rodteague
-
Posts
24 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Content Type
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Posts posted by rodteague
-
-
this is what you want, Nordic Components . Follow the fit guide and then select the appropriate nut and extension kit.
Regards
Rod
-
Glock 19 w/ extra mag
Mikov Predator Auto Lever lock
Surefire E2T-MV Tactician
This is what I carry on my person every day for personal defense. My daily driver has another EDC....
The Zippo stays in the pocket of my M65 field jacket along with a Ranger Silva compass; which is always in the back seat of my truck. the 870 Tac14 and battle belt are covered by the M65. When tensions are high and riots are imminent, the shotgun and belt are replaced with my AR and load bearing vest/plate carrier. Depends on what Defcon we're on.
Sorry for the edit....... But this what I carry every day
Best regards
Rod
-
9
-
-
Take all of it with a grain of salt; and beware, there are a lot of fakes. A barrel can be stamped to match a receiver at a later date; as well as proof marks. When I first got into mausers, there was a lot of that going on with M98's and K98's; as well as 03 Springfield's. Most were intentional chicanery and some, unintentionally misleading. Lot's of receivers were recycled post war by Mauser and given new life in the commercial market with matching serial numbers. Could have also been done by a smaller export company or a gunsmith; your rebore seems to suggest one of the scenario's. At the very least it may have started as an original commercial mauser as you suspect, but has received embellishments over the years. It's one of the reasons I honed in on the Swedish Mausers. The Swedes were very meticulous in the mfg of their rifles and subsequent, freakishly straight S/N's and proof marks. It's really hard to fake a Swede. All that aside it's a fine looking curio and relic, and tells a great story regarding gun ownership in post war Germany and Europe. What better historical document than an actual rifle from that era. FWIW, the truth is, the Elk won't know the difference, and that's all that really matters
Good luck, I hope you get it figured out.
Best Regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Sunfish said:
It's a WW1 Imperial that was re barreled and proofed commercial N. Those Gew 98's had a straight bolt so it was bent or forged over and ground. The reason they made them in different chamberings than 8 mm was many countries didn't allow civilians to own anything in a military caliber
This ^^^ It also appeared to me..... to be a post WWI conversion. IIRC Imperial(WWI) and Nazi(WWII) markings on the side and top of the front receiver ring were generally removed (ground off) in order to export to other european countries; and to make them legal to own in post war Germany. Lot's of records were destroyed by Allied and Russian forces post WWII and unfortunately, many pre/post WWI military and commercial Mauser records were lost. If it had been a factory commercial German Mauser; the "Mauser" logo would have been stamped on top of the front ring. Commercial variants were tolerated and generally left in "virgin" state; but not always. Because there is nothing visible stamped on the top of the ring and on the left side of the receiver; it's a safe bet you have "probable" post WWI conversion. Looking thru a copy of "The Mauser Bolt Actions ....M91-M98... A Shop Manual" By Jerry Kuhnhausen, it dose appear to be a M98.
All that being said, I have one question; Is the floor plate "hinged"? If it is hinged, according to Jerry Kuhnhausen, early commercial M98 Orberndorf sporters could be had with adjustable double set triggers, and the sporters had hinged floor plates. In your first pic, it appears the floor plate is not hinged; but it is difficult to determine. Hinged, could be a commercial Orberndorf sporter; not hinged, a post war M98 sporter conversion. That's all I've got. Hope this helps
Regards
Rod
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 5/9/2020 at 8:03 PM, deerslayer said:
It's arguably superior to both. It will kill pretty much anything a .308 will with less recoil and a flatter trajectory, especially past 500 yards. It is not more accurate, but is easier to shoot accurately at extended range because it remains supersonic another 500-600 yards after the .308 has gone sub. It was designed to duplicate the trajectory of the .300 Win Mag without rearranging the shooter's spine. It succeeded and the military took note. Go to a long range shooting match that doesn't require 5.56 or .308 and you will see plenty of 6.5s. Go to the Bass Pro ammo section and you might find about as many 6.5 CM SKUs as you will .308. It's not just another fad or designer cartridge and it has already taken a chunk of the .308's market share. The 6.5 CM is here to stay.
