Scout rifle proliferation

[Coal Dragger]

not many. They’re just not competitive. That’s prob a topic for a different thread.

But coopers thoughts on scout rifles seem specifically to address what I imagine he perceived as shortcomings in the practical use of old military bolt guns. (Assuming were talking mausers springfields and the like)

They’re overpowered and difficult to load difficult to scope and just not handy. The stock is typically banded to the barrel which limits not just the accuracy but the ability to make it shorter or longer or thicker or thinner.

I will say I prefer a firing pin block in theory. I just don’t know of one in practice that makes it worth it.

The only bolt guns that I have encountered with really superbly executed firing pin blocks, or safeties that deactivate the firing pin are the Steyr SBS action, and the Blaser R8. Both of those rifles have a safety capable of rendering the rifle completely inert with a live round in the chamber, that is also ergonomic and quick to take off safe and be ready to fire.

 

[Old Stumpy]

Changing the cartridge to suit your angle doesn’t slip past unnoticed.

Without question, an equal barrel length LFAR can be as light as most of these Scout rifles, even lighter and shorter given some very common parts options, equally as powerful when chambered in the same cartridge, more readily repaired in the field, and a far better choice as a “might have to hunt, might have to fight” rifle.

But frankly, I’ve killed enough game in the last 20yrs with a 5.56/223, and subsequently with 6.8 spc and 6.5 Grendel, indeed, I’d grab a so chambered AR-15 over any .308win bolt gun in a “might have to hunt, might have to fight” scenario.

I didn't change the cartridge, though you incorrectly assume so for some reason. I made a flat statement that a bolt action .308 Scout rifle is a better survival rifle than a 5.56 AR15 where hunting would also be a part of the situation. I stand by that statement.

You might grab a .556 rifle over a .308 for big game hunting, but the vast majority of responsible hunters certainly would not.
The 5.56/.223 is simply a pipsqueak military version of the .222 varmint cartridge, and is unsuitable for hunting, unless you like eating squirrels, bunnies, and coyotes as a steady diet. In many locales it is illegal to use the .556/.223 for hunting deer sized game, with good reason.

One of your exotic 6.5mm or 6.8mm or whatever rifles would work okay for deer or elk perhaps, if this is the most that an AR15 could handle, but why would a survivalist limit himself to these cartridges just so he could carry an AR15? In a survival situation the .308 round would be far more common to find, and much more suitable for larger game as well as deer sized game.

As for repair-ability, it depends on the bolt action doesn't it? A Mauser 98 action is eminently easy to change parts in, though beyond a firing pin, you probably would never need to change any other parts because it is so robust and simple.

And, the idea that you might need a semi-automatic rifle as a generalist rifle in a survival situation seems a myth. You would be just trying to efficiently survive, not going to war. A good light bolt action rifle and a good 12 gauge pump action shotgun would serve you best.

I mean, unless you envision rapidly peppering the landscape with one 30 round magazine after another to turn back the ravenous hordes intent on overwhelming your home or homestead. That was the 1980s popular survivalist myth, but it seemed contrived to justify the hobbyist desire to stockpile tons of .556 ammo and an AR15 for everyone in the family.

 

[fireside44]

In a survival situation the .308 round would be far more common to find, and much more suitable for larger game as well as deer sized game.

I am not so certain of that. Every gun guy I know has a .308 or two. Every gun guy I know has at least 3-5 AR's bought or built. Actually I'm the only gun guy I know who don't own either of those! Is the AR not the most popular selling American gun of all time or am I missing something there?

I mean, unless you envision rapidly peppering the landscape with one 30 round magazine after another to turn back the ravenous hordes intent on overwhelming your home or homestead.

You mean dealing with more than one or two ne'er do wells at a time? Heck grandma got robbed in her own driveway by four thugs. You're out at the ranch cutting wood out back it's daylight and you left the gate open cause the ol' lady is in town spending your money on incense, peppermints, and patchouli oil. A truck with 3 or 4 strangers pulls rapidly into your drive and exit the truck aggressively, possibly armed. It's called a home invasion. They happen in peacetime too. I'll take the AR. Nothing readily available is quite as comforting as a couple large dogs and 30 rounds in your rifle when dealing with dirtbags out in rhubarbville USA.

