Beyond the Scout Rifle

 

Is it Time to Rethink the General Purpose Rifle?

In 1984, Jeff Cooper wrote that the "purpose of a rifle is to allow the rifleman to strike a decisive blow to the limit of his vision."  He then proceeded to define the "limit of vision" as "the greatest distance at which 20-20 eyes, unaided, can clearly discern the vital zone of the animal engaged."

 

That was his criteria when he set about developing the Scout Rifle concept.  Using that idea is how we ended up with many of the features on the Scout and that goes a long way toward explaining why the scout scope was selected.  Unaided 20-20 vision can see a white target board at something approaching 600 yards.  An elk silhouetted against the sky might have a clearly visible vital zone at 400;  a deer standing in a pasture at noon, maybe 250 and a sika deer in swampy cover maybe 40 yards.  For those targets, at those ranges, a scout scope works quite well.  Not coincidentally, most real-world hunting takes place inside 300 yards and I’d wager to say that East of the Mississippi, probably inside 150. 

 

A scout rifle with a scout scope also works extremely well in a training range setting where the targets are easily visible to the naked eye.  A shooter who understands the scout scope can pull off some amazing feats with a bolt gun and a scout scope.  The scout concept works well in the right circumstances.

 

But is that truly “general purpose?”  Does that really encompass what we expect a rifle to do?  It surely did in the 1980’s but does it still?

 

In the last 10 years, all the energy of the firearms industry has moved toward long range shooting.  The barrels, stocks, optics, mounting systems, gear and accessories, cartridges, bullets and most importantly, the training has advanced by leaps and bounds.  Competition followed this trend.  Everybody, it seems is focused upon developing a better understanding of how to get a bullet on target at longer ranges that we ever imagined.

 

In the not-too-distant past, the 1000 yard shot was viewed as unachievable by the common rifleman.  That was the domain of the sniper and the benchrest shooter.  Today, there are countless training classes and competitions that start at 1000 and go on from there. 

 

Long range shooting, however is a specialty skill.  It was so specialized at the time that it was not included in the realm of things Cooper considered important.  Cooper pointed out that specializing is relatively easy.  Define a goal and develop a solution that achieves that specific goal better than anything else.  What is difficult is generalizing.  Meaning, you find a solution that may not be ideal for any one task, but will work acceptably well for many (or most) tasks. 

 

The Big Issue:

The question becomes, what can we learn from the long range community that we can use to make a GP rifle more general in purpose?  How can we take the scout concept and build upon it to achieve a better general purpose rifle?  We don’t want to lose the handiness that makes the scout so attractive.  We don’t want to sacrifice performance at shorter ranges in order to be effective at longer ranges. The idea is to take the accumulated lessons learned from the long range community and adapt what we can to the general purpose rifle.  

I think it can be done but it takes real effort to not fall into the trap of specializing.  Once you start down a rabbit hole of improving one aspect, it is very easy to forget that the goal is a better overall gun and not a better long range rifle.

 

Here is my plan.  It is a multi-part plan and it starts with equipment but doesn’t end there.  It ends with training and competition to prove the plan.  Let’s start with the equipment though.

 

To begin, I start with a Steyr Scout in .308.  The stock is heavily modified from previous projects.  The full description of how to get a lighter weight stock for a Steyr Scout is described here:  The Three Kilo Scout Rifle.  The bottom line to this is to get rid of the factory bipod on the Scout.  It adds 8 ounces, is bulky, non-adjustable, flimsy and folds the wrong way under load.

The next thing is to figure out a better bipod solution.  You can always just drill a hole in front of the front swivel socket and add a conventional sling swivel post and use that for adding a QD bipod from Harris or any other company.  If you retained the metal UIT rail, it is easy to get an adapter like this one:  https://www.amazon.com/Hammers-Swivel-Adapter-Competition-Anschutz/dp/B083XNN7CR

My rifle has one unique feature and that is I shortened it to 16” and threaded the barrel for a suppressor.  I didn’t want to destroy the handling characteristics of the completed package so I wanted to start out as short and light as possible before adding the suppressor. 

 

I can’t understate how important that suppressor is.  For hunting, it allows me to hear the bullet impact without ringing in my ear.  Beyond that though, it reduces the recoil to a much more manageable level.  Shooting an 8 pound .308 for a few groups isn’t a big deal but all day in training will leave a vicious bruise.  The suppressor turns it into a kitten.  

I have two suppressors and recently discovered that one of them has inconsistent effects on accuracy.  The Silencerco Harvester has been consistently accurate and quiet.  I mean bizarrely quiet.  It also has a built-in muzzle brake which seems to work.  It is long, but light.  At almost 9", it is longer than I'd like but it only adds 11 ounces and that is worth it.  Someday, I may spend the money and upgrade to a Thunder Beast 5" but for now, this will do.

 

Finally, we come to the big decision.  The optic. 

 

My goal was not to find the best long range optic.  It was to find an optic that would be capable of long range shooting without sacrificing what I enjoy so much with the GP rifle.  I know from years of experience and several training classes that the low end of magnification needed to be no more than 3 power and preferably a bit less.  In my experience, 2.5X is the sweet spot for anything out to 100 yards for all practical shooting situations. 

 

The top end needed to be close to 10 power.  The US military M24 sniper rifle between 1988 and 2014 wore a Leupold Mark 4 10X scope so I knew that while more is always better for long shots, long range shooting can be done with 10 power magnification. 