I have to agree on all counts. I have been a big fan of the 6.5mm and see no downside to it's performance. FWIW when JC Garand developed the M1, the cartridge was initially a 7mm. From Wiki:
QuoteIn early 1928, both the infantry and cavalry boards ran trials with the .276 Pedersen T1 rifle, calling it "highly promising"[20] (despite its use of waxed ammunition,[21]shared by the Thompson).[22] On 13 August 1928, a semiautomatic rifle board (SRB) carried out joint Army, Navy, and Marine Corps trials between the .30 Thompson, both cavalry and infantry versions of the T1 Pedersen, "M1924" Garand, and .256 Bang, and on 21 September, the board reported no clear winner. The .30 Garand, however, was dropped in favor of the .276.[23]
Further tests by the SRB in July 1929, which included rifle designs by Browning, Colt–Browning, Garand, Holek, Pedersen, Rheinmetall, Thompson, and an incomplete one by White,[nb 2] led to a recommendation that work on the (dropped) .30 gas-operated Garand be resumed, and a T1E1 was ordered 14 November 1929.
Twenty gas-operated .276 T3E2 Garands were made and competed with T1 Pedersen rifles in early 1931. The .276 Garand was the clear winner of these trials. The .30 caliber Garand was also tested, in the form of a single T1E1, but was withdrawn with a cracked bolt on 9 October 1931. A 4 January 1932 meeting recommended adoption of the .276 caliber and production of approximately 125 T3E2s. Meanwhile, Garand redesigned his bolt and his improved T1E2 rifle was retested. The day after the successful conclusion of this test, Army Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur personally disapproved any caliber change, in part because there were extensive existing stocks of .30 M1 ball ammunition.[24] On 25 February 1932, Adjutant General John B. Shuman, speaking for the Secretary of War, ordered work on the rifles and ammunition in .276 caliber cease immediately and completely, and all resources be directed toward identification and correction of deficiencies in the Garand .30 caliber.[22]:111
Had MacArthur not insisted on keeping the .30 caliber; we might be arguing "how many angels can dance on the head of pin" regarding 7mm vs 6.5mm. Differences are slim at best. Not the case between 6.5 and .30 cal/300WM. The 6.5mm CM is vastly superior in most comparisons.
Regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
On 4/26/2020 at 6:04 PM, Capbyrd said:
If LPVO’s had been popular in Cooper’s day, would he have accepted them for his scout rifle concept? One of his reasons for the forward mounted optic was to facilitate the use of stripper clips for fast reloads. The common use of detachable box mags now negates that need. He also wanted to avoid scope eye. And that may be the hang up that he couldn’t get past. But the ability to use a true 1x as a red dot but also with the most current batch be able to turn up to a 10 power scope might just change his mind. Oh, and he loved both eyes open so that goes along with the red dot too!
Let me first say, that my response is not only based on the things I have learned from Jeff Cooper's books and articles; but on my own practical application of field craft over the last 40 years or so. I began before I ever read a word of Cooper's. I embraced his idea's because my own triumphs and failures in the field, mirrored what I began to read in his penned experiences and ideas. In other words, Col. Cooper validated that I was moving in the right direction. So, ......
...... I think he would have seriously considered them and may have concluded a few have merit. But, as long as weight and excessive magnification were not a issue. I'm not convinced he would embrace the current crop of red dot and holograph sights as a whole. The reason for a forward mounted fixed, low powered scope are multiple and varied.. Stripper clip use is one that is brought up frequently; but, was never a condition for a proper scout. The primary reason(s) for the forward mounted scout rifle scope are:
1. The scope is far enough forward that it does not obstruct your wider view of what is down range and to your periphery. There are reasons why we have sniper "teams". The shooter and spotter. The spotter keeps a wide field of view while the shooter is looking thru the narrow scope FOV. The spotter has to alert the shooter to abort or take the shot, depending on changing conditions around them. The shooter cannot always see what's evolving because his view is physically blocked by the scope. The scout is a singular entity and must fulfill both roles.
2. The forward scope readily accommodates the use of "both eyes open"; enhancing reason number 1.
3. A fixed power scope, forward or conventionally mounted, is inherently brighter, less complicated, lighter, and less prone to operator error than variable counter parts.
4. The forward mounted scope makes the rifle balance, and easier to grasp and carry in hand; while traversing extremely difficult terrain. This can not be understated. After reading most of Coopers commentaries regarding the general purpose rifle and it's evolution to the scout rifle, it becomes very apparent he places more value on the "handiness" element than any other. From my own personal experience this is unequivocally true. A rifle with a conventional, receiver mounted scope, is awkward in hand and difficult to manage. Particularly as the day lengthens, it only adds additional fatigue to the hands and arm as you are constantly switching it back and forth. I have never had that problem with my scout rifles. They are easy to grasp at the "balance" point, using the off hand. Arm and hand fatigue are rarely a problem by the end of the day. This is very important when you are by yourself and rationing food and water stocks. Increased work over the course of the day(no mater what form) requires a corresponding increase in caloric intake and hydration. Anything that can be done to mitigate the crescendo, is worth the effort. Your rifles, in hand ergonomics, is worth a critical assessment. Field craft 101.