 

[taliv]

I’d take an ar in 223 over anything else even though I’m extremely fond of bolt guns to the point I really don’t practice ar enough

 

[mokin]

not many. They’re just not competitive. That’s prob a topic for a different thread.

But coopers thoughts on scout rifles seem specifically to address what I imagine he perceived as shortcomings in the practical use of old military bolt guns. (Assuming were talking mausers springfields and the like)

They’re overpowered and difficult to load difficult to scope and just not handy. The stock is typically banded to the barrel which limits not just the accuracy but the ability to make it shorter or longer or thicker or thinner....

I'll second that.

I put a scout style scope mount on a bubbad No.1 Mk III for many of those reasons. It'll shoot well enough out to 200 yards. Not really a scout rifle per Cooper's definition.

"Cooper Personality Disorder" may afflict some members here as well, possibly.
Not at all an uncommon affliction, methinks.

It seems to me that describing those who like the Scout Rifle concept as "Jeff Cooper Cultists" seems very elitist and inaccurate. I have seen threads where members have fitted suppressors to old lever actions and have received much more acceptance and courtesy, although the concept seems odd.

I hadn't read The Colonel's ideas about "scout rifles" until I went looking in how to put a scope on the above mentioned SMLE.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

Jeff Cooper was a die-on-the-hill sort of fellow, and it's no surprise that a lot of his fans are the same way.

I think we can be a lot less literal about the "308, under 7 pounds and iron sights, or it's crap!" thing and just appreciate a lightweight, high caliber, Model 7-ish rifle for what it is - but even those have limited utility. Hunting? If you're going to be walking around a lot they're perfect, but a lot of guys hunt in blinds where they don't really care about weight. Self defense? Step one, don't have a bolt action. Hanging out in a lawless wilderness regions for weeks on end, needing to hunt for food and fight roving gangs of bandits? That's basically a SHTFantasy, and there's a reason we don't even consider them on this forum.

I think the real scout rifles these days are the "mini-bolts" in intermediate calibers have proliferated over the last few years. CZ 527s, the 16" Ruger Americans, Howas... they much more realistically fit what the average shooter is going to do: punching paper at an outdoor range likely limited to a couple hundred yards. They fit the "utility" role a bit - they're easy to carry, they can be thrown on an ATV or truck, you can hunt 30-30 type game with them at 30-30 type ranges - but mostly saliently, for 95% of the times they will be taken out of the safe, they are a much better fit than a 308.

 

[greyling22]

the forward mounted 2x scope is not a good setup. I've had it, gave it up. A decent 1-4x conventional scope is lighter, offers a much larger FOV, and a more forgiving eyebox. I'm also of the opinion that backup irons are useless, and I cannot imagine the scenario that I need more than 4 or so rounds in a bolt action gun.

That said, a light handy bolt action rifle has a lot of appeal. Especially since I got into suppressors. I'd much rather have a 16-18" 308 with 8" of can on it than a 22-24" barrel with 8" of can on that. I guess I'm more of a fan of the bolt action carbine than I am of the scout rifle. I keep thinking that if ruger would take off the forward scout mount, flash hider, and iron sights it would make a handy little rifle. Especially since I can get it in left hand...... why for the love of pete can they not make me an american ranch rifle in left hand.......

 

[Boattale]

I've got a 20" barrel .270 M77 RL with a 3x9 that does everything a lower 48 rifle will ever be called on to do. Especially being carried a heck of a lot more than ever being shot, which in reality is the life of every rifle I've ever known, target shooters excepted.

 

[Frostbite]

Cabelas Canada currently offers the Ruger Ranch rifle in .308, it is marketed as a special edition. That is the closest thing to a practical rifle I can envision if topped with an appropriate scope. My personal choice would likely be a 1-4. Some think it is weakening the cartridge to offer it in such a light and short rifle. I think it is strengthening the rifle, and it can be bought in large quantities for a good price.

As for the current issuing of a scout rifle, or near scout rifle, the Canadian rangers now have a nice Tikka, in .308. It's iron sights are exceptionally attractive. I prefer the CZ Ranger rifle's price and look, though. However, I am not likely to buy any of those two rifles, even if they represent the pinnacle of what a scout rifle should be in my personal opinion, which is forth every penny you paid for it!