 

I was unconcerned about front focal plane versus second focal plane.  Long range shooters have a real need for FFP, just like they need more than 10 power magnification.  But for snap shots on lower power, FFP has the disadvantage of being more difficult to find in the glass.  A properly designed FFP reticle can overcome this to a degree but I never considered it important to have an FFP scope since my top end magnification would be relatively low.

 

Reticle choice is a big consideration.  I wanted something that had both elevation and windage reference marks.  Most hunting scopes have a simple duplex reticle with neither elevation nor windage reference points.  There are several low power variable optics (LPVO) that have elevation but very few that also have windage marks. They often have a BDC reticle which assumes a specific velocity and bullet profile which is never exactly correct.

 

I also wanted a scope that used MRAD, rather than MOA adjustments and marks on the reticle.  The reason for this is training.  Every trainer I’ve looked at says they don’t care.  They can train in either mode.  If you listen to them however, they universally speak in MRADs.  This is especially true when they discuss wind calls.  When I take a class and go out to learn long range shooting, I want to speak the same language as the instructors and other shooters so I settled on MRAD.  This may not be important to others and may be less important than I imagine but that was my thinking.

(Edit on 10/31/22) Upon discussions with a number of knowledgeable people on this, I think I'm too hung up on MOA versus MRAD.  Yes, most of the long range community uses MRAD but either works just fine.  Any instructor can teach either and there are easy ways to work within the "language" of the shooters using MRAD.  

 

Finally, I wanted to be able to dial elevation in the field.  That means target style turrets.  This isn't hyper critical but for training, I think it will make things easier.  (Edit on 10/31/22)  Capped turrets do have the advantage in hunting scenarios and times when you want to set it and forget it.  

(Edit on 11/4/22) There are a number of scopes that fit some or all of this criteria but not as many as I would have thought.  There are plenty of LPVO’s and lots of long range scopes, but not a lot that split the difference.  There are a number of companies that are using Chinese glass which may or may not be good in the long term.  I have a strong preference for second focal plane scopes so that throws out a number of others.  It really came down to a Leupold Mark 3 3-9X40, the Nightforce NXS 2.5-10X42 or the Nightforce SHV 3-10X42. 

 

I started by ordering the Leupold Mark 3.  I like the weight and the features and it cost considerably less than the Nightforce.  It was advertised as having 36 mils of total internal adjustment.  That should have meant 18 up and 18 down.  It turns out it only has 18 total.  That means 9 up and 9 down.  My rifle and scope (using TPS rings) required that I come up by 4 mils to achieve a 100 yard zero, leaving me only 5 mils of upward adjustability. 

 

I called Leupold and they admitted that their web site is in error.  They said it should show 15 mils of total internal adjustment.  I have no idea why mine was 18 but it was.  They made some generous offers on exchanging it with them but they didn’t have anything else that really fit my criteria.  To get a refund, the best way was to send it back to Optics Planet which is what I did.

 

Since I had already mounted the scope, Optics Planet could only offer store credit which I figured was fair and I accepted that with the intent of buying the NXS scope.  I even sold a rifle in order to afford that upgrade but that didn’t work out either.  They are backordered for months on that scope. 

 

That meant I was down to the Nightforce SHV 3-10X42 which turns out to be a better option than I had originally thought.  This scope has MOA adjustments and reticle but I have since been set straight on this.  It really doesn’t matter.  I’m familiar and comfortable with MOA anyway and I have picked up a few ideas on how to translate between mil and MOA well enough that for my non-specialized uses, this is just fine.

 

The SHV uses the exact same glass as the NXS but they cut a number of corners in terms of features.  The illumination doesn’t switch between red and green.  It doesn’t include a power throw lever.  It has a capped turret which lacks a zero stop but does allow for dialing elevation.  It weighs 2 ounces more. 

 

It also costs $600 less which means for the same money, I can afford 400 rounds of match grade ammo and still have money left over.  I’m also experimenting with a DIY zero stop which will be the subject of future articles if it works. 

 

So far, I really like the SHV.  It was advertised as having 90 MOA of internal adjustment. (45 up and 45 down).  I opened the box and spun the dial.  It actually has 104.  I had to use some of that for sighting in but I still have 46 left.  According to my ballistic calculator, I need 43.4 to reach to 1000 yards which is the absolute extreme edge of that I think this could be capable of. 

 

The package weight is a bit more than I’d like.  Including the scope, sling and bipod, it is 9 pounds, 4.5 ounces.  When hunting here in VA, I’ll leave the bipod off but leave the suppressor on and that brings it down to 8 pounds, 7.4 ounces.  For the curious, removing the suppressor lowers the package to 7 pounds, 11 ounces.  It is still light and handy but not really in the range of a true scout.  