5. The uncomplicated nature of a simple, forward, low mounted, low powered fixed magnification scope; does not impact practical accuracy, even at ranges beyond 200 yds. In fact, it enhances ones ability, provided good marksmanship skills are utilized. Ultimately it's not about the scope, but the rifleman's ability to make accurate, singular hits.
If the red dot gives you the ability to embrace all five of these; then by all means use it. I personally do not see the need on a scout rifle; CQB rifle, yes. I am pragmatic by nature and generally regard two principles that guide me with personal safety and field craft. KISS and "If it ain't broke don't fix it".
Best Regards
Rod
Edited for grammar/punctuation and additional clarity with regard to reason no. 4.
-
1
-
-
As an addendum to my earlier post(s) I am including scans of a article written by Jeff Cooper in a 1984 periodical, "The Gun Digest". It tracks nicely with my observations and experience. It is also telling of Cooper's flexibility in regard to what actually makes a "scout" rifle and it's purpose. A point also needs to be made regarding cartridge selection. At the time of this article, the 6.5-08(260 Remington) was being developed as a "wildcat" cartridge and was not commercially available. The 6.5 Creedmore wasn't even a glint in it's progenitors eye. These two have come into their own and are widely available; more so than the .243 and 7mm-08. They would be right up the Colonel's alley. Here is his article.
If you have not been living under a rock the last several days, and witnessed the violence being perpetrated on our american society. You might see that, Jeff Cooper, in 1984 "resurrected" the Scout philosophy to fit the times. He saw this coming, and wanted American patriots and riflemen to be prepared. He chose his words very carefully; as should we. I mentioned his book "The Art of the Rifle", Cooper wrote and published the book before he developed the scout rifle concept; the perfection of the "general purpose rifle" discussed in the book. The current print editions include a last chapter on the Scout Rifle Concept. This, for your consumption and enlightenment.
Patriotic Regards
Rod
-
5
-
-
50 minutes ago, Henry347 said:
The barrel was touching the stock right where the sling swivel stud was. Had about a 1in section that had to be ground down. The paper will slide all the way to the receiver now with no contact. Got a 3-9X40 Vortex coming for it in the mail and we'll see if it improved. Thanks for everybody's input, I've done what I could just gotta wait on the scope now.
Good catch! Your RM7 chambered in 7mm-08 should be punching one hole groups at 50 yds! At 100-200yds you should expect groups around +/- 1". Thats if you are shooting from a bench rest. I do not have a rest so my 6.5x55 4 shot groups at 100yds are 1-1.5"(usually one flyer) At 200 yds they spread a little more; 2-2.5". I fatigue easily; I know, I'm a wuss. This using a 1.5x Burris scout scope. Floating your barrel as you have done and the 3-9x scope will tighten your groups considerably. As previously mentioned, letting your barrel cool between shots is also good advice. Breath and trigger control are paramount when not using a rest, and don't be in a hurry; take your time. I'm anxious to hear of your results. Aim small, hit small!
Best regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
The simpler the better for me; Streamlight Stylus Pro 100 lumens, EDC for general outdoor activities and work; Pelican 2360 200 lumens for around the house, and back up tactical EDC. Surefire Tactician E2T-MV 400 lumens. My "go to" EDC tactical light; best light I have ever owned, bar none. I have about 20 other "Tactical" lights I keep in a case for my carry permit students to play with. Some are older Surefire 6P halogens, and most are chinese crapola; examples of what not to buy. One of them is a light my wife bought for me as a Christmas stocking stuffer. She asked later if I liked the light; I said "I love it; I use it in every class as an example of what not to buy". Got the "stink eye" and a punch in the arm. LOL
Regards
Rod
-
Check the barrel inlet in the stock to be sure it's not putting uneven pressure on the barrel. To check, cut a 2" strip of notebook paper, loop it under the barrel in front of the fore end. Attempt to slide the paper between the barrel and channel. If it won't slide up the channel you have contact points that may effect your accuracy. It could be the wood itself; or over the years dirt and oil can pack down in the channel causing problems. Easy fix is to remove the barreled receiver from the stock and first clean; then sand the high spots using a short wooden dowel and a medium grit sand paper. Don't be too aggressive, but slowly clear the inlet so that at least 1/2 to 2/3's of the barrel is free floating and the NB paper slides easily between the barrel and the stock. Done this many times with my bolt guns and can make a big difference with the thinner tapered barrels. Best of luck
Regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
Jeez, I remember when we thought a 60 lumen halogen was a blaster!
