Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > FIREARMS DISCUSSIONS > Centerfire Rifles - Manually Operated
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Centerfire Rifles - Manually Operated Lever action, bolt action or other non gas operated centerfire rifles.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 12-13-2023, 10:57 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmCheese View Post
Someone up thread made the point that the scout rifle is, specifically, a hunting rifle.

I hadn't thought that's what it was for, but idea that Colonel Cooper wasn't an idiot and realized that the role of the 19th century scout was no longer necessary and so designed the scout rifle as a hunting rifle first and foremost makes some sense to me.
I don't know if you were shooting back then, but the AR in the early 80's was a crappy rifle. I hated them. They didn't really have any scout qualities. But these days there's not a lot that a hunting bolt gun does better than an AR.

Quote:
If it wasn't for dead critters (and in this case a 25 WSSM) I wouldn't be having dinner tonight!
Same here, but a machine yanked its head off. Then someone took all the feathers off, yanked its guts out, sent it to a place with a drive-thru, and all I had to do was give them 8 bucks.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 12-13-2023, 11:23 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,529
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps View Post
I know that is what you are saying. It is not a new argument. Seen it many, many times. But I would argue it represents thinking that isn't quite there yet in terms of understanding and getting the concept.
At this point, it has grown tiresome to be told or have you allude to the idea that I don't get the concept. Clearly, I do. The problem is that I don't agree with you. There is a difference between not agreeing and not understanding.

As I said, you want a specific (of sorts) and I am pointing out that Cooper provided a concept, which is defined as 'a general notion,' i.e., an abstraction. He listed certain criteria which created a differentiation from general rifles and even some general purpose rifles; but, that differentiation did not include a specific - this is it, that's not - criterion. For example, according to Cooper, a 'Scout Rifle' was desirable in .308, but it wasn't necessarily in that caliber.

The basic concept was a caliber, available worldwide, without handloading. After that, other criteria came into play in terms of range, power, handling, accuracy, etc. in terms of the caliber options. The same with the other criteria he cited. In other words, they were, if you'll pardon the phrase, 'generalized specifics' which could be met by a number of different configurations and though no one truly has, yet, such is not the point. Even Cooper, so far as I know, never truly succeeded completely either.

Is there 'something' which makes a rifle a 'Scout Rifle' rather than a general purpose rifle? Sure...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
I know of a participant over on the Scout Rifle forum that would regularly take his attempts at building a scout and most of the time as I understand the stories, Cooper would politely point out, nice rifle, but not a Scout.
But, then again, even Cooper wasn't necessarily content with any design. Just like the Steyr you favor...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
Per Cooper, even the Styer falls short of ideal. This is true. I believe he said something along the lines of it gets there about 80/85%. Do you even know what missing feature makes up a big chunk of "missing the mark"? The obvious one is weight, but not the one I have in mind. Cooper said the Styer is a scout, and since it is his creation, despite the short comings he dub the Styer a Scout Rifle
You don't get to pick and choose the criterion or criteria that 'makes the difference.' It either is or it isn't. That's your argument in a nutshell. Yet, there you are, quoting Cooper and challenging me (and readers) to name the criterion you feel important when he was even willing to 'overlook' some things and deem something a 'Scout Rifle.'

What you aren't seeing (or not acknowledging) is something I've seen in a number of things. The person who created the concept didn't necessarily share 'everything' with one person or in one place. But, those who followed didn't necessarily have access to 'everything' and worked from what was there, declaring what they saw, preferred, worked for them, etc. as THE correct understanding and all else to not be. The problem? The original concept was based on the premise of what worked for you and, thus, alternatives were allowed; which is why Cooper, in this case, provided 'generalized specifics' rather than specifics which were immutable beyond a certain point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
...BUT I do find his Scout Rifle concept interesting, and I make an effort to respect the creative effort that went into it. Respect the creation is my point.
Respecting the creation is respecting the concept, not a specific. Which is why, while he preferred a bolt action, even Cooper acknowledged that a Savage 99, a lever action, could be made into a "quite good scout rifle," though it was a little long. It's why you tend to contradict yourself. You acknowledge that Cooper said that the Steyr didn't fully meet the criteria, but it was still a 'Scout Rifle,' then you state...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
But this, no. The less you match his criteria, the less you have a Scout Rifle to the point you don't. Regardless of what you call it. The more criteria you drop, the more you break the desired end result, the less likely someone will then get to experience what Cooper was going for, and then not truly be able to say if it is for them or not.

This is where you and I will likely never agree. I do not believe it is possible to experience A by messing around with B. If you want to experience the Scout Rifle concept, you need a Scout Rifle. Hence, the Styer IS the entry rifle. At this time, that is our most affordable path to experiencing the scout rifle concept.
Really? You're not allowing for an 'evolution.' Again, you want whole hog or nothing. Conversely, I'm arguing that Cooper 'allowed' for a certain level of training. The purpose of training isn't just getting better. It's also about familiarization and comfort.

Not everyone is ready for a short(er) rifle and it can take some getting used to before you believe in it. Shooting with a forward mounted scope can take some real practice, even if Cooper felt it to be better for the concept. Lighter rifles recoil more and it can take getting used to for some. For those used to magazines which hold 10, 20, and 30 rounds, having a magazine of only 3 or 5 rounds can take some learning in terms of 'picking your shot' rather than relying on having sufficient cartridges to 'allow' for a bad shot.

That's been my point. Not everyone is ready for a 'Scout Rifle' immediately. Just like the guy I watched one time at a fly fishing store who purchased a $1,500 outfit, but couldn't cast the line past his shoes (which was quite a feat unto itself given the 9' rod length ). Why not produce a rifle which allows someone to 'enter' the concept in stages where, once they develop a certain level of 'expertise' with part of the concept, they can add the next stage based on their unique experience?

Oh, yeah, right. It's whole hog or it ain't it. The problem is you keep claiming that I'm saying things I didn't to justify your argument. For instance...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
...You take the "should" as giving you lots of room play. Another way to look at that is "should embody" but if does not then not a scout...
I said 'wiggle room,' not 'lots of room to play.' Some times that 'wiggle room' is 'notable;' which isn't necessarily synonymous with 'lots of space.' It actually means 'worthy of note.'

In other words, you are the one invoking a criterion even Cooper didn't. While he had a mark which he felt made a rifle a 'Scout Rifle,' there was not a single criterion which constituted that mark. Yes. There were things which made it 'not' a 'Scout Rifle;' but, not one thing which made it one, which is why he had a list of 'generalized specifics' as criteria.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
1. The concept is more the philosophy, reasoning, purpose behind Cooper's thoughts and choices. The who, what, and why of it all.
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
2. The criteria is what a rifle MUST have in order to be a Scout Rifle. This is the "ridged, in stone" part.
Sort of. It's not a binary "yes" or "no." It's an aggregation of criteria, with that aggregation allowing some 'wiggle room' in terms of a specific rifle not meeting a certain criterion and a different rifle not meeting another criterion, but both rifles still being considered a 'Scout Rifle.'

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
3. How to achieve all those criteria... now that gets a bit "fuzzy". This is where we do have some room to play.
Which has been my point and your "good to go" is what I have been speaking to.

