring.

I’ll post some pics of the rifle when it’s all finished. It’s going to be a general purpose rifle so I’m just going to parkerize the metalwork and leave the old factory stock as-is for now. The stock may get recontoured and refinished in the future after my sons and I spend a little time shooting it.

RC