-
Let's dig a little deeper into semi vs bolt action and cartridge selection. It has been proposed that there are semi-auto actions capable of meeting Coopers Scout rifle concept. As much as I would like to see a modern semi land squarely in the middle of the Scout definition; sadly there are still none capable. The first hurdle is weight. Once they are shortened to the 1 meter length and the receivers are robust enough to handle a intermediate cartridge, sighted and slung; they "ALL" are pigs weighing in at the 9 lb. range. Most bolt guns; struggle to get below 7.7 lbs, much less the nirvana of 6.6 lbs; sighted and slung.
Below, is my unmolested 1952 Tula SKS, it weighs in at 9lbs; sighted and slung. I can shed the bayonet; add a ghost ring aperture and possibly get it close to 8 lbs; but I'm still handicapped by the 7.62x39 round which is 4 moa(on a good day) at 200 yards. That doesn't imply 7.62x39 can't be accurate, it just means it dose not meet the 2 moa criteria. The same can be said for the AKM (later variant of the AK47). The AK47 weighed in at a porky 9.5 lbs; the AKM at roughly 8 lbs. The AKM and it's variants have potential to make the upper end of weight (7.7 lbs); but it is still plagued by the 4 moa cartridge; and you will not have a telescopic sight
The next semi is my AR-15; as you can see below I have it in Scout configuration. Sighted and slung, as pictured, it weighs a "porky" 8.3 lbs; 7.75 lbs. without the Burris scout scope. It also uses 5.56x45, which is highly accurate and a sub 1 moa round at 200 yds. Unfortunately, it's not capable of effectively incapacitating a 450 lb gorilla at 200 yds. Some AR's are capable of making weight; but the round is not up to the mission.
Some may argue that there are many intermediate cartridges used in Eugene Stoners AR platform. This is true; however, they all are too portly and have no chance of making weight. The same can be said for all semi auto battle rifles utilizing a intermediate cartridge. EDIT: There appear to be some AR "type" rifles that seem to be sniffing the sub 8 lb range. The problem I see with the some of these "piston" rifles is their failure rates. Eugene Stoners direct impingement gas system is tried and true and has stood the test of time. There are many advocates for a piston driven AR but I am not one of them. They are prone to catastrophic failure and are not suited for "burst or full auto" rates of fire. Now we get into why Cooper was so adamant regarding a bolt gun. The best word to sum up his philosophy would be "conservation". Make your shot count as a rifleman; one shot, one kill.
The next rifle pictured is my M1 Garand. It has no chance of ever making Scout rifle weight(10.5 lbs). The cartridge however, is 30-06. In a bolt action rifle it is a 2 moa round; however the long action handicaps the the weight criteria. I've seen it done; but at a cost most of us would not be willing to pay.
Another common bolt action rifle many attempt to convert to Scout rifle status is the Enfield in .303. The rifle is certainly capable once lightened and trimmed to 1 meter length. The .303 is handicapped due to it's 3 moa at 200 yds. That being said it has a storied history of being a dangerous game cartridge, and certainly up to the task. There are some Enfields that have been converted to 7.62x51(.308). These rifles were referred to as "Jungle carbines". They make capable Scout's but are still plagued by weight. Few have ever been trimmed enough to get below 8 lbs.
Below is one of my M96 Scout rifles. It is a Swedish Mauser chambered in 6.5x55. It is a 1 moa cartridge and can easily make weight( 7.7 lbs) if utilizing a lighter stock. Mine, sighted and slung as pictured, weighs 7.8 lbs.. My other M96 Scout weighs just at 8lbs. The M96 utilizes a intermediate cartridge on what is considered a medium receiver bolt action rifle. They are excellent starting points for building a fine Scout rifle. The 6.5x55 cartridge is a intermediate cartridge that is not based on the .308 family that Cooper preferred. It is however, an acceptable alternative. I do not generally stray too far from the Scout concept's 308 family of cartridges, but there are some exceptions. The 6.5 Creedmore is another example. It is an excellent cartridge that nearly every rifle maker world wide, offers several chamberings. It may possibly become the most versatile cartridge ever manufactured; and could supplant the .308 as king some day. JMHO
The last rifle is my Ruger scout. It is my only Scout rifle that made weight right out of the box. That turned to fubar once I added the scout scope. LOL. I have neither the funds nor desire to fight it at this point. It's chambered in .308 and checks most of the boxes in the Scout Concept. 7.62x51(.308) is a 2 moa round and by far is the most popular intermediate cartridge world wide. Cooper was prophetic. The .308 family of cartridges, IMHO dosen't really have a dog in the bunch. The most popular, not in any particular order and not all inclusive:
.243(6mm) sub moa @ 200 yds
.260 Remington(6.5mm) sub moa @ 200 yds; arguably; the flattest shooting, most accurate intermediate/long range cartridge in the .308 family
7mm-08 1 moa(+/-) @ 200 yds; pretty darn close to the .260 but not quite there.