My deer hunting experience suggests that my muzzleloader with fiber optic sights, my single shot .30-06 with a variable 3-9 or my semi in .270 with iron sights, see-through rings and a 1.5-6 scope are all better choices for deer hunting here, each in its own way.

Survival in a destabilized world starts and ends with a .22 LR semi-automatic scoped rifle in my book : hunting regulations stop applying in such an instance, ammo buying (accumulating) before any catastrophy and subsequent transportation capacity are unequaled. My pump twelve gauge is a close second because of its versatility. In the hands of someone else, it might be different. A recent thread got me to think about this a lot. I decided on the .22 because I shoot it way better than the twelve, and I have more confidence in my capacity to use it adequately.

As for shooting at people, well, I guess I am no help at all into that thought process, apart from saying I would try to avoid it as much as possible. I can only guess they are not so tasty.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

I will, again, mirror what others have said that I like the "idea" of a scout rifle, but being specific to Cooper's strict recipe is kinda silly in today's market.

Having said that, my "scout" style rifle would probably be my Marlin 336Y in .30-30.

But....

Have y'all seen the Tikka T3x Arctic that the Canadian Rangers use?? That thing is sweeeeeet!!!!!

 

[Space Ghost]

I like the idea of a scout rifle, but I also understand that it's a tool for certain things. Going to war, isn't one of them... I have ARs for that. Hunting squirrels, ain't one either... I have a 10/22 for that.

If you can see where I'm going, you'll notice that the scout rifle has a limited role, but that doesn't make it an illegitimate one. Arguably, that role can be expanded to others as the scout rifle is just so dang handy to have with you. You get bolt gun reliability, big cartridge power, a little magnification, (but not so much you can't use it close up, or in a hurry) it's not so long and ungainly to carry around... Good overall rifle.

I have two scout type rifles. Neither would meet with Col Coopers approval probably, at least not going by the standards he set long ago. Had he still been with us, there is a good chance that his concept, and teachings (along with all other firearms technology) would have evolved. My first one is a Rossi 92 in.44 mag. Nope... not a true scout. It does, however, fill the same role as a light handy rifle for use when you just need to get around in the woods, and something may pop up that could be a danger. Col Cooper wasn't from Indiana, so he doesn't know that I don't need to shoot 400 yds. The .44 mag out of a 17" barrel will kill anything I need it to, and within the range I'll likely encounter it. Seeing that's the case, I need no magnification, and just went with a red dot, in the forward position of course. (also dictated by the rifles design) I also went modern and added a light. It may be used as a defensive gun, and I feel every defensive gun needs a weapon mounted light.



My latest is much closer to his original concept, a converted Mauser. This is a Brazilian Mauser in 7mm, so it doesn't fit into his .308 idea of being able to find ammo everywhere, but it's enough to kill most things, and it shoots a lot softer. That is important to a guy with a bunch of injuries that nag on him daily. Being a smaller round, I left the barrel 20" long to give it as much power as I can without making it cumbersome. That 29" barrel defiantly had to go... Wouldn't even fit in my gun cabinet. It's probably overweight by his standards, but then, so am I. I don't require a 6 or 7 pound rifle, I just don't want a 12 pound one. Still have to figure out how to put sights on it. So far the XS ones look to be the best. Probably won't ever need them with today's modern scopes, but I'd like them on there if only for piece of mind.



NO... either wouldn't be the gun I'd grab if the zombies came, but I can tell you that the Rossi 92 is welcomed in more places that my AR when I travel, and it's my very favorite gun to go shooting with. I have an AR SBR as a home defense gun, but the Rossi will go with me on my trip to Prudhoe Bay once I get the Jeep CJ7 I'm rebuilding finished, and I won't feel undergunned in bear country...

 

[boom boom]

I like the idea of a scout rifle, but I also understand that it's a tool for certain things. Going to war, isn't one of them... I have ARs for that. Hunting squirrels, ain't one either... I have a 10/22 for that.

If you can see where I'm going, you'll notice that the scout rifle has a limited role, but that doesn't make it an illegitimate one. Arguably, that role can be expanded to others as the scout rifle is just so dang handy to have with you. You get bolt gun reliability, big cartridge power, a little magnification, (but not so much you can't use it close up, or in a hurry) it's not so long and ungainly to carry around... Good overall rifle.

