I was really quite surprised when I received the email on this rifle because I really like the Scout concept and have used one extensively but to date there has not been a durable and reliable commercial version (the Steyr has bolt lift and light primer strike issues/the Savage is delicate--bolt retaining pin, scope mount, magazine, etc) other than the Frontier but the 16.5 barrel kept me away. This new rendition is durable/reliable, has iron sights and most importantly, an apparent reliable box magazine but the barrel is only 16.5 inches! The muzzle blast must be tremendous. Am I right? If so, will the flash hider in any way attentuate the blast and noise?
The shorter 16.5" barrel chambered in most cartridges, is not for everyone.
From my own personal experience (but this is me and nobody else), I have no problem in dealing with any added noise (use hearing protection on hunts and at the range), or with any additional so-called muzzle blast when firing my 300 WSM Ruger Frontier. Also have a friend with a Ruger Hawkeye laminated compact chambered in a 300 RCM and another owning a 338 Federal Frontier.
From the standpoint of a shooter behind the butt and pulling the trigger, I don`t feel nor see all this muzzle blast even when using maximum loadings. I don`t hunt in low light or at night in the dark. No doubt in doing so, more visible blast would be obvious.
I use both a conventional scope and a scout scope as the need suits. The Frontiers are set up to use either, which imo has great appeal for optics versatility.
From the standpoints of recoil and noise, this new Ruger Gunsite scout in the 308, should be a pussycat when compared to what I`m used to.
From my own personal experience (but this is me and nobody else), I have no problem in dealing with any added noise (use hearing protection on hunts and at the range), or with any additional so-called muzzle blast when firing my 300 WSM Ruger Frontier. Also have a friend with a Ruger Hawkeye laminated compact chambered in a 300 RCM and another owning a 338 Federal Frontier.
From the standpoint of a shooter behind the butt and pulling the trigger, I don`t feel nor see all this muzzle blast even when using maximum loadings. I don`t hunt in low light or at night in the dark. No doubt in doing so, more visible blast would be obvious.
I use both a conventional scope and a scout scope as the need suits. The Frontiers are set up to use either, which imo has great appeal for optics versatility.
From the standpoints of recoil and noise, this new Ruger Gunsite scout in the 308, should be a pussycat when compared to what I`m used to.
Was looking at the Ruger Compact for my daughters and think the much milder 6.8 SPC might be the answer to the 16 inch barrel. I don't know how they handle, though.
I don't care that much for Ruger's hi-cap mag fed bolt gun in its current state. I think I would like it better with a smaller mag, conventional scope mounting and a can in place of the flash supressor! That probably would not be that hard to do.
Expat
I don't care that much for Ruger's hi-cap mag fed bolt gun in its current state. I think I would like it better with a smaller mag, conventional scope mounting and a can in place of the flash supressor! That probably would not be that hard to do.
Expat
the balance of the rifle would not work right for me. Its easier for me to hold a rifle steady with some weight out front. I have fired 16.5 inch 223 rifles, 18.5 inch 308, 16.5 inch ported 44 magnum without hearing protection, as I have grown older my ears ring constantly and my high frequency hearing is gone. Ruger is appealing to a certain type of person with this rifle and no doubt its a fine weapon. I would not want to use it in an emergency where you did not have time to put in your ear plugs. I have gone back to a 20 inch pencil weight 223 instead of the short fat 223 barrels. Turns out open sights are just as fast as an aimpoint for me anyway.
I was afraid of that. That is a pretty hefty action behind that little barrel.
Expat
Expat
Blast is going to be fierce because you are still on the steeply descending part of the pressure curve. You may still be at almost half of peak pressure when the bullet exits - and 30,000 psi suddenly released is gonna make something of a "pop"!
You could select a faster powder but it won't help much if you load to the same pressure level because the pressure will still be pretty high at bullet exit. You'd also lose even more velocity with a faster powder - and velocity loss is going to be pronounced in a short barrel to begin with.
Bottom line: you can have handiness or hearing, but not both.
You could select a faster powder but it won't help much if you load to the same pressure level because the pressure will still be pretty high at bullet exit. You'd also lose even more velocity with a faster powder - and velocity loss is going to be pronounced in a short barrel to begin with.
Bottom line: you can have handiness or hearing, but not both.
Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Blast is going to be fierce because you are still on the steeply descending part of the pressure curve. You may still be at almost half of peak pressure when the bullet exits - and 30,000 psi suddenly released is gonna make something of a "pop"!
You could select a faster powder but it won't help much if you load to the same pressure level because the pressure will still be pretty high at bullet exit. You'd also lose even more velocity with a faster powder - and velocity loss is going to be pronounced in a short barrel to begin with.
Bottom line: you can have handiness or hearing, but not both.
You could select a faster powder but it won't help much if you load to the same pressure level because the pressure will still be pretty high at bullet exit. You'd also lose even more velocity with a faster powder - and velocity loss is going to be pronounced in a short barrel to begin with.
Bottom line: you can have handiness or hearing, but not both.
I had a .308 stainless laminate compact......, and blast was fierce. Nice fireballs, too.
And it was a good handling little rifle to hunt with out of treestands or elevated blinds.
I'd use another one. Problem is I like the Ruger I have, with a 22 inch barrel, and my Guide Gun is right handy in the stands/blinds, also. I can't justify buying it, and I know that, in itself, is a whole nuther argument.
And it was a good handling little rifle to hunt with out of treestands or elevated blinds.
I'd use another one. Problem is I like the Ruger I have, with a 22 inch barrel, and my Guide Gun is right handy in the stands/blinds, also. I can't justify buying it, and I know that, in itself, is a whole nuther argument.
My BIL has a Rem M7 (old style, wood stock) in 223, and that little gun is tremendously loud. My son's 10-inch Contender in the same caliber sounds like a big cannon. I can only imagine how loud the Ruger Frontier would be with it's 16-inch barrel.
Blast isn't fierce if you are already deaf, also. Mr Squeeze, I sincerely hope that is not your circumstance. I've done everything possible to protect my own hearing, having lost more than I think I can afford to. So forgive me if I tend to overemphasize it a bit.
Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Blast isn't fierce if you are already deaf, also. Mr Squeeze, I sincerely hope that is not your circumstance. I've done everything possible to protect my own hearing, having lost more than I think I can afford to. So forgive me if I tend to overemphasize it a bit.
I know that when in the field, hearing protection can be an inconvenience.
Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Blast is going to be fierce because you are still on the steeply descending part of the pressure curve. You may still be at almost half of peak pressure when the bullet exits - and 30,000 psi suddenly released is gonna make something of a "pop"!
You could select a faster powder but it won't help much if you load to the same pressure level because the pressure will still be pretty high at bullet exit. You'd also lose even more velocity with a faster powder - and velocity loss is going to be pronounced in a short barrel to begin with.
Bottom line: you can have handiness or hearing, but not both.
You could select a faster powder but it won't help much if you load to the same pressure level because the pressure will still be pretty high at bullet exit. You'd also lose even more velocity with a faster powder - and velocity loss is going to be pronounced in a short barrel to begin with.
Bottom line: you can have handiness or hearing, but not both.
you'd have to cut the barrel to less than 10" (more like 7") to get 30K psi when the bullet exits. 16" will put at more like 14-15K PSI.
Doesn't muzzle blast transmit some through skull/jawbones to the inner ear regardless of ear protection? Short barrels would do it more, no matter if ear protection was 100%.
Bruce
Bruce
Sound is transmitted by ALL the bones in your body. You hear some sound through your tailbone, in fact. But by far, the most comes through your ear canals - which ought to be no surprise. The only way to muffle all bone transmission would be to encase yourself completely in foam. Of course, breathing would be an issue ...
Fortunately, bone transmission is pretty inefficient. It would take sound levels high enough to kill you outright to damage your hearing by bone transmission alone.
Good friend toad, that's not quite correct. Exit pressure of some magnum rifles exceeds 15Kpsi even with 30" barrels. That equates to 140+dB. A 16" barrel in many different chamberings from .223 up can top that easily.
Fortunately, bone transmission is pretty inefficient. It would take sound levels high enough to kill you outright to damage your hearing by bone transmission alone.
Good friend toad, that's not quite correct. Exit pressure of some magnum rifles exceeds 15Kpsi even with 30" barrels. That equates to 140+dB. A 16" barrel in many different chamberings from .223 up can top that easily.