The problem you're having, as I've said, is that you want it to be a 'Scout Rifle' from the get go...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
So on and so forth. The above is not a full listing of all the criteria. The criteria must be there, or not a scout rifle. The criteria matter more than how it is executed to have it all come together.
What I have been saying is that not everyone is ready for that. Yet, such is, in essence, the only option out there and you pay for that. Just like the guy with the fly rod I mentioned. It met some criteria in terms of being the 'proper gear;' but, he wasn't ready for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
Respect the creation. We do not get to "reinvent" what constitutes a Scout Rifle. Dropping something or adding something that wasn't there to it. Cooper laid out what makes a scout rifle a scout rifle. But he did so in a way there is room to use different methods/options/material for achieving the criteria. But to be a Scout Rifle, it MUST meet his criteria. Not mine, not your's, HIS.
Which is what I've been saying. The difference is that you refuse to allow someone to 'evolve' through experience into the criteria; modifying the rifle as their experience allows for it. That's exclusionary thinking and such is not necessarily 'respecting the concept.' But, once again, you argue a straw man...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
Respect the creation. Don't build something that is not a Scout and then claim it so.
Go back to some of the first things I said to you...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia
...In short, it's not supposed to be about a rifle with all the latest/greatest technology, allowing it to... kind of... meet the criteria and, most certainly, allowing the manufacturer to come in at a certain price point. It's supposed to be about manufacturers producing a firearm within certain parameters to allow for the type of use Cooper was talking about. In that sense, if you look at his criteria, he isn't talking about having to innovate new rifles. He's talking about taking certain characteristics, already in existence, and putting them together in a single design...

Remember, the idea was to have a rifle which served a practical, functional application. Each of us is going to have individual needs and preferences in terms of how we meet that application and a good deal of that will stem from research and actual experience. In that sense, might it not make a certain sense for manufacturers to produce an usable, but more affordable, rifle as a starting point and allow the actual user to adapt it as they gain more experience in terms of what works for them?...
Such is the reason Cooper left 'wiggle room.' It's like Cooper used to say: "Owning a piano does not make one a pianist any more than owning a handgun makes one a good shooter." The same holds true for a 'Scout Rifle.' It's the essence of why Gunsite Academy exists, another Cooper conceptualization. In fact, I think their website has a line which encapsulates what I've been trying to get across to you...

Quote:
...With the company of like-minded students, supportive Instructors and in a friendly and challenging atmosphere, you will undergo a graduated, comprehensive system of education that will improve you as a practitioner and perhaps, as a person...
"Graduated, comprehensive system." The two are not mutually exclusive, but the one allows for the other. The goal? Education and improvement of the individual as a practitioner. Just as not every instructor is identical, neither is every student cast from the same mold.

I remember, 2 or 3 decades ago, talking to a Kenpo Karate black belt who talked about Ed Parker's (the guy who created the style) example of a school which famously taught students to throw a right hand punch perfectly. Then, in walked a prospective student with no right arm. The thought has stuck with me over the years in that it serves as an example of how we can accomplish the same thing, but in many different ways based not only on our physical assets, but our abilities.

The same, I believe, underlies Cooper's concept of a 'Scout Rifle.' You don't have to reinvent the wheel. But, it needs to be adapted for the size, weight, purpose of the vehicle using it.

In the same way, it's still Cooper's concept. It's just that the specifics might not be exactly to a certain spec because that 'specification' might not allow an individual or a group of individuals to accomplish the task the 'Scout Rifle' was intended for; i.e., achieving "the highest level of individual competence, with the instrument best suited to the task." Which is why Cooper allowed some 'wiggle room' with the concept in terms of how a given rifle met the name.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 12-14-2023, 6:51 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Three pages of minutiae. Had colonel Cooper not changed definitions over time this would all have been easier. I would ask Richard Mann what HIS definition of a Scout Rifle is, and go with that. The End.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 12-14-2023, 8:57 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 11,531
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

I'll be interested to see how Savage develops their straight pull Impulse rifle. If they can manage to get it to lose weight, it would make a far faster and better manual rifle than a bolt action.
__________________
"Show me a young conservative and I'll show you a man without a heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you a man without a brain." - Sir Winston Churchill

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" - Senator Barry Goldwater
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 12-14-2023, 9:56 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,529
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
Three pages of minutiae. Had colonel Cooper not changed definitions over time this would all have been easier. I would ask Richard Mann what HIS definition of a Scout Rifle is, and go with that. The End.
Analysis of the Scout Rifle: Part 1

Quote:
As those who frequent the Scout Rifle forum and its similar Facebook page: Jeff Cooper?s Scout, know, there are ongoing arguments about what is and what is not a Scout Rifle. The argument is not just between those in the know and those who are not, it exists between many who have been a student of the Scout Rifle for a very long time. This series of articles will attempt to address some of the reasons for these disagreements, but more importantly it will look at the enigma that is known as the Scout Rifle by questioning - with no disrespect to Cooper intended - the concept, the name, the rifle, the community that worships it, and perceived or practical performance standards of a general-purpose rifle...

Over the years Cooper worked with a variety of rifles configured in an attempt to meet the parameters of the definition he created. A definition that, if it did not evolve, was at least somewhat inconsistent. Ostensibly, Cooper?s Scout Rifle can be defined as having the following characteristics:
  • Weight of less than 3.5 kilos (7 pounds, 11.45 ounces) but ideally less than 3 kilos (6 pounds, 9.82 ounces) with the optical sight and sling attached.
  • A maximum length of one meter (39.4 inches)
  • Chambered for the 308 Winchester, with allowances for the 7mm-08 Remington where the 308 Winchester could not be legally owned, and for the 243 Winchester for those who are recoil sensitive.
  • A short-action with a 19-inch barrel.
  • Axillary iron ghost-ring sights.
  • A fixed, low-power telescope mounted as low over the bore as possible.
There were some other suggested optional accouterments, but this is most likely the best homogenous and unrefuted definition that can be assembled from all of the writings Cooper offered.

Two very important defining but somewhat ambiguous characteristics are missing from this definition. Cooper felt his Scout Rifle should be friendly, meaning it was easy to carry, fast to get on target, and well configured to allow for excellent marksmanship from field shooting positions. He also felt that it should fill the need of a general-purpose rifle, meaning that it could effectively perform general-purpose rifle tasks anywhere in the world. In other words, while it might not be perfect for any single task, it could passably perform all tasks. It was not to be a specialized rifle but one that was very generalized...

So, what Cooper gave us was a blueprint for a rifle that was nearly impossible to create - Steyr, one of the best rifle manufactures in the world, tried to do it and failed. And, at the root of the concept is a rifle that, arguably, no one in today?s world really needs, and that was crafted for a man and time that no longer exists.

The message here is that when discussing the Scout Rifle as defined by Jeff Cooper, it should be done with an understanding of what Cooper was attempting to define. In Cooper's writings I can find no reference to an attempt to define a rifle that everyone would like, chambered in a cartridge that was everyone's favorite, or that was specifically configured to address the individual and specialized problems or desires they might have...

