Question about "scout" rifles

[Questor]

I see that Ruger is now selling a rifle that uses a "scout" mounted scope, like the old Scout Rifle that was being sold a few years ago by some European company.  Doesn't that kind of scope limit your field of view much more than a scope mounted with closer eye relief? Is it a significant amount?

[Larry Gibson]

"Doesn't that kind of scope limit your field of view much more than a scope mounted with closer eye relief?"

No.  It actually increases your field of view because you very quickly learn to use both eyes.  The caveat is the scope must be low powered and mounted correctly.  Most attempts at "scouts" have the scope too high and too far forward.  If mounted correctly when the rifle is shouldered and a correct cheek weld is taken the shooting eye is looking through the scope imediately.  You should not have to raise your head or search for the field of view.  It should just "be there".  If not the scope is not correctly mounted.  

I have been using scout rifles for quite a few years.  I currently have three bolt guns set up that way.  One has a 1.5X Burris, one a 2X Leupold and the other a 3X Burris.  I have also had a M1A set up as a scout (pre "Bush" rifle) and a M94 Winchester.  I have also used the Steyr and the Savage scouts.  All are very good set ups IF the scope is mounted correctly.  Factory bases were used on the last four rifles mentioned and all were good and correctly positioned the scout scope.  However, all of the commercial scout bases I have seen for milsurp rifles are abomonations.  They all mount the scope way to high, even with the lowest rings available.  Another abomonation is the "lets" use a cheap pistol scope as a scout scope concept.  Haven't found any regular pistol scope to work because the eye relief is too long.  consequently the scope can not be mounted correctly.  

I also have a Spanish Destroyer I mounted a Tasco red dot sight on.  A TC Contender weaver style base was used as the contour fits the barrel.  I really like it and it is great for jump shooting jack rabbits and general plinking.  Only one problem, I let my wife shoot it and now it is "hers".  I just get to load the ammo and clean it, no respect....

As I sit here in Iraq I have my M16A2 laying across my lap.  It has a C.R.T.C. adjustable (elevation) mount on the handle that puts the EOTech forward of the handle and low (I actually filed some of the top of the hand guard down) on top of the hand guard. Both were my own purchase. I have the iron zeroed at 300 meters and the dot of the EOTech co-axial with the iron sights. The 1 MOA dot sits just on top of the front sight when I aim through the sights.  With the dot center mass the zero is back down to 250 meters which I prefer.  I can use the small apeture for precission shooting, the large aperture for quick shooting out to 200 meters or look across the top of the rear sight and just use the dot for CQM or the other two for that matter.  All three methods are very quick and extremely accurate.  Setting the dot shoulder level takes targets at 400 and just on top of the head will drop them at 500m. When I return the EOTech with be tried on a couple other rifles including an M1A but most likely will rest on my AR15.  It is a very nice set up and I'm betting will be the cat's meow for calling coyotes.

" Is it a significant amount?[/quote]"

No.  See explanatin above.

One last caveat.  I do not say that the scout type rifle is the end all and obsoletes all other types of hunting rifles as does Jeff Cooper.  I do agree with him that it is a very useful concept with in it's limitations which are very few.  I do still have and use rifles of other more standard configuration.  However, I must say that my scout rifles are creeping more and more into my hands when I go hunting. Especially when ranges will not exceed 300 yards. That IS most of the time now isn't it?

Larry Gibson

[Scout]

OK -- Not saying I don't believe you, just shaking my head at "the small world" syndrome..  

Your post runs something through my mind that I want to share.. I keep thinking that if I ever was sent into combat as a part of our forces, I would take my M1A and to hell with the "poodle shooter"- I noted you read Cooper so I threw that in for a kick..

 Do you wish you had your M1A or are you comfy with the A2..?  I am a 30 something that has a traditional vein that runs deep.. One of my closest shootin friends says he'd take his Garand over all else..He is a one rifle man and it's a Garand -- even deer hunting.  He's had it to Perry a bunch of times too. I love the Garand too..but my M1a is the choice for me.

I know this sounds all retro and such but man the things are solid - and they shoot well .. I have handled and fired several M16 variants and just can't envision going to battle with them -- of course Id have not been to battle so I can just postualte here.

Is it "spray and pray" there or is there more riflemen with discipline than in previous conflicts?
God Bless,
Scout

[Larry Gibson]

OK -- Not saying I don't believe you, just shaking my head at "the small world" syndrome..  

Yes, I REALLY am in Iraq.  

"Your post runs something through my mind that I want to share.. I keep thinking that if I ever was sent into combat as a part of our forces, I would take my M1A and to hell with the "poodle shooter"- I noted you read Cooper so I threw that in for a kick.."

I was of the same opinion for the many years I was in SF.  It was ok as my unit still had quite a few very nice M14s.  I always thought I would take one instead of the M16/M4.  However, I am not in SF now so that option was not available, I did try though.  I am a soldier and have been one for a very long time.  I deployed with the 173d (Recon, 1/503d) from Okinawa to RVN in May of '65.  We still had many M14s and had the "new" XM16s.  I am well aware of ALL the problems of the M16 series weapons from the git go to the M16A1, to the M16A2 and the M4 series.  Like the man said; "Hell, I was there!".  They are very, very strict on the use of POWs (that's Privately Owned Weapons these days).  they are quite prohibited and just having one is a violation of GO #1 here.  So, being the professional soldier I am I go where I'm told to go and I shoot who I'm told to shoot with what they tell me to shoot them with.  I am not in a position to say anything else, now am I?