Ruger Scout is .308 Win. pull up QL, punch in a max load, and put the cursor on the pressure line of the graph. it will show you pressure and inches at that point.
i just pulled a couple loads out of thin air and both were very similar
![[Linked Image]](http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp78/1sikpupi/jpg.jpg)
i just pulled a couple loads out of thin air and both were very similar
To Flashman, Rocky Raab, Vic in Va, Big Redhead, bcp.....
Take a look at these two videos. Both are posted at,,,shootingtimes.com. Sorry but there`s no direct link.
On the home page just below the video section box, click onto "view all"..Then towards the upper right corner click "cartridges"...Scroll down until you find a 2 min 12 sec video called "338 Federal Rifle Cartridge." In that video you`ll see Boddington shooting a Ruger Frontier chambered in a 338 Federal at some steel plates.
While still in that same section, click onto "optics" at the same upper right corner. Scroll down until you find a 1 min 24 sec video called "Variable vs Low powered Fixed Scopes" with Wayne Van Zwoll. There too, you`ll see Van Zwoll bench shooting a Ruger Frontier with a Leupy scout scope. That Ruger Frontier that Van Zwoll is shooting is a 300 WSM Frontier, which he used on a New Zealand red stag hunt. That particular video was filmed in New Zealand while on that hunt. That article can be read in the `08 Ruger catalog. Van Zwoll was using 300 WSM factory ammo.
Cannot gauge the noise levels, but in your opinions, do either of these two Ruger Frontiers seem overwhelming as far as blast is concerned coming from their muzzles? You do see a small fireball from Van Zwoll`s 300 WSM Frontier, but no fireball from Boddington`s 338 Federal Frontier.
Imo, a 308 would have less a visual muzzle blast than either the 338 Fed or a 300 WSM when fired from a Frontier.
Take a look at these two videos. Both are posted at,,,shootingtimes.com. Sorry but there`s no direct link.
On the home page just below the video section box, click onto "view all"..Then towards the upper right corner click "cartridges"...Scroll down until you find a 2 min 12 sec video called "338 Federal Rifle Cartridge." In that video you`ll see Boddington shooting a Ruger Frontier chambered in a 338 Federal at some steel plates.
While still in that same section, click onto "optics" at the same upper right corner. Scroll down until you find a 1 min 24 sec video called "Variable vs Low powered Fixed Scopes" with Wayne Van Zwoll. There too, you`ll see Van Zwoll bench shooting a Ruger Frontier with a Leupy scout scope. That Ruger Frontier that Van Zwoll is shooting is a 300 WSM Frontier, which he used on a New Zealand red stag hunt. That particular video was filmed in New Zealand while on that hunt. That article can be read in the `08 Ruger catalog. Van Zwoll was using 300 WSM factory ammo.
Cannot gauge the noise levels, but in your opinions, do either of these two Ruger Frontiers seem overwhelming as far as blast is concerned coming from their muzzles? You do see a small fireball from Van Zwoll`s 300 WSM Frontier, but no fireball from Boddington`s 338 Federal Frontier.
Imo, a 308 would have less a visual muzzle blast than either the 338 Fed or a 300 WSM when fired from a Frontier.
Flasher,
You didn't mention caliber but since you're talking the "Scout" rifle concept I'd guess you are primarily interested
in the .308. I've had the 16" barreled Ruger Compact in .223,.243, .260 & 708. Of those only the .243 displayed enough muzzle blast to be of concern. I made the assumption that it had more to do with velocity than caliber......
FWIW
You didn't mention caliber but since you're talking the "Scout" rifle concept I'd guess you are primarily interested
in the .308. I've had the 16" barreled Ruger Compact in .223,.243, .260 & 708. Of those only the .243 displayed enough muzzle blast to be of concern. I made the assumption that it had more to do with velocity than caliber......
FWIW
I've got a Springfield Armory M1A "Scout",.....The combo Flash Hider / Brake on that thing is VERY effective, and we've handed two "standard models" and it back and forth between three shooters, all loading the same 'English Stuff' ( thank you J&G Sales).
All Agree that the Scout with it's nominal 18" barrel, and that brake has the quickest recovery / back on target time. The "SOCOM" is a beast,......loud, and KICKS,....go figure.
I've got to wonder W
A.) Why Ruger is calling their lash-up a "Flash Hider" only,....and not incorporating the geometry that makes this Springfield armory set up such a winner.
