Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Jeff Cooper - Styer Scout - just don't get it?

Friend DB Bill,

Stripper clips. What the Hell was Cooper thinking? It takes one, very occasionally two, shots to harvest a game animal.

If you can't hit game animals, maybe a fella could follow the path of stripper clips and piles of brass back to camp. Hell of a deal!

A true gunny needs the ability to use stripper clips like my buddy Charlie Sisk needs the silicone implants he's talking about (though they might make him prettier) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.

I killed four big game animals last year; a hell of a Montana mule deer buck, a decent Montana pronghorn, a raghorn 6X5 bull elk and a moose. Took precisely four shots. My wife, Karen (Old Dead Eye in my articles) shot a Montana antalope (bigger than mine - dammit) and a fairish mule deer. She shot twice. Six shots for six gorgeous critters -- like we need stripper clips

Yeah, I suppose there might be some crossover between the military, the tactical and the practical sporting world. Having said that, I see guys in the bush with the damndest, most useless gear and it usually came from the advise of some writer who had very little bush experience. This makes guys like Mule Deer and I cringe because the public often believes the ravings of the radical fringe writers.

There is a reason why normal gear evolved the way it did; it works. Yes, we must follow the advances, like some of the great stainless barrels (Krieger) and the really excellent synthetic stocks we have today, but I don't see a strange thing like the Scout replacing my tried and true .280 Ackley any time soon.

Man, I'm getting crotchety (60 years old now), but when I see bull [bleep], I just have to say something.

Seve

How about using a reddot sight on a 45/70 lever action or large caliber bolt action rifle with 16.24" heavy barrel.

The reddot can be mounted as far forward as you want.

Conrad,



The 45/70 lever gun with a Red Dot makes a lot of sense to me. It would be an awesome Alaskan creek bear gun.



Steve

If I remember correctly the Scout Rifle Concept is for a general purpose tool. I.e. it will do many things well as opposed to one thing perfectly. Light , portable and accurate. What is wrong with that, if that is what you want in a rifle? Col. Cooper is not perfectly happy with the Steyr, but it is the closest rifle being made to fit the CONCEPT of what he believes is the ultimate and multi-use tool. Bob

I have several "scout mount" type setups for my milsurps. These usually are mounted in place of the rear sight leaf. This is done to prevent permanent alterations to collectable rifles.

I have to say that with practice these are the fastest sighting systems I have ever seen. Not the best, just the fastest on target.

My favorite is on an M 38- 7.62x 54/ Mosin Nagant. Its perfect for going " down in the holler" to kick a big buck out of the brush. Nothing to "line-up" just put the "x" where you want the bullet and squeeze.

It is a very specialized gun. A Reddot is great for fast target aquizition at close range.

It is not as good as a scope for picking out game that is barely visable or a long ways away. It would be very good for dangerouse game assuming that is is dependable enough.

Actually if I every go after big bears in Alaska or dangerouse game in Africa I will put a leupold 1.5-5 with circle dot illuminated retical on my 416 remington. I have more confidence in it's reliability.

Double hex, Charlie?
Like in twelve flats?
I wonder what a barrel cross-sectioned like an overweight Star of David would look like -- with acute and obtuse (is that the right term) angles.
Hmmmm.

After the Treadwell deal, my bear gun will something along the lines of a Vulcan Canon mounted atop my tent...even if it does wobble the stakes some.

Is depleted uranium legal in national parks?

Is that the idiot who decided to live with the bears and stated that they are not dangerouse ? He did not have any firearms and even touched the bears ! A 416 rem should be plenty for the big bears and is a lot lighter than a vulcan.

Conrad

dogzapper, reason for mounting scope up front to use stripper clips is because Cooper conceived scout rifle as general purpose tool including personal defense - and offense - where rapid reload would be desirable.

Dogzapper, et, al:

In the immortal words of Chief Engineer Scotty, "You hafta use the right tool for the job, laddie!"

A rifle configured "scout" fashion is intended to be a general-purpose tool, good-to-go for any big game animal at reasonable ranges. It is not meant to be an effective long-range varminter or part of one of those ultra-long range rigs (.30-378 Wby, LRF, ballistic computer, etc) used to kill big game at LONG ranges (think 700+ yards, for the love of Pete!). FWIW, thats more artillery practice than hunting, IMO.

For big (whitetail+) game out to 200 yards, I'm generally happy to have a decent aperture & a steady position to get the job done. The addition of a scout scope would only extend the range at which I would reasonably expect to take a shot (again, given a steady position) to around 300 yards, the range at which most the rounds I'd use start makin' like a rainbow, trajectory-wise (.308, .30-06, 6.5x55, 8x57, 7x57, .303 Brit).

It would also be pretty near ideal for up close hunting. The feel is most like the M4 & Trijicon reflex sight I used in the service, which was the fastest means by which I could get rounds on target at short ranges.