 

Training:

 

I had already decided to take a training class from Bang Steel in Wytheville VA at www.bangsteel.com.  They are relatively close to me and their prices are amazing.  Their web site is great at describing their philosophy.  They say they can take a willing student out to 1000 yards with a common hunting rifle.  That’s the attitude I need.  But then I saw that they have an article on their web site that describes exactly what I’ve been discussing here.  They call it the “Machaira” rifle which is a Greek word for a  short sword or large knife.  Here is a copy from their web site:

 

Looks kinda familiar, doesn’t it?  They are looking at exactly the kind of thing I’ve been describing here.  They didn’t approach it from the perspective of a GP rifle but merely a usable hunting rifle that a person might already have in their closet.  I like it a lot.  I’m looking forward to training with these guys in the spring of 2023.  Here's a link to their site:  http://www.bangsteel.com/philosophy....html

 

Competition:

 

There is one last element to this idea.  That is to test it.  Once I have some training and the DOPE on this rifle, I want to see if I can actually put it to use under pressure.  Range shooting and classes can't duplicate the field conditions like a well designed competition can.  There are a LOT of long range shooting competitions around the country but here on the East coast, most are PRS matches which have a reputation for being a bit… gamey.  I don’t think that’s going to be a good fit for me.  Instead, I’ll be looking at either a Guardian or NRL Hunter match that I can travel to.  I know I will not be “competitive” with the long range specialists, but I want to see if I can engage targets with this package.  That’s down the road a bit but it definitely plays into my plans for this “beyond scout” project.

 

Finally:

This is not a long range specialty rifle.  It isn’t even a long range hunting rifle.  It is also not a scout rifle.  It is a general purpose rifle that takes the concept of  GP out to longer ranges… say 800 to 1000 yards perhaps.  It retains many of the features of the scout rifle and pays homage to its roots. 

Remember the goal:  A better general purpose rifle.  It is not a better long range rifle or a better scout rifle.  It is a rifle that can do more things well than anything else in the industry.  

 

As of this writing, it is untested.  I will be updating this as I progress through training and competitions.  I believe the idea has merit.  I hope that the firearm industry notices things like this and Bang Steel’s Machaira concept.  This needs developed.  I believe this could be the future of the GP rifle.

"Not a Sermon" text on Miracles, God's Plan and the Still, Small Voice

 

Miracles, God’s Plan and that Still, Small Voice

 

This is going to be a personal testimonial, but hopefully one that you can relate to and hopefully find some truths that you can apply to your own life.  It is a testimonial of my life but it is scripturally and spiritually based.

 

I was raised in a fundamentalist denomination and my family left that denomination when I was 15 or 16.  I didn’t attend church again until age 39.  I didn’t deny the existence of God, but I knew that the God I was taught about as a child could not be the true God.  There’s a longer story there but that isn’t the point today.

 

I had a number of relationships during that time including a marriage that ended in divorce.  The other relationships were much worse and I seemed to have an ability to make some really bad choices in partners. 

 

In early 2008, I met a woman who didn’t meet any of my preferred characteristics.  Physically, she wasn’t “my type.”  She lived in Spotsylvania which was much too far from my townhouse in Woodbridge than I thought could work for dating.  She was a mother of three kids, including twins who were 9 and a son who was 7 and I had carefully avoided children all my life.  She was not only a Christian, but was the choir director at an Episcopal church.  Overall, there just wasn’t anything there that attracted me, but she had shown interest in me.

 

Something in the back of my mind told me to stop.  That voice said “Steve, you’ve proven that your criteria isn’t healthy.  Maybe you should at least say hello and see what this woman is all about.” 

 

I listened to that voice.  I made contact and quickly discovered just how wrong I had been.  We talked often for a few weeks and finally had our first date on February 14, 2008.  On February 14, 2009, we were married.  In mid-February 2010, I adopted her children.  I became a confirmed Episcopalian and joined the choir.  I found happiness in so many things that I had scrupulously avoided all my life. 

 

On February 12, 2015, two days before our anniversary, she suffered something called Spontaneous Arterial Dissection, also known as the widow maker or the bolt from the blue.  Her coronary artery ruptured with no warning, symptoms or heart disease.  She died while I tried in vain to perform CPR.  It was the most shocking and devastating event in my life. 

 

It was then that I discovered that far too many people don’t understand how to console the grieving.  The most common phrase I heard was “We just never know God’s plan” or “God called his angel home.”  It was as if God had some mysterious plan that I could never know or understand.  God killed my wife and I wasn’t allowed to question that because his plan is divine. 

 

As a side note, if you ever look up advice on how to console the grieving, the number one thing they all say is to NOT use the “God’s plan” phrasing.  God did have a plan and I’ll get to that in a moment, but implying to somebody who just lost a loved on that God planned their death is never constructive.

 

Jeremiah 29:11-14 says “¹¹ For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. ¹² Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. ¹³ You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. ¹⁴ I will be found by you,” declares the Lord,”

 

I adopted a mantra to respond to the “God’s plan” comments.  I realized that the people using that phrase didn’t realize just how damaging it was and I didn’t get mad.  Whenever I heard it, I responded by saying “We live in an imperfect world, in imperfect bodies.  God gave us free will and sometimes, that means horrible things happen.  I don’t think God planned for my wife to die but I do think he planned on how my family moves forward.”

 

So yes, God does have a plan, but that plan is not for harm or calamity.  So what is it? 

 

Jeremiah actually answered that a few verses before this passage.  Chapter 29 verses 4-7 shows that plan.  “ This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says to all those I carried into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon: ⁵ “Build houses and settle down; plant gardens and eat what they produce. ⁶ Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease. ⁷ Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.”

 

Think of the context of this.  Israel, the chosen people of God have been defeated, captured and sent into exile hundreds of miles from their home.  There was no bigger calamity.  I have no idea how many Israelites died during their defeat but I imagine it had to be in the tens of thousands.  That means tens or even hundreds of thousands of widows and orphans and now childless parents were grieving and couldn’t even visit the graves of the deceased.  The men had to be completely humiliated as they realized that they couldn’t defend their nation, their temple or their families from this bitter result. 

