PDA

View Full Version : Ruger Scout


J. Armstrong
June 11, 2014, 17:47
I've got a chance to pick up a NIB Ruger Scout, left hand, in .308 at an extremely good price. Seems like a handy little rifle, but I haven't had any experience with the M77 action since I sold a heavy barrel one maybe 20 years ago. Anyone with any experience with these or helpful info ?

MAINER
June 11, 2014, 18:58
Like you, my experience with the M77 was 20 years ago. I had a standard model in 30-06 with 22" barrel and iron sights.

I hated the spring loaded ejector and removed the thing. Was able to get a real nice trigger pull by grinding some extra room in the mechanism.

Real nice rifle, wouldn't have sold it, but needed the monies for a Ruger #1 in '06 that I just had to have, and still do.

I think the newer Ruger M77's are better than we had then. I like the finish on metal and wood better. I noticed they reverted back to the fixed ejector ala Mauser. The barrels seem too short and too skinny for my taste these days. Hard to get them with irons on them too.

I'd buy a M 77 if I found one in the configuration and caliber that appealed to me. "Extremely good price" is definitely a big plus. ;)

I was looking for a Ruger M77 in 260 Rem. when I stumbled upon a CZ 550 in 6.5X55 Mauser that ended the search.

J. Armstrong
June 11, 2014, 20:22
I got to bring it home to check out before committing, but at less than $500 brand new it seems hard to pass up.

Metal is park, laminated stock, so it is more functional looking than pretty, which is fine. 16 " barrel plus FH is a bit short for my taste, but is in keeping with the scout concept. Line of sight is very low - a b it lower than I'm used to, and I keep scopes pretty dang low wherever possible :) Polymer trigger housing, but then what isn't these days ? Very nice trigger as is, can't complain there. Bolt throw is a little gritty , but to be expected with no breakin time yet.

I'm sure it is more accurate than I am, so I'm mostly interested in what thoughts or problems others may have experienced with these, If I get it I'm thinking Leupold 2,5x28 Scout scope on it, although reading reviews on some other boards on the Leatherwood scout,they seem to be getting surprisingly good reports. Don't much trust the durability of chinese optics myself.

vt34
June 11, 2014, 21:28
I happen to own a Ruger Scout, in lefty as well, but I paid $750-800 for mine. 500 seems like a steal.
It's so light, smooth, reliable, and accurate that I now feel that if I could have only one gun, it would be my GSR.
I have a Leupold 1.5-4x IER scope on mine. I also own the fixed 2.5x Leupold IER. Both would suit the rifle well. I use quick-detach rings so I can use the irons whenever I want, which I really enjoy. Not enough bolt-guns come with good irons, but the GSR sure does.
If you decide to purchase it, get the polymer mags instead of the steel mags.

0302
June 11, 2014, 22:58
a few years ago the local gun dealer showed me a .270 ruger bolt action in which someone had fired a .308 in with zero damage.

J. Armstrong
June 12, 2014, 00:09
a few years ago the local gun dealer showed me a .270 ruger bolt action in which someone had fired a .308 in with zero damage.

:eek::eek:

Guess we can say the action is plenty strong enough !!!!! Hell of a good vote of confidence :) :beer:

J. Armstrong
June 13, 2014, 13:16
Well, the guy tossed in a good deal on some extra mags so I went for it.

$550 for nib left hand Scout and 10 rd metal mag, plus one each of the 3,5 and 10 rd polymers.

De burred action, cleaned and lubed - much smoother, as one would expect. Should prove to be aq fun shooter, I'm thinking.

Now for a scope.........

L Haney
June 13, 2014, 17:58
Now for a scope.........

Put what you saved into a good optic. You won't ever regret it.

J. Armstrong
June 13, 2014, 19:13
+1

I've always been a firm believer in not scrimping on optics - it's a false economy.

Scout scope options are a bit limited, but at the moment it looks like a Leupold 2.5x28.

TOWS220
June 13, 2014, 20:21
Send my a pm if you are interested in a deal on a lightly used one.