This uncovers the problem with the Scout Rifle Concept. It is not the only rifle most people need. It is however the one rifle Jeff Cooper thought most people needed. Need is a relative thing and without a proof-positive performance benchmark, it is also something that is damned hard to prove. Needs vary as do the speculations on how to fill them. Your needs and speculations on fulfilling them do not support the alteration of another man?s concept, they only mold and define yours...
Analysis of the Scout Rifle: Part 2

Quote:
...By Cooper naming his concept rifle a Scout Rifle, it opened up the interpretation of the weapon system to legitimate real-deal, mondern-day scouts all over the world. And, while they all might have similar general-purpose rifle needs, they all also have very specific needs that need to be addressed such as suppressors, high capacity, more power, less power, and subsonic performance. (A modern day 19D US Army cavalry scout does not need the rifle Cooper identified as a Scout Rifle, he needs something different.) Had Cooper simply called his concept rifle something else, like maybe the Cooper Rifle, today we would not find ourselves involved in so many arguments over what is and is not a Scout Rifle and what a Scout Rifle should and should not be. The way it is now, the term "scout rifle" could legitimately be used to describe rifles used by real scouts, as opposed to illegitimate wannabes. But, because Cooper coined the term and set the definition, all these so-called "scout rifles" are measured against his "concept," with arguments to support their differences...
Analysis of the Scout Rifle: Part 3

Quote:
...The primary problem with the Scout Rifle is that today it is used by a generation of folks who are accustomed to rifles ideally adapted to the specific tasks they need their rifles to perform. Cooper's Scout Rifle was ideally adapted to, not being ideally adapted to, anything. It is not the best rifle for deer hunting, it is not the best rifle for fighting bad guys, it is not the best rifle for engaging targets at very close ranges, intermediate ranges, or long ranges. Name a specific, singular task for a rifle to excel at, and the ideal rifle for that task will not be a Scout Rifle.

Cooper and others have speculated that most do not understand the problem, riflecraft, or rifles, enough to appreciate that the Scout Rifle is the best rifle for general-purpose use. While this might be an elitist position to take, to a large extent it is true; few shooters do in fact understand these facets of weapon application and firearm suitability to have what would be considered a qualified opinion. However, like with most everything else in life, the free market has a way of establishing what best suits the most people. And, at the same time, it seems odd that the so-called best rifle for general use would be such an enigma...

And that is the problem with the Scout Rifle; today, most people need and want something just a little bit different, but something that also fills their interpretation of the Scout Rifle role that they need filled. What they need is a scout-like rifle, conditioned to their geographic location and individual needs. This is why, with inspiration from Cooper and his Scout Rifle Concept, I floated the notion of the CUR - conditional utility rifle - several years ago...

Cooper's Scout Rifle was the inspiration for the CUR classification, but a Scout Rifle is more of a general-purpose utility rifle suitable for everything, anywhere in the world. You might say the CUR is more of an adaptive Scout Rifle, with sort of a 21st century twist that?s driven by individual and geographical needs. It is in fact a better way to describe most of the rifles people today call Scout Rifles...
Analysis of the Scout Rifle: Part 4

Quote:
The members of the Scout Rifle community exasperate all of the problems with the Concept, the name, and the Scout Rifle. Some believe that for a rifle to be a Scout Rifle it must fully meet every aspect of Cooper?s definition. I believe that since Cooper defined the Scout Rifle; this is a logical approach. However, the problem arises when his disciples disparage those who do not fully understand the Concept, its history, or Cooper. A fellow may present a rifle that?s almost a Scout Rifle, only to be met with condescending treatment. These folks will use the term pseudo-scout, lever-scout, or some other hyphenated-scout moniker, to describe these rifles. Ironically, many of these, shall we call them elitists, have never fired, handled, or even seen a rifle that met every element of Cooper?s definition. (Truth is, most people haven't.)

Other members of the Scout Rifle community take a more inclusive approach and seem to not get all bent out of shape when someone calls a rifle that does not fit within the definition Cooper established a Scout Rifle. I think this is a wonderfully wholesome approach but admittedly, I don?t really know how it?s supposed to work. If Cooper's definition of a Scout Rifle is not the definition of a Scout Rifle, then what is? And, if Cooper?s definition is only a guide, then there really is no such thing as a Scout Rifle; there?s just rifles with scout scopes or rifles used for ?scouting? purposes...

The underlying fact is that a rifle that meets every aspect of Cooper's definition is indeed a very handy rifle that would serve someone doing scout-like things anywhere in the world very well. Cooper was, as bad as some might hate to admit it, right. Those who have worked with a rifle meeting Cooper?s definition will tell you it is a joy to carry, handle, and shoot. By allowing any rifle that looks like a Scout Rifle, but is definitely not a Scout Rifle, to carry that name, the Concept loses value and meaning.

Is there an answer to the problem? Probably not...

And maybe with that we?ve found the primary problem with the Scout Rifle; the damn thing is expensive! It always has been and most likely always will be. This means most of us who are interested will purchase or craft the approximations we can afford, will tweak them for our personal needs, and will also make excuses for why our rifles fall short of the definition or why the definition falls short of our actual needs. There is nothing - NOTHING - wrong with that. Especially if while doing so we remember and honor Cooper?s concept without trying to change it. And, maybe that is the message the Scout Rifle Community needs to support. For the most part, we are all on the same road, we?re just riding different horses...
Analysis of the Scout Rifle: Part 5

Quote:
...Jeff Cooper felt that he could prescribe a definition for a rifle that would yield a particular level of performance. This is of course a very analytical approach to any problem. Ideally, you identify the desired/proven characteristics, coordinate them into a package, and you will achieve the level of performance you want. The result is not always what is desired. I think it is clear that Cooper realized this from the outset and even more so as he continued to work with various examples of rifles that were created by virtue of the definition/s he provided...

There is wiggle room in Cooper?s definition with regard to weight. It started at 3 Kilos, climbed to 3.5 kilos, and in 2004 when C Stories was published - after the introduction of the Steyr Scout Rifle - it dropped back to 7 pounds. There?s wiggle room with regard to sights as well. Cooper seemed to authorize a rifle without an optical sight, a rifle with a scout scope, a rifle with a traditional - low powered - scope, and more commonly, a rifle with an aperture sight and a scout scope. I don't want to argue any of those points here, but I want to point out that while his elemental definition could be ambiguous, nothing is more ambiguous than saying a rifle must be friendly...

Given that most of these rifles meet or come close to meeting Cooper?s elemental definition, it seems to be obvious - at least to me - that friendliness might matter most. As you will see in Part 6, this will challenge some of the assumptions associated with Cooper?s elemental definition, but maybe not so much his inspiration for the concept...
Analysis of the Scout Rifle: Part 6

Quote:
...Cooper's Concept has been twisted and modified by almost everyone, including manufacturers, who have flirted with this thing called a Scout Rifle. They modify and adjust Cooper's definition to best suit their individual, general, or specialized needs. Though some consider this sacrilege, it is in fact a good thing; a rifle should be ideally adapted to the individual and their needs. If it is not, it does not matter what it is called, it is not the best tool for the job...