 

But now, God was telling them his plan.  His plan was not the calamity that had already happened.  His plan was how they moved forward.  Build, plant, harvest, marry and prosper!  That was his plan.  His plan was how to move on and live a full life after something so devastating.  He was telling them that they had to figure out what the next best thing to do was. 

 

So how does God help us move forward?  This is where I discovered the nature of miracles.  Here’s where we hit some heavy stuff.  In the years preceding my wife’s death, we made a number of decisions.  We didn’t always have clear reasons behind some of those decisions but something told us that there were some things we should do.  That starts with my decision to speak to her in the first place.  The decision to adopt was a weird one as well because it meant that her ex-husband could stop paying child support but also meant that upon her death, the kids would be safe and cared for.  Her ex was not a good man and upon her death, people around us suddenly realized how important that adoption was.  We decided to get life insurance in spite of the financial strain that sometimes meant.  She was 40 and I was 41 when we got those policies and both of us were in good health so it wasn’t like we feared the demise of either of us but a nagging voice in the back of our mind told us it would be a good idea.

 

So what was that voice?  I am absolutely certain that this is exactly what Elijah described as the still, small voice that is the Holy Spirit.  It was not a fire, an earthquake or the wind.  It wasn’t loud.  It was not an order.  It was a suggestion.  We listened to that still, small voice, the whisper that told us how to implement God’s plan.  Following that plan is where the miracles happen. 

 

When my wife died, it all came into focus very quickly.  All those large and many of the small decisions that I had made over the previous several years, suddenly made sense.  Dating her, marrying her, adopting the kids, the life insurance, the crazy number of groups and activities we participated in which made for an enormous support group for me and the kids, the closeness of her family, and even the fact that the last thing she heard before she fell asleep was that I loved her.  All of it meant that there was a future.  A future without regrets.  A future where all of us could grow and prosper in spite of the calamities.  A future where our family is not bitter toward God because we know his plan was not the death. 

 

Her death was the result of living in a sin filled world.  Our lives though, are a gift and our future is the result of many people listening to the spirit and allowing miracles to happen by following God’s plan.

 

Before I finish up, I want to share one more of the miracles surrounding her death.  This one will put the icing on the cake if you’re on the border in believing in miracles.  Three days before she died, we attended a funeral.  She hated open casket funerals.  They freaked her out to see a person she remembered as alive and happy to be laying in a box.  It made her very uncomfortable and we had talked about her desire for cremation before.

 

She looked at the coffin and tugged at my sleeve and whispered, “Don’t you EVER do that to me!  I don’t believe in ghosts but if you do that to me, I’ll find a way to haunt you!”  I chuckled but she wasn’t done.

 

“And use Covenant Funeral homes.  The Mullins are good people but don’t spend any money you don’t need to.  Don’t buy an urn from them.”

 

I looked at her like she was joking.  “How much could an urn cost?  It can’t be that much?”

 

“It doesn’t matter.  You don’t need to spend the money.  Have my dad make an urn.”

 

Now I’m laughing.  “You think your dad will outlive you?”

 

”Of course he will.  My dad’s immortal.”

 

I chuckled and dropped it but three days later, guess who was making an urn?  I have no ideal what prompted her to talk about that at that moment but that became a very important detail in the funeral planning.  It is just one more thing I chalk up to listening to that still, small voice. 

 

This is the beauty of God’s word and his plans.  He does plan for our happiness.  He wants us to move forward.  He wants us to prosper.  If we listen to his plan through the whisper of the Holy Spirit, we’ll see how to make that plan work. 

 

I’ll end with one more miracle.  After her death, I met another wonderful woman.  That woman had been told she could not bear children.  Well, if you know anything about me, it is that by another miracle, we are the parents of beautiful twin daughters.  So yes, I am the father of two sets of twins and I thank God for that every day. 

LPVO and the Scout Rifle

 Low Power Variable Optics (LPVO) are more than just the "new hotness" in the world of firearms.  The development of these versatile optics has been mind boggling.  It has been facilitated by a number of factors including interest by the military, various 3 letter government agencies, and the competitive shooting community.  The results so far have been optics that are rugged, durable, mission flexible and suitable for a wide variety of uses. 

So is it time for the scout rifle community to hop on this bandwagon?  Perhaps, but there are a few things to keep in mind.  The development of these optics was driven by a lot of things that may not have relevance to the scout and there are costs to that.  Let's examine a few trends. 

The "true 1X magnification" of the LPVO -  This means that the magnification range always starts with zero magnification.  This is held to be desirable.  A 1.5-5X scope is considered antiquated because it lacks the ability to see an undistorted view of your target in a close quarters situation. But is that really needed?  If you want a funny conversation, ask for an explanation of why.  Most likely, you'll get a series of beliefs and assumptions but very little in the way of actual experience.  

Many years ago, Cooper noticed that your eye could do some remarkable things.  A scope that is placed 9 to 10 inches from one's eye could have something close to 3 times magnification and the brain could be fooled into accepting this if one keeps both eyes open.  It is a cool trick.  With a genuine scout scope, keep both eyes open and look in the general direction of a target.  With a 2.5 power scope, your brain allows a full 180 degree field of view and doesn't reject the small portion of your vision that includes the magnified area.  It is a seamless field of view with a small portion showing a magnified image.  When a decision to shoot is made, a quick shift in focus to the reticle to confirm sight alignment and press the trigger for a VERY rapid snap shot.  If the scope is far from the eye and only takes up a small portion of one's total vision, there is no need for a 1X scope.  