Whydah
June 24, 2014, 07:50
I've had the Ruger GSR for about two years. Put a 2.75X Burris Scout Scope on it with QD rings. It certainly meets the criteria Cooper intended. I killed a nice six-pointer with it last fall, and have shot it out to about 300 yds with good accuracy considering such a short bbl and low-powered scope. I must admit, the LER scope takes a bit of getting used to!

My only negative is the lengthy 10-rd box mag hanging beneath it. Seems to prohibit a balanced carry to me, but I certainly see the advantages of such a feed mechanism.

Early on I purchased a few extra mags from Alpha Industries out in Cali. Great quality steel mags, and they were a bit cheaper than the Ruger mags at the time. The AI mags actually doubled-stacked the rounds, making the mag a bit shorter, as well. Don't know whats being marketed now.

Oh, $500 was a steal!

Delta-3
June 24, 2014, 09:55
The wife & kid got me a Ruger GSR for fathers day. Great suprise as I had no idea. Took it out and ran 40 rds of 168g AMAX through it using the iron sights. Held a 3"+ group at 100 yds. Not bad for my old eyes. Going to add a Leupold 1-4x scout scope. That should help considerably out to 300 yds.
Overall I like it very much. The action & trigger were smoother than I thought they would be from a M 77. Don't care much for the metal magazine as it was difficult to get that 10th rd in & pushed back. The polymer 10 rd was much easier & a pleasure to load. Also, it's shorter than the metal mag but still holds 10 rds.
It's light, accurate & handles very quickly.


http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w44/Delta-3/ColtAR15A4-Ruger-GSR004_zps62b4ca20.jpg

RetiredNSmilin308
June 24, 2014, 10:41
Nice new toy, J. Those sights & that laminated stock look nice. I do however do not know why Ruger engineers made the front sight on that rifle HIGHER that the ears that were designed to protect it. I thought it was supposed to be lower. But then again I do not have an engineering degree. Just one each in Process Instrumentation & Electronics Technology.

I have to admit, I do NOT understand the SCOUT RIFLE concept.

I am not saying it is wrong, I just do not understand it.

I feel I have several "SCOUT" rifles already except for the over 5 round mag.

All are in .308.

1.) Browning BLR

2.) FR-8

3.) Spanish Mauser

When I hear the term SCOUT RIFLE I think of an Aussie coast watcher or Jim Bridger. Niether one was intended to duke it out the a squad of bad guys, but needed soming to help them unass the area, and more accurate and longer range than what the bad guys were carrying. Turning around and dropping one every now and then as they made their escape.

I guess it is time to GOOGLE it and do some reading.

I am very impressed with that GSR rifle, but think there are others a bit cheaper.

Mossberg MVP in 308? or is it a Savage. I forget.

Whydah
June 24, 2014, 12:04
Lately I have read some positive reviews of Ruger's new "American". At under $400 it is said to have great accuracy OTB along with quality features of much higher-priced rifles. Worth a look.

Sijones
June 24, 2014, 15:43
No personal experience with the rifle per se (most of what I have heard is its good to go ). About the scope: Scout Scopes in general do not perform nearly as well as a good low range variable. A solid 1x4 or 1x6 will do a much better job. The best of scout scopes suffer from poor field of view, insufficient magnification for a .308 rifles intended use, poor light transmission (so called light gathering), and very problematic with the sun in your eyes as its coming up as well as sun coming up behind you. They are at their best at under 200 yards in the middle of the day.

There are some 1x4+ scopes that have sufficient eye relief to mount in front of the irons (Minox is one that comes to mind in their recently discontinued 1.5 x 8, there is also a Bushnell Elite that is the bomb on a Ruger Scout, but its pricey), but are still conventional low range variables that are taylor made for that rifle.

I know its designed to take the forward mounted optic, but it will work much better in all areas of performance with the low range variable.

