Scout Concept and Jeff Cooper
- Thread starter scout308
- Start date
Im pretty sure the "old man" would scoff at the idea. He didnt take well to the "new fangled electronic crap".
I think that as red dots have progressed and improved over the years we are at a point where they are at least as reliable as a magnified scope. Prob more so
Our years fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq and other places using these scopes has proved they are worthy of being called robust.
Im not a fan of the magnifer behind one though...added weight for a pretty small benefit.
Im of a mind that its a compromise you dont need to make. If you want some magnification for range but like the red dot concept, look at the vortex 1-4 PST or something like that
I think that as red dots have progressed and improved over the years we are at a point where they are at least as reliable as a magnified scope. Prob more so
Our years fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq and other places using these scopes has proved they are worthy of being called robust.
Im not a fan of the magnifer behind one though...added weight for a pretty small benefit.
Im of a mind that its a compromise you dont need to make. If you want some magnification for range but like the red dot concept, look at the vortex 1-4 PST or something like that
A major part of the scout concept was for the rifle to be as light as possible. That being the case something like a micro aimpoint or Trijicon RMR would be better then the EOTech. An RMR with the tritium/fiberoptic combo and a smaller dot in 2-4MOA range with a magnifier in one of the various removable mounts would probably meet with his approval. It would add less weight then the forward mounted scope, not need batteries, and be much faster into action.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Other than maybe the issue of battery life, Cooper likely would accept the modern versions of these sights, given their now-proven reliability.
For him, "new" tended to mean "unproven".
For him, "new" tended to mean "unproven".
bamaranger
New member
proven
Cooper was leery of battery powered sights, and said so in print in one of his columns. But as noted, such devices have come a long way.
Coopers idea on the scout scope, the long eye relief, (well intermediate) low magnification scope which help to place a rifle in the "Scout " category, actually function much like a dot. The recticle appears foreward using both eyes, in the field of view and is pasted on the target, much the same way the modern dot works. You don't get "in" the scope. The difference of course was there were not really any good dots when Cooper was developing his parameters for the Scout. And I have to wonder how much he might have actually shot one in his later years as dots began to be refined.
Cooper wrote that he scoffed at bipods until he witnessed a good shot made from a "dismount" and reconsidered the issue. I betting that some time and exposure to good dots (compact mind you) would sway him on the dot sight as well. But they would have to be reliable too.
I note that on a lot of rifles being used in Euro driven boar hunts, that dots are pretty common. Hard to argue against results.
Cooper was leery of battery powered sights, and said so in print in one of his columns. But as noted, such devices have come a long way.
Coopers idea on the scout scope, the long eye relief, (well intermediate) low magnification scope which help to place a rifle in the "Scout " category, actually function much like a dot. The recticle appears foreward using both eyes, in the field of view and is pasted on the target, much the same way the modern dot works. You don't get "in" the scope. The difference of course was there were not really any good dots when Cooper was developing his parameters for the Scout. And I have to wonder how much he might have actually shot one in his later years as dots began to be refined.
Cooper wrote that he scoffed at bipods until he witnessed a good shot made from a "dismount" and reconsidered the issue. I betting that some time and exposure to good dots (compact mind you) would sway him on the dot sight as well. But they would have to be reliable too.
I note that on a lot of rifles being used in Euro driven boar hunts, that dots are pretty common. Hard to argue against results.
"I used to assume that most practical rifle shooting was done from the sitting position, properly looped up. I am not sure of that now." - Jeff Cooper
Once in a while I stumble across something in his commentaries that suggests the Colonel was not as much of an unrepentant curmudgeon as he was often considered to be. He wrote several things that speak of being open to new ideas about a few things. This one is funny:
"We have been advised to make a point of what follows, so we dutifully comply:
At the Quantico commissioning ceremonies I was astonished to note that the "drum major," or whoever it is who struts out in front of a military band controlling both its movements and its music, was, in this instance, a female. I was profoundly shocked. In my cultural development the man out there in front of the band was by tradition the mightiest warrior in the clan, who by choice stood six feet five, measured about four feet across the shoulders, and had more combat ribbons than anybody in the regiment. So, here we had a girl doing his job! Well, she was quite splendid. I have observed and participated in a good deal of military ceremonial worldwide and I have never seen that duty performed better, if as well. The more I saw her do her stuff, the more I swallowed my preconceptions. ("And they were very great.") So much for the gender gap! I do hope that girl never gets killed in action, but if she does, she will have contributed more with her grande baton than she ever could have with her puny little M16.