All of this brings us to the point of this six-part analysis of the Scout Rifle and that is, what is most important? In order for a rifle to be a Scout Rifle is it more important that it meet a specific elemental description? Is it more important that the rifle be handy and friendly? Or is it more important that a rifle be the best rifle at performing scout-like chores? And finally, do all these important things matter the most to everyone or just the person owning/shooting/using the rifle?...

In closing, I?ll leave you with this. Cooper gave us a definition for the Scout Rifle but we all too often forget to pay any respects to what he considered the most important part of that definition and that's that a Scout Rifle must be friendly and handy. Cooper had visions of one rifle for everyone, but I find it very hard to go there, at least until we can all agree on what type underwear we will all wear.

Until there is a settled and agreed upon performance test to validate a rifle's claim to the Scout Rifle title, and until there is a definitive way to measure the friendliness and handiness of a rifle for scout-like field use, by all practical reasoning none of us have the authority or experience to claim that this or that rifle is or is not a Scout Rifle. I have several I consider worthy of that name; some are better for me than others. You're not obligated to like any of them, and Cooper cannot give his opinion on them either.

The Scout Rifle will forever remain an enigma and we must honor the road Cooper started us down. But by all means, find your own answer to his question. If you're smart, you'll base your decision on friendliness, handiness, and performance, rather than an elemental definition that may or may not serve you best...
Our 'three pages of minutiae' is demonstrating what it took Mann an entire book and six articles to speak about. If you read the articles, you will see where both of us are 'right,' but with emphasis on different aspects. While I think both of us end up in, essentially, the same place as Mann, neither of us is likely to agree with the other in terms of what we emphasize.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 12-14-2023, 10:18 AM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Just out today, a simpler, lighter SIG Cross Trax. 6.1 pounds in .308 w/16 in barrel.

Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 12-14-2023, 12:50 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
If we are thinking of the same person, that is quite true. The last time I had occasion to speak with Janelle, that came up, and she remembered him and verified pretty much the same. Glad to say that at least one of my kids had the opportunity to meet her. The Sconce is not quite the same without her. Still very worthwhile to see. Lots of neat historical stuff there.
Most likely.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 12-14-2023, 1:51 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Trapped,

Where you and I do not agree is around this idea of a "beginner" scout rifle. or that you can have a partial scout rifle and be able to evaluate if it is for you or not.

You posted a bunch of stuff from Richard that says the same thing I have been...but with different words.

There is one aspect I have not touched on yet, because I haven't been sure how to bring it up without ruffling feathers. But it is NOT based on my opinion, but on things Cooper himself said. Might as well just bring it up.

Cooper was not building a rifle for beginners. Frankly knowing what I know today, I would NOT advise a beginning rifle shooter to get a Scout Rife. Shooting light rifles takes more skill than shooting heavy rifles. You do not need a Scout Rifle to start building your skills. I thought I could shoot rifles until I got my Scout and learned how weak some of my fundamentals were. Not everyone is the same, some people will persevere and overcome. If that is you, you likely will be ok with a Scout Rifle early on in your rifle shooting. But I would toss out, you are the exception, not the rule.

He did not care that the end result might be out of reach financially for some people. I based this on looking at the whole man we get to know through his books and commentaries. I 100% believe you need to read it all to start to get an understanding of the Scout Rifle concept. The concept is greater than the rifle. It derives from how he appeared to think about hunting, life, values he held. etc.

For example, he was obsessed with the pursuit of excellence. This factored into the end result that is the Scout Rifle as we know it. Cooper was willing to pay to avoid "cheap, good, fast, choose two" to achieve excellence. Or at least what he felt was excellence. This is why there is more to the rifle than a short barrel, 308 and a forward mounted scope. It is also why Scout Rifles are not "cheap" to acquire.

You keep saying the Styer fell short (which technically it did) and use that as an excuse to alter the concept/criteria. But before you do (which I think invalidates a rifle as a Scout Rifle) can you even identify the two main reason it came up short according to Cooper. I tossed out the easy one...weight. But there is one other that seem to really bother him. No, it wasn't that the rifle was at one time available in .223.

The reason I bring this back up is because it really clarifies how CLOSE to ideal the Styer actually is, while still missing the ideal of ideals for all Cooper hoped for. If we pretend the rifle can make weight and pretend this one other criterion was met, the Styer is pretty darn close to perfect criteria/concept wise.

Yes, the Styer could be improved. Better bipod, better sights, larger ejection port, go on a diet... BUT that is refinement of manufacturing and implementation, not concept/criteria.

Even Richard says there is a minimum criterion you need to meet to have rifle be a scout rifle. I am not the type to say your rifle isn't a Scout Rifle if you miss something like the magazine must protect the bullet tip, though that IS in the criteria. BUT there is a minimum you MUST meet. Richards articles shared above is in part why I hold this position. And I think he makes a solid argument for what those minimums are.

Can a better GPR rifle be built than what Cooper came up with. Maybe. So far no one has put the effort in to try. If you think you can, go for it. Just don't call it a Scout Rifle, because it won't be one. Respect the creation, which is as much the concept as the rifle itself.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-14-2023, 3:46 PM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The next time I see Richard, I will tell him about this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 12-14-2023, 8:11 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,529
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps View Post
Where you and I do not agree is around this idea of a "beginner" scout rifle. or that you can have a partial scout rifle and be able to evaluate if it is for you or not.
Sigh. What part of "build into it" isn't clear? I haven't been talking about a 'beginner' Scout Rifle. I've been talking about a base model which can, with experience in the various features and money availability, be fleshed out into a Scout Rifle; but, one which is more 'tailored' to the individual.

Remember what I said at the beginning of our back and forth. It's about a rifle which can be put to the type of use intended, not about all the whiz bangs in a package which is unaffordable to many. Remember also that many aren't ready for a 'finished' package. They need to gain experience with the various features without necessarily being 'overwhelmed' with everything at once in a package they spent heap big money on, but won't be able to use effectively, if at all, at first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
You posted a bunch of stuff from Richard that says the same thing I have been...but with different words.
Did you even notice what I said at the end of that post?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia
Our 'three pages of minutiae' is demonstrating what it took Mann an entire book and six articles to speak about. If you read the articles, you will see where both of us are 'right,' but with emphasis on different aspects. While I think both of us end up in, essentially, the same place as Mann, neither of us is likely to agree with the other in terms of what we emphasize.
It's not about you being 'right' and me being 'wrong' or vice versa. It's about what each of us chooses to emphasize. You want an absolute adherence to Cooper's ideal and I, like Mann, have been saying... today, most people need and want something just a little bit different, but something that also fills their interpretation of the Scout Rifle role that they need filled. What they need is a scout-like rifle, conditioned to their geographic location and individual needs. Such is consistent with the final part I quoted...

Quote:
...In closing, I'll leave you with this. Cooper gave us a definition for the Scout Rifle but we all too often forget to pay any respects to what he considered the most important part of that definition and that's that a Scout Rifle must be friendly and handy. Cooper had visions of one rifle for everyone, but I find it very hard to go there, at least until we can all agree on what type underwear we will all wear.