Now... what happens when the scope isn't 9" from the eye?  What if the scope is 3.5" away and the ocular lens is larger than the typical scout scope?  Will that image size disparity become an issue?  Maybe.  I honestly don't know.  The point here is that "true 1X magnification" isn't an issue on its own.  It may be important, but that has yet to be demonstrated.

Those who have used red dot scopes look at this and argue that the lack of magnification does make it faster.  Red dot scopes are indeed very fast, but that isn't a magnification (or lack thereof) issue.  The benefit of a red dot is that the emitter takes the place of the reticle.  That emitter eliminates parallax effect behind the optic.  Your head doesn't have to be perfectly aligned behind a red dot in order to see where your gun is pointed.  It can be off by quite a bit and still see where the bullet is going to fly.  That isn't the case with a 1X scope.  A 1X scope still has an "eye box" meaning your eye must fall within a pretty tight area in order to see the reticle and therefore, where your rifle is pointed.  A 1X scope is not like a red dot in that regard.

This is not to say that a "true 1X" scope is a bad thing.  It isn't, but it also may not be nearly as critical as many would argue.

Huge magnification range - Right now, one can find 1-6X, 1-8X and even 1-10X scopes.  That's some pretty amazing versatility.  It was not too long ago that the US military snipers were using fixed 10 power scopes so having that much magnification on a relatively compact scope is pretty cool.  In theory, that should extend the range of any rifle because you can only shoot at things you can see and 8 to 10 times magnification will allow a person to see a LONG way.  Again though, this is not a benefit without cost.  Weight is the obvious problem here but not the only one.  Scopes in this adjustment range start at just over 18 ounces and end at just over 2 pounds.  Compare that to the 10 ounces that a Leupold 1.5-5X scope weighs and you see what you're sacrificing.

There is another sacrifice as well.  That is the length of the ocular housing.  For reasons that are beyond me, the ocular housing on the wide ranging variables tends to be much longer than ones with less adjustment range.  The Leupold 1.5-5X has a housing that is 3.08" long.  The Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6X is 3.9", the Razor Gen II-E is 3.6" and the various Trijicon models vary from 3.3" to 3.6".  That complicates scope mounting on a bolt action rifle.  It isn't a big deal on a flat top AR15 platform.  An AR15 stock is such that the scope has to be mounted quite high anyway so adding a forward offset is not a big deal.  Yes, that adds even more weight as well, but at least it can be mounted.  A Vortex on a gun like the Steyr Scout might have issues.  That ocular housing is so long that it may not allow for the shooter to get enough eye relief when behind the gun.  

Front focal plane - Also known as FFP, this is something fairly new for an LPVO.  It is something that the long range shooting community has used for a long time and for good reason.  A brief description of this is that as the power adjustment ring is turned, the reticle magnifies along with the image the shooter sees.  At low power, the reticle and the image are small.  At high power, the reticle is magnified at the same scale as the image.  The benefit is that ranging reticles and mil dots (or marks... whatever) work at any magnification.  That's good, right?  Well... only if you're needing to use the reticle for ranging at 1 power, 3 power, 6 power and 8 power.  On a second focal plane reticle (SFP), the ranging marks are only valid at full magnification.  Think about the realities of that though.  We're not talking about a 5-25 power scope where you need to dial back to perhaps 18 power for most shooting.  We're talking about an absolute high end magnification of 6 to 10 power.  If you're ever shooting at 600 yards, you're not going to dial back to 4 power.  You're going to be at max magnification anyway so what does it matter if the reticle is accurate at 4 power or not?

So what is the downside?  At 1X, your reticle is pretty small.  Didn't you want to use that for CQB ranges?  Isn't that where you want the absolute fastest target acquisition?  A larger reticle would be a big help here.  Besides that, for reasons that are unclear to me, I've been told that SFP scopes are slightly more durable and tend to cost a bit less.  For an LPVO, I don't see the point of a FFP but that seems to be the current trend.

Reticles... lots of reticles - A basic duplex reticle is considered old fashioned and it may be.  There are more reticle designs out there than I can count.  Most will have some sort of ranging system built in.  Some will have a bullet drop compensator in the reticle.  Those BDC reticles assume the shooter is using a common bullet type and shooting close to a pre-determined velocity.  For combat purposes, it really doesn't matter if the actual velocity is off a bit.  When shooting at a man sized target in a military context, a hit is a hit so it only needs to be close.  The other popular type of reticle will have marks to show either mils or MOA distances.  On a SFP scope, these marks will only be valid at the highest magnification setting while a FFP will be valid at all settings.

There are also many reticles that draw your attention for fast target acquisition.  They normally have some sort of circle or a portion of a circle.  Quite often, these are illuminated which is great for low light situations.  It also may help overcome the problem of a FFP at 1 power since the illuminated circle may end up looking like a red dot for very close target encounters.  

So what about applications for a scout rifle?  The first thing to keep in mind that what works for a 3 gun competitor or a soldier may not be the best for you.  The 3 gun shooter needs only hit a steel plate anywhere on the plate.  A soldier doesn't have to hit the sternum of an enemy combatant in order to take them out of the fight.  You however, need to pick the exact right tuft of fur on a game animal in order to take an ethical shot.  Make sure that the reticle you chose is fine enough to accomplish that.  If it is illuminated, has a circle, mil ranging and the rest is secondary to having a precise aiming point.  Chose accordingly.