I see that I am not as hard-nosed and moss-backed as I had been told." - Jeff Cooper
Once in a while I stumble across something in his commentaries that suggests the Colonel was not as much of an unrepentant curmudgeon as he was often considered to be. He wrote several things that speak of being open to new ideas about a few things. This one is funny:
"We have been advised to make a point of what follows, so we dutifully comply:
At the Quantico commissioning ceremonies I was astonished to note that the "drum major," or whoever it is who struts out in front of a military band controlling both its movements and its music, was, in this instance, a female. I was profoundly shocked. In my cultural development the man out there in front of the band was by tradition the mightiest warrior in the clan, who by choice stood six feet five, measured about four feet across the shoulders, and had more combat ribbons than anybody in the regiment. So, here we had a girl doing his job! Well, she was quite splendid. I have observed and participated in a good deal of military ceremonial worldwide and I have never seen that duty performed better, if as well. The more I saw her do her stuff, the more I swallowed my preconceptions. ("And they were very great.") So much for the gender gap! I do hope that girl never gets killed in action, but if she does, she will have contributed more with her grande baton than she ever could have with her puny little M16.
I see that I am not as hard-nosed and moss-backed as I had been told." - Jeff Cooper
Last edited:
While I cannot point to chapter and verse, Cooper himself was not as big a proponent of the Scout scope concept as we have made him out to be.
He preferred the iron sights (ghost ring), and essentially felt that if you were going to put a scope on it, then the scout scope (type and location) is what it should be.
Just about the whole world fastened on the Scout scope as what "made" the scout rifle, because the scout scope's location is the ONE thing that visually makes the scout rifle different from all the rest.
he did talk about the advantages of a "scout" scope, its location, magnification, etc., but that was to show his reasoning. Having a scope on a scout rifle was never part of his original concept. He was also enough of a realist to know that a people were going to put scopes on them.
So he came up with what he felt was the best way to mount the scope (and the kind of scope to mount there) and still stay as close as possible to his original concepts for the Scout Rifle. He also put some on his rifles, to prove they would work the way he said they would. And guess what? They did.
Anyone remember WHY he wanted the scope mounted so far forward?
It was so his scout rifle could use stripper clips. The fact that the forward mounted scope had other advantages was simply gravy.
Cooper was not quite the fossilized reactionary that others, and even he himself, made him out to be. Really no worse than many of the other gun writers of his era in his holding forth his opinions in a resolute manner.
He actually was fairly open to new ideas (particularly when they were his ideas), but if your idea met his minimum standards for reliability and usefulness, he was open to taking a look at it. That didn't mean he would approve of it, but he would consider it.
One of the ways he got such a reputation for being a curmudgeon (among other things
) was because, if your idea didn't at least measure up to his minimum standards at a glance, he wouldn't waste his time on it. And he would say so in print. I always liked what he wrote, and was entertained by the way he wrote it. Read a lot of his stuff over the years, and while not everything was "right", very little of his ideas have I found to be seriously "wrong".
While many won't publically admit to it, I think there are quite a few of us who he touched, deep inside, and who do remember that we cried, the day his music died...
I think if he were with us still, he would, grudgingly perhaps, approve of your dot/electronic sights, now that they have a proven track record.
He preferred the iron sights (ghost ring), and essentially felt that if you were going to put a scope on it, then the scout scope (type and location) is what it should be.
Just about the whole world fastened on the Scout scope as what "made" the scout rifle, because the scout scope's location is the ONE thing that visually makes the scout rifle different from all the rest.
he did talk about the advantages of a "scout" scope, its location, magnification, etc., but that was to show his reasoning. Having a scope on a scout rifle was never part of his original concept. He was also enough of a realist to know that a people were going to put scopes on them.