Anyway, to each his own. I'm not a fan of big ol' high-powered optics, monte-carlo stocks, and mega-boomer magnums, and shooting from the bench rest. I have my reasons, but I understand why others might have a soft spot for them. Don't make 'em wrong, just makes 'em different.

A couple scout rifle links:
http://home.netcom.com/~chingesh/scoutrifle.html
http://www.beast-enterprises.com/scoutdefine.html

FWIW:

Cooper says:

"Let us attempt it by declaring that a general-purpose rifle is a conveniently portable, individually operated firearm, capable of striking a single decisive blow, on a live target of up to 200 kilos in weight, at any distance at which the operator can shoot with the precision necessary to place a shot in a vital area of the target."

This is a General Purpose Rifle. Not an Elk rifle, not a Beanfield special, not a deer stand gather-all-the-light-you-can-for-a-trophy-buck rifle.

I have an SMLE No 4 Mk 1 that is my "scout rifle." That it to say, I carry it when I scout hunting territory. If I run across a "marijuana grow operation" I can defend myself. If I stumble onto a Mountain Lion eating a road kill deer, I can defend myself. If I am out in the woods for a walk in March (and I have a tag) I can take that Big Black Bear that keeps leaving HUGE scat piles -- if'n I see him.

Essentially, the Scout is a daily carry weapon. It is not a hunting rig. It is not an assualt rifle. I have read a lot of Cooper's writing on this subject, and I do not think he would carry this rifle on a Canadian Moose and Caribou expedition. (though he might choose the 350 Remington Mag Scout).

If you don't want to hunt with it, don't. If you live in Vermont, it's too much to carry in densely populated woods. But here, in Oregon, where I can drive from my house to no less than eight true wilderness areas in less than 2 hours (each, that is), it is a great tool.

There is a Wilderness Area 26 miles from my front door that is Packed with Deer, Elk, Black Bear, and Mountain Lions. Some of these places don't see human footprints for decades at a time (the terrain is too steep and the brush it too thick). The people who live on the edge of these area routinely carry rifles. For me, as a hunter scouting the areas, and for those who live adjacent to these areas, the scout rifle is perfect.

Just My 2 cents.

BMT

257B,

I hear you... and I hear Mr. Cooper too.... Personally I like the scout concept but not as Mr. Cooper invisions it. I have my scout rifle (almost) it is as follows :::::

Several years ago I came across a lonely looking Marlin 1894C (44mag, pre lawyer button) at the local gun shop and I found it a good home. Orginal idea was to get it for the grandkid to start hunting whitetails with. Well I had never owned a rifle in a 'pistol' round before and set to working this one out. I have put red dot sights, scopes, peep sights, fire sights (which is what is currently on it) and the standard Marlin sights. I have added one of those slip on butt stock shell holders (holds nine rounds) that cost a whole three dollars at the local K-Mart. It is 37 or 38 inches long, just barely over a meter long and holds 10 rounds in the tube mag.

The only thing I would change are the sights to those Tridtium (sp?) night sights you can get for handguns, but I have not found them for rifles yet.

As a pure tool in a scout concept the Ol' Marlin will drop anything at the range I am worried about with one well placed shot. It is light to carry, compact, balances well, and I have all the fire power needed. If I can not take care of the situation with 19 rounds of 44 mag 300g load to the Max; it is not a scout rifle I need, its reinforcements !!!!

The more I think about this; did not our ancestors need a firearm 'tool' or 'scout rifle' in the days of the Ol' west and did not Winchester make a fortune selling John M. Brownings designed 1892 lever actions by the wagon load, and mostly in 44-40?

I just think Mr Cooper is try to solve a problem that was 'fixed' long ago... just my thought and opinion. Of course if you need more power you have the 1894 Winchester in 38/55

"I just think Mr Cooper is try to solve a problem that was 'fixed' long ago... just my thought and opinion. Of course if you need more power you have the 1894 Winchester in 38/55"

In fact, Mr. Cooper has stated that the 1894 winchester was a great ancestor in the scout bloodline. And if you look closely at the "definition"I quoted in my last post, it appears that you may have a good psuedo scout in the 44 mag. The choice of caliber can be altered to fit local conditions. The 308 has been chosen for its univerality and utility. Its not magic, its just very good. The 44 Mag is ubiquitous in the US and (assuming short ranges in your neck of the woods) it will meet your needs and the "scout" requirements.

As I stated, mine is a 303 British, (SMLE No 4 Mk I). Awhile back, the Guru wrote:

"Have you noticed in recent advertisements that the excellent Enfield No. 4 battle rifle is now available in the larger stores for $70 a crack! This is a very superior utility weapon, and you should snap it up while it lasts. If you have a safe place to store your weapons you ought to buy at least two of these pieces, together with a satisfactory supply of ammunition. As it comes out of the box, the piece will do ("for government work"), and if you want to play around with customizing it, you can turn it into a pretty nice approximation of a Scout. Take heed!"

I think that Jeff is more concerned about maintianing the integrity of the concept and informing the public about maximum utitlity rifles, rather than selling a Steyer.

Just my 2 cents.