Whydah
June 24, 2014, 15:50
No personal experience with the rifle per se (most of what I have heard is its good to go ). About the scope: Scout Scopes in general do not perform nearly as well as a good low range variable. A solid 1x4 or 1x6 will do a much better job. The best of scout scopes suffer from poor field of view, insufficient magnification for a .308 rifles intended use, poor light transmission (so called light gathering), and very problematic with the sun in your eyes as its coming up as well as sun coming up behind you. They are at their best at under 200 yards in the middle of the day.

There are some 1x4+ scopes that have sufficient eye relief to mount in front of the irons (Minox is one that comes to mind in their recently discontinued 1.5 x 8, there is also a Bushnell Elite that is the bomb on a Ruger Scout, but its pricey), but are still conventional low range variables that are taylor made for that rifle.

I know its designed to take the forward mounted optic, but it will work much better in all areas of performance with the low range variable.

You can choose to mount your scope the traditional way on the GSR, but you will loose the rear sight. I thought my rifle came with traditional rings, too, but if it did I don't know what I did with them. The sights on the GSR are the same as Ruger installs on their Mini-14. Somewhat crude, but they get the job done.

shortround
June 24, 2014, 17:53
Or you can mount the XS sight rail, which gives you the option of LER (scout) scope mounting, a regular picatinny rail over the receiver and a built in backup sight that works with the OEM front.

http://http://www.brownells.com/optics-mounting/scope-bases/rifle-bases/ruger-scout-rifle-rail-prod44897.aspx

J. Armstrong
June 27, 2014, 14:22
No personal experience with the rifle per se (most of what I have heard is its good to go ). About the scope: Scout Scopes in general do not perform nearly as well as a good low range variable. A solid 1x4 or 1x6 will do a much better job. The best of scout scopes suffer from poor field of view, insufficient magnification for a .308 rifles intended use, poor light transmission (so called light gathering), and very problematic with the sun in your eyes as its coming up as well as sun coming up behind you. They are at their best at under 200 yards in the middle of the day.

There are some 1x4+ scopes that have sufficient eye relief to mount in front of the irons (Minox is one that comes to mind in their recently discontinued 1.5 x 8, there is also a Bushnell Elite that is the bomb on a Ruger Scout, but its pricey), but are still conventional low range variables that are taylor made for that rifle.

I know its designed to take the forward mounted optic, but it will work much better in all areas of performance with the low range variable.

With all due respect, I have to disagree with ya on this.

First, I firmly believe that the majority of folks use overpowered scopes. I would be hard pressed to find a use for a 4x scope for general use. If you can't hit it at at least 400 yds with, say, a 2.5x, something is seriously wrong with the weapon or the "operator" ( there, I finally got to say that :D) .

The whole scout concept revolves around keeping the power low so that you are not limited to the field of vision of the scope. It is quite easy to utilize that small 2.5x circle while retaining useful vision in the "1x" field surrounding it. The result is MUCH better useable field of view than with a conventional 2.5x to say nothing of the really limited field in higher powers. In fact, 2.5x is about the upper limit for the scout concept to function properly, so even a 4x scope in the traditional mounting position defeats the function and purpose of the scout concept.

J. Armstrong
June 27, 2014, 14:40
Nice new toy, J. Those sights & that laminated stock look nice. I do however do not know why Ruger engineers made the front sight on that rifle HIGHER that the ears that were designed to protect it. I thought it was supposed to be lower. But then again I do not have an engineering degree. Just one each in Process Instrumentation & Electronics Technology.

I have to admit, I do NOT understand the SCOUT RIFLE concept.

I am not saying it is wrong, I just do not understand it.

I feel I have several "SCOUT" rifles already except for the over 5 round mag.

All are in .308.

1.) Browning BLR

2.) FR-8

3.) Spanish Mauser

When I hear the term SCOUT RIFLE I think of an Aussie coast watcher or Jim Bridger. Niether one was intended to duke it out the a squad of bad guys, but needed soming to help them unass the area, and more accurate and longer range than what the bad guys were carrying. Turning around and dropping one every now and then as they made their escape.

I guess it is time to GOOGLE it and do some reading.

I am very impressed with that GSR rifle, but think there are others a bit cheaper.

Mossberg MVP in 308? or is it a Savage. I forget.