So he came up with what he felt was the best way to mount the scope (and the kind of scope to mount there) and still stay as close as possible to his original concepts for the Scout Rifle. He also put some on his rifles, to prove they would work the way he said they would. And guess what? They did.
Anyone remember WHY he wanted the scope mounted so far forward?
It was so his scout rifle could use stripper clips. The fact that the forward mounted scope had other advantages was simply gravy.
Cooper was not quite the fossilized reactionary that others, and even he himself, made him out to be. Really no worse than many of the other gun writers of his era in his holding forth his opinions in a resolute manner.
He actually was fairly open to new ideas (particularly when they were his ideas), but if your idea met his minimum standards for reliability and usefulness, he was open to taking a look at it. That didn't mean he would approve of it, but he would consider it.
One of the ways he got such a reputation for being a curmudgeon (among other things
) was because, if your idea didn't at least measure up to his minimum standards at a glance, he wouldn't waste his time on it. And he would say so in print. I always liked what he wrote, and was entertained by the way he wrote it. Read a lot of his stuff over the years, and while not everything was "right", very little of his ideas have I found to be seriously "wrong".While many won't publically admit to it, I think there are quite a few of us who he touched, deep inside, and who do remember that we cried, the day his music died...
I think if he were with us still, he would, grudgingly perhaps, approve of your dot/electronic sights, now that they have a proven track record.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
http://www.dvc.org.uk/jeff/
Smarts sorta ran in the family.
http://dvc.org.uk/jeff/jeff4_13.html
Scroll down to daughter Lindy's poem.
Smarts sorta ran in the family.
http://dvc.org.uk/jeff/jeff4_13.html
Scroll down to daughter Lindy's poem.
Bullet Bill
Inactive
Personally I think an EOTech or other AR15 based sights sit far to high on a scout mount with a traditional stock. Also I don't believe a red dot sight offers near enough advantage over a ghost ring sight to consider running. A scout scope on the other hand gives you a benefit with better target identification.
kawasakifreak77
New member
Personally a short .30 caliber bolt action of some sorts is probably my favorite firearm made. I don't subscribe exactly to the scout rifle concept but I think several of the characteristics Cooper laid out make perfect sense for a 'do all rifle'
Having said that, before my local smith could put irons on my micro 7 I was using a 2x truglo red dot on my rifle. I had never had any sort of battery powered optic before & was quite skeptical but I ended up loving the stinkin' thing! The wee bit of zoom combined with a nice little dot made shooting so quick & instinctive yet precise enough to easily hold sub 2 moa groups!
A low magnification, dot type sight on a scout type rifle I think would be terrific! As long as it was tough & even better did not rely on batteries & of course had good backup irons in case of total failure.
Most would scoff at a $60 turkey gun optic on their rifle I'd imagine but I can say it's tougher than it looks. I was loading me up some subs one day with my rifle leaned against the wall behind me. I got up & knocked my rifle over on a concrete floor & she landed with quite a smack!
Upon further inspection, a smack hard enough it bent the edge of the battery chamber's cap so good I had to get a little screwdriver in there to pry it up so it would be able to unscrew... I went to the range fully expecting it to be thrown out of whack. I shot five shots right through the middle of the bullseye at 100 meters!
Since I've got my iron sights now I've not been able to bring myself to putting it back on even as much as I like it mainly because how trim the rifle is without an optic hanging off it. My roomie just bought an AR & needing something to slap on to shoot the thing I gave him the truglo. We got it sighted in & even in a howling Kansas crosswind were able to print multiple sub 2 moa groups with bargain brand ammo. Then having a bunch of leftover cruddy beers people had left here, we placed them all over the range out to a bit past 100 meters. We'd crack a round offhand & hand the AR over to the other person for their turn. Most all the cans blew up in a miniature geyser on the first attempt. Not only was it a blast but it convinced him also that for shorter range work it's a great combination of speed / accuracy.
I know that's quite long winded but think that yes, the concept has merit & might not be the perfect answer, but at least deserves a hard look into the possibilities. Only I would want it directly over the action, traditionally mounted but that's only personal preferhence.