I have two scout type rifles. Neither would meet with Col Coopers approval probably, at least not going by the standards he set long ago. Had he still been with us, there is a good chance that his concept, and teachings (along with all other firearms technology) would have evolved. My first one is a Rossi 92 in.44 mag. Nope... not a true scout. It does, however, fill the same role as a light handy rifle for use when you just need to get around in the woods, and something may pop up that could be a danger. Col Cooper wasn't from Indiana, so he doesn't know that I don't need to shoot 400 yds. The .44 mag out of a 17" barrel will kill anything I need it to, and within the range I'll likely encounter it. Seeing that's the case, I need no magnification, and just went with a red dot, in the forward position of course. (also dictated by the rifles design) I also went modern and added a light. It may be used as a defensive gun, and I feel every defensive gun needs a weapon mounted light.

View attachment 860208

My latest is much closer to his original concept, a converted Mauser. This is a Brazilian Mauser in 7mm, so it doesn't fit into his .308 idea of being able to find ammo everywhere, but it's enough to kill most things, and it shoots a lot softer. That is important to a guy with a bunch of injuries that nag on him daily. Being a smaller round, I left the barrel 20" long to give it as much power as I can without making it cumbersome. That 29" barrel defiantly had to go... Wouldn't even fit in my gun cabinet. It's probably overweight by his standards, but then, so am I. I don't require a 6 or 7 pound rifle, I just don't want a 12 pound one. Still have to figure out how to put sights on it. So far the XS ones look to be the best. Probably won't ever need them with today's modern scopes, but I'd like them on there if only for piece of mind.

View attachment 860209

NO... either wouldn't be the gun I'd grab if the zombies came, but I can tell you that the Rossi 92 is welcomed in more places that my AR when I travel, and it's my very favorite gun to go shooting with. I have an AR SBR as a home defense gun, but the Rossi will go with me on my trip to Prudhoe Bay once I get the Jeep CJ7 I'm rebuilding finished, and I won't feel undergunned in bear country...

He did also express a concept about something called Thumper which was a large bore, short range rifle firing a rimless high powered pistol cartridge for anti-personnel activity. I'd imagine that your rifle would qualify. Here is a thread on it. https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/13532927/jeff-coopers-thumper and an old THR thread discussing it. https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/coopers-thumper.102510/

Col. Cooper was of an era and a particular organization, the USMC, that emphasized rifle marksmanship over the number of rounds fired and thus was not particularly favorable toward the idea that superior firepower consisted of firing a lot of small caliber rounds in a hurry at relatively short ranges. Prior to WWI, the U.S. Army did so in a similar fashion as they kept the Trapdoor around simply to reduce ammo requirements fighting Indians and made sure that the Krag and 1903 had magazine cutoffs to conserve ammunition. Notably, the Brits did the same on their early SMLE's and kept the Martini-Henry about the same length of time that the U.S. used the Trapdoor for similar reasons.

In part, the USMC still emphasizes this and part of that is the expeditionary forces model that places a premium on a light logistical footprint (read not requiring gobs of ammo to do the mission). Before the NATO era, the Brits did something similar and for similar reasons as their Army was set up for expeditionary tasks rather than homeland defense. Cooper was also familiar with a conscript military and its limitations in training during conflicts which probably also colored his thoughts.

At various times, Col. Cooper expressed disdain for wonder nines, submachine guns, and did not particularly cotton to the AR due to caliber issues among other complaints. I remember in one column he discussed submachine guns as useful in one particular application such as room clearing but as a general rule felt that they were wasteful and inaccurate for the general user. He mentioned that he was good enough with one to sign his name but only at the expense of a lot of cartridges fired to get that good paid for by Uncle Sam.

The Thumper concept from what I remember in his books or columns is that modern combat in urban areas needed to emphasize put down power. The military due to training shortcomings should also focus on short range large caliber pistol cartridges (designed for auto feeders) that did not have a large amount of recoil and this would mitigate the limited marksmanship training that he saw the U.S. provide to troops during his lifetime.