Until there is a settled and agreed upon performance test to validate a rifle's claim to the Scout Rifle title, and until there is a definitive way to measure the friendliness and handiness of a rifle for scout-like field use, by all practical reasoning none of us have the authority or experience to claim that this or that rifle is or is not a Scout Rifle. I have several I consider worthy of that name; some are better for me than others. You're not obligated to like any of them, and Cooper cannot give his opinion on them either.

The Scout Rifle will forever remain an enigma and we must honor the road Cooper started us down. But by all means, find your own answer to his question. If you're smart, you'll base your decision on friendliness, handiness, and performance, rather than an elemental definition that may or may not serve you best...
You've got your answer and I have mine. Someone else will have theirs. The problem is, you are doing exactly what Mann lamented in not allowing them to be 'in pursuit of' the ideal. They are either there or they're not. Just like...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
Cooper was not building a rifle for beginners. Frankly knowing what I know today, I would NOT advise a beginning rifle shooter to get a Scout Rife. Shooting light rifles takes more skill than shooting heavy rifles. You do not need a Scout Rifle to start building your skills. I thought I could shoot rifles until I got my Scout and learned how weak some of my fundamentals were. Not everyone is the same, some people will persevere and overcome. If that is you, you likely will be ok with a Scout Rifle early on in your rifle shooting. But I would toss out, you are the exception, not the rule.
I wouldn't advise a 'beginner' to start with the finished product either. In fact, that's exactly what I have been saying and if you go back and read what I've said, you'd see that. If you do go back and look, pay particular attention to what I said to you 3 days ago...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia
Think of it as buying a 'barreled action' in a functional rifle. That way, the user has a rifle of the 'type' to play and experiment with; but, something they can build on as experience (not to mention finances) dictates. That $900 - $1,000 difference between the "$675" and your "$1,600" starting point could be a major, deciding factor in terms of allowing for people to develop the interest or cultivate the interest which already exists to a point where they, eventually, commit 'big money,' but end up with something that suits them personally within (give or take) the parameters that Cooper laid out.
Once again... a rifle which can be put to the type of use intended, one which allows them to gain experience with the various features without necessarily being 'overwhelmed' with everything at once in a package they spent heap big money on, but won't be able to use effectively, if at all, at first. Doing the latter virtually guarantees a discouraging outcome for many and a 'bad' result for some.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
...I 100% believe you need to read it all to start to get an understanding of the Scout Rifle concept. The concept is greater than the rifle. It derives from how he appeared to think about hunting, life, values he held. etc.
There's nothing wrong with knowing where you want to end up. But, you don't necessarily need to start at the end. You can grow (and build) into it, provided you have a place to start which doesn't seem insurmountable to begin with. Think of the Marine Corps. Not everyone who enters Boot Camp is a rifleman. Yet, by the time they graduate from Boot Camp, every Marine is a rifleman.

Even Cooper didn't start out ready for a Scout Rifle. It was an ideal even he pursued. In fact, he pieced together and edited his ideal as his experience(s) allowed him to refine that ideal. However, as Mann observes, one man's ideal is not necessarily ideal for another man. This is where 'only Cooper's definition, period' begins to fall apart, fueled by the idea the Cooper himself never had a 'set in stone,' absolutist definition. Instead...

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
...he was obsessed with the pursuit of excellence...
Excellence isn't a single, homogenous result. Neither is there ever a definitive end point; i.e., what one can do excellently can be done better. That's what "the pursuit of excellence" means. That is why one aspires to an ideal. Such is why there is no single rifle which actually epitomizes his ideal, even those custom jobs which incorporate all or nearly all of his criteria.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps
You keep saying the Styer fell short (which technically it did) and use that as an excuse to alter the concept/criteria.
Sigh. Again with a straw man? I never 'altered' the concept or the criteria. I said the Steyr doesn't fully meet the criteria and it doesn't. Such doesn't 'invalidate' the rifle. It does, however, point to the fact that even Cooper would recognize something as a Scout Rifle which didn't fully meet his criteria. Is there a 'minimum' set of criteria? Yep.

Your problem is that you refuse to recognize that there was not a single criterion which constituted that mark. Yes. There were things which made it 'not' a 'Scout Rifle;' but, not one thing, a single item, which made it one, which is why he had a list of 'generalized specifics' as criteria. It's an aggregation of criteria, with that aggregation allowing some 'wiggle room' in terms of a specific rifle not meeting a certain criterion and a different rifle not meeting another criterion, but both rifles still being considered a 'Scout Rifle.'

This is the problem. You keep injecting the idea that I want to 'change Cooper's criteria' and, therefore, I don't know what I'm talking about. The problem? I'm not looking to change anything about his criteria. What I'm saying and have been putting out there is that...

1.) Individuals need to be allowed to grow into the criteria; i.e., be allowed to learn to use the concept constructively, not in a deconstructive manner. In other words, learn as they 'piece it together' rather than having to learn it by 'taking it apart.'
2.) The criteria, as set forth by Cooper, is not universally applicable for everyone; thus, some adaptation is inevitable. Which is precisely why Cooper himself left some 'wiggle room.'

Notice what Mann said about the Steyr...

Quote:
...Many who are interested cannot afford the Steyr Scout, which is the only commercial Scout Rifle Cooper blessed. And, creating a custom definition-meeting rifle is very, very costly. The average guy with a wife and two kids and an average job simply cannot afford to do it. This is of course why Ruger introduced the Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle; it's a modernized approach to what Cooper envisioned but more importantly something the average guy can afford. Though it's a fine rifle it falls a bit short of what Cooper envisioned. Is it a Scout Rifle?

Well, it's as close as most of us will ever get to a rifle that will meet Cooper's definition. I know I fall in that group; was it not for my profession and industry connections, it's doubtful I would have ever claimed experience with or ownership of a true Scout Rifle, or even a Steyr Scout. If you want a true Scout Rifle you have to spend money and Cooper was OK with that, he felt perfection should not be sacrificed for affordability...
In other words, Mann is incorporating elements of what each of us emphasizes. However, as I've said, several times now, you want 'whole hog or nothing,' whereas I suggest the "How do you eat an elephant?" approach. We both end up in the same place. The difference is in the paths we see as being able to get us there.

Think of it this way... You want the user to appreciate the completed art or they aren't qualified to even view it because they don't understand it. I'm saying that the best way for many to appreciate the art is to go through the process of completing it themselves; something which allows them to understand how it comes together as art.

There should be room for both approaches. That's respecting the creation and the creation was the concept, not a specific rifle.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 12-15-2023, 12:26 PM
200Apples's Avatar
200Apples 200Apples is offline
-DVC- Mojave Lever Crew
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,909
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I hold both 1859sharps and TrappedinCalifornia in high regard... but, gentlemen, please... enough already. Your points have been made.

__________________
.
"Get a proper holster, and go hot. The End." - SplitHoof

NRA Lifetime | Avatar courtesy Elon Musk's Twitter User SomthingWicked
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 12-15-2023, 2:31 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,529
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 200Apples View Post
I hold both 1859sharps and TrappedinCalifornia in high regard... but, gentlemen, please... enough already. Your points have been made.

Yep. I concur and have said so a couple of times.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 12-17-2023, 4:10 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Apples if you will indulge me a last comment for now.

