What do you think?

[jason41987]

yes jimbob.. at range.. if anyone hunts, they know at range means anything beyond 50 yards, and an AK will be a decent hunting rifle out to about 300, no responsible hunter tries to take game beyond that range even with bolt actions... and the key word here is responsible

 

[L_Killkenny]

and an AK will be a decent hunting rifle out to about 300, no responsible hunter tries to take game beyond that range even with bolt actions...

There's a couple loads of BS there if I've ever heard it. The Ak's good to 300 yards but it's irresponsible to use a better, more accurate gun with a better cartridge beyond that? Someone needs to take a Rifles 101 class (and stop posting useless false info until they do).

The Scout rifle? A **** poor compromise. Wouldn't own one and if one was given to me it would get sold of in about 2 heartbeats.

 

[jimbob86]

an AK will be a decent hunting rifle out to about 300,

Not.

1-Even assuming your 123 gr SP* bullet could be driven to 2300 f/sec out of that short barrel, it'd drop more than 10 inches between 250 and 300 yards: you'd better be pretty exact with your range estimation, or you'll miss completely, or worse, wound the animal.

2- By 300 yards (again assuming you start with a muzzle velocity of 2300) you round is nearing 500 ft/lbs of energy - not a lot, and possibly not enough to make that bullet expand....

3- Placement, as they say, is everything: What kind of group can you get with an AK? I've heard 3-4 MOA is the norm. 4 MOA is roughly a 12 inch circle at 300 yards. If you put the gun in a mechanical rest, and there was no wind or shooter error, you still would have a rather weak hit outside the heart/lung area of a whitetail 25% of the time with a 4MOA gun! And with the short sight radius and crude sights of the AK, there's plenty of room for shooter error. Don't talk to me about responsible hunting.....

 

[jimbob86]

if anyone hunts, they know at range means anything beyond 50 yards,

I'll take a WAG and say my 16 y.o. daughter has killed more deer "at range" than jason..... though she probably would be bit confused about that term....

I know hunting is not a contest, but I just can't stand it when someone makes ridiculous claims to new hunters...... and suggesting that an AK-47 is a good hunting rifle for deer and elk to 300 yards is about as ridiculous a statement I have ever seen on the web.

..... and in the same breath calling folks who take deer at distances exceeding 300 yards "irresponsible".

 

[jimbob86]

no one ever debates its effectiveness for hunting

I think that is up for debate- I'm your huckleberry!

The Scout rifle? A **** poor compromise.

I'll take that debate, too.

It is a compromise, yes, and by design: Anything "cabable of doing a great many things well" must be a compromise. But it is just about perfect for 90% of whitetail hunting. Fast handling, good for everything in the lower 48 .... What is not to like, besides that short barrel (non-issue for it's intended use)?

 

[hooligan1]

"no responsible hunter would try to take game beyond that range even with bolt actions" hell the key word is what planet are you from? If I get a decent chance at a shot like that I sure am going to take it. I'm pretty responsible... Can't understand why you think that past 300 yds is irresponsible to take a shot if it presents itself,,,, I hope the Varmit hunting groups here don't hear talk like that..... There are alot of Responsible hunters that Cleanly take game out to 500 yds!!! let alone past 300 yds.....???

Yer ,misinformation knows no bounds.

 

[L_Killkenny]

It is a compromise, yes, and by design: Anything "cabable of doing a great many things well" must be a compromise.

Back at ya brother

In your quote ya had to go on and add the word "well" at the end didn't ya. It doesn't do a great many things "well". As a matter of fact is doesn't do much more if anything better or even as good as a basic bolt action rifle. Yes, the short barrel is a plus, I love carbines, but it's far from a new concept for shortish barreled bolt action rifles have been around since long before the over priced scouts came out. The Gunsite Scout rifle makes no more sense than the tactical leverguns mossberg is putting out today. Maybe even less sense. Yes, those are the same leverguns getting trashed by about everyone who has ever shot a gun. Yet, Cooper comes out with the scout concept and is declared a genius. Bunch of hogwash. Heck even the Scout rifle is not much more than a modern knock off of the Enfield Jungle Carbine. Far from original buy 30 or 40 years. Fact is that if you want/need a rifle even the slightest bit tactical or defence oriented than a semi is the only way to go. On a compromise gun semi autos make much more serviceable field guns than any bolt action in a defence situation.

 

[jimbob86]

Coopers Scout concept will do for anything that someone without a Government sponsored supply chain needs done.

Show me a semi-auto in a major caliber that is at once fast handling and less than 9 pounds loaded.

While the Ruger version is overly heavy- the synthetic stock certainly could be made lighter- it pretty well fits Cooper's requirements.

 

[L_Killkenny]

Coopers Scout concept will do for anything that someone without a Government sponsored supply chain needs done.

