More on the Steyr Scout...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kevin has let this cat out of the bag a bit early. No harm done and he deserves bragging rights for the attention he's paid to the issue.

I've been determined to find a workable solution to the problem of light primer hits with the Scout since February. Steyr's solution, as Rob points out, is an adjustable tension firing pin spring. Unfortunately, the tension necessary to fire military surplus ammo renders the Scout a Crew Served Weapon...bolt work is damn near impossible. Factory ammo proves no problem as the lightest tension adjustment is reliable and the bolt work smooth and quick.

After discussions with Kevin, Ashley Emerson, Colonel Bob Young, John (Fr. Frog) Schaefer, Wolff Springs and several others, I came to a couple of conclusions. (At this point, I can recite all manner of useless technical data on the Scout and other rifle firing mechanisms.)

The bottom line is this: The Steyr Scout employs a 60 degree bolt throw, as opposed to the 90 degree throw of most other bolt rifles. This requires that proportionately more force be applied to the bolt in order to compress a given spring. Thus Steyr uses a 15 lb vs 30 lb firing pin spring (rough numbers). However, in order to reliably fire MilSurp ammo, additional kinetic energy must be transferred to the primer.

There are only two ways to reasonably retrofit the action to allow proper bolt functioning with a stronger spring:
- Increase leverage
- Decrease friction

The leverage increase was suggested by the Steyr Tactical Bolt which John Schaefer has generously supplied. Increased leverage allows us to use a stronger spring without increasing the force necessary to compress it (instead it increases the distance over which the spring is compressed). The Tac bolt is about 1/2" longer...a fact which is not immediately apparent because it sweeps back more. Steyr, incidentally, refuses to sell the Tac bolt handle separately, which, I believe is the epitome of arrogance in Customer Service.

Looking at the LURCR rifle, which Kevin built for me earlier this year, it's obvious that we can get even more "useful length" out of a given bolt handle by using a truncated cone, rather than a ball at the end. And so it was decided to extend the bolt handle by about 1/2"-3/4", sweep it back about 10 degrees and install a truncated cone terminator.

As for the friction: Kevin has about said it all. The fit and finish leave a great deal to be desired. Not only are the surfaces of the cam sleeve, cam lugs and gas shroud woefully unpolished, but the threaded firing pin, itself, actually rubs aggainst the internals of the spring when firing...this robs it of much needed kinetic energy.

And so it came to pass that I roped the best machinist I know into the job.
smile.gif
I spoke to Kevin on Thursday afternoon, FedEx'd both bolts that day and he worked thru the weekend on the fix. I will have the bolt back tomorrow and will post the range results here in the evening.

Not wanting anyone to get away without sacrifice to the cause, I have comandeered Rob's own Scout bolt until May 15. By exchanging guts between the redone bolt and Rob's we'll be able to get a feel for the possibility of Scout owners resolving the problem by simply polishing the internals (vs machining the bolt handle).

I leave for Africa with both bolts on Thursday. If the redesign proves effective, I intend to corner Colonel Cooper while there, and enlist his support and/or comments.
Rich
 
Now let me get this straight. We can afford a rifle that sells for $2000 to $2500 dollars but we can't afford anything but surplus ammunition to feed it? The solution to your problem would be to buy some Federal Match Ammo or crank out some good reloads.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M16:
The solution to your problem would be to buy some Federal Match Ammo or crank out some good reloads. [/quote]

Have you been talking to Colonel Cooper? The point is not that someone can or can not afford "proper" ammo but that the Scout was designed to be a general purpose rifle in .308 because .308 is readilly available all over the world. Some of that worldly ammo aint that good. The Scout should still fire it. IIRC this requirement is in the original design spec that came out of the Scout Conferences.



------------------
Schmit
GySgt, USMC(Ret)
NRA Life, Lodge 1201-UOSSS
"Si vis Pacem Para Bellum"
 
Shin - thats a good question. Why 2K? I have yet to figure that out. As much as I like the features of the stock and the magazine system - its a rather mundane little rifle.

I would like to see some one go nuts with a SS and make an "SSS" Super Steyer Scout.
A Carbon Fiber match barrel free floated over a modified scout stock with caliber enhancements and a better trigger. Just for fun.
 
Rich Lucibella and I have been actively investigating the "light hit" problem, and Kevin is right in his observations.

I maintain the Steyr Scout web site at:
http://207.181.246.106/johns/project.htm

and have been actively involved with Steyr and GSI with this rifle since day 1. A lot of attention to internal details would have helped prevent the nagging glitches that are sometimes seen. However, there is more to check than just rough finishing. Check out the "Tips & Tricks" link on the Steyr Scout site and go to the "Light Hits" link on that page for more info.

In talking with the factory the designer is aware of some of the finishing issues but states that additional hand finishing would drive the cost up which is unacceptable. The factory does have an "improved bolt" with aan extended handle fitted with a US type round knob. Unfortunately, it is only available on the "Tactical" Scout and GSI has refused to consider offering it as an aftermarket upgrade for owners of the conventional Scouts.

Cheers,

John S.