Perhaps, the Scout rifle concept was borne from his love of hunting, the outdoors, his familiarity and comfort with bolt action rifles used in war, marksmanship ideas, and the idea that an individual with such a rifle should ideally be able to fire a bullet that could put down man or beast at a long range in the field without large expenditures of ammunition. His emphasis on field shooting, adequate slings to fire, stalking competence, familiarity with nature, physical fitness, and marksmanship meant that he did not feel underarmed with a bolt action going up against folks with semi or full auto rifles and certainly not when going after deer.

As usual, YMMV and your applications, experiences, and likes may be different than his.

 

[Offfhand]

Whenever "Scout" rifles are mentioned I always recall this cover of a 1966 issue of Sports Afield and the article therein by Pete Brown. Yep, that was over 50 years ago. Brown was a well respected writer and firearms expert back in those days. Cooper who?

 

[edapp]

Reliability - practically speaking, it is generally a myth that bolt actions are more reliable than semi autos. Having been a match director for both 3gun and PRS style matches, I’ve seen an awful lot of folks shoot on the clock and I saw way more issues with bolt guns than I ever saw with ARs.

Safety - I don’t know what would cause one to think ARs are less safe. There are an awful lot of rem700 out there with factory triggers that got recalled and are generally considered unsafe. Factory AR triggers are comparatively much safer until bubba decides to do a trigger job.
As a point of comparison, most matches allow competitors with ARs to run around with the safety “on”. But if that same competitor was using a bolt gun he would be required to open the bolt when moving because nobody trusts bolt gun safeties and triggers.

Cherry picking known manufacturer defects to claim semiautomatic rifles are more safe than bolt action rifles is a stretch.

In one case, the rifle once fired cannot be made to fire again unless the user intentionally ejects the spent case and loads a new round. In the other, after being fired, the rifle is ready and capable of being fired in less than the time it takes to pull the trigger again. The action is more enclosed and harder to see, the status of the rifle being loaded or not is harder to determine. It is darn near impossible to load a bolt action rifle without knowing it. My comments regarding safety were not necessarily about design, or claiming AR's are unsafe. Moreso about the likelihood of user error resulting in a accidental discharge.

I don't know why a match wouldn't require bolts be locked back for AR's or any semiauto (same as bolt action) but it seems like a common sense safety measure to clearly show anyone around that the rifle is empty. I have never thought of opening an action as a way to override a faulty safety... only to make it obvious to everyone the condition of the firearm. Pretty standard range rules.

 

[taliv]

Cherry picking known manufacturer defects t

as oppose to speculating about unknown defects?

the status of the rifle being loaded or not is harder to determine. It is darn near impossible to load a bolt action rifle without knowing it.

That's easy. All guns are always loaded.

I don't know why a match wouldn't require bolts be locked back for AR's or any semiauto (same as bolt action) but it seems like a common sense safety measure to clearly show anyone around that the rifle is empty.

shoot some matches and it will become pretty immediately obvious.

I will tell you that in the pre-PRS years and the first year of the PRS, the de facto standard was not just opening the bolt, but completely unloading the gun. If you shot a match 10 years ago with a bolt gun, every time you run from one barricade to another, you'd have to COMPLETELY remove all rounds from the rifle and then load again once you got to the next barricade and got into position. This is why so many rifles you see today have detachable box magazines; because people would show up to a match with a blind magazine and spend more than half their time fumbling around ejecting shells and picking them out of the dirt/snow.
now, even cheap bolt guns come with detachable box magazines.

 

[ATLDave]

I don't know why a match wouldn't require bolts be locked back for AR's or any semiauto (same as bolt action) but it seems like a common sense safety measure to clearly show anyone around that the rifle is empty. I have never thought of opening an action as a way to override a faulty safety... only to make it obvious to everyone the condition of the firearm. Pretty standard range rules.

I wonder if you're confusing gun status when not the shooter/off the clock versus shooting and moving between positions while on the clock.

I'm pretty sure that at the end of a course of fire, all the competitors have to empty the gun and insert a chamber flag to prove the gun is empty/action opened.

 

[edapp]

I wonder if you're confusing gun status when not the shooter/off the clock versus shooting and moving between positions while on the clock.