In theory so will a .410 single shot but you won't catch me dead with that as my primary. Getting things done and getting them done well are 2 different things.

Show me a semi-auto in a major caliber that is at once fast handling and less than 9 pounds loaded.

While the Ruger version is overly heavy- the synthetic stock certainly could be made lighter-

Mini-30, SKS, to name a couple. Hey, you did say caliber. But tell you what I'll do, I'll show a whole bunch of carbine length bolt action rifles for less money and even less weight since you're willin to sacrifice weight for quick follow up shots.

it pretty well fits Cooper's requirements.

Cooper requirements were lame and outdated from the word go. He might of been the greatest rifle guru ever to set foot on this earth but the Scouts a ****. Don't worry, I'll forgive him. Betting even John Moses himself had a **** or 2 in his life. Just the internet wasn't around to claim those ****s were the greatest thing since sliced bread.

But to sum things up if you really think you need anything even remotely defence oriented you need something better than a bolt action (personally, I don't want or need any rifle remotely defence oriented, another reason to dislike the Scout). If you need a lightweight field gun than you don't need box magazines, scout scopes, flash hiders and a heftier price tag.

 

[jimbob86]

In theory so will a .410 single shot but you won't catch me dead with that as my primary. Getting things done and getting them done well are 2 different things.

Now you are being ridiculous- a .410 won't kill a 1,000 pound animal out to 300 meters.....

Mini-30, SKS, to name a couple.

I guess you missed the "major" before caliber .... and I would not rely on either of those to take down an elk out to 300, either.

Tell you what I'll do, I'll show a whole bunch of carbine length bolt action rifles for less money and even less weight since you're willin to sacrifice weight for quick follow up shots.

Quick follow up shots- that's up to the user. None that you can show me will be able to be quicklly reloaded.

If you don't like the concept, fine ..... but you can't argue that Ruger's GSR comes pretty close to meeting Cooper's requirements, or that if you had to have one gun to do it all in the lower 48, that would be the closest to it, in a production rifle.

Calling the Scout concept names does not change anything..... they work.

 

[Stuohn]

I might like the idea of the AK if the 308 AR didnt exist. I mean if I was to buy one it would be an Arsenal for what @ $900-$1000 (havent priced in awhile).
Well for @ $100 more I could get a dpms 308 (ar10). Im not knocking the 7.62x39 round but, is there anything it does better than the 308?

As for the Ruger Gunsite, I was just thinking back when I had my Benelli Supernova (GRS and comfortech stock) but thinking I wanted more range than a shotgun. Then started thinking add a bolt gun to reach out if needed. Then I saw the RGS and kinda thought best of both worlds in one gun but, after adding it up. I decided it would be more cost effective to buy the two guns which puts me in the AR range.

Now, Im down to thinking either 308 or 5.56 AR is going to be it.
So I pretty much have to figure out if I want more range or more time shooting.

 

[hooligan1]

Whoa there killkenny, John Moses Browning didn't develop any a******?????
If so list'em and I'll tell you why they're great!

 

[L_Killkenny]

I guess you missed the "major" before caliber .... and I would not rely on either of those to take down an elk out to 300, either.

No, I didn't miss the "major". You said "caliber" and for all practical purposes the 7.62 x 39 and the .308 are the same "caliber".

but you can't argue that Ruger's GSR comes pretty close to meeting Cooper's requirements,

You're right on that one. But..............

or that if you had to have one gun to do it all in the lower 48, that would be the closest to it, in a production rifle.

I can argue this all day long. A scout rifle is so far down my list of "the one" guns to not even register. I built my "one rifle", a 18.5" Savage 110, and it will do anything I need a rifle to do better than the scout. Weighs less, looks better, handier, etc etc. Heck, even a pig like the AR10 is a better all around gun. So much better that we can almost forgive it's weight.

Tell us one thing a GSR can do better except for faster reloads (a non issue with a bolt action) than something like a Remington M7 or a Hawkeye Compact?

 

[jimbob86]

Show me a semi-auto in a major caliber that is at once fast handling and less than 9 pounds loaded.

anythingx39 an intermediate round, no matter the bore diameter.... it's about power, and the x39 case does not have the capacity.

a 18.5" Savage 110

Why the 110 and not the 10? Or is one of the things you need done is have a huge fireball of wasted/unburned powder?

A Savage 10, like this one here with a 20 inch barrel?:

http://www.steyrscout.org/savscout.htm

Unfortunately, no longer in production ..... and the scope mount was a bit flimsy, from what I've read.

You may be able get one done with a conventional scope mount more to your liking, from their custom shop- contact info at the link.

 

[L_Killkenny]

Why the 110 and not the 10? Or is one of the things you need done is have a huge fireball of wasted/unburned powder?

