Please note the height of the scope above the bore on the Steyr, and then the milsurp rifle.

This difference in height makes more of a difference than you would first believe.

Avoid any scout scope mount that mounts the bell of the scope more than 1/16" or so above the barrel.  I kid you not.

Quoted: Quoted: Please note the height of the scope above the bore on the Steyr, and then the milsurp rifle. This difference in height makes more of a difference than you would first believe. Avoid any scout scope mount that mounts the bell of the scope more than 1/16" or so above the barrel.  I kid you not. Parallax error?

No, the criticality of low scope placement is a result of the need for the shooter to be able to use the scope naturally and instantly, without need for cheek risers or craning the neck into an unnatural position.  One of the attributes of the Scout rifle is handiness and speed of use.  A too-high mounted scope defeats this goal.  believe me, even a slight bit too high makes a whale of a difference.  How well and how fast could you shoot if you couldn't get a decent, natural, quick cheek weld on the stock, but instead had to hunt for the scope every time?

Quoted: The scout as desinged to kill any North American big game as well as to legged varmints.

I haven't heard the Colonel advocate the use of the .308 on Grizzly or Polar Bear, let alone using it with the Scout platform.  The .308 Scout will certainly dispatch any game in America, though

Cooper is very dissapointed that the Army no longer uses the 1903A3.

Again, I do not recall him saying this.  You would be correct if you had instead said "M1 and/or M-14".  Whether that statement is true is a subject for another thread.

He thinks the Scout would be a good weapon for military purposes.

Not quite.  The Scout is not a Main Battle Rifle, nor was it intended to be.  However, a trained Scout/Observer/Spotter would be better served by carrying a Scout than an MBR.

Once again, we allow ourselves to focus on equipment instead of seeing the whole picture.

One thing constantly re-appears within Cooper's writings: that it is the man not the gun that is the primary weapon.  A well-trained man with a Scout rifle should be able to evade or dominanate pretty much any  single opponent that he is likely to meet.

IMO, the concept of the Scout Rifle is absolutely brilliant, but building a really good one can be very expensive. The nicest I have ever seen was one custom built by...I think...Robbie Barkman, from a small ring Mauser for a doctor in Texas. Twenty some odd years ago it cost over $2500. Still, I think the Scout is a much more useful and "practical" rifle for most shooters than, say, a 14lb. bull barreled precision bench rifle. The Steyer is not perfect, but is probably the best approximation ever built and when compared to a really nice custom, is a bargain.

They are meant to be carried, and are usually fired offhand with only sling support in the field. They are not "paper target" rifles. A good shooter with a proper rifle can actually hit thrown clay birds going away with the Scout 50% of the time or more. We are talking about one second for an accurate shot from the time the butt hits the shoulder. As for extra ammo, stripper clips are a better bet IMO than extra mags, as they are much more compact and easier to carry. The rifle may also be "topped off" with single rounds if desired.

For a "Scout" in a military setting, once he is "found and fixed" he is dead. Mobility is crucial...it is best if he does not shoot at all, but if he must, he is better off to fire one accurate shot and move. 100 rounds for such a mission is a LOT of ammo.

I have seen lots and lots of money spent by guys on far less useful firearms than a good Scout rifle...but that is just my opinion.

Quoted: Parroting the gospel according to Jeff is NOT a substitute for actually getting out and using a pseudo-Scout.  Which I have done for almost 10 years.

Cooper's set of specifications were established by himself and a committee of hunting and military experts over a number of years, using at least four prototypes that I know of.  It was not conjured up out of thin air, but was hammered out, through trial and error, and by rifle experts over the years.

Having built a Modelo 1912 Mauser-based Scout, using the Ashley Scout mount, and also having used it for years, I can attest to the well-thought-out nature of the Cooper  Scout rifle specs. Every time I deviated from his specs, and then re-worked to adhere to same, I was amazed by how much better his concept (and execution) was than my first attempt.

And ANYONE who advises a sub-7 pound 308 as a general purpose tool has not shot one extensively.  They are whippy and hard to hold steady offhand.  And recoil, especially during a long training session, becomes a nuisance and detriment to precision shooting.  And if the gun is no fun to use, it won't be.

IMHO, anyone complaining about the recoil effect of any rifle-based .308 has nothing to complain about.  If a properly made Scout rifle is difficult for someone to use, then they need more and better practice, not more weight in the rifle.

How about everyone with an "opinion" also post pictures of their own personal interperation of the Scout concept, instead of repeating information that was decided arbitrarily to meet Col. Coopers ideal over two decades ago.

 Sorry, no pix.  Details of my Scout rifle on demand, tho.

Do you Coopersque luddites really believe that nothing has been learned since then?

With the exception of  better optics and other sighting devices, and the introduction of high-tech composites, not much is really new in the last couple of decades.

I would say that Cooper's Ideal has been so poorly received commercially that it demonstrates conclusively it was ....gasp...a less than perfect, probably unobtainable goal.  The readily available and considerably less expensive alternatives such as Lever Scouts, the Mini-Scout, and Springfield Armory's interpetation actually acheive the goal of being GP tools. Paladin ETA: In a 7 pound rifle throwing a 150 grain bullet at 2800 fps, the free recoil is 19 ft.lbs. at a velocity of 13 fps rearward.  The Springfield Scout at 10 pounds only recoils 13 fpe at 9 fps rearward, a reduction of over 30%, BTW.

Hmmmm.  $2600 rifles are not for everybody.  Neither are Ferraris.  As is usually true, the average person, not being able to afford high-end things, comes to believe that they are just a little better than his low-end rifle or sports car.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  Shoot a real Scout, or drive a real high-end sports car and you will see how you have been decieving yourself, and missing out on excellence.

Savage made a pretty good Pseudo-Scout for a few years, and Ruger is doing so now.   Some of these imitations are better than others; better in this case being closer to the "Cooperesque Ideal" than not.

If you have not actually carried a real Scout on a hunt for a week or so, you have no business complaining about the specs from which it was designed and built.

Quoted: I'm not complaining about the specs. You however don't seem to "get" something significant.  "Eyetalyun trash" is not useful to West Texians.  I need a vehicle with enough ground clearance to accomodate rough trail conditions.  And my cattle dog detests the smell of wet leather on our return trips from the lake.  So a car that turns you on might not fit my needs. Inflexible pronouncements like "the best blah blah blah" are patently BS from the start, because they presume the needs of one user will suffice for all.  And rigid thinking where one must follow a certain recipe exactly discounts the individual capacity to decide for themselves what is working for them.  I do NOT defer my firearms decisions to a committee of strangers, however well qualified they might be... As I stated, with 10 years of shooting a pseudo-Scout with COMPLETE SATISFACTION and fulfillment of my particular needs, "bending" Coopers rules has merit for some of us. Paladin

Well, my Scout is also a pseudo-scout. if only because I have not yet shortened the barrel to make weight, nor installed Pachmayr flush sling swivel mounts.  Even though I can't yet afford a Steyr Scout, I still appreciate that it is fine machinery.  It would probably still be fine machinery in West Texas, if the place hasn't changed much since I was through last.

But, hey.  Whatever floats your boat.  Best of luck to you.