B.) Given what Col. Cooper WANTED as the main attributes in his concept,....WHY a 'Flash Hider' at all ?
......strikes me that the extra 3-4 inches of barrel would not have been such a worse idea.
"Tacticool" wins again, it would seem.
GTC
All Agree that the Scout with it's nominal 18" barrel, and that brake has the quickest recovery / back on target time. The "SOCOM" is a beast,......loud, and KICKS,....go figure.
I've got to wonder W
A.) Why Ruger is calling their lash-up a "Flash Hider" only,....and not incorporating the geometry that makes this Springfield armory set up such a winner.
B.) Given what Col. Cooper WANTED as the main attributes in his concept,....WHY a 'Flash Hider' at all ?
......strikes me that the extra 3-4 inches of barrel would not have been such a worse idea.
"Tacticool" wins again, it would seem.
GTC
i have an 18.5" ported barrel on my 45-70..I don't think it is all that bad.Everyone is different to there tolerances but for example,if you have ever shot some of the Big Bore handguns,it won't be much different.
Jayco
Jayco
So forgive me if I tend to overemphasize it a bit.
You were not!
.223 loaded to 1900/2000 fps cracked like a .38 Special in revolver. .308 was horrible, let's just say you didn't want to leave anything much lighter than a full 20 rd. catridge box within 2 feet or closer to the muzzle blast.
You were not!
.223 loaded to 1900/2000 fps cracked like a .38 Special in revolver. .308 was horrible, let's just say you didn't want to leave anything much lighter than a full 20 rd. catridge box within 2 feet or closer to the muzzle blast.
I know from side by side comparison that the 16.5" barrel is louder. Seen it and done it myself. It's a fact that I have to accept if I want to use a barrel of that length. I, at one time, had .308 rifles in 16.5", 20", and 22" barrel lengths, and the 16.5" definitely had more bark. All were bolt action sporting rifles.
I don't know what powders they were using, but I load my .308s with Varget, and you will get some flash at 16.5". It's possible to use a powder to eliminate as much flash as possible, but I'm partial to Varget in the .308.
The little Rugers are handy little rifles, and I like carrying them. But, to ME and MY EARS, they are louder
I don't know what powders they were using, but I load my .308s with Varget, and you will get some flash at 16.5". It's possible to use a powder to eliminate as much flash as possible, but I'm partial to Varget in the .308.
The little Rugers are handy little rifles, and I like carrying them. But, to ME and MY EARS, they are louder
Originally Posted by logcutter
i have an 18.5" ported barrel on my 45-70..I don't think it is all that bad.Everyone is different to there tolerances but for example,if you have ever shot some of the Big Bore handguns,it won't be much different.
Jayco
Jayco
Those get right damned loud.
I've also got a Guide Gun, though unported, and the report is somewhat more pronounced than a 22" version.
If I'm inclined to use a shorter barreled rifle, I am willing to accept the slightly elevated noise level. Comes with the territory.
Greetings friend Jayco,
If a ported G doesn't bother you, you almost certainly have more hearing damage than you realize. I have owned multiples of both ported and unported units, and the ported models definitely are louder. I once fired 3 rounds from a ported G into a stump after a few frustrating days of fruitless bear hunting in Michigan's U.P., and my ears rang for 3 days. The unported units are definitely not as loud. Be careful of the hearing you have left. I need you to hear me when I holler for help to carry out my first elk.
If a ported G doesn't bother you, you almost certainly have more hearing damage than you realize. I have owned multiples of both ported and unported units, and the ported models definitely are louder. I once fired 3 rounds from a ported G into a stump after a few frustrating days of fruitless bear hunting in Michigan's U.P., and my ears rang for 3 days. The unported units are definitely not as loud. Be careful of the hearing you have left. I need you to hear me when I holler for help to carry out my first elk.