You keep insisting on using the word caliber when what you really mean is cartridge . Then you insinuate that action length has anything to do with cartridge selection. Why a 110? Because it's what I had already. My 110 predates production of the 10. Already in .22-250, a short action cartridge. Converted it to .243, another short action cartridge. I could of just as easily converted it to a .308. Guess what? Another short action cartridge. For the record many many many 110's were chambered in short action cartridges since the only thing Savage made for years was, guess what, the long action 110. Anyway, the difference between a 10 and a 110 has absolutely nothing to do with cartridge efficiency, fireballs or how much unburned powder remains. Chamber, barrels, all the same.

 

[jimbob86]

Tell us one thing a GSR can do better except for faster reloads (a non issue with a bolt action) than something like a Remington M7 or a Hawkeye Compact?

How is faster reloads a non-issue with a bolt action? Were you to use it for something like 3-Gun Heavy Metal, it would matter. Besides that, the OP stated:

So that leaves me with @ $1300 for a long gun for bad times/learning/hunting.

I would think that "bad times" infers fighting, in which case rapid reloads would be a good thing....

Remember- if you only have one gun..... not an AR-15 for this, an AK for that, a bolt gun in 30-06 for something else, an AR-10 for the other thing..... The OP has 1300 bucks for gun, glass and ammo. Entirely possible with the Ruger. Maybe with enough left over to buy a reloading kit.

Aside from more rapid reloads, the Ruger scout comes with iron sights out of the box, which new production Model 7's and Ruger compacts do not..... the Compact Magnum does have irons, but the sight radius is shorter, and the sights are not as robust ....

 

[jimbob86]

You keep insisting on using the word caliber when what you really mean is cartridge

You are quibbling over semantics now...... you know the 7.62x39 is an intermediate round.

You are right- I assumed a long action cartridge when you stated "Savage 110" ..... but if you could have whatever you wanted, why would you want a long action with a short cartridge in it (other than sentimental reasons)? Longer bolt throw and a couple ounces more weight ..... where's the upside?

 

[Basement-Gunsmith-Z]

Show me a semi-auto in a major caliber that is at once fast handling and less than 9 pounds loaded.

Around 7.25 pounds with a 20 rd pmag.

Now, find me a bolt action that weights 7.25 pounds loaded with a 20 round pmag But on a serious note you have a very valid point.

 

[L_Killkenny]

You just made my point for me. Maybe faster reloads are important, maybe they aren't, but when it comes down to it if faster reloads are needed than so are faster follow up shots. Thus a HD/SD bolt action rifle with faster reloads is like putting lipstick on a pig. Let alone when we get into crap like the flash hider, scout scopes, etc.

If you have $1300 you don't settle for one gun let alone and over priced compromise.

Not many, if any guns, strike a good balance or compromise. It's just a fact. Until someone comes up with a PC looking, high cap, super accurate, durable, 7lbs semi auto rifle a good gun for lugging around the mountains after goats isn't gonna make a very good SD/HD rifle. Likewise, a FAL, AR , AK, M14 etc isn't gonna make a very good goat gun either. Yes, the GSR will go to the mountains and get the job done but how well, when compared to the competition, will it do in a fire fight? No amount of bells and whistles can turn a bolt action into a comparable fighting gun. So if you want a hunting bolt action rifle with some bells and whistles that gives it a very very very slight edge for SD/HD it may be the gun for you. But if someone is thinkin it's even a poor replacement for a battle or so called assault rifle their gonna be sadly mistaken.

Having your cake and eating it too is a rare thing in life. If you think you have it you'd better be lining up a shrink cause life gonna toss you on your head someday.

 

[jimbob86]

Basement-

I followed your link, and clicked on the specs tab .....no numbers .... but even taking your word for it that loaded with 1/2 a pound of ammo, and with sights installed, it's less than 7.25 pounds..... the OP had a $1300 budget for fun, glass and ammo ....... $3495 without sights of any kind, let alone glass and mounts, not to mention ammo, kinda blows that all to hell- You might as well recommend a phased pulse rifle in the 40 Gigawatt range ..... that'd nearly be as available to the OP as your carbon fiber and titanium sci-fi gun .....

L_K- We get it, you don't like the scout scope concept, or the GSR ..... others do..... don't buy it.

I like the flash hider, as it protects the crown (and threads for a can when I get one.....)

If you can't learn to cycle a bolt gun efficiently ..... that's your issue, I guess ..... there's plenty of material available out there on how to do so.

As for

will it do in a fire fight?

nobody without a Quartermaster Dept. can afford to get into a suppressive fire type of firefight---- certainly not more than once. You'll shoot yourself defenseless in short order. To that end, making your shots count is a MUST. Bolt guns are conducive to that.