The scout concept was, if not invented by Jeff Cooper, at least popularized by him. He gives a nice overview of the concept in "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth". Your perception of it is not far off the mark. To loosely restate the intended purpose, it is a light, compact, easily carried rifle of sufficient caliber to be capable of one shot stops out to any range a man can see. It is not a battle rifle nor is it intended to supplant one. Frankly, my interpretation is that it was not even conceived to be a military weapon at all, although it could be used as one in some situations. For example, in a SHTF situation, those individuals who foresee extended engagements with opponents are likely to end up dead very early. A more viable option is "shoot and scoot" - engage at a distance at which you can disable an individual opponent, or perhaps several, but allow the option of disengaging and withdrawal. This does not require large cap mags or semi actions. Interestingly, I think he would have agreed about your BLR - he mentions the Win levers in the context of the sort of rifles that the theory was encompassing.

There were several parameters Cooper suggested, the most controversial which seems to be the LER scope position. Nothing precludes the use of an iron sighted Scout, but Cooper acknowledged that optics are helpful for aging vision, and also allow improved target ID ("friend/foe") at the intermediate ranges the rifle was anticipated to be used at. The forward scope position allows the advantages I mentioned in the post above. It also allows stripper clip loading with some rifle, which Cooper liked. In playing with the new toy so far ( still waiting for lower QD rings to optimize the sight picture for me ) I would have to say it seems a viable concept. Acquiring a target is very fast - sort of like having an Aimpoint or EOTech with a little magnification in the center of the field of vision. Seems easy to adapt to as well.

The above is only my simplified, humble interpretation of the concept, but I think it is a fair statement of the basics Cooper was espousing.

Sijones
June 27, 2014, 14:45
With all due respect, I have to disagree with ya on this.

First, I firmly believe that the majority of folks use overpowered scopes. I would be hard pressed to find a use for a 4x scope for general use. If you can't hit it at at least 400 yds with, say, a 2.5x, something is seriously wrong with the weapon or the "operator" ( there, I finally got to say that :D) .

The whole scout concept revolves around keeping the power low so that you are not limited to the field of vision of the scope. It is quite easy to utilize that small 2.5x circle while retaining useful vision in the "1x" field surrounding it. The result is MUCH better useable field of view than with a conventional 2.5x to say nothing of the really limited field in higher powers. In fact, 2.5x is about the upper limit for the scout concept to function properly, so even a 4x scope in the traditional mounting position defeats the function and purpose of the scout concept.

I own and have hunted extensively with a Leupold Scout scope on an 1894 Winchester with XS Systems mount and Leupold QD rings. When the sun comes up behind you, you cannot see diddly squat. Same thing happens when the sun comes up in front of you. Knowing the limitations of a scout scope I use QD rings so I can take the damned thing off when it won't do its job. And from personal experience its not so hot in poor light either. Poor twilight factor is part and parcel of the design. There aren't many scout scopes out there. I've owned the Burris and ditched it for Leupold. 2.75 to 3 x is fine for a 30-30. It isn't enough eyes to do justice to the 308.

There is absolutely nothing that a scout scope will do better than a 1x4 or 1x6 quality low range variable. I prefer the so called "dangerous game" low range variables over the tactical types as the reticles are more suited to the precision hunting requires. And for the record, I like the old '94 with the Loopy on it, but I have often stripped the scope off it and used it with the Williams receiver sight instead. Too many limitations on a good gun if it didn't have the QD rings. AND i agree with you about people generally over scoping rifles. I don't. That old 94 is one of my favorite "walking around" rifles despite its limitations. Fast, light and easy handling mounts like a good bird gun and both eyes open. Might not be bad in a pinch against two legged game either.

J. Armstrong
June 27, 2014, 15:02
I own and have hunted extensively with a Leupold Scout scope on an 1894 Winchester with XS Systems mount and Leupold QD rings. When the sun comes up behind you, you cannot see diddly squat. Same thing happens when the sun comes up in front of you. Knowing the limitations of a scout scope I use QD rings so I can take the damned thing off when it won't do its job. And from personal experience its not so hot in poor light either. Poor twilight factor is part and parcel of the design. There aren't many scout scopes out there. I've owned the Burris and ditched it for Leupold. 2.75 to 3 x is fine for a 30-30. It isn't enough eyes to do justice to the 308.