.308(7.62x51) 2 moa @ 200 yds; the standard by which all of it's siblings are measured. Cooper was indeed brilliant.
EDIT: This will be my last edit. After reading my post again, I thought it prudent to mention that Cooper was not opposed to riflemen utilizing various aspects of the Scout concept on other platforms. He referred to these as "pseudo-scouts". He owned and was quite fond of some of his pseudo's and even admired some lever action attempts. Lever actions and semi-autos can be viable scout type rifles, and should not be completely discounted. They can most certainly be legitimate examples of a pseudo Scout.
So, as I see it, there are good options for building a legitimate Scout rifle. Long, medium and short action bolt rifles to start; but sadly, no semi auto's can make the list. Cartridges should stay in the intermediate range of the .308 family or similar ballistic equivalents i.e. 6.5mm CM, 6.5x55 Swede etc. Long action cartridges that have potential would include, but not be limited to: 30-06, .270, 7mm mauser etc. Weight of the action being the only hurdle. These are just thoughts and observations after nearly 2 decades of using the Scout concept in the field. I also highly recommend Jeff Coopers books, "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Tell the Truth"; and "The Art of the Rifle". If you disagree with the Scout concept, and believe it is irrelevant in todays times; read the books and then come back and talk to me. Hope this helps a few of you to sort this out.
Best regards
Rod
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Handsome Rob said:
Same Redhawk, better grips.....
I have always liked the Redhawks, finding a good used one and sending it to Bowen Customs is on my bucket list
Regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, loadedp3at said:
I am wondering how telling about training my horse has to do with the caliber of style of gun people would prefer to have. I did not ask for you to do any homework. Do you know that my horse is use to gun fire and has been shot off of and around? The only thing in the post that relates to the topic is the single action but not caliber. Thanks for the input.
Didn't mean to offend you; if your horse is trained and used to gun fire so be it. The size of the cartridge won't matter to it. I suggested a SA revolver; a lot of SASS riders shoot 38 special loaded down because it's easier to manage while on horse back. If you haven't already, you might try browsing their forum and see what they are shooting specifically. I was a member of SASS many years ago, but never fully embraced it. Best of luck to you.
Regards
Rod
-
11 hours ago, FUJIMO said:
Pistol
Caliber
RevolversI know somewhere on TGO is a thread hashing out the to have or not to have revolvers in 9mm 40 45 acp 10mm etc and the pic I posted is 3 of those. Charter Arms 9mm, 40 S&W, and 45 acp.
The correct terminology is Pistol Cartridge Revolvers. FWIW Most pistols and revolvers can share the same caliber but not the cartridge. Revolvers of course, can shoot pistol cartridges of the same caliber with the correct modifications where semi pistols cannot.
Regards
Rod
-
On 3/23/2020 at 2:03 PM, loadedp3at said:
Just wondering, revolver or semi and what kind of caliber? Just casual trail riding in the mountains mostly. Feel free to be specific... Barrel length and other.
I'm responding to your original post; don't care regarding any responses or advice given prior to my response. First, your horse has to be prepared for the retort of your gun fire, I would suggest you you look into how to train your horse to handle it. There are multiple resources regarding horse and and rodeo, look into it. I have neither the desire or inclination to do your home work. Second, a single action revolver is your best option due to the fail safes afforded by the mechanism. It will protect you you and your steed in the long run. I believe your inquiry is noble and has merit. Taking advantage of your second amendment right is paramount; doing it atop a horse requires a great deal of preparation and training that I cannot give you. Happy trails and best of luck
https://www.fivestarranch.com/training/mounted-shooting/
here is one of many tutorials for your consideration
Best Regards
Rod
-
2
-
-
24 minutes ago, SRST51 said:
This is the gun I need.
When I travel to fish the western US, Ozarks, Cumberlands, Appalatian MTNs and the Gulf Cost; It's strapped to my hip or chest. Big medicine for bear, cougar, wolves, coyotes, gators, sharks and aggressive bipeds. I hand load, so the Boarshead is just at the lower edge of 454 Casull pressure and velocity.
Humble Regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
I posted a article many years ago, based on the lattitude Col. Cooper left in his definition of what constituted a "scout rifle". Here are two links, one on scoutrifle.org which is now a "sticky" and the other on my blog.