I'm pretty sure that at the end of a course of fire, all the competitors have to empty the gun and insert a chamber flag to prove the gun is empty/action opened.

Yes that is what I was referring to.

as oppose to speculating about unknown defects?

That's easy. All guns are always loaded.

As opposed to assuming that in generic terms, the hypothetical semiauto vs bolt guns in questions are not defective or improperly modified.
I only had a problem with the position of semiautomatic rifles in general being MORE SAFE than bolt action. If bolt action rifles in general were unreliable or unsafe, or had triggers and safeties that were generally unreliable, they would not be the standard for hunters and target shooters. I have never met a hunter that decided to upgrade to an AR based rifle for the more reliable safety or trigger system. I prefer bolt action rifles for reasons that include added safety and peace of mind for me and those around me. The same reason I am teaching my son to shoot on a single shot... which is one step further in the direction of safety through even more clarity of the rifles condition.

If there is an advantage to an AR in a PRS match, that really doesn't have any bearing on the point I am trying to make.

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

I like the idea of a scout rifle, but I also understand that it's a tool for certain things. Going to war, isn't one of them... I have ARs for that. Hunting squirrels, ain't one either... I have a 10/22 for that.

If you can see where I'm going, you'll notice that the scout rifle has a limited role, but that doesn't make it an illegitimate one. Arguably, that role can be expanded to others as the scout rifle is just so dang handy to have with you. You get bolt gun reliability, big cartridge power, a little magnification, (but not so much you can't use it close up, or in a hurry) it's not so long and ungainly to carry around... Good overall rifle.

I have two scout type rifles. Neither would meet with Col Coopers approval probably, at least not going by the standards he set long ago. Had he still been with us, there is a good chance that his concept, and teachings (along with all other firearms technology) would have evolved. My first one is a Rossi 92 in.44 mag. Nope... not a true scout. It does, however, fill the same role as a light handy rifle for use when you just need to get around in the woods, and something may pop up that could be a danger. Col Cooper wasn't from Indiana, so he doesn't know that I don't need to shoot 400 yds. The .44 mag out of a 17" barrel will kill anything I need it to, and within the range I'll likely encounter it. Seeing that's the case, I need no magnification, and just went with a red dot, in the forward position of course. (also dictated by the rifles design) I also went modern and added a light. It may be used as a defensive gun, and I feel every defensive gun needs a weapon mounted light.

View attachment 860208

My latest is much closer to his original concept, a converted Mauser. This is a Brazilian Mauser in 7mm, so it doesn't fit into his .308 idea of being able to find ammo everywhere, but it's enough to kill most things, and it shoots a lot softer. That is important to a guy with a bunch of injuries that nag on him daily. Being a smaller round, I left the barrel 20" long to give it as much power as I can without making it cumbersome. That 29" barrel defiantly had to go... Wouldn't even fit in my gun cabinet. It's probably overweight by his standards, but then, so am I. I don't require a 6 or 7 pound rifle, I just don't want a 12 pound one. Still have to figure out how to put sights on it. So far the XS ones look to be the best. Probably won't ever need them with today's modern scopes, but I'd like them on there if only for piece of mind.

View attachment 860209

NO... either wouldn't be the gun I'd grab if the zombies came, but I can tell you that the Rossi 92 is welcomed in more places that my AR when I travel, and it's my very favorite gun to go shooting with. I have an AR SBR as a home defense gun, but the Rossi will go with me on my trip to Prudhoe Bay once I get the Jeep CJ7 I'm rebuilding finished, and I won't feel undergunned in bear country...

I like the lever gun. I'd like to do a similar setup and make a "tactical" lever gun. I have an 1894C in 357 that I plan to leave stock, and is the backup HD rifle after my CX4 ( I still don't own an AR but I guess I should get one Soon). A Marlin Black in 44 mag would be nice

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

Actually I'm the only gun guy I know who don't own either of those! Is the AR not the most popular selling American gun of all time or am I missing something there?.

I'm one of the few people that don't own either. My CX4 and my 1894 are my only 2 HD rifles atm. I guess I need to get an AR someday.

Actually, I just found out several of ny co workers own AR's and are gun people.