There is absolutely nothing that a scout scope will do better than a 1x4 or 1x6 quality low range variable. I prefer the so called "dangerous game" low range variables over the tactical types as the reticles are more suited to the precision hunting requires. And for the record, I like the old '94 with the Loopy on it, but I have often stripped the scope off it and used it with the Williams receiver sight instead. Too many limitations on a good gun if it didn't have the QD rings. AND i agree with you about people generally over scoping rifles. I don't. That old 94 is one of my favorite "walking around" rifles despite its limitations. Fast, light and easy handling mounts like a good bird gun and both eyes open. Might not be bad in a pinch against two legged game either.

I see your point about the lighting limitations. Haven't tried the setup under those conditions yet, but I can certainly see where that would be a problem. And I absolutely agree with QD mounts on all scopes - besides lighting probs, there is always the chance of busting the optic.

For me, there is one factor which gives the scout and advantage over even a 1 or 1.5x scope, and that is that I have only one peeper that works. Of course, this has nothing to do with either validating or invalidating the scout theory, since that wasn't one of the parameters :D Anyway, the scout opens up the peripheral field of view that the rear ocular obscures for me. That wouldn't be an operative problem for folks with binocular vision who shoot with both eyes open, of course.

Sijones
June 28, 2014, 11:16
I see your point about the lighting limitations. Haven't tried the setup under those conditions yet, but I can certainly see where that would be a problem. And I absolutely agree with QD mounts on all scopes - besides lighting probs, there is always the chance of busting the optic.

For me, there is one factor which gives the scout and advantage over even a 1 or 1.5x scope, and that is that I have only one peeper that works. Of course, this has nothing to do with either validating or invalidating the scout theory, since that wasn't one of the parameters :D Anyway, the scout opens up the peripheral field of view that the rear ocular obscures for me. That wouldn't be an operative problem for folks with binocular vision who shoot with both eyes open, of course.

That does change things rather drastically. That scenario would make the case for the forward mount working in your favor in many circumstances at least in toleraable light conditions. Using QD rings ( I actually prefer Warne to Leupold, and have them on most of my weapons ) , you may want to consider an Aimpoint H1 or T1 as an additional option to the scout scope for those commonly encountered light conditions that cause issues with the forward mount. I have one mounted forward of the ejection port on one of my AR's. All I see is the dot. The Aimpoint itself is almost not even there.

Hope you find an optic combination that works. As much as I harp on the scout scope set ups I admit that I enjoy shooting the one I have when the light is right.

TOWS220
June 29, 2014, 08:21
Please post a range report when you get a chance. Have you gotten a sling for it yet?

Sijones
June 29, 2014, 10:39
FWIW I've tried both the Burris and the Leupold scout scopes. Prefer the reticle of the Burris, but the Leupold performs a bit better over all. Bit better light transmission. Nicer build quality.

J. Armstrong
June 29, 2014, 18:11
FWIW I've tried both the Burris and the Leupold scout scopes. Prefer the reticle of the Burris, but the Leupold performs a bit better over all. Bit better light transmission. Nicer build quality.

Not much experience with Burris ( I agree about the reficle ) and have been pretty much happy with several Leupolds, plus TOWS gave me a good deal on a nice used one, so the Leupold it is. Warne rings now, although I may be scoring a set of Leupold low rings, so may end up with them.

J. Armstrong
June 29, 2014, 18:15
Please post a range report when you get a chance. Have you gotten a sling for it yet?

Probably going to be awhile yet - finishing up a relocation and some other practical crap first :D Looking at a Wilderness 3 point CW sling , keeping to Colonel Jeff's gospel, but it's one of those things that always seems to be evolving. It's been years since I've used a sling for anything other than transport, so I expect to be relearning as I go..... Will need to add the third QD sling stud but that's easy.