Close inspection of Col. Coopers Scout Rifle Definition....scoutrifle.org
Close Inspection of Col. Coopers Scout Rifle Definition...libertytreeblogs.blogspot.com
The following is a copy and paste of my blog; don't worry "moderators" I get no financial compensation from the blog. I haven't posted in a long while, but that will change in the near future and I will not be using it for profit, just my way of giving back and moving it forward. The scoutrifle.org thread has a lot of responses that are good reading and will help clarify where Col. Cooper would ultimately land on the subject of red dot's and other long eye relief optics. I personally think that all are within the definition of what a "scout rifle" should be.
I currently have three scout's; two chambered in 6.5x55 and one in .308. All use various Burris scopes; two using older 1.5x scout scopes and the other using a 2.0x handgun scope. At the time I built my first scout rifles there wasn't much available in IER and LER scopes; so I made do and am very happy with the combinations. They are pictured below.
Best Regards
Rod
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" -
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Close Inspection of Jeff Coopers Scout Rifle Definition
The dogma and misinterpretation surrounding the definition of the Scout rifle has bothered me for quite some time. So, I felt I needed to give my thoughts and observations regarding the scout concept and how I interpret Coopers beloved rifle. But first, let me toss a few comments out on the "guru" himself.Jeff Cooper spent his life developing shooters into marksmen. Whether it was a pistol or rifle, Mr. Cooper was dedicated to improving the craft and those who practice it. The "general purpose" or "practical rifle" was but one aspect and he defined it as this:"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." Col. Jeff Cooper " To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth"Mr. Cooper was not interested in developing your skills for any narrow purpose such as long range, target, tactical, varmint, etc. His efforts were concentrated on developing shooters who could cleanly handle themselves in "all" situations. This definition was the start of a quest to develop the ultimate practical rifle, and the "scout rifle" was, in his mind and others, the perfection of the concept.I never knew or met Mr. Cooper, so I can only summize his intentions when it appeared his dogma regarding the "scout definition" would violate the principle(s) of his "general purpose rifle" concept. I believe the key lies with Coopers very definition of the scout rifle. Cooper, as we all know was a wordsmith of which few were equal; his definition contains both broad and specifics, which would allow the originator to narrowly define and the practitioner to build a rifle suitable for his/her needs. He was brilliant. In practice, he was generally forgiving and gave legitimacy to various forms of the scout rifle. In word, he kept to his dogma, I suppose out of fear the concept would loose relevance; or out of a need to keep the concept as pure as possible. Either way, it has allowed the scout concept to be discovered and applied by future generations of "riflemen". Again, not sure, and just an observation on my part.Now, lets move on to the "Scout Rifle" definition and my observations.Weight-sighted and slung: 3 kilograms (6.6 lb). This has been set as the ideal weight but the maximum has been stated as being 3.5 kilograms (7.7 lb).Surprisingly there is considerable wiggle room in the weight of the rifle. Here the words "set" "ideal" and "stated" are used. The word "set" denotes finality and "ideal" relates to perfection or "to attain". It means the rifle "can" weigh less or it "can" weigh more. But, the "ideal weight" will always be 6.6 lb; it is set. In order to keep the weight from getting to far from the ideal he "states" a maximum weight of 7.7 lb. A statement has no finality. It is merely what a person "says". A statement can be changed for further clarification; and Cooper did just that concerning the weight of his Steyr Scout. Essentially we really do not have a maximum weight by Coopers own definition. I believe this was Coopers way of keeping some level of control so weight would not stray to far from "ideal". Brilliant.So, what we have is a "ideal weight range" of between 6.6 lb - 7.7 lb that allows the rifle to weigh a little more or less outside the "ideal range".Length: one meter (39 inches)This is the only specification of the Scout concept or definition that is set. Not much to discuss here. I find it odd that the length is the spec few give much regard to. Most agree it shouldn't be longer, but if it is a little shorter I see no purists shouting "it ain't a scout". I figure it's because it's harder to make "length" rhyme with "fate".Nominal barrel length: 0.48 meter (19 inches)Cooper uses "nominal" twice in his definition. Nominal is quite possibly the most ambiguous word in the english language. It can be minimal, small, figurative, less than, meaningless, inconsequential, etc. Examples in use would include "The club has a nominal fee for entry"; "The candidate for office is a nominal choice"; "The queen of England is a nominal head of state". You notice Cooper did not use the word "ideal" here. That is because barrel length actually effects performance. I am sure barrel length was a hotly debated topic and I assume that most in the conference followed the 1980's conventional wisdom that barrels should be no less than 20" in length. Cooper was less dogmatic about barrel length; but was more concerned with practical results. I personally believe 19" was a compromise and his choice of "nominal" allows the barrel to be a little shorter or longer than 19" and most cases to err towards longer. Currently we know that shorter barrels do not effect practical results in a defensive rifle. So Cooper was yet brilliant again. 