Why a scout rifle(carbine)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't recall him, specifically saying anything against the 6.5/6.8 (AR calibers) for the scout rifle concept.
Click to expand...
The 6.5 calibers are on the border of intermediate cartridges or firmly intermediate depending on which you choose. He wanted the full power. He also seemed pretty strongly convinced it should basically be the rifle round currently or previously employed by the countries military for logistic reasons.

But why not for a scout rifle.
Click to expand...
Because the 6.5s are much better for a light do everything inside 500 yards rifle with the ability to take longer shots if forced to do so and they can be marginally lighter.
Also, the scouts "mission" is limited in scope. The 1000 rounds of 'subsidized' military surplus ammunition I have in spam cans at my house doesn't fit into the equation. In a wilderness survival situation I will have whatever ammunition I take with me.
SCENARIO:
I get lost in the woods and a month later I haven't been found. I am out of ammo. I come across a cabin. Is 308 the most likely round I will find in said cabin? 30/30, 22lr, large bore handgun rounds, all seem more likely to me.

The scavenging ammunition in a TEOTWAWKI type situation doesn't work for me either. Like all things what you take into such a situation is simply to help transition to the subsequent realities. A box or two of ammo, let alone a spam can, is quite a lot when placed in the context of a scoped bolt action rifle used as a "scout" in combat. That would entail doing your best to stay out of combat. The whole idea of a "Scout" is to avoid exchanging fire. Only giving when there will be little chance for it to be returned and otherwise convincing the enemy the scout does not exist.
Anything you scavenge is going to have a different POI anyways. Are you using the general issue 308 to practice or match grade ammunition? Maybe not a big deal at 100 yards, but at 500 it isn't going to be as simple as "strip those rounds from the belt-fed and dump them in a magazine."
Cooper seemed to also hint at a place for this set-up in a standard military organization. It has never been adopted, probably for good reasons, and even if it was, where is the lone scout cut off from supply going to scavenge his sides ammunition? How often has anyone fought an enemy using the same ammunition?
At the end of the day, in either of the above scenarios, you just have to be prepared to pick up whatever is laying around and adjust.

So, for all those reasons, I think trying to match the logistics of the host countries military or the general populations whims, is the least important of Cooper's guidelines.

As for personal ammunition logistics, I am trying to decide on a 6.5. Probably going to choose a "scout" set-up. If it works out I will look at liquidating my other centerfire bolt guns and maybe a semi-auto. Except the K31. I only have one or two other milsurp, so that isn't a grand statement.
 
Last edited:
I'm still trying to figure out a likely situation where you will be forced to take a 500yard or longer shot.

I just don't see it. Not for a scout, or a civilian.

Sniper? that's a different matter.

also trying to get my head around the idea that something that doesn't have the flattest possible trajectory isn't capable of taking long shots.

SO what if the 6.5s have less drop?!! Its NOT the cartridge that makes the hit, its the shooter. If you can't hit with one, you won't hit with the other, and vice versa. If YOU know what you are doing.
 
I never read Cooper...

But I am enjoying reading you guys :)

In think the closest thing I have / had to a classic "scout rifle" is my 30 Carbine ( I used to have a forward mounted scope with a see through mount on it ) but have since turned it back to GI issue...

doubt the 30 carbine would be considered a "scout" caliber though...

my new CZ 527 Carbine in 7.62 X 39 might make a good scout rifle if I took the conventional scope off though ???
 
Cooper called his African scout "Baby", and the .350 Rem Mag round "Fireplug" or something like that. I believe it was a Rem 600 rifle to begin with. I believe he later had another one made up on a BRNO (or some other) action.
Click to expand...

Close. Cooper has three main Africa rifles originally.

A Scout in .308 for game up to around 200 kilos, of which he had various versions before the Steyr came out, each with their own moniker.

The Fireplug was indeed a 600 Remington action in 350 Rem Mag. It was dubbed the "Lion Scout" after the Colonel took a South African lion with it. His reloader added a bit extra propellant to it and seated the bullets long to compensate. Cooper often called this the 360 Magnum to set it apart for this reason. He noted that the fired cases were not suitable for reloading after the initial loading.

Baby was a shorter-barreled Brno magnum action with a heavy barrel installed. Caliber was 460 G & A (Guns and Ammo) and reached what Cooper thought was the "magic combination" of 2400fps/500 grains. He and others used it to great effect on several trips, and eventually he left the rifle on the Dark Continent to simplify traveling, presumably. He managed to get it back to the states before his death.