"Do you wish you had your M1A or are you comfy with the A2..?"

Yes, I wish I had an M14 or either of my M1As.  I have also been a HP competitor for some years and reached Master classification in both Service rifle and Long Range with the M14/M1A.  However, I am comfy with the M16A2 I have.  It is very accurate and has not been abused.  I have had this particular rifle assigned  to me for some 7 years and has never failed to function through a couple thousand rounds, give or take.  But then I am an old soldier who knows how, and does, maintain his rifle.  

"I have handled and fired several M16 variants and just can't envision going to battle with them -- of course Id have not been to battle so I can just postulate here."

I have so I guess I don't need to postulate; I had a M16 (my assistant gunners) jam on me in a tight situation once.  It left a nagging heartburn with regards to M16s for a long time.  I also am quite well aware that an enemy that is 10X'd with a 5.56 (M193 or M855) will drop.  I am also well aware that 5.56 will not do near the damage that 7.62 Nato will nor is it as an effective "stopper".  A peripheral hit with 7.62 Nato is far more effective and incapacitates quicker and than 5.56.  Down range performance is greater with 7.62 Nato and what is cover to 5.56 is only concealment to 7.62 Nato.  I have seen this first hand too many times for it to be postulation.

"Is it "spray and pray" there or is there more riflemen with discipline than in previous conflicts?"

There are some Marines and good infantry soldiers that apply marksmanship and good fire discipline because they know it works better than anything else.  But for the most part "spray and pray" is the norm, especially when in convoy.  The run everyone through CQM (Close Quarters Marksmanship) and troops get to shoot 100 rounds or so in a couple hours.  Ranges are 25 yards and under with most shooting under 15 yards.  The "fighting stance" is a crouch with the muzzle pointed down about a meter in front of them.  On command they present the rifle and fire 3 shots using a variation of the old "Quick (s)Kill" technique looking over the rear sight and just using the front sight.  Most of the troops learn real quickly how easy it is to miss.  The training doesn't last long enough for the soldiers to learn proper application to hit the target so the technique they are inclined to use is the three shot burst.  They don't realize if the 1st shot misses the other 2 will also.  Night fire consists of a full magazine of tracers to engage an F target at 25 meters.  They are told not to use the sights but to "walk" the tracers into the target.  Eight hits out of 30 were considered "good".  Mounted convoy live fire teaches nothing but "spray and pray" and to drive through the contact to the next "safe" place.  From an up-armored HMMMV only the gunner up top with the M2/M240B/M249 has any chance of aimed fire.  Everyone inside may (if they're on top of things, awake and tactically oriented) probably won't get the muzzles of their M16s out the iddy biddy windows (if they even get them opened) to shoot before the driver has driven through the contact anyway.  

It may sound as if I paint a bleak picture, I don't.  It is the nature of things.  I am an old NCO and soldiers are never as well trained as I want them to be, especially when sent to war.  When our soldiers stop, dismount and fight they win, even the non infantry ones.  That is evidenced by the recent National Guard Convoy that did just that and killed 26 of the miscreants.  Our Army Infantry and Marines are second to none and prove it time after time in hell holes like Falujah. An Najaf, Ar Ramadi and nameless other places.
 
"God Bless,
Scout

"

Yes, God Bless them..
Larry Gibson

[Shorty]

Way back when Cooper was just fomulating his concept, and hadn't even built one, he stated that it would have to be a Mauser type action for total reliability.  It would have the foreward mounted scope, not just for fast target aquizition, but also so that stripper clips (!) could be used.  That factor rarely gets mentioned.

[Larry Gibson]

Way back when Cooper was just fomulating his concept, and hadn't even built one, he stated that it would have to be a Mauser type action for total reliability.  It would have the foreward mounted scope, not just for fast target aquizition, but also so that stripper clips (!) could be used.  That factor rarely gets mentioned.

I concur Shorty, I've not understood why the use of the stripper clip for reloading was abandoned so early and yet Cooper champions the extra mag in the utstock of the Steyr.  I have an FR8 (M98 Mauser) and a M96 Swede I've made into scouts.  I can reload both of the with strippers, from the belt, as quick if not quicker than I could reload the Steyr.  I am of the opinion that the FR8 comes as close to the original "scout" concept as any.

The FR8 already comes as a 7.62 NATO with a short 18" barrel.  As it is in military trim it is hell for stout.  With mine I did away with the CETME style flash suppressor, front site and cleaning rod tube and the rear sight.  I mounted a M14 flash suppressor with front sight, D & Td the reciever for a Lyman reciever site, recontoured the barrel for the SA Scout scope base, inletted the hanguard for the base to fit through, inletted a sling sivel in the bottom of the fore stock for correct sling use and mounted a 1.5X Burris scout scope on it.  The bolt handle was forged for easier bolt manipulation from the shoulder. I also modified the stripper clip guides to take Swede stripper clips which work great with 7.62 (they also work perfect in M1903s).  Fully loaded it is about 1/4 lb heavier than Coopers specs but I can live with it.  It handles and shoots as well as any other, including the Steyr, scout rifle I have used.  Particularly with the use of stripper clips for reloading it comes as close to the "scout'" concept (excluding the latest additional criteria of the bipod) as any other model rifle.  It has become my favorite scout.

Larry Gibson