I'm thinking something like a Levang compensator would be the answer, if they make one for a 308 caliber.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=524840
http:/
bigsqueeze I am sure you are a fine fellow and are gifted with some extraordinary ears as you have been able to maintain your ears with good hearing protection over your +45 years of shooting. Most folks are going to fire a rifle in the field without wearing hearing protection, I myself cannot hear the animals come up behind me if I wear muffs but I am investigating the EAR products as soon as some lawyer bills are behind me. It is my belief based on what causes my ears to ring more is that most people will do more damage to their ears and faster if they fire a 16.5 inch barreled rifle in the field than if they fire a 24 inch barreled rifle in the field. I think this is true but maybe I am wrong. At any rate if a fellow wants one of these little scout rifles I think he should buy it, I don't want one the balance has to be awful with such a short barrel, and the ear pain inflicted by firing one more significant than that of a 20 inch 308. Please note I hunted for 10 years with an 18.5 inch 308 so I am not without some knowledge on the subject. Back in the day short barreled rifles seemed very cool to me until I started losing my hearing and also discovered it was easier to make a standing offhand shot with a longer barreled rifle at least for me.
a 16.5 inch 300WSM is an enigma..
a 16.5 inch 300WSM is an enigma..
Where does the comment about the Steyr come from? I have a conventional .376 Steyr that I have shot extensively & used in Africa with out any issues. Bolt lift is comparable with other rifles I have used such as Remington, Mauser, & CZ. Probably more Internet fable than fact.
he might be refering to the first generation bolt cams, but those are easily swapped for the newer improved ones. i sent my .376 bolt guy in AZ for the bolt cam upgrade and round bolt handle install.
The muzzle blast from firing short-barrelled rifles gives me a headache in just a few rounds. This is with double hearing protection (plugs and muffs). It is the shock wave and recoil that is causing the headache, not the noise.
JB says the headache means that you are giving youself a mild concussion; not good. Actually, many mild concussions.
My theory is that this may cause cumulative brain damage resulting in the common "gun loony" syndrome that most of us on the campfire suffer from to varying degrees. The term "loony" is obviously short for something...regarding mental condition.
JB says the headache means that you are giving youself a mild concussion; not good. Actually, many mild concussions.
My theory is that this may cause cumulative brain damage resulting in the common "gun loony" syndrome that most of us on the campfire suffer from to varying degrees. The term "loony" is obviously short for something...regarding mental condition.
Flashman,
Just a few thoughts.
I use barrels from 7 inches to just under 18 inches, and most of them have brakes.
From the small 223 Rem to a 338 Lapua Improved these guys are loud.
I always use hearing protection, even when hunting.
Most of my range time has me wearing double.
I would even urge all of you to use hearing protection at all times regardless of your barrel lengths (braked or not).
What is obtrusive to one shooter, may be fine for the other as far as blast goes.
Just a few thoughts.
I use barrels from 7 inches to just under 18 inches, and most of them have brakes.
From the small 223 Rem to a 338 Lapua Improved these guys are loud.
I always use hearing protection, even when hunting.
Most of my range time has me wearing double.
I would even urge all of you to use hearing protection at all times regardless of your barrel lengths (braked or not).
What is obtrusive to one shooter, may be fine for the other as far as blast goes.
Originally Posted by jimmyp
bigsqueeze I am sure you are a fine fellow and are gifted with some extraordinary ears as you have been able to maintain your ears with good hearing protection over your +45 years of shooting. Most folks are going to fire a rifle in the field without wearing hearing protection, I myself cannot hear the animals come up behind me if I wear muffs but I am investigating the EAR products as soon as some lawyer bills are behind me. It is my belief based on what causes my ears to ring more is that most people will do more damage to their ears and faster if they fire a 16.5 inch barreled rifle in the field than if they fire a 24 inch barreled rifle in the field. I think this is true but maybe I am wrong. At any rate if a fellow wants one of these little scout rifles I think he should buy it, I don't want one the balance has to be awful with such a short barrel, and the ear pain inflicted by firing one more significant than that of a 20 inch 308. Please note I hunted for 10 years with an 18.5 inch 308 so I am not without some knowledge on the subject. Back in the day short barreled rifles seemed very cool to me until I started losing my hearing and also discovered it was easier to make a standing offhand shot with a longer barreled rifle at least for me.
a 16.5 inch 300WSM is an enigma..
a 16.5 inch 300WSM is an enigma..