------------------
The Infamous Fr. Frog
 
Thanks, John and welcome to TFL.

I received the bolt from Kevin today and the execution is, quite simply, flawless. The bolt is almost an inch longer but still quite presentable.

I will report back this PM after having tested it at the range.
Rich
 
Well Well, Father Frog... finally hopped your way over to TFL. <G> Glad your aboard!



------------------
Schmit
GySgt, USMC(Ret)
NRA Life, Lodge 1201-UOSSS
"Si vis Pacem Para Bellum"
 
6forsure,
The Remington 7 seems to "fire" most any surplus ball ammo, but gives hard extraction with several varieties. They'll extract, given enough force, but it sure plays heck with a decent bolt flick.

The model 7 that is the basis of my comment is a friend's stainless/synthetic model. It went back to the factory a couple times and they finally replaced the rifle, but the hard extraction with most types of ball remains. To see if it were a "model 7 specific" problem, we tried the offending ammo in my Remington 700 VS. It was hard to extract in it too. The same ammo extracted just fine in Ruger 77 and Ruger 77 MKII rifles.

Rosco
 
Back from the range with results:

Kevin's work on relieving the pin from abrading the spring during firing seems to have worked. At the lowest setting I got 1 failure to fire MilSurp in 20 rounds (out of the box, the failure rate had been 4/15).

No failures on the second tension setting...and here's where we see the effects of the custom bolt work. The Bolt opening is much smoother than the stock bolt. Unfortunately, I now realize that we were dealing with an additional problem of a match-tight chamber. This causes the bolt throw to fail at the extract stage (top of arc).

While this is unacceptable in a utility rifle, it is not uncommon to find a tight chamber....my last Winchester (a Mod 70) suffered from this and was made right by Kevin; my last Remington (a 700 PSS) suffered from a pitted chamber and was made right by GunMart and Remington.

If I can get the chamber reamed tomorrow in the AM, I will take both bolts (mine and Rob's) to the range and do some more extensive testing and comparison. We're hoping that a solution for the average Scout owner will consist of checking the chamber and reaming, if necessary, and polishing the internals. If this is the case, it would be an inexpensive correction. Remaning the bolt handle (at least with the fit and finish of Kevin's work) would begin to get pricey.
Rich

[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited April 25, 2000).]
 
Mr. Schaefer,

Welcome to the board. It's a pleasure to have you here, and I know your name will be added to the list of trusted information sources I find here.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Do-Man:
John,
So buying the Scout Tactical solves the light hit problem?
[/quote]

Not really! The Tac bolt is identical to the standard bolt and firing pin except for a slightly slicker black finish and the "round knob. Both types will benifit from polishing.



------------------
The Infamous Fr. Frog
 
Have notice a comment on the SS trigger. The factory setting is 56 oz +/- 7 oz. They are usually quite good and are easilly adjusted to lower settings. However, I do not recommend the 26oz "Cooper Trigger" as it is a little too light for rough field use and easy to screw up at that setting if not done right. Just as neat at 32 oz.

GSI's and the factory's lawyers live in fear of trigger jobs. However, if you email me off-line and really beg me I might be persuaded to send you the trigger adjustment procedures. If you are not a complete jerk it is not hard to do.

John S. [frfrog@sprynet.com]
 
Well-
We tried the Scout with two bolts and two different milsurp ammos (Venezuela and England). Kevin's work on the bolt absolutely reduced the incidence of light hits. The bolt handle also made for a much smoother throw.

Unfortunately, the Scout's ability to allow ease of bolt use with this ammo remains nonexistent. The bolt hangs up at the top of the arc and requires a palm slap to break and open....not good. What we thought might be a tight chamber turns out to be a chamber at the outside edge of SAMMI specs. Fr. Frog indicates that this is by design.

The result, I suspect, is that the milspec cases are somehow flowing into the excesses, resulting in additional force required for extraction. More when I return from across the lake.
Rich
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Kevin's work on the bolt absolutely reduced the incidence of light hits. [/quote]

Sounds like Milspeak or Clintonese for not eliminate. Yes?





------------------
Schmit
GySgt, USMC(Ret)
NRA Life, Lodge 1201-UOSSS
"Si vis Pacem Para Bellum"
 
is this surplus ammo problem pretty much a problem with most push feeds? or just some?

i've fired south american surplus 30'06 with difficult and failed extraction with a rem 721. but they would all fire.
 
Schmit-
Since the Steyr firing pin spring is adjustable down to about 10lbs, "eliminating light hits" is not an appropriate decriptor. No amount of polishing will allow the the weapon to fire everything at the lowest setting.

In fact, we shouldn't refer to the Scout as having a problem with light primer hits at all....since every one manufactured can be easily reset to a higher spring tension that will fire all ammo. The real problem is excessive force required to manipulate the bolt under spring tensions that reliably fire all ammo. Reducing this force is the goal of the polishing. Checking % of light hits at low spring tension is just a measure of the effectiveness of the gunsmith's work.

Mr. Dog done good
Rich
 
Steyr is not the first to find that the seemingly great idea of a 60 degree bolt has its drawbacks. They probably won't be the last.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top