Scout rifle, circa 2016

[Malamute]

+1 to the theory that the folks complaining about wandering zero may just be recoil sensitive.

I recall some amount of discussion about them on one of the military rifle forums I believe. It wasn't simply recoil sensitive people, some guys were having real problems with them. There were some tricks they did to the guns that helped, but I think some guns never were completely reliable in their zeros.

[GJM]

I sighted in a guys 375 Whitworth for him once. There was no good rest to be had. I leaned back into a tree while sort of sitting. I managed to scope myself on 3 of the 4 final shots as I was trying for something of a group. I did manage a 1 1/2" group though.

I think you could break something in your body, leaning against something hard, since your body can't move with the recoil!

Twenty years ago, we were getting ready for a trip to Africa, and I bought a Swarovski 1-4 for my wife's Dakota .375 H&H. After we got it mounted, with it pushed as far forward as possible, she went to verify zero. First shot scoped hurt, lightly making an impression in her forehead. I told her we needed to go Leupold 1.5-5, as it had more eye relief. She accused me of wanting to take her high quality 30mm, European scope. I said OK, have at it, and the next shot hit her forehead, left a deep cut, and a scar that is still visible today. At that point, she stopped thinking the 30mm Swaro was such a great idea. I think we ultimately put a scout scope on that rifle, just like she had on her .416. I have only been hit by a scope twice, both were with a .375 and that Swaro, and I remember both instances. Once was shooting downhill in the snow and the other time was shooting a leopard in a tree blind, in the pitch dark, when I crawled the stock. Still remember the blood dripping down my face, but it seemed trivial at the time.

[Malamute]

I was leaning my left shoulder against the tree to try to be as steady as I could when sitting on the ground. It didn't seem like that great of an idea after it was all said and done, but I was glad I focused on the shooting anyways. I don't recall what scope he had on it, it was in the mid 80s when I was first coming up in the northern rockies looking around.

[Bigghoss]

I recall some amount of discussion about them on one of the military rifle forums I believe. It wasn't simply recoil sensitive people, some guys were having real problems with them. There were some tricks they did to the guns that helped, but I think some guns never were completely reliable in their zeros.

So maybe it's some and not others. Maybe a batch of rifles got cuts that were too deep that allowed the receivers to flex or something.

[That Guy]

Bolt Action Classifier, version 0.1

Okay, so I shot this... But without a suitable mag pouch, fishing my extra magazine from my jeans pocket, with a cut on my thumb, in the rain. I am hesitant to post any results, in other words... It was fun though!

Once you start getting into the larger magazines aren't you starting to drift out of scout rifle territory and into military rifle territory?
If I'm bumping up to more than a flush fit magazine, then I'm going to build a ultralight AR10 instead of using a bolt gun and running 10-20 rounds mags.

Are ultralight AR-10's reliable enough these days? I assume it would have to be a custom rifle? (The only ones I've locally seen have been ultraheavy ones designed for maximum accuracy and only carried from the car to the shooting bench... Not a topic I am well versed in, in other words.)

Besides, it's a lot cheaper and simpler to just slap a bigger mag into a gun you already have than to get a new gun. In some places a lot more legal as well...

Depends on your priorities as well, I'd think? Boltie for portability and if the probability of bigger trouble increases, switch to something semi-automatic? But if you miscalculate your odds or are simply unlucky, well, at least you have bigger mags for your boltie...

My Steyr Scout kicks the shit out of me from prone.

And suddenly I'm less annoyed at the porkiness of my Ruger Scout.

Sent from my Infernal Contraption using Tapatalk

[rob_s]

Is it feasible to get a mount like the ADM Scout-X scope mount; turn it around so you mount it "backwards" so that the rings are over the receiver and it is mounted on the GSR scout rail? This way you can detach it when needed and yet have a convention scope position. It only weighs 7 oz. I have one on my FAL and it can sit low enough.

https://www.americandefensemanufactu...ce7bd5153d.jpg

Maybe. It's an interesting solution, but a $1k gun, $1k optic, and a couple hundred for the mount is a lot to invest for "maybe".

Other than it has Scout in the name, why spend more money on a Ruger, when a Tikka T3X with a pic rail from the Tikka Performance Center, allows you to mount a LPV or Aimpoint, while having a more accurate, lighter weight rifle, with a far better bolt throw feel (speed and smoothness) at the cost of only having five round magazines and no BUIS?

The negatives for the Tikka, again for me, are the small ejection port, lack of sights, and lack of threading.

It's both of those things. I like the idea of a bolt gun with detachable mags with at least 10 rounds, open sights, 16-18" barrel, and not too heavy. I was really interested in the Mossberg MVP Scout until I learned about how the bolt and feeding system works.

Me too.

Not sure of the weight, but the Sako Canadian Ranger rifle would seem to fit your requirements well.

It would. But are they available yet? Last I heard, they had plans to release a version on the commercial market but it hasn't happened yet.

If I didn't care about the threading, there are lots of Sako options that would appear to be good ones. i'm assuming none are for sale in the US
85 GRIZZLY
85 BLACK BEAR
85 BAVARIAN
75 DELUXE

That's where the Savage scout has some appeal. It comes with a 10-rounder but will take their flush 5's. Part of the appeal of a manually-operated rifle is the PC-ness of it.

I didn't know they had a flush-5 for that gun... Interesting.

My Steyr Scout kicks the shit out of me from prone.
I'm glad it only took 6 to get a zero, many more and I'd of been flinching for sure.
Offhand it's not bad at all. The Enfield jungle .303 I shot wasn't bad offhand either (never shot it from prone).

FWIW, and you're likely already aware of this, the gun/stock may not fit you correctly which could be causing this.

[Bigghoss]

I didn't know they had a flush-5 for that gun... Interesting.

The scout has the same magwell as their other rifles so any of the Savages with detachable mags will take the 10's and the scout will take the 5's. Maybe they're only 4's, I'm not sure.

[JodyH]

FWIW, and you're likely already aware of this, the gun/stock may not fit you correctly which could be causing this.

No, it was a really bad chest flat prone position and the butt resting more on my collarbone than in the shoulder pocket.

[RoyGBiv]

No, it was a really bad chest flat prone position and the butt resting more on my collarbone than in the shoulder pocket.

I made that mistake with a 30-30 once. I'm sure I would have broken my collarbone if I did the same with a .308.

[GJM]

In a perfect world, you would be able to shoot a bunch of these, because often how they feel when shooting is much different than how they look on paper.