19" is "nominal"Sighting system: Typically a forward and low mounted (ahead of the action opening) long eye relief telescope of between 2x and 3x. Reserve iron sights desirable but not necessary. Iron sights of the ghost ring type, without a scope also qualify, as does a low powered conventional position scope.I am going suggest you read the above carefully. There are a lot of options here. As I understand it, the rifle can have a forward or conventionally mounted scope with or without iron sights. If you choose to have reserve iron sights there is no specification as to what type; you choose. If you do not want a scope on your scout it will qualify for a scout if it uses ghost ring aperture sights. If you use a telescope it should be of low power. Forward mounted scopes typically being 2x to 3x(fixed assumed); traditional mounted scopes of low power(low power is generally considered 1x to 4x fixed) Notice there is no mention of variable in the definition. In the 1980's low powered variables were few in number and Cooper considered a variable scope, because of it's typical high end magnification, a liability for dangerous game and self defense. But things have changed. Low powered variables are pouring into the market as well as red dot, illuminated reticle and holographic sights. By Coopers open ended definition and his use of the word "typically" any of these sight options and in various combinations would qualify on a scout as long as the magnification does not exceed the accepted low range of 1x-4x(this is assumed). Cooper again was brilliant in his choice of words because he knew technology would change and was seeing it evolve shortly before his death.Action: Magazine fed bolt action. Detachable box magazine and or stripper clip charging is desirable but not necessaryNotice, short or long action is not specified; we assume it should be a short action because Cooper preferred them and it was easier to make ideal weight. Detachable box mag's and striper clips are not required, nor is a magazine cut off. We make too many assumptions regarding action. The only requirement is that it be a magazine fed bolt action.Sling: Fast loop-up type, ie Ching or CW style.Many assumptions made here. Just because Cooper gave 2 examples does not mean these are the only choices for a quick loop up style sling. It also doesn't mean a scout rifle has to have 3 sling swivels. A Ching requires 3 but a CW uses 2; one at the forend and one just in front of the magazine well. I personally can think of at least 5 to 6 more "quick loop" style slings that I like much better than the the Ching or CW; and they only require 2 sling mounts. My personal favorites are the Allen slide loop nylon sling and the Hunt sling made of leather. In my opinion they are faster; easily adjustable and won't hang up on brush when carrying the rifle off the shoulder. These two slings were not available when Cooper put the conference together; he just preferred the Ching and CW. Only requirement here is a fast loop style sling and enough sling swivels to make it work.Caliber: Nominally .308 Winchester(7.62x51). Calibers such as 7mm-08 Remington(7x51mm) or .243 Winchester(6x51mm) being considered for frail individuals or where "military" calibers are proscribedThere's that word "nominally" again. Cooper preached the .308 and short action because he felt it was the best overall combination to achieve scout rifle specs and effectiveness. But the definition does not require it. I believe in this case Cooper wanted the smallest most effective family of medium range cartridges available. Nominally here refers to the .308 family. You ask how can you say that? because just after".308 Winchester" he gives two examples in the cartridge family that denote "range". He also uses the phrase "such as" which is the equivalent to "for example". This leaves all cartridges below .243x51 out; and those cartridges above it as viable alternatives for the scout rifle. This would include long action medium range cartridges as well. Cooper knew the .308; although widely distributed thru out the world; is not available every where. Cooper couldn't tell a Swedish or Norwegian citizen that they really can't have a scout rifle because the most plentiful ammo available is either 6.5x55 or 7.62x54. I don't believe we have that right either. So, from Coopers designed choice of ambiguous language, cartridges greater than .243 Win and up are good to go. Even Cooper's own rhetoric did not completely limit the scout to only three cartridges; he preached it in order to keep the purity of the concept; but practically, he changed it when it suited him. I think "Lion Scout" comes to mind.Built in bipod: desirable but not mandatoryEnough said, I'll move on.Accuracy: should be capable of shooting into 2 minutes of angle or less(4") at 200 yards/meters (3 shot groups)Accuracy for the scout is a practical issue and does not require sub moa. Although, most of us desire a rifle more capable of 2 moa just for bragging rights. I just want to remind everyone that tack driving is not required of a scout rifle.Couple of other features or lack of them that are not required of a scout rifle.1. Synthetic stock; you mean it's not in there! yup. Cooper preferred them but it's not required.2. Threaded barrel and flashhider; yes Virginia, there is a santa clause; and there will be a sound suppressor under the tree for your GSR. Cooper had no use for any of them; but by definition they can be included.3. Magazine cut-off; nope still not there.4. The list could get long so I'll stop.I hope many of you will see my point. We tend to be far more dogmatic than we should regarding what does or does not make a scout rifle. I find it interesting that Cooper preached a narrow scout definition while alive; but chose to leave the characteristics of the scout as a concept. I say again, the man was brilliant.