For some of the type of hunting I do though, I prefer a very handy, an easy carrying, a highly manuverable, and fast pointing rifle with a shorter OAL, which ballistically betters 26" barreled 30-06s, which my shorty 300 WSM certainly does. I have on more than one occassion been in thick brush where shorter ranged shots have presented themselves, and within just a few minutes, been in far more wide open clearings where some ranges can exceed 400 yards. What the Frontier chambered in a 300 WSM does, is give me an excellent handling shorter OAL brush and timber gun, while at the same time, having the capabilility for some serious long range hunting should that need arise as well. And it has in the past.
But as I`ve stated before, all things come with compromises and tradeoffs. Those short barreled tradeoffs to me, such as having more noise or more blast, is something I can handle comfortably, whereas most cannot or will not.
As to your other point. If two people begin shooting 300 WSM rifles with different barrel lengths, one shorter such as my 16.5" barrel and another being a 24" barrel, eventually and given time, without any hearing protection worn by both, the one shooting the shorter barrel will probably have a higher percentage of hearing loss.
However if on the other hand, both are wearing the same identical and very good hearing protection, neither will suffer any hearing loss imo. Imo, hearing loss comes from not wearing hearing protection, rather than from a shorter barrel length.
When I did my extensive chrony testing experiments comparing my 16.5" 300 WSM velocities to the velocities of two 24" barreled 300 WSMs, I fired several hundred rounds over a period of several weeks. And to be perfectly honest here, there were little noise level differences to my ears between those two 24s and my own 16.5" WITH my muffs on. So the only conclusion I can come to is, that regardless of barrel length, if one chooses NOT to wear hearing protection, there will be hearing loss consequences given enough time and enough rounds fired. And when good muffs or good field hearing protection is worn, whether muffs for range use or good hearing protection for field use such as my "Game Ears", they are very capable to protect ears and offsetting any increased noise levels by the shorter barrel.
As far as rifle balance is concerned, I have no problems in that area with my Frontier nor even from my 375 Ruger Alaskan. Whether I use my conventional scope or the scout scope on my Frontier (as I do both), it is a matter of quickly adapting via a little practicing and getting use to those changes.
Quote
If a ported G doesn't bother you, you almost certainly have more hearing damage than you realize.
To be fair here,maybe all the chainsaws has effected my hearing..But the only gun I have that actually makes my ears ring on every shot is a ported 454 Casull..The ported Guide Gun doesn't/the BFR-45-70 doesn't nor my sons unported Guide Gun or any of my other rifles...
Some say they do but I just have not noticed it being much worse than other rifles.
Maybe were all subject to different pitches of noise or just maybe,I am a deaf old fart.
Jayco
Nifty, shock wave is noise and noise is shock wave. But you are absolutely correct when you say that the noise and recoil of shooting cause mild concussions. JB's wife Eileen now gets them severe enough that it takes her days to recover. She just wrote about it recently.
It is not something to take lightly.
It is not something to take lightly.
Originally Posted by logcutter
Quote
If a ported G doesn't bother you, you almost certainly have more hearing damage than you realize.
To be fair here,maybe all the chainsaws has effected my hearing..But the only gun I have that actually makes my ears ring on every shot is a ported 454 Casull..The ported Guide Gun doesn't/the BFR-45-70 doesn't nor my sons unported Guide Gun or any of my other rifles...
Some say they do but I just have not noticed it being much worse than other rifles.
Maybe were all subject to different pitches of noise or just maybe,I am a deaf old fart.
Jayco
30+yrs of chainsaws did my hearing in. Especially those Super XL's. I gotta agree with you. I shoot an unported GG,a 20"bbl 9.3x62,a 17.75"bbl 30-06,and a few others. I just don't find them any nosier than my std length bbl rifles. I do double up on hearing protection when not hunting. But when hunting I wear none. In fact I even wear hearing aids. All that being said,don't do as I did/do. Protect your hearing at any cost.
In 40 years of hunting and 18 years of law enforcement I have experienced auditory exclusion every time I have fired "for real."
Save once, well twice. I shot two does one morning with my ported GG. It literally rocked my world and my ears rang for a couple weeks. I've only fired it on the range since then...
I need to either trim those ports off, get a 26-in. Cowboy barrel on it or just sell it.
Though physiological changes seem to dampen sound of gunfire truth is the damage is ongoing. Really need some of those in ear electronic plugs for the field.
P.S. I never experienced post hunting ringing when I fired shots at critters with our .260 Compact.