Invitation for those who interested in the topics of General Purpose Rifles, Scout Rifles, and Practical rifles, I would encourage joining the Scout Rifle forum. https://www.scoutrifle.org/

Some great discussions have gone on there, and while a bit quiet right now continue to happen. Has a wealth of excellent information, and Richard Mann while not as active as he used to be, pops in from time to time.

Just a warning though, while it is true that "what IS a Scout Rifle" is at times hard to nail down, what is NOT is often much clearer. Cooper was often clearer on this point than what is a Scout Rifle. There is in fact a wrong way to build a Scout Rifle per Cooper. If you try and pass off a rifle or idea as part of the Scout Rifle concept that is clearly not, you will get called out for it. Generally, politely, but you will get called out none the less. If it is a grey area, make your case.

Frankly this is how Richard became a respected member of that community, he came in with a fresh perspective, shook things up, made his case and has left his mark on what is known as "the Scout Rifle". It did not go smoothly at first, but it happened. He is now viewed as one of THE authorities on the topic.

Beyond that, the community is very friendly and supportive of learning and improving everyone's understanding and knowledge.

The topic is larger than any one forum post/thread/discussion. There is an entire forum of highly knowledgeable people, some who were friends with Cooper himself, had discussions about Scout Rifles with him from which to learn about these types of rifles, particularly The Scout Rifle.

If you are into these types of rifles, concepts and want to explore them in depth, it's the place to go hang out.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 12-25-2023, 9:35 AM
W.R.Buchanan's Avatar
W.R.Buchanan W.R.Buchanan is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ojai CA
Posts: 3,249
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I was going to comment on this, but since this thread has digressed into a "Urine Exchange for Points" I will only comment on my gun.

I have #159 of the First Run of Ruger Scouts. It is a Sub MOA Rifle, and has been since day one. I started running a 1-5 Leupold on it, then a few years ago I installed a 3x9 Leupold on a GG&G QD Mount. I also run a Bushnell TRS 25 Red Dot on it for some 3 gun shoots I go to.





With the Red Dot Sight, I can hit a man sized target every single time at 200M off a rest. I can hit it at 300M 8/10 off a rest. The gun handles really well with just the Red Dot on it so I have been running it mostly. I would not hesitate to hunt or fight with this gun as I know it would be effective. With the Scope mounted I am good to 600+ yards

I consider this to be the best Iteration of the Scout Concept that Cooper never tried. And the Tikka T3x Artic that has replaced the #4Mk1 Enfield for the Canadian Rangers the other one. Probably a few others based on the basic Bolt Action Magazine Fed Concept.

https://choose.tikka.fi/usa/group/tikka/t3x-arctic

My gun has an XS Rail on it and the GG&G mount Repeats perfectly so I can change sights at will. That rail also has a Peep Sight on it so if the optic gets broke I still have sights on the gun.



It also has a Smith Enterprises Muzzle Brake which practically eliminates Recoil.



Since most all of my Meaningful Firearms Training happened at Front Sight where Brad Ackman who was Cooper's #1 Prote'ge', was the one who set up all the courses there, and was the Biggest Purveyor of the Cooper Doctrine of all. I feel that I can comment intelligently on this subject since all my Latest Training came from that source. I wish I could have shook his hand in the hopes that some of his essence would run down his arm and into me!

The Cooper Scout was not a close up and personal type of gun. Although it could be used in that role if Pressed. It was more a "Ranger" type of gun that could be used for everything effectively.
It was a "If you could only have one gun." type of Gun. A gun that would do everything and do it well.

All of my Carbines are set up with Red Dot Sights, and based on my ability to hit a man at 200-300 yards, and probably a little farther, I figure that was more about what Cooper was trying to convey with his concept.

The Canadian Rangers carry this concept to the max by using the Guns they are issued as "Subsistence Rifles," carried on a Dog Sled or ATV but with the Capability to engage the Russians that might try to Invade from the North if necessary.

I never did like the Steyr Version. I didn't come with iron Sights and I kinda think a gun like this should have them as Back Ups. Also the Bipod Fore End is a joke on a $2000 gun. I even got rid of the one on my Kel-Tec Su 16 which was a $400 gun..

My .02 on this subject! And You guys really need to post more Pics because your threads with all the back and forth banter get pretty boring with out pics.

Randy
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 47273.jpg (69.1 KB, 156 views)
File Type: jpg 1450501.jpg (72.5 KB, 154 views)
File Type: jpg Access 5.jpg (18.2 KB, 155 views)
File Type: jpg 1450507.jpg (79.2 KB, 153 views)
File Type: jpg 47282.jpg (22.2 KB, 158 views)
__________________
Rule #1 Liberals screw up everything they touch.
Rule #2 Whatever they accuse you of, they are already doing.
Rule #3 Liberals lie about anything no matter how insignificant.
Rule #4 If all else fails, they call you a Racist!

It's not how well you do what you know how to do,,, It is how well you do what you don't know how to do.
www.buchananprecisionmachine.com

Last edited by W.R.Buchanan; 12-25-2023 at 11:12 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 12-25-2023, 6:34 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W.R.Buchanan View Post

With the Red Dot Sight, I can hit a man sized target every single time at 200M off a rest. I can hit it at 300M 8/10 off a rest. The gun handles really well with just the Red Dot on it so I have been running it mostly. I would not hesitate to hunt or fight with this gun as I know it would be effective. With the Scope mounted I am good to 600+ yards
I absolutely love that you choose the word fight. The Scout Rifle, being a general-purpose rifle, IS suitable for fighting. Using your GP rifle for self-defense is another way of phrasing this.

On red dots, Cooper was aware of them, they were new, unproven, and had battery problems early on, mostly for how long the battery lasted during the peak period of his Scout Rifle development/testing. He even acknowledged their potential in the early 90's.

Thank you for sharing the pictures and perspectives, red dots are an overlooked option in the Scout Rifle world.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 12-26-2023, 10:02 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps View Post
red dots are an overlooked option in the Scout Rifle world.
On my last outing to school for some scout rifle activity, several who were using the Steyr have found that a pre-zeroed, small-ish RDS in QD mounts and carried in a pocket or pack makes a suitable back up sighting system as would permanently affixed suitable iron sights. With the quality of modern optics this is quite acceptable, IMO.
As to fighting with a scout rifle, I can think of several scenarios in which one could find themselves in and survive.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 12-26-2023, 4:14 PM
smle-man's Avatar
smle-man smle-man is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 10,352
iTrader: 127 / 100%
Default



This Ruger Scout was put together by a Calgunner, who added an M1 rifle laminated handguard attached to the rail mounting point, and a flash hider. I obtained it and added a PTG aluminum trigger guard and magazine well with oversized magazine release. I checked and it is no longer on their website. The scope is a Leupold.

The rifle is 5.56mm, picked for several reasons:

1. I suspect that 5.56mm/.223 is the most widely distributed center-fire rifle cartridge in the U.S. today, even more so that .30-06 or .30-30, so finding ammunition shouldn't be an issue.
2. The barrel looks to be large diameter which helps with barrel heating when firing a magazine or two quickly. It is stable and doesn't throw shots when it does heat up.
3. More ammunition can be carried compared to .308
4. For fun shooting, 5.56mm doesn't beat me up like .308 does in a medium weight sporting rifle


The downside to the 5.56mm Ruger Scout is the weight. It is heavier than it needs to be for the cartridge. The upside is the previously mentioned heavier barrel and that the weight helps to steady the rifle for off-hand shooting.