2 comments:
-
-
My recollection is that the forward mounting extended-eye-relief 'scout' scope was initially intended to preserve stripper clip loading. Once just about everyone went over to box magazines, it seemed to stick around because it looked different and 'tacti-cool'. Unfortunately, when people started proclaiming imagined advantages to placing the scope far far away, it muddied the waters on what really was a better solution; an intermediate-eye-relief scope which placed the ocular bell just forward of the bolt handle. The IER scope eliminates bolt handle interference while giving a substantially larger sight picture. Oddly, Cooper used a Noske IER scope on his Canadian hunt many years before the Scout era; the pictorial evidence is on the Jeff Cooper website (and, he did it while sporting what appears to be a Boer War British pith helmet, go figure). Anyhow, the scout scope highjacked the term intermediate eye relief, and none of the makers currently offer what I believe to be the better solution. Although Redfield briefly offered the 1-4x IER SHOTGUN Scope; Bob Bell custom mounted on on a 98 Mauser in the 1980's, and wrote a Gun Digest article up praising its qualities; yeah Redfield marketed it as a shotgun scope, no wonder they went tits up.
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Garufa said:
That’s what I thought. A much desired Smith & Wesson.
Yep, it will be a heirloom piece for sure. The Irony is I sold a '86 Colt King Cobra and replaced it with the S&W M-13. I wish I still had the Cobra; who knew the snake guns would go out of production. Honestly having owned both; I much prefer the 13.
-
23 minutes ago, Garufa said:
Is that a 3” 10 or 13?
M-13 3" with a milled front sight(not pinned like later mfg); identical to the FBI issue. Used it qualify for my first TN carry permit back in the 90's. It was my EDC for many years and still gets special duty when I have to dress up coat and tie. My EDC now is a tool( Glock 19); figured I'd better learn to use one since literally half my students bring either a Glock or M&P to class. I have learned to love it due to it's light weight and complete utilitarian nature.
Regards
Rod
-
1
-
-
I was having a hard time getting my pride and joy to post up. Large frame 3" barrel Ruger Vaquero; 45 Colt; Super Blackhawk unflutted cylinder and hammer; custom checkered Ruger black micarta factory grips. Call her the Boarshead. She's a hand cannon made for the trail and when I'm fly fishing.
Regards
Rod
-
4
-
1
-
-
-
4
-
1
-
-
On 5/21/2020 at 11:37 AM, Erik88 said:
I just don't think the data supports that for this particular topic. The issue is that most of the hard right people out protesting are doing it in states where Democrats are in charge. I don't think that's a coincidence. There are plenty of Republican voters who claim to love the constitution but look the other way with the GOP craps on their rights. They care about the 2nd Amendment, and that's about it. The protesters in Michigan were flying Trump flags, while complaining about the very thing he told us to do. Who exactly are they mad at?
A few people on here got pissed at Bill Lee but the truth is that they will all be lining up to vote for him next time.
I don't agree with your assertion that Tennesseans will be lining up to vote for Bill Lee; I didn't vote for him in the primary and held my nose when I pulled the lever in the general. Governors should have only adopted guidelines( which is what Trump did; not sure he anticipated the banana republic response that spewed from the state level) which would have given free men and women in our Republic the option to choose. What he(and other governors) did was abhorrent to anyone who believes in a free Republic, our constitution and bill of rights. He should be removed from office along with every other governor who did the same thing; Republican or Democrat. Only time will tell, but I am certain this will eventually make it's way to the Supreme court, at that point we shall see........
On 5/21/2020 at 10:51 AM, TGO David said:I'd challenge you to re-think the statement to be "They are upset because an elected politician is telling them what to do" and strike the party line out of it. People, in general, are starting to become very tired of elected representatives acting like ordained directors or dictators. It's happening with elected representatives across party lines, but is perhaps more prevalent in the Democrat side of the problem.
agreed
-
Just wanted to introduce myself; New to TGO but not new to firearms. I've been carrying legally in Tennessee for twenty five years. I have been a NRA certified Handgun Instructor for 17 years and a NRA certified Rifle Coach for 11 years. I look forward to being part of this community!
Best Regards
Rod
Remington 870 Magazine Extensions +3 rounds
in Long Guns
Posted
here you go: Carlson's mag extension