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

I think the real scout rifles these days are the "mini-bolts" in intermediate calibers have proliferated over the last few years. CZ 527s, the 16" Ruger Americans, Howas... they much more realistically fit what the average shooter is going to do: punching paper at an outdoor range likely limited to a couple hundred yards. They fit the "utility" role a bit - they're easy to carry, they can be thrown on an ATV or truck, you can hunt 30-30 type game with them at 30-30 type ranges - but mostly saliently, for 95% of the times they will be taken out of the safe, they are a much better fit than a 308.

I agree. I'm already sold on getting a Ruger American Ranch in 7.62×39 when budget permits.

Although I plan on getting an AR or other semiauto eventually, I want something more than my current pistol caliber rifles but I don't need something as powerful as a 308. The Ruger would be powerful enough to hunt if ever needed, and cheap enough to for its main purpose as a range gun.

As you said it fits 95% of the needs of someone that has a 308. Even though it wouldn't be anyone's first choice, With the 10 and 20 rounds magazines it make a decent HD gun

 

[Charlie98]

Memorialized in The Art of the Rifle, it’s an idea that persists. If you have an AR (or 5) or a lever gun (or 5), you don’t need a bolt action scout rifle.

That's kind of my thought. The whole label of 'scout' rifle sounds really Tacticool in our 'lookit what I got now!' environment. Some concepts of the scout rifle I don't get... like the forward mount scope, not in today's environment of optical dots and such. Truthfully, though, jamesx2 is correct... if you have a reasonable AR or lever-action, or, for that matter, a lighter semi-auto... you are all set. That's not knocking the bolt gun, mind you.

Whats the point of that caliber in a barrel that short?

Because my Socom16 M1a is a blast to shoot, is handy as all get out, and, well, just 'cause I can. Oddly enough, in these days of 16" barreled (5.56mm) AR's... or shorter... I still trot around with my 20" -A2.

Cooper's Scout rifle is to bolt guns what Dirty Harry was to N-frame Smiths... etc, etc...

 

[Varminterror]

If bolt action rifles in general were unreliable or unsafe, or had triggers and safeties that were generally unreliable, they would not be the standard for hunters and target shooters. I have never met a hunter that decided to upgrade to an AR based rifle for the more reliable safety or trigger system.

I’ve never met a target shooter who chose a bolt action for its reliable safety either. Many, many target rifles don’t even have safeties, and further many more have safeties which have never been activated.

It’s a running joke among shooters in our state club - there are three “pranks” guys joke about pulling to throw some dropped points at another shooter (but never actually would). 1) spin a rev onto their elevation turret. 2) throw a couple mils of wind onto their windage turret. Or 3) turn on their safety.

 

[fireside44]

My first one is a Rossi 92 in.44 mag. Nope... not a true scout. It does, however, fill the same role as a light handy rifle for use when you just need to get around in the woods, and something may pop up that could be a danger. Col Cooper wasn't from Indiana, so he doesn't know that I don't need to shoot 400 yds. The .44 mag out of a 17" barrel will kill anything I need it to, and within the range I'll likely encounter it. Seeing that's the case, I need no magnification, and just went with a red dot, in the forward position of course.

That is a fine looking rifle you have set up there. I am using the same principle on my AK. Forward mounted red dot.

Because my Socom16 M1a is a blast to shoot, is handy as all get out, and, well, just 'cause I can. Oddly enough, in these days of 16" barreled (5.56mm) AR's... or shorter... I still trot around with my 20" -A2.

Too short to spend money on for 308. I could see if you were 5'5" or 5'8" but it looks and feels toyish and silly on a six foot plus. Never mind giving up ballistics.

 

[Varminterror]

Too short to spend money on for 308. I could see if you were 5'5" or 5'8" but it looks and feels toyish and silly on a six foot plus. Never mind giving up ballistics.

Pick up a specialty pistol sometime...

 

[LoonWulf]

I've played with the scout concept a couple times, but mostly just cause 91/30s have a convenient little rail under the rear sight.
Ive had no issues with using a forward mounted scope, but haven't really wrung one out.
Both of my projects had longer tubes, one was full length, the other 25"

personally I don't have any real desire to try again.

I also think the ARs are probably better for the intended purpose of the scout rifle. I don't particularly care for them, so Id be more likely to have a bolt gun for general use.