A later factory cartridge, the 376 Steyr, eventually made it into the Colonel's hands. It was basically the same rifle as the 308 Scout, with changed as necessary for the larger cartridge. He was originally dubious about it's utility, noting overlap between a true medium and a true heavy, but became fond of the setup after running the combo for a while. The original 376 was engraved with the term "Dragoon," and indeed Cooper called it this from then on, but Steyr did not share the admiration for the term.
 
a likely situation where you will be forced to take a 500yard or longer shot
Click to expand...
If it was likely I think we'd just go with a regular mount.
But, I'll play. Overwatch. Not likely, but reasonable for a scout to run into.

something that doesn't have the flattest possible trajectory isn't capable of taking long shots.
Click to expand...
I didn't see where anyone claimed this.
Maybe that is how you construed my statement about full power. I don't think the flat trajectory is what he was after.
I would say there is little difference between 308 and the 6.5s, but 357 magnum CAN hit at or close to 500 yards. That is an extremely skilled shot far beyond any normal sights adjustment I am not capable of making. Even the 45-70 is going to be more difficult than the 308 or 6.5s. There is point where trajectory comes into play.
 
Even the 45-70 is going to be more difficult than the 308 or 6.5s. There is point where trajectory comes into play.
Click to expand...

First off, trajectory is always in play. But the degree it matters is what I'm talking about. People are always saying that flatter trajectories are "better" but what they mean really is "easier". It isn't the actual amount of drop that makes one better than another, but the easier use of flatter trajectories, and the flatter shooting round being more "forgiving" of shooter errors in range estimation while still being in the target zone of a typical big game animal (or person).

It takes more "work" from the shooter, the shooter has to be more accurate with his range estimate, and his ability to adjust for drop with a "rainbow" trajectory round, in order to keep hits in the zone, but that is the responsibility of the shooter, not the round.

A century plus, ago, they were still shooting target matches at 1,000yards, with .45-70s. AND, making groups that are not an embarrassment, even today. True the rifles used were tricked out (sights, etc) to make them the best practical for doing that , but they did do it.

To exaggerate the point, if your round drops 8 feet at XXX distance, and you are set up for that, and experienced with that, you will make hits, the same as the guy shooting one that "only" drops 4 feet (who is also set up for that, and experienced). The tyro shooting something that only drops 1/2 a foot will also make hits, but will be totally out of their element with the one that drops 4 or 8 feet.

As often said, its not the arrow, its the Indian.
 
What guys are missing here is (1) whether any current 7.62/.308 "Scout Rifle" retains the optimum form in which Cooper envisioned it (pick your favorite bolt gun: Steyr, Ruger, Savage, homemade, or otherwise), ... and (2) is a SR still even relevant (?).

We've had now - how many years? - to consider this rifle and improve on the Colonel's design, if possible?

Apart from hunting, or as a last-weapon-to-grab in a SHTF survival scenario, where would you actually use it, ... over other rifles in your inventory?
 
Last edited:
We've had now - how many years? - to consider this rifle and improve on the Colonel's design, if possible?

Apart from hunting, or as a last-weapon-to-grab in a SHTF survival scenario, where would you actually use it, ... over other rifles in your inventory?
Click to expand...

I know several people with scout rifles. They are all very proud to have them.

The conversation usually goes something like this...

Them: "This is my scout rifle."
Me: "What does it do different that your regular rifle?"
Them: "It fits Col. Cooper's concept for what a scout rifle should be."
Me: "And that is important to you, why?"

As near as I can tell, it is not a go to rifle for anyone I know for hunting or SHTF/crisis types of situation. They all have guns they prefer or have designated for those things and they are not Cooper's concept. Especially in today's environment, there is no reason to have to settle somebody else's criteria for what a general purpose rifle should be or what it should include.

I really have to believe that the concept of Cooper's (conference) scout rifle only has heuristic merit because Cooper promoted it and there is a large fascination with Cooper and his ideas, not so much because all that many people think that they actually need a scout rifle to fulfill the needs that Cooper envisioned it filling. I think had anyone on on this forum come up with this concept, it would not have gone much beyond this forum. The concept has not advanced the American rifleman as envisioned.http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/10/2/throwback-thursday-the-scout-rifle/

agree on the leverguns and pumps, sacrilege to put optics on them.
Click to expand...

Night vision on a 1895 in .45-70 is just plain heretic cool!
1213.jpg
 
In my mind simpler = better, so flatter, all other things being equal is better.
I've never been in a situation where a larger margin of error was not better.

With all the other things to consider at long ranges the drop is pretty simple. If your scope has enough adjustment for the compensation, and you don't lose count of clicks while making the adjustment. I sure enjoy counting half as many when I can. Worse yet a cheap scope where the clicks aren't always sharp.
 