Having said that, before my local smith could put irons on my micro 7 I was using a 2x truglo red dot on my rifle. I had never had any sort of battery powered optic before & was quite skeptical but I ended up loving the stinkin' thing! The wee bit of zoom combined with a nice little dot made shooting so quick & instinctive yet precise enough to easily hold sub 2 moa groups!
A low magnification, dot type sight on a scout type rifle I think would be terrific! As long as it was tough & even better did not rely on batteries & of course had good backup irons in case of total failure.
Most would scoff at a $60 turkey gun optic on their rifle I'd imagine but I can say it's tougher than it looks. I was loading me up some subs one day with my rifle leaned against the wall behind me. I got up & knocked my rifle over on a concrete floor & she landed with quite a smack!
Upon further inspection, a smack hard enough it bent the edge of the battery chamber's cap so good I had to get a little screwdriver in there to pry it up so it would be able to unscrew... I went to the range fully expecting it to be thrown out of whack. I shot five shots right through the middle of the bullseye at 100 meters!
Since I've got my iron sights now I've not been able to bring myself to putting it back on even as much as I like it mainly because how trim the rifle is without an optic hanging off it. My roomie just bought an AR & needing something to slap on to shoot the thing I gave him the truglo. We got it sighted in & even in a howling Kansas crosswind were able to print multiple sub 2 moa groups with bargain brand ammo. Then having a bunch of leftover cruddy beers people had left here, we placed them all over the range out to a bit past 100 meters. We'd crack a round offhand & hand the AR over to the other person for their turn. Most all the cans blew up in a miniature geyser on the first attempt. Not only was it a blast but it convinced him also that for shorter range work it's a great combination of speed / accuracy.
I know that's quite long winded but think that yes, the concept has merit & might not be the perfect answer, but at least deserves a hard look into the possibilities. Only I would want it directly over the action, traditionally mounted but that's only personal preferhence.
Last edited:
Well, I can quote him chapter and verse:
The primary reason for the scout scope was fast target acquisition. Ease of reloading was second (note there is no mention of stripper clips) and handiness was third.
I agree that Cooper would have found a scopeless scout perfectly acceptable, but the scout scope was hardly the grudging afterthought you've made it out to be.
As far as electronic sights go, I can say quite confidently that he was very leery of any gun accessory that required batteries.
I miss him too.
Courtesy of ScoutRifle.Org and intended for non-commercial use only. An article from Gun Digest, 38th Edition (1984), penned by Jeff Cooper himself on the scout rifle concept and giving his reasons for it's design features.
I'm not sayin' some people are wrong about why certain features are the way they are, but those features aren't there for the reasons some people think they are.
I'm not sayin' some people are wrong about why certain features are the way they are, but those features aren't there for the reasons some people think they are.
Cooper was very leery of any gun accessory that requires batteries? Probably so. I never met him but his writings do give me the opinion that he viewed things with a critical eye. But his writings also give me the opinion that he was not as closed minded as he is sometimes said to have been.
"The coaxial illuminator is, of course, a feature of the Steyr Scout, which I have called the "leopard light," since leopards are normally taken at night on a bait, but this feature improves the utility of the Scout in certain forms of law enforcement activity."- Jeff Cooper
"The coaxial illuminator is, of course, a feature of the Steyr Scout, which I have called the "leopard light," since leopards are normally taken at night on a bait, but this feature improves the utility of the Scout in certain forms of law enforcement activity."- Jeff Cooper
Last edited:
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
If you've not read "Brown On Resolution", I recommend it very highly.
4thPoint, thanks for that article.
4thPoint, thanks for that article.
I'd be inclined to agree that he probably didn't have much experience with modern red dot sights, and would readily agree that battery life technology has improved greatly, especially in the last few years. (Cooper passed away in 2006).
I'll also observe that no matter how good battery life gets, it always fails when you need it most.
Bear in mind that the question was what Cooper thought at the time, not whether his opinions, which may have been well founded at the time, are still as valid today. Tempus fugit.