Target style turrets - This is a cool development.  Older hunting scopes required removal of a cap and then a coin was needed to move the reticle.  Today, exposed turrets are common.  Even ones that have a cap, the adjustments under the cap don't require any tools.  Mil or MOA marks are common on the turret so dialing in for specific ranges is FAR easier than it was in the past.  It used to be that riflemen zeroed their rifle for 200 yards and then figured out hold-overs for ranges beyond 250.  Now, one can zero the rifle for 100 yards, set the turret and then have a DOPE card so the correct elevation can be dialed in.  The only catch is, one must resist the urge to fiddle with the turret.  A locking turret or a cap over the turret will prevent mistakes here.

The other thing to consider is whether to go with MOA or mil markings.  Most guys who were raised on MOA have a hard time adjusting to mils.  It isn't impossible but it is difficult to change one's thinking .  Mils does make more sense and the long range shooting community uses that almost exclusively.  Just make sure the reticle and the turret use the same system.  Some older scopes have mil reticles but MOA turret adjustments and that is obviously silly.

Illuminated reticles - This is a game changing feature in low light.  In most of the United States, hunting hours are from 30 minutes before sunrise until 30 minutes after sunset.  That first and last 15 minutes are tricky without an illuminated reticle.  If one is just making a shot at a silhouette, it isn't so much of a problem but if the shooter really wants to put a precise hit on a specific part of a target, the black of a standard reticle just will not do the trick.  You need light.  

The downside is weight, bulk, complexity and a reliance on batteries and electronics.  Leupold now makes the VX3HD 1.5-5X in two configurations.  One is illuminated and the other is not.  The non-illuminated uses a 1" tube and weighs 10.1 ounces.  The illuminated version weighs 12.5 ounces because it needs a 30mm tube.  That isn't a lot, but it isn't nothing either.  

So what about an LPVO for a scout rifle?  The development of the LPVO over the past few years leaves us in an unusual spot.  These scopes have advanced in ways that did not have the scout platform as its base.  The base is an infantry rifle or a 3 gun competitor's rifle.  That means the features don't always align with the goals of the scout rifleman.  What we have are scopes that are feature rich, versatile, rugged and have much better optical qualities than they ever did.  They also tend to be heavy, have ocular housings that make proper mounting difficult on a bolt gun and may have features that just don't have any benefit for the scout rifle.  

The trick is to figure out which features are important to you.  Figure out what you're likely to ever encounter and use that to make a decision.  For me, true 1X isn't an issue but a locking turret is.  I prefer MOA adjustments and SFP makes more sense.  I value low weight and compactness.  I would want a reticle that has a fine aiming point and would prefer a reticle with known distance hold-over and windage marks.  I would like something that can allow me to be effective from 10 feet out to 800 yards which means probably a  top end of 8 power.  As of right now, nothing exactly matches that but several come close.  

On a final note, I can't help but wonder what would have happened if the scout rifle concept had taken off more than it has.  What if we were the ones driving the innovations in scope technology?  Would we have seen more work to bring the scout scope into this modern age with things like the Leupold VXR Scout?  Imagine that scope with a locking CDS turret and a range finding reticle with a top end magnification of 6 or 8 power.  

My Leupold VX-R Scout with custom Kenton turret

Cliffy's Scopes - Stories and Lesson's Learned

 

The Scopes I’ve Owned

And Stories About Them

Lessons Learned

 

I’ve written extensively about scout scopes over the years so I thought I’d put into writing what my experience is with different scopes.  Some of this is just background and some is a review of various scopes from my experience.  My experience is by no means exhaustive.  Most of it is just trial and error based on what I find in Central Virginia piedmont hunting.  There have been some training classes in the past 6 years but for the most part, this is hunting experience.

 

Leupold M8 2.5X – Nice little scope.  It started off life on a Winchester Model 70 in .308 (the old style with the push feed).  I was looking to have a scoutish type rifle back before it was fashionable.  The rifle was crap but I kept the scope for a number of years.  I used it on various rifles including an FN-FAL and it wasn’t bad on that.  I finally sold it a few years ago.  Nice scope.  It was handy and fast and very light weight.

 

Leupold Vari-X-III 2.5-8X – This scope came on a used rifle I bought in the early 90’s and it was a really good scope.  Very clear, rugged and light.  I sold the rifle and kept the scope for a number of years and finally sold it.  When I sold it, it had a weird speck that appeared at some point.  It was in the glass, next to the reticle.  The guy I sold it to didn’t care because he knew of Leupold’s lifetime warranty and knew they would take care of it.

 

Leupold Mark 4 10X40mm M3 – I had this scope on a Remington heavy barrel that was supposed to be the same configuration as the US military sniper rifle of the time.  Unfortunately, this was a time in my life that I couldn’t find a range longer than 100 yards so I really can’t describe how it performed.  The rifle could produce some astonishing groups at 100 yards but that doesn’t really speak too much to the performance of the scope.

 

Nightforce 5-25X – I had this for a hot second back in the 2007 timeframe.  I mounted it on a Steyr Tactical Elite and again, it was a tack-driver but as with the Mark 4, I never had the opportunity to use it before financial realities forced the sale.

 

Leupold Vari-X-III 1.5-5X – I think I bought this in the late 90’s to put ton a Remington Model 7.  It is a fantastic little scope.  Very crisp and clear and good low light performance.  It is a good match for a light and handy bolt gun.  It currently resides on my wife’s Ruger American .223.  My only complaint is that the eye relief varies too much between the high and low magnification settings.  The difference is so dramatic that it is difficult to mount it properly as the eye relief at 1.5 is just too long. 

