"Scout" just a glorified lever gun?

R

Red Bull

New member
It seems to me that the "Scout" concept is just an expensive way to skin the same cat as the good old lever gun.
The lever gun was made to be small, light quick and cycle fast. With open sights, it excels within the 100 yard realm.
The Scout rifle just seems like an expensive and BULKY, fragile, way to skin the same cat. The optics might be a little better visually, but they are not any faster to aquire, and shooting open sights is a little more conducive to keeping both eyes open and seeing everything in the field. Optics are lso fragile and picky, and when the optics go on a scope=only rifle, you are not very well off.
Anyway, I was just noticing that it seems that a lever gun can do everything a Scout rifle can do, and that this new Scout movement is just kinda silly. Is there any reason to own a Scout rifle over a simple lever gun?
 
Well, they are typically more accurate from the bench, but since the scout rifles are really designed to shoot offhand, no, not really.

I shoot about 4MOA in rapid fire offhand, and it doesn't matter to me if the rifle is a quarter incher or a two incher, it all comes out about the same when I'm standing. I think lots of people have lost sight of that.

I ain't ever seen a benchrest in the woods deer hunting, and I didn't see any in the field with the Marines, either. For practical shooting, I cannot for the life of me see what good having a quarter inch group shooter will do you if you can't shoot a quarter inch group with it without a benchrest. We're talking minute-of-deer here.

I know lots of people measure their rifles by groups, and I don't mean to put that practice down, but I think they get too wrapped up in paper punching and forget that things just ain't like that in the woods.

You don't have known distances, you don't know the exact size of the target, and you almost never have a decent rest. Under those circumstances, I myself will shoot a $300 Winchester about as well as a $3000 custom bolt gun, so I saves me money and spend it on practice ammo.

As always, IMHO, YMMV, etc. I am not trying to start a flame war, this is just my opinion here.

------------------
With my shield or on it...
 
I agree. I would rather have a Marlin Lever gun in .44 Magnum or .45-70 than some of the so called Scout rifles out there.

The Styre Scout is however - too freakin cool to be excluded... As is and AR with a Scout set up... or a M1A Scout Which are all worthy by shear COOL FACTOR.
 
The answer Red Bull is "sorta".

If your lever gun has a Ching sling, 308 power and the optics, then yes, they're the same.

The problem is that folks talk about the accuracy (big whoop) not the enhanced ability to hit to 300m.

I will never own a Steyr myself. I do own a M600 Remington. Same smack, same speed for 5 rounds, less bullets on the rifle. 1/3 the price.

If you haven't tried the package, it dosen't make sense. When you put the sling/scope/rifle together it's obvious. (in the field)

Giz
 
A rifle built on the true scout concept has see-through mounts and regular iron sights for quick off-hand shooting.

Plus, besides what Gizmo said, the advantage even low power scout-type optics have over iron is NOT better accuracy, but being better able to clearly make out your target (i.e. "Through that brush, is that a deer's vital area, or a deer's non-vital area, or another hunter?")
 
Futo--

Actually, the increased magnification on a scout, ideally, shouldn't be much of a factor. 2.5X is probably over-powered for the Scout concept.

Gizmo makes a SUPERB point: the issue isn't accuracy, it's improved hitability at longer ranges. Inside of 90-100 yards and off-hand, it's a wash between a smooth lever gun with ghost ring receiver sights and a Scout. At 263.47 yards with only a brief moment before yonder game steps behind yon bush, the answer is very, VERY different. Even if your Scout is only a 2MOA rifle and your 336 Marlin is a 1 MOA rifle (they exist!), the clear answer is the Scout, for "hitability." Cartridge, sights, sling all contribute to that being a makable shot. I'm a good rifleman (not GREAT, but good), and I just won't in the same situation with a Marlin or Winchester lever gun.

Exception: Ching sling (HOW?) and IER scope on an accurate 336 or maybe a Browning BLR lightweight in .308. Would have to see one, first.

------------------
Will you, too, be one who stands in the gap?

Matt
 
A while back, I had the opportunity to see and hold a Steyr Scout. My impressios were one, that it was the ugliest rifle I have ever seen. Two,it was the best feeling rifle I have ever held, and I have several very good feeling rifles. I did not have a chance to shoot it, but if they shoot half as good as they feel? Maybe. The only problem is my wife would scalp me if I did buy one. :(
Paul B.
 
At first I didn't quite understand the Scout concept. Now that I've had a chance to look one over and think about what Jeff Cooper had intended, it makes absolute sense.

It isn't designed only to be a light, fast handling rifle. It is meant to be an all purpose rifle that can fill the role of many. While it may not have any significant advantages over a lever action within 200 yards, I believe it has the capability to go beyond 400 yards and be used not just for hunting purposes.

As for being fragile. The only thing about the Scout that I can see as being fragile is the scope. The workmanship on this rifle is excellent. If well cared for it should last a long time.
 
Long Path, that's basically the same thing I said - but you were able to coin a word for it - "hitability" - that's good. At the distance you described, in addition to the cartridge and sling, 1.5 or 2 power optics can indeed be the difference between seeing your target (more) clearly, or not seeing it well enough to justify the shot ethically, IMO. This is what accounts for "hitability", if you really think about it - after all, as you say, it's not the intrinsic accuracy - a scout rifle may be 2+ MOA vs. same or maybe better for a lever. So, near as I can tell, in a scout rifle, the only other factor in "hitability" at longer ranges, beyond the cartridge/trajectory and the sling, is in fact the low power optics -2 power aint much (and it needs to be this low to serve its purpose), but its plenty to make this critical difference, IMO. Also, one question: Is a scout rifle bolt action (sans the scope) generally heavier, lighter, or the same as a comparable purpose lever rifle?
 
Actually, come to think of it, you're right - there's a further distinction to be made between a scope's ability to let you SEE the target well enough to shoot (which may in fact be nearly neglibile with scout optics), and the scope's (perhaps arguable) intrinsically better ability than an iron sight to release the bullet with the trigger at the precise moment of a good hold, and to acquire that hold more quickly with a reticle rather than a sight picture. I suppose this would be due to the decreased number of brain & motor functions one has to perform to get a get hold with a scope vs. an iron sight. With a scope, your brain's objective is single-function before shooting- "Move the crosshairs to the target", whereas with an iron sight, there's a multi-step function - "First, get that front sight under the target, then get that front sight within the rear peep/U both horizontally and vertically. Although the latter can be done very quickly with practice and becomes second nature, it seems this must be the difference in "hitability" with a scope vs iron sights. If not this, then what I ask?
 
Futo....

all of which are functionsof GOOD SHOOTING.. regardless of what weapon you use.

1. be sure of your target and what's beyond it (a scope can help)
2. Bring the sight/scope up to your eyes.. rather than your eyes to the scope/sights.
3. Hold steady (brace if you have time) ie sling.. shooting position, brace point
4. squeeze

That has NOTHING to do with scout rifles... that's about good shooting habits.

Sounds to me like what i need to do is put a shotgun bead on the barrel (say at 10 o'clock) of my rifle if its TOO CLOSE to use the scope... cause if its THAT close ghost ring sites won't matter anyway. Point it and squeeze...

any thoughts?? I'll post a new thread on this...


Dr.Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top