Jim243, not sure how you define "snap shooting", but I'm willing to conduct a test. Let's set you down on a hillside 400 meters out and I'll wait in the low ready with my scout, and when a timer goes off, we'll see how long it takes for me to put lead on target. I'm guessing <3 seconds.
 
I'm going elk hunting in two weeks, and will pack two rifles, (pack, not carry, don't ask silly questions about me carrying two rifles on the mountain), a custom '03 whelen AI, and BLR 358 win. Deer hunting is usually a custom barreled 270WSM. That's about the limit of my "hunting these days, so when I take out any of three dozen other rifles I own, from Krags to Marlin 39s, to Marlin 1895s to Remington 14s and on, it's just because I love shooting them; with one exception. Whenever I go on rambles/walkabouts/hikes and carry a longarm it is one of my two scouts. Easiest carrying, fastest on target, funnest, easiest on shoulder, easiest on pocketbook, capable on anything from 0-500 yard rifles I own. As for the caliber of choice? .308/7.62x51 hands down. I can buy it for very competitive prices on sites like the CMP, AimSurplus, etc. Two weeks ago I bought 500 rds of Prvi 145 fmj for $300 shipped. Reloadable, boxer primed, and reasonably accurate. I reload for hunting and accuracy, but I love that I can affordably keep several thousand rds of plinking/shtf ammo on hand for all of my 308s, not just the scouts. XM193 is ~$380/m shipped today, .308 ball is ~$600/m shipped today. $.38 a rd for ammo that's worthless beyond 100 yards, or $.60 a rd for ammo good to as far as one can reasonably expect to shoot. Which is the better value? I'm curious, what's the going rate for anything 6.5? Do I take my scout rifles hunting? Nope. I do have specialized rifles for just about everything, big game, small game, target, plinking, 'yotes, feral pigs, you name it, got it covered, but would I take the scout rifle out to do any of those things? Darn tooting, and would be very comfortable doing it, and that is the beauty of the scout rifle, and is precisely where it beats all the other rifles I own hands down, it is a the ultimate general purpose rifle. Now isn't that what Cooper was talking about? Hmmm...........
 
Last edited:
I spent 29 years in the Army, packed black rifles my whole life, I've owned AR10's, Garands, and currently own an M1A. I own all sorts of lever guns, bolt rifles, and even an old Remington model 14 pump. I love them all, wouldn't sell my 1985 all wood stocked NM M1A on a bet, but I'll damn well guarantee you that if I had to pick up just ONE rifle and walk off into the hinterlands with it, it would be a .308 forward optic mounted bolt gun, aka scout rifle. 45-70 lever? Nope? Rainbow trajectory, kicks your ass. 30-30 lever? Nope. Rainbow trajectory, pipsqueak beyond 150 yards. 357 lever? Nope? Rainbow trajectory, pipsqueak beyond 100 yards. Any levergun? Nope? AR10 platform in any caliber? Nope. Way too heavy. AR15 in any caliber? Nope. 300 blackout might get the job done to 300 yards but ammo is a nogo, and anyone going to try to convince me that it's a well balanced rifle in the hand? Any commercial semi auto sporting arm? Nope. Too heavy, too unreliable. M1A or Garand? Ya, right, I just love packing a 10 lb rifle around. Way I see it, a general purpose rifle, (remember those parameters?) is limited to a bolt gun, and a lightweight one at that, sub 8 lbs, preferably sub 7 lbs, and what does that leave you? A syn stocked short action in a caliber that will get the job done 0-500 yards on man or beast up to 400 lbs. Pick or choose the forward mounted optic, no biggie IMO, but it needs to have QR mounts and decent BUIS. Pick your poison for platform and optic, but I really don't see how anyone can argue that the 308 or 7.62x51 isn't the best choice in such a rifle. Arguably the most affordable do anything centerfire cartridge on the market, most readily available, at the best prices, easy on the shoulder in a 6 1/2 lb gun. If I lived in Sweden I might pick the 6.5x55 but on second thought, nah.
 
* * *
Way I see it, a general purpose rifle, (remember those parameters?) is limited to a bolt gun, and a lightweight one at that, sub 8 lbs, preferably sub 7 lbs, and what does that leave you? A syn stocked short action in a caliber that will get the job done 0-500 yards on man or beast up to 400 lbs.
Click to expand...

Actually, Cooper's weight specs for the SR ranged from an ideal of 6.6lbs to a max of 7.7lbs.