 

Burris 2.75X Scout – This was my first scout scope and at the time, the choice was between it and the Leupold 2.5X.  Everything I could find at the time said there was really no difference so I chose the Burris because… well, 2.75 is better than 2.5, right?  I found the scope frustrating and couldn’t explain why until I actually used it side by side with a Leupold 2.5X Scout.  The Burris had a lot of black area visible in the scope around the viewable image.  Where the Leupold had a very thin ring of metal, the Burris had a thick housing and even within the lens, it seemed to have a smaller visible image.  A true scout scope allows your eye to see the unmagnified surrounding area and the magnified image in your dominant eye without requiring you to focus through the scope.  That black ring caused a distraction to my eyes and never allowed it to do what it was intended to do.

 

Leupold M8 2.5X Scout (the first one) – I used this scope pretty extensively in the early 2000’s.  This was before I took any training classes and I didn’t have a place to really train so my use was exclusively in the hunting field.  It got quite a workout.  I loved how fast it was to acquiring targets.  I took deer from 40 out to about 250 yards with it and I want to describe a few situations where it really shined… and where it didn’t.

The longest shot I ever took was 250 yards.  I was hunting with friends and we would “push” a woodlot by having one guy walk through a patch of woods the several of us would be waiting on the other end to cover escape routes.  Because the deer were not pressed hard, they usually didn’t come flying out.  I was on top of a hill when a deer trotted past me down in a valley.  He was headed toward a fence where I knew he was going to pause to jump.  I dropped to a seated position and got looped up in my sling.  As predicted, the deer stopped at that fence in preparation to jump.  With both eyes open, the scout scope showed up in my vision exactly like it was supposed to and I briefly shifted my focus to the reticle and pressed the trigger.  It was a textbook success for the scout concept.

Another time, I was hunting in the snow and was walking along a ridge when a doe broke from cover below me.  She was bounding in the snow about 50 or 60 yards below me.  I didn’t pause and swung the rifle up and used it like I was shooting sporting clays with a shotgun.  I timed my shot so she was at the apex of a leap and she was dead by the time she landed.  Again, the scout scope performed exactly as intended.

Over the years, I learned that I had to stop hunting before the end of legal shooting light.  Unless a deer happened to wander into a field, there was just no way to see them at 15 minutes past sunset if they were in the woods.  Even in a high contrast setting like a deer in a green field, that last 15 minutes of legal light was a challenge.  I had noticed this for some time, but had just filed it away as an annoyance that I could live with.

Then it happened.  I was hunting in the early afternoon and crested a hill where I could look down in a small draw below me.  The draw had tall brown grass, some scrub brush and was littered with small pines.  Distance was 100 to 150 yards depending on where I was looking.  I could see nothing with my naked eye but scanned it with my 8X binoculars.  There was a herd of deer filtering through.  It was a mix of does and fawns and I’m a meat hunter so I was excited.  I sat down and looped into my sling.  I brought the gun up and… nothing.  I couldn’t find them. 

I thought maybe they busted when I sat down so I raised my binos again.  They were still there.  They were oblivious to my presence.  There were at least 8 of them.  Again, I raised my rifle and again, I could not find a single deer.  “You’ve got to be kidding me!” was the though going through my head.  “A scout scope can’t be this bad, can it?”  Well, apparently, it could because in broad daylight, I could not find a single deer in the lens of that 2.5X scout scope.  It was at this point that I decided two things.  1. There is something wrong with the scout scope concept.  2.  I need to find a better solution that doesn’t sacrifice many of the benefits of the scout concept.

 

Leopold Mark 4 MR/T 1.5-5X – This is the scope that I decided upon to replace the scout scope.  This was in 2006 (or thereabouts) and it was the best low power variable that I could find at that time and it is still a pretty good choice.  It has an illuminated reticle but takes a weird battery and has a large appendage on the side of the ocular housing for it.  It has an exposed target turret marked for 63 grain 5.56 ammo and it has ½ MOA clicks.  The reticle is a circle dot crosshair with mil markings.  So yes… a military configured scope with a mix of MOA and mil markings.  This scope completely solved the shortcomings of the scout scope and I used it for several years.  It isn’t as light as the scout scope and it isn’t quite as fast or handy.  It wasn’t bad either and was excellent in low light or with hidden targets.  I successfully used it on deer right to the edge of legal shooting light without any problems.  In the back of my mind, I kept thinking that there had to be a better solution that didn’t give up the advantages of the scout scope but had the benefits of this one.  More to come on that.

 

Leupold VX2 4-12X – I purchased this to go on a heavy barrel Remington Model 700 in .223 Rem.  This was my coyote gun.  It did its job.  Nothing fancy but it worked as intended.  My coyote hunting never really exposed any flaws but I never asked it to do anything crazy.  I’d call it a good value.

 

Leupold VX2 1.5-4X Scout – I’m not sure when this scope came out but I bought mine in 2016.  I was excited because I thought this could be the answer.  This could solve the issues I had with the original fixed power scout scope but give me to versatility of the LPVO.  In all honesty, I wasn’t bad.  It was clearly better than the original scout scope in fading light and I could find game better.  It had a shorter eye relief than the fixed scout scope but still allowed for the open field of view of the scout.  Still though… it just didn’t really shine.  One hunting trip found me sitting in the woods and 3 does were picking their way through the hardwoods toward me.  At about 70 yards, I found that it was difficult to really see them in the lens.  It wasn’t that I couldn’t see them… they were just hard to find in the glass.  I chalked this up to too little magnification.  More on this in a bit.  For reference sake the VX2 Scout has been replaced by the VX Freedom Scout which seems to have the same dimensions as the VX2 Scout.