BMT

I cannot see any purpose of the "Scout Rifle" which cannot be served, equally or better, by a 30-40 Krag carbine, model of 18 and 96. Or, if you have to have a scope sight, any 30-06 with a 22" barrel.

So what's the hype about?

Oh yes, clip loading. However, I suspect that there has not been a single occurrence in 100 years where a civilian needed clip loading for any reason (except some target shooting matches which require it).

So I think it's a non-solution to a problem which doesn't exist.

FWIW,
The Scout Rifle Concept will continue to baffle those who will not read. In short BMT has explained the concept and the Colonel's Intentions very well. imho.

Regards, Matt.

matt,

You may be correct, but I think the Col. knows exactly what he is doing, I.e directing his comments to the market that would be interested in buying into this concept.

Face it, by his own comments "live target...200 kilos" smacks of catering to the paramilitary "thinking" types.

Not saying that it is wrong, just saying that the Col. appears to know how to market his ideas. Can't believe that he doesn't get a cut from Styer for every scout they sell.

Also not saying that he doesn't believe in his scout concept, but in the end, it is all about the cake ($$)!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Personally, for self protection at close range, you can't beat a Rem 870 loaded with buckshot !!! The sight of which would change any would be burgelar's mind !!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Kind of like a computer mouse....point and "click". <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Tony.

I finally can't stand it anymore and have to put in my two cents worth.

I know Jeff Cooper fairly well. The Scout is indeed his idea of a general purpose rifle, though how in hell it got mixed up with the .376 Steyr (the correct spelling, by the way) I don't know, since he hates the regular .375 H&H, and the .376 is basically just a shorter version of the H&H. Jeff claims the .375 is too small for the really big, dangerous stuff and too big for general purpose hunting. This is not the opinion of 99% of the African PH's I've gotten to know, but every American is entitled to their own opinion.

Let is forget the Steyr rifle for now (as most shooters seem to have already) and go back to the original Scout in .308. From my own experience I would argue that a 7-pound .308 with a 2.5x scope of any sort is indeed plenty for any hunting out to sane ranges for game up to 440 pounds (200 kilos) or thereabouts. There are those would wouldn't agree, but I have done the job myself with variations on this theme too many times to dismiss it.

As for the forward-mounted scope, well, one knowledgeable friend pointed out that Jeff has gone through life doing most of his aiming with handguns, with the sights held at arm's length. He might have a point--but Jeff's major claim about the forward-mounted, low-powered Scout scope is that it provides an infinite field of view and a precise reticle for aiming at, again, any sane range.

Many shooters don't get the infinite field of view part. They assume that because the scope is mounted well forward it has a little tiny field of view. That's correct as far as it goes, but a low-powered scope can easily be shot with BOTH EYES OPEN, providing the infinite field. This is the way iron sights should be used, or any very low-power aiming device. So a correctly used Scout scope gives up nothing to the field of view of a conventional scope of 3x on up.

Whether everybody cares to use one is another matter entirely. Personally I find a Scout scope makes for an ill-balanced, clunky-looking rifle, and much prefer a good aperture sight--an alternative Jeff would approve.

As for built-in bipods and all that stuff, I have a set of collapsible shooting sticks that are much more versatile and fit any rifle I own, turning all into Scout rifles of one sort or another. They can also be whittled out of any sticks lying around in the woods.

I learned how to shoot with a sling many years ago but have always found a pair of sticks handier and more versatile than any rifle-attached bipod and/or sling. But again, that's just me. Military-minded folks like Jeff obviously sometimes feel differently about it.

JB

well, MD (JB), there you go; you have nailed it very well, indeed.
and for those who think cooper was advancing the scout concept for money, my goodness gracious ... look at how many years it took for a manufacturer to show some interest. i really do not think col cooper has made much money - if any at all - with his scout ideas, none of which, by the way, he claims as purely his own except for maybe what he considers the proper parameters. parameters don't make you any money.
col. cooper is an interesting fellow and fun to read. i think, perhaps, his greatest gift to the shooting/hunting world is his prose. may he ever write clearly and concisely in his ever-so-slightly-old-fashioned style - whether any of use agree with the ideas presented.

BMT et al:
"I think that Jeff is more concerned about maintianing the integrity of the concept and informing the public about maximum utitlity rifles, rather than selling a Steyer."

Yes, Cooper's time of his orignal scout rifle is over, why he has not updated it is the question. It was born during the "survivalist" period in the late '70's. People (the gun culture) were hording 22lr, 223 and 308 ammo along with rifles buried in thier backyard. Cooper's primary purpose was to build a generalized utility rifle with shooting game/food being the secondary function, man was the first target. It was for the individual in the woods and desert protecting and providing for his family Randy Weaver style.

Times have changed. New materials, new scopes (I like the "halo" for the purpose as does the military)etc. but for some reason Cooper has stayed with the Styer. The 376 was definitly a mistake.

The above is generalized from his concept articals in SOF Magazine which I wore out as a young adult sailor.
Kirt