Not true to Cooper's vision but it works for me.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 12-26-2023, 5:50 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

If you go that route, you're better off with an AR.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 12-27-2023, 5:57 AM
smle-man's Avatar
smle-man smle-man is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 10,352
iTrader: 127 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigstroker View Post
If you go that route, you're better off with an AR.
And the .308 shooters with the SFAR but that's not the game.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 12-27-2023, 9:25 AM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
On my last outing to school for some scout rifle activity, several who were using the Steyr have found that a pre-zeroed, small-ish RDS in QD mounts and carried in a pocket or pack makes a suitable back up sighting system as would permanently affixed suitable iron sights. With the quality of modern optics this is quite acceptable, IMO.

As to fighting with a scout rifle, I can think of several scenarios in which one could find themselves in and survive.
Scout Rifle forum has bounced this idea around, you might have even been the instigator. But that is a small percentage of Scout Rifle owners.

The fixed magnification prism optics are another option being explored by some.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smle-man View Post

The rifle is 5.56mm, picked for several reasons:

1. I suspect that 5.56mm/.223 is the most widely distributed center-fire rifle cartridge in the U.S. today, even more so that .30-06 or .30-30, so finding ammunition shouldn't be an issue.
2. The barrel looks to be large diameter which helps with barrel heating when firing a magazine or two quickly. It is stable and doesn't throw shots when it does heat up.
3. More ammunition can be carried compared to .308
4. For fun shooting, 5.56mm doesn't beat me up like .308 does in a medium weight sporting rifle


The downside to the 5.56mm Ruger Scout is the weight. It is heavier than it needs to be for the cartridge. The upside is the previously mentioned heavier barrel and that the weight helps to steady the rifle for off-hand shooting.

Not true to Cooper's vision but it works for me.
Richard Mann called these types of rifles CURs, conditional utility rifles. I call them practical rifles. Same idea, rifles heavily influenced by, but not to Coopers vision. But that is ok, they are still very interesting rifles as they are the individual expression of what you believe you need out of a rifle.

Regardless, you have a very fine rifle that meets your needs.

Food for thought. Because you chose .223/5.56, if you are not already making it a "reflex" to work that bolt while keeping the rifle at your shoulder after each shot, I would strongly encourage doing so. You are more likely to need a follow up shot with .223/5.56 than with 308. Admire your shot after you have the rifle ready for action again. This advice comes from not just Cooper, but people like Client Smith, Ryan Cleckner and others who are very familiar with the bolt rifle in action. This advice applies to all cartridge choices, but the smaller calibers make this not just a best practice, but critical.

Having said that, love me some .223 bolt rifles. Sometimes I wonder why I bother with anything else.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 12-27-2023, 11:17 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1859sharps View Post

Having said that, love me some .223 bolt rifles. Sometimes I wonder why I bother with anything else.
Lately I have been experimenting with a CZ600 Trail rifle in .223/5.56. I have installed the Burris IER Scout optic, an M16 birdcage, and of course a sling. There are some aspects that take getting used to. Not all of it is great, but for a very compact bolt rifle in a minor caliber it has its place.
Interestingly, I have managed some very good shooting with it while the stock is in the collapsed position, when used much like a single-shot pistol.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 12-27-2023, 11:53 AM
smle-man's Avatar
smle-man smle-man is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 10,352
iTrader: 127 / 100%
Default

Reading on the NC forum from deer hunters attempting to use scout scope setups for whitetail and having issues in low light conditions. They recounted that the deer were visible to the naked eye and with binos, but because of the eye gap on the forward mounted scope, they couldn't see the deer. In normal daylight this wasn't an issue but most hunting is happening at twilight (according to the commenters) in the last 20 minutes of light.

Your experience?
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 12-27-2023, 1:17 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smle-man View Post
Reading on the NC forum from deer hunters attempting to use scout scope setups for whitetail and having issues in low light conditions. They recounted that the deer were visible to the naked eye and with binos, but because of the eye gap on the forward mounted scope, they couldn't see the deer. In normal daylight this wasn't an issue but most hunting is happening at twilight (according to the commenters) in the last 20 minutes of light.

Your experience?
While forward mounting does affect your ability to fully benefit from a scope that can still transmit usable light to your eye in low light conditions, it is not as handicapped by this as some people think.

The root problem is technically Scout Rifle aficionados have NEVER, EVER had a high-quality optical sight designed specifically for the Scout Rifle concept of forward mounting. Which means many people's experiences and opinions are based on low quality non optimal stuff. Rather than what could be if the same design effort went into them that we see in quality LPVOs.

The sort of exception to date has been the now discontinued Leupold VxR Scout Scope, which was intermediate eye relief, not long eye relief. It gave us a glimpse at what could be. It could also be used in the time windows discussed on the NC forum.

I personally think if you can't get a proper "scout optic" that works, swapping out the forward mounted one for a 1-4, or 5 or 6 power LPVO or something fixed in that range that allows you to enjoy and be successful on a hunt, you should do so. Cooper never meant for the concept to 'handicap' you, and the scout scope is the most undeveloped part of the package and has always been so. Getting optical companies to take a risk on development is a huge challenge.

If staying within the concept matters to "you", Cooper is on record saying this is within concept. Reference the gun digest article shared earlier in this thread and his commentaries. It's in there. Yes, his clear preference was the forward mounted optical sight, but he understood we did not have anything close to ideal available and made allowances for "conventional" low power optics ...if you care about these things.

Bottom line, your rifle, your hunt. Make sure it is set up to help you be successful and enjoy the experience. My two cents though, don't mount a heavy, large objective, high magnification scope on there. You will start ruining the benefits of a Scout Rifle or a scout inspired rifle. Make choices that keep it light, handy, and quick to use.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 12-27-2023, 2:22 PM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I am fortunate to own three of the aforementioned Leupold VXR line, and have taken game (mostly wild boar) in all lighting and weather conditions, and have NEVER had any issue finding game animals within the optic.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 12-27-2023, 2:48 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
Lately I have been experimenting with a CZ600 Trail rifle in .223/5.56. I have installed the Burris IER Scout optic, an M16 birdcage, and of course a sling. There are some aspects that take getting used to. Not all of it is great, but for a very compact bolt rifle in a minor caliber it has its place.
Interestingly, I have managed some very good shooting with it while the stock is in the collapsed position, when used much like a single-shot pistol.
What benefit would it have over an AR or a SIG MCX with a folding stock, or something similar?
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 12-27-2023, 2:58 PM
Imageview Imageview is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,425
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Different ergos, different maintenance needs, different reliability. Not everything has to be an AR, although they are there for those who prefer them. Not everyone wants an ar for everything, and everyone?s reasons will be different.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 12-27-2023, 3:10 PM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sigstroker View Post
What benefit would it have over an AR or a SIG MCX with a folding stock, or something similar?
In my situation, it is not yet saddled with restrictions based on action type, and it is very simple.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 12-27-2023, 3:51 PM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 4,180
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imageview View Post
Different ergos, different maintenance needs, different reliability. Not everything has to be an AR, although they are there for those who prefer them. Not everyone wants an ar for everything, and everyone?s reasons will be different.
Well said.
Sometimes I choose different weapon types simply because I like them. I have my share of AR platform-based weapons, have been to school with them, along with a plethora of other combat-type weapons of all sorts, to include rifles, carbines, shotguns, and sidearms.
I do like my single-shot weapons as well, including some mediums and heavies.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 12-31-2023, 10:53 AM
W.R.Buchanan's Avatar
W.R.Buchanan W.R.Buchanan is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ojai CA
Posts: 3,249
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Back to the .223 bolt gun. The Ruger American Rifle series has a " Ranch" model in .223 that takes AR mags. It only weighs 6 lbs and with a Red Dot on it and a Sling and full 10 round mag probably just over 7 lbs. It is light enough that an older person could run with it if necessary. I always consider "Running from Danger" with a rifle as a real possibility because at 74 it is a consideration that all of us should be looking at.