Pick or choose the forward mounted optic, no biggie IMO, but it needs to have QR mounts and decent BUIS. Pick your poison for platform and optic, but I really don't see how anyone can argue that the 308 or 7.62x51 isn't the best choice in such a rifle. Arguably the most affordable do anything centerfire cartridge on the market, most readily available, at the best prices, easy on the shoulder in a 6 1/2 lb gun. If I lived in Sweden I might pick the 6.5x55 but on second thought, nah.
Click to expand...

One big factor favoring the 7.62/.308 chambering is the availability of the ammo - and not just off-the-shelf during good times. The cartridge is generally available country-wide (also world-wide) should you and your SR become caught up in something, or stranded somewhere, during not-so-good times, whether natural or man-made.

While the various odd-ball cartridges have niche applications where they shine, and there are certainly some less-powerful cartridges you might choose for a SR, Cooper's twin concern was for a potent cartridge of maximum availability.

And for the intended role of a SR, the 7.62/.308 chambering basically chooses itself.
 
Last edited:
Lookit, couple things.

You have to distinguish whether you:

ARE

or

are NOT

going to do the "just ONE rifle" thing.

If you are not, and going to have 2 or 3 or 4 or more rifles, then of course it doesn't make a lot of sense. But if you really and truly are going to go with "just one" centerfire rifle, for all purposes, then most of the criticisms, such as DNSs, are not so valid. It IS, generally, the best setup for a "just one", in my opinion.

Albeit you could argue several small things, both in terms of what Cooper "required" and what you think he may have over-emphasized (got wrong). So it's a good concept in theory, but only if you're going with "just one" rifle (not counting rimfires) - well, since in our modern rich 1st world country (most of us on here are from USA), most of us can easily afford 2-5 if not more, then the whole raison d'etre fails, and it's easily criticized, most notably the features that make it better for doubling up as a defensive/combat rifle (the forward mounted scope for example).

I think one of the few things that was proper to emphasize then but not as much now is chambering in .308. At least in the USA, there's no reason to not pick a better chambering, since it's legal and relatively cheap to pre-handload any amount of ammo you want, which will last you years on end. Hence .260 rem would be my scout chambering choice. He pretty much nailed the rest of it, IMO. I have a few other *additions*, but no major *changes* to Cooper's concepts. Not that mine are better period - just better for me....stock that holds two extra stripper clips of ammo, carbon fiber wrapped barrel, and couple others.

I also think he should have made his weight requirement more strict, and not so loosey-goosey within such a wide range. I think that's the main problem with scout type rifles like the Ruger - too dang heavy.
 
Last edited:
The other side of the coin is that while we can (many of us) afford more specialty rifles, we generally only carry one at a time.

I wouldn't pick a scout rifle to hunt woodchucks, but its a fine choice for a walk in the woods during deer season.

My first deer rifle was a Rem 600 .308 Win. Pretty close to a scout rifle with standard rear mounted optics. Very handy short, light carbine in a reasonably powerful round.
 
My first deer rifle was a Rem 600 .308 Win. Pretty close to a scout rifle with standard rear mounted optics. Very handy short, light carbine in a reasonably powerful round.
Click to expand...

And that is just it. We already had the "scout rifles" we needed and they were carbines. We didn't need anybody to come up with a concept gun based on somebody else's perceived needs.
 
* * * But if you really and truly are going to go with "just one" centerfire rifle, for all purposes, then most of the criticisms, such as DNSs, are not so valid. It IS, generally, the best setup for a "just one". * * * So it's a good concept in theory, but only if you're going with "just one" rifle (not counting rimfires) - well, since in our modern rich 1st world country (most of us on here are from USA), most of us can easily afford 2-5 if not more, then the whole raison d'etre fails, and it's easily criticized, most notably the features that make it better for doubling up as a defensive/combat rifle.
Click to expand...

You make a good point about Americans and their 200+year love for rifles.

It's not just that we are - or are descended from - a "nation of riflemen," but over time and with some degree of increasing economic betterment, most Americans who own or inherit a rifle of some flavor (perhaps the single-shot .22 they started on as a kid) eventually come into more of them - whether new or, especially, the lightly-used "pre-owned" ones.

Bolts, single-shots, and autoloaders - for Americans, rifles are like golf clubs. It's really hard to limit yourself to just one.

Yeah, you probably could play 9-holes of golf with one club, ... but why would you? :confused:

So the hypothetical premise at the outset of any Scout Rifle discussion - which usually begins with, "If you could only own ONE rifle," ... is simply irrelevant to the *pros* and *cons* of the SR's utility as one type of rifle in your personal battery of long guns. :cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top