Save once, well twice. I shot two does one morning with my ported GG. It literally rocked my world and my ears rang for a couple weeks. I've only fired it on the range since then...
I need to either trim those ports off, get a 26-in. Cowboy barrel on it or just sell it.
Though physiological changes seem to dampen sound of gunfire truth is the damage is ongoing. Really need some of those in ear electronic plugs for the field.
P.S. I never experienced post hunting ringing when I fired shots at critters with our .260 Compact.
If you don't like it add a "bloop" tube. I put one on my AR to shoot varmints without ear plugs. Simple solutions are easy to find when you keep an open mind.
As far as "handy" is concerned I don't have any problem with rapidly deploying my 29" long barrel on my 300. Unhandy is a full wooden stocked military rifle, not a 20 inch sporter weight barrel on an M77.
I think the detractors of the Savage Scout are over blowing their concerns too. Mine is about to get a good spring workout since I located a better Scout Scope and picked up a pile of ammo cheap last week. We will see if any issues crop up. I do wish I could get a high capacity magazine for it, but not a single stack like Ruger went with, I use Rugers and like them, but their scout magazine looks funny.
As far as "handy" is concerned I don't have any problem with rapidly deploying my 29" long barrel on my 300. Unhandy is a full wooden stocked military rifle, not a 20 inch sporter weight barrel on an M77.
I think the detractors of the Savage Scout are over blowing their concerns too. Mine is about to get a good spring workout since I located a better Scout Scope and picked up a pile of ammo cheap last week. We will see if any issues crop up. I do wish I could get a high capacity magazine for it, but not a single stack like Ruger went with, I use Rugers and like them, but their scout magazine looks funny.
wonder how loud a trapper model marlin gg would be ?
16.5 inch barrel on that monster !
16.5 inch barrel on that monster !
Originally Posted by logcutter
Maybe were all subject to different pitches of noise or just maybe,I am a deaf old fart.
You're not deaf.
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
I think the detractors of the Savage Scout are over blowing their concerns too. Mine is about to get a good spring workout since I located a better Scout Scope and picked up a pile of ammo cheap last week.
Ooo, you have one of those? I have lusted for one since they came out. How do you like it? Are they still available?
The closest things I have to a scout are a Winchester M70 Classic compact (that my wife stold), and a Kimber 84M classic. Both are nice, but they aren't scouts. The Winchester is the better balanced of the two because the barrel is a bit heavier than the Kimber. Kimbers are nice, but dang light in the muzzle.
wonder how loud a trapper model marlin gg would be ?
16.5 inch barrel on that monster !
If you are standing under a rain soaked tree and the GG has the barrel ports, and shoot at a hog, I can testify it will make an instant, misty, rain cloud followed by a short heavy shower.
Think I would have to vote very loud,
!
edit: typo
16.5 inch barrel on that monster !
If you are standing under a rain soaked tree and the GG has the barrel ports, and shoot at a hog, I can testify it will make an instant, misty, rain cloud followed by a short heavy shower.
Think I would have to vote very loud,
!edit: typo
first deer i shot with my ported GG was just like that. dark rainy day under a hemlock. between the flames and the noise i'm not sure who was more suprised, me or the deer.
Originally Posted by Big_Redhead
Originally Posted by siskiyous6
I think the detractors of the Savage Scout are over blowing their concerns too. Mine is about to get a good spring workout since I located a better Scout Scope and picked up a pile of ammo cheap last week.
Ooo, you have one of those? I have lusted for one since they came out. How do you like it? Are they still available?
The closest things I have to a scout are a Winchester M70 Classic compact (that my wife stold), and a Kimber 84M classic. Both are nice, but they aren't scouts. The Winchester is the better balanced of the two because the barrel is a bit heavier than the Kimber. Kimbers are nice, but dang light in the muzzle.
I believe the best way to order the new model is from the Savage Custom Shop. http:/
They have refined it over the years, and th enew model may have a larger capacity magazine available. I see they have a 10 BA Model with a larger magazine capacity of 10.
My bad the 10 BA mag costs over $100.00 and does not look anything like the 10FCM (Scout) magazine.
The flash/boom of the 6.8 SPC in a 16" barrel is no more than any longer barrel because the round was designed for that profile barrel. And the recoil is negligiblwe to boot.
1B
1B