 

Burris 2-7X Scout – This had to be it.  This had to be the solution to match the versatility of the scout rifle concept… right?  Wrong.  Using this scope finally made me realize what the problem with scout scopes really is.  Yes, this scope is a true scout scope with a 9” eye relief and it is a variable that can be cranked all the way to 7 power.  In that regard, it works.  I found it to be less bright and crisp than the Leupold VX2 Scout and I noted a fair amount of edge distortion (AKA fish bowl effect).  But the real problem was that it still didn’t allow me to see small, camouflaged targets, especially in low light.  I had been mistaken in what the cause of this was.  I had thought that magnification could solve this issue but that really wasn’t it.  The problem was that with an ocular lens so far from the eye, any image in that lens requires fairly high contrast to pick it out.  Magnifying it helps some but then you have issues to losing the subject in the limited field of view.  This is exacerbated by the fact that both the Burris and Leupold VX2 (and the fixed power Leupold Scout for that matter) have fairly small ocular lenses.  A small lens, far from the eye, means finding low contrast target indicators is difficult at best.  That is why the LPVO works so much better for these targets.

 

Leupold VX-R 1.5-5X Scout – This was the solution.  This fixed everything.  The eye relief is between 6 to 7 inches and on the Steyr with the stock spacers removed, it comes right to 6 inches.  The ocular lens is 50% larger than the VX Freedom Scout.  The lenses themselves have much better lens coatings and are clearly of better quality than the other scout scopes.  Being 6” from the eye with high quality glass and being so much larger than the others, it is like a totally different category of optic.  The performance of this scope in low light is nothing short of stunning.  I used it in a Randy Cain Practical Rifle class where he has a low light drill.  Students are lined up at 100 yards from their target stands near dusk.  Students are to pull themselves out when it becomes too dark to identify the targets and place an accurate shot.  With that scope, I was on the line the longest.  Hunting has confirmed just how amazing this thing is in low light.  It really seems that the trick is not so much the magnification, but rather, the fact that the lens is large and closer to the eye which allows me to pick out subtle target indicators.  It is a fantastic optic.

The other thing that is nice about this scope is that it overcomes some of the issues with an LPVO.  An LPVO is a very versatile optic but it suffers some in the way of handiness.  In the real world (as opposed to on a square range), a person can get contorted into all manner of jackass shooting positions.  Quite often, this means one is forced to creep up on the back of the scope.  That can be a bloody problem with a conventionally mounted optic but it is no problem if you start out 6” behind the ocular.  Brimmed caps are another area where an LPVO is often less than handy.  The brim often gets in the way, particularly under recoil.  Again, the longer eye relief of the VX-R Scout makes this a non-issue.  The VX-R Scout has the best of both worlds and is a rare instance of a compromise actually working better. 

Of course, this means that Leupold discontinued it and seems to have no plans for a replacement.

 

Leupold M8 2.5X Scout (second try) – I was signed up for a second time to take Tom Russell’s Scout Rifle class at the Whittington Center in New Mexico.  I decided to run this one with the lightest and most handy package possible.  I stripped down one of my scout rifles to the bare essentials.  I removed the bipod, modified the stock, and shaved every ounce of weight possible.  I installed a Leupold Scout scope and the whole package weighed in at exactly 3 kilos… grail weight!  Running that scope in that class illustrated to me why Col Cooper was so enamored of this package.  It was phenomenal.  It was light and handy and very fast.  I won the overall shootoff at the end.  I earned my Expert rating from Tom.  The thing was just a joy to carry and shoot the whole week.  If all my shooting were on a range like that and the targets were equally visible, it is all I would ever want or need. 

 

Leupold VX-R 1.5-4X Patrol – I have this mounted on an AR15 and it is a really nice optic.  The reticle is easy to pick up for snap shots and it is clear and sturdy for more precise work.  I haven’t put it through its paces enough to say much more than that, but overall, it is a good scope.  I do wish it had a bit more magnification but it is so compact that I am not sure I’d change it.

 

So that’s my scope use resume’.  I might have missed one or two but that’s what I recall.  I know there are plenty of people with more knowledge, training and experience than me.  My brain is funny though.  I really try to examine what works and what doesn’t and why.  It irritates me to no end that I finally found the best and most versatile scope only to have Leupold discontinue it the following year.  It makes it difficult to recommend a scope to others.  The perfect scope doesn’t exist at this point.  LPVO’s are developing nicely with lot’s of real world experience.  The military, gun culture 2.0 and the competitive 3 gun community all have contributed to furthering development of those scopes.  The VX Freedom Scout is probably the best of the scout type scopes but there isn’t a lot of competition.  Apparently Skinner Scopes is developing a variable power scout scope so that will be interesting to look at. 

 

If somebody were to ask me to develop the ultimate general purpose scope, I would hand them the VX-R 1.5-5X Scout and tell them to put a BDC reticle in it and a CDS turret and call it a day.  If somebody at Leupold ever reads this and wants to gain an advocate for life, that is what I would beg them to do.  Considering that they already had this scope on the assembly line at one point leaves me with a glimmer of hope every year when SHOT show rolls around.