https://www.ruger.com/products/ameri...ets/26965.html

Randy.
__________________
Rule #1 Liberals screw up everything they touch.
Rule #2 Whatever they accuse you of, they are already doing.
Rule #3 Liberals lie about anything no matter how insignificant.
Rule #4 If all else fails, they call you a Racist!

It's not how well you do what you know how to do,,, It is how well you do what you don't know how to do.
www.buchananprecisionmachine.com
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 12-31-2023, 12:44 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W.R.Buchanan View Post
Back to the .223 bolt gun. The Ruger American Rifle series has a " Ranch" model in .223 that takes AR mags. It only weighs 6 lbs and with a Red Dot on it and a Sling and full 10 round mag probably just over 7 lbs. It is light enough that an older person could run with it if necessary. I always consider "Running from Danger" with a rifle as a real possibility because at 74 it is a consideration that all of us should be looking at.

https://www.ruger.com/products/ameri...ets/26965.html

Randy.

While not a scout rifle by any stretch, that Ruger Ranch rifle has some potential that should not be overlooked. Youtube channel C_Does has used that rifle in 2 gun and brutality matches out scoring people with ARs. Food for thought for those who are legally prevented from owning an AR.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 01-01-2024, 9:41 AM
k1dude's Avatar
k1dude k1dude is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: la Republika Popular de Kalifornistan
Posts: 11,531
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Ruger now has their Ranch Rifle Gen II out. It's 0.10 pounds heavier, but seems to have a few improvements.

__________________
"Show me a young conservative and I'll show you a man without a heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you a man without a brain." - Sir Winston Churchill

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" - Senator Barry Goldwater
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 01-06-2024, 2:09 PM
villageidiot357 villageidiot357 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 13
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

It took the biggest LARPer on the YouTube, but Grand Thumb demonstrated how silly a concept Jeff Copper?s scout rifle was. You take a handy short action rifle, put a crippled optical system on it; and then argue for hours over the details of backup sights, swivel mounts, and double-detent magazines.

What does it get you? A rifle that is not suitable for combat, is non-competitive for 3Gun/PRS matches, and underperforms as a hunting rifle during the time of day that matters. But hey, you can shoot clays with it!

Where does a scout rifle excel? Perhaps in a Heinlein-esque neo-western fantasy where one is both hunting for game and shooting bad guys while re-supply is years away. In any other situation there is probably a better (and cheaper) rifle.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 01-06-2024, 2:31 PM
Imageview Imageview is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,425
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Sometimes I think some folks don?t appreciate the scout rifle concept.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 01-06-2024, 3:21 PM
200Apples's Avatar
200Apples 200Apples is offline
-DVC- Mojave Lever Crew
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,909
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imageview View Post

Sometimes I think some folks don?t appreciate the scout rifle concept.

Well, the username is apt.
__________________
.
"Get a proper holster, and go hot. The End." - SplitHoof

NRA Lifetime | Avatar courtesy Elon Musk's Twitter User SomthingWicked
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 01-06-2024, 5:32 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by villageidiot357 View Post
It took the biggest LARPer on the YouTube, but Grand Thumb demonstrated how silly a concept Jeff Copper?s scout rifle was. You take a handy short action rifle, put a crippled optical system on it; and then argue for hours over the details of backup sights, swivel mounts, and double-detent magazines.

What does it get you? A rifle that is not suitable for combat, is non-competitive for 3Gun/PRS matches, and underperforms as a hunting rifle during the time of day that matters. But hey, you can shoot clays with it!

Where does a scout rifle excel? Perhaps in a Heinlein-esque neo-western fantasy where one is both hunting for game and shooting bad guys while re-supply is years away. In any other situation there is probably a better (and cheaper) rifle.
You forgot defending themselves against bear attack.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 01-06-2024, 7:46 PM
1859sharps 1859sharps is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,250
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 200Apples View Post
Well, the username is apt.
LOL... true.

Growing up I was taught that it is better to be thought of as a fool than open one's mouth and remove all doubt...

The Scout Rifle isn't for everyone and that is ok. I find it peculiar that those who do not get it/understand it often feel the need to put it down with all kinds of bizarre, irrelevant, and uninformed opinions.

I don't make fun of 3-gun rifles, even though rifles optimized for playing games tend to not be practical for anything else. Seems like a waste of rifle to me. But to each their own.

In a time when the average person has plenty of disposable income, for some it is hard to imagine not buying specialized rifles for all the various uses they have for a rifle. Which I think contributes to people not comprehending why someone would be interested in a general-purpose rifle (one rifle for common rifle needs). But again, to each their own.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 01-09-2024, 4:26 PM
tacticalcity's Avatar
tacticalcity tacticalcity is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Danvile, California
Posts: 10,455
iTrader: 150 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoJack View Post
The comments are talking about how obsolete it was on day 1 and GT pretty much saying the same thing. To me it seemed reasonable in an age where lightweight handy AR carbines, LPVOs and wonder calibers were not really available to the common man. His followers lack perspective but probably due to youth.

They don?t like the forward mounting of the scout scope, but it?s supposedly due to allow for quick target acquisition with both eyes open.

It?s cool to see it run through its paces though. I?d for sure trade my Winchester 70 for one.
Trade your Winchester 70??? Crazy talk.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 01-18-2024, 8:09 AM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

New Savage "Scout Magpul".

https://savagearms.com/content?p=fir...ummary&s=58172



At 8.4 pounds it doesn't look like they read any of Cooper's articles. The Magpul stock should be the last one they chose. Not to mention the size of that barrel. They used the small port action and blueprinted it. That's precision/target stuff. With a 16" barrel. They seemed to be confused over there.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 01-18-2024, 2:14 PM
NapalmCheese's Avatar
NapalmCheese NapalmCheese is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Jose
Posts: 5,842
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

They make what they think will sell, and to many people all "scout" means is a forward optic and a short barrel.
__________________
Calguns.net, where everyone responding to your post is a Navy Force Delta Recon 6 Sniperator.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 01-18-2024, 3:05 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,393
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

And it looks all tacital with those irons.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:33 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy