Ruger .308 Scout Rifle Released!

[BAC]

$.02 interjection into the discussion:

I'd like to remind the group that not all states allow hunting with a semi-automatic rifle.  In those states an AR is not the answer for someone looking for a one-rifle for everything answer.  If I hunted this would definitely be high up on the list, especially when it becomes available in a left-hand version.

[justbill]

Losing a magazine isn't worth considering simply because the Lee Enfield has proven itself in wartime very successfully. It has a 10 round detachable box magazine. How many soldiers who carried it were killed because they lost their magazine in battle?

Who's to say? Perhaps the soldiers who did lose their magazines were unable to report it to anyone but St. Peter.  Seriously, lets not forget the Lee-Enfield magazine was never intended to be removed from the rifle on a regular basis. L-E magazines were always loaded from stripper clips. Even at that the British soldier was issued a spare that was kept in his pack.* That's a big difference from this Ruger sans clip guide and designed from the start to reload from fresh magazines. 

I've read a fair number of first person British accounts from both world wars. Excluding A Rifleman Went to War (written by a Yank gun enthusiast serving with the Canadians) and With British Snipers to the Reich, the Tommies I've read didn't make much mention of personal arms. Even the latter was somewhat bereft of weapon details compared to similar works by Americans. Couple this with the facts that in wartime there will always be plenty of spares from your logistics train and fallen comrades, I wouldn't take much faith in the fact we don't have a lot of reports of lost L-E magazines.

Contrast this with a lone individual trying to survive some sort of calamity that's forced him into using his Ruger Scout for defense. He can't rely on any kind of a logistics train. What are the chances he'd come across someone with a compatible Accuracy International magazine, let alone be willing to part with it?

* British Enfield Rifles, vol. 2 by Charles Stratton, North Cape Publications, p. 53

[billt]

I'm just not seeing the "losing" of a detachable magazine as a deterrent to this, or any other magazine fed rifle or pistol, of which there are hundreds of different models. No one with any type of survival skill or knowledge would use one without an ample supply of extra magazines. I do not own a single magazine fed rifle or pistol that I don't have several spare magazines for, nor would I. If you can afford the weapon, optics, mounts, along with any and all other gear necessary to support it, a few bucks more for a couple of mags is a worthwhile investment. In short the added ammunition capacity is well worth the small "risk" of losing a magazine. Reward far outweighs risk. At least in this case. The AR-15 / M-16, M-9 as well as the M-14 are all magazine fed weapons. The "losing" of magazines is not, and has never been considered an issue. In combat, or in civilian use. It shouldn't be one in the case of this weapon either.    Bill T.

[tombogan03884]

The majority of failures with firearms using "detachable magazines" stem from the magazine its self, usually dents in the body or damage to the feed lips.
This is not a big deal to a military organization with its huge logistic tail, or even to the civilian shooter who can simply go to the store and buy more.
What about when those options are not available ? If the supply chain has for what ever reason, broken down a fire arm with fewer parts offers less opportunity for something to go wrong. It doesn't even have to be something as drastic as "End of the world". You could be to far from a store, it could be a holiday week end when stores are closed.
Not necessarily "life threatening, but still darned inconvenient.

[seeker_two]

No they are not. There are small differences in case dimensions, so according to SAAMI using 7.62 in a .308 generates excessive pressure and is definitely not recommended.

Other way around...7.62 NATO generates less pressure than .308WIN, so you can use 7.62 NATO in .308WIN rifles with no worries.  


I like the Ruger Scout....and I'll probably save my pennies to get one. I prefer a bolt rifle over a semi-auto for a "survival" situation, and the Scout's features make it a lot more practical and reliable than the semi.

I hope Ruger makes a 77/22 verson of this as a "Training Scout" rifle as well....

[Sponsor]

[PegLeg45]

Pertaining to the .308/7.72 NATO thing, some might find this PDF interesting info:

http://home.comcast.net/~ehorton/The%20Truth%20About%20308%20Win%20and%20762%20NATO.pdf

Conclusions
The pressure difference between the two rounds is insignificant, the real problem is commercial
ammunition has thinner cases that were not designed to shoot in military chambers BUT we do it all the
time anyway and this why you see more case head separations on commercial cases fired in military
chambers.
The M118 special long range round is loaded to 52,000 CUP (all other U.S. 7.62mm are 50,000 CUP)
which would be equal to the pressure levels of commercial ammunition, this means actually there is no
pressure difference between the .308 and 7.62 NATO for the M118 cartridge.
No accurate conversion between copper crusher and true pressure exists, but approximations can be
made. In all the conversions outlined above, pressures are in thousands of PSI (KPSI). Expect errors of
several KPSI, or about 15%, with such formulas. Many factors determine how much the indicated
pressure reading from a crusher misses the true pressure, and the error varies among cartridges and
even among different loads for one cartridge. The conversions might be accurate enough for many
practical purposes.
So, to sum everything up, the pressure difference between the 308 Winchester and the 7.62x51mm
NATO is less than 2,000 PSI which is statistically insignificant. The same pressure variation may be
achieved by firing any rifle on a hot day and on a cold day or by changing brands of primers. It is safe to shoot 308 Winchester in your 7.62x51 rifles (even the Ishapores) and vice versa. Handloaders should be
aware that they should reduce the amount of powder when using military 7.62 NATO cases by about 10-
12% and work up to safe pressures with corresponding velocities.

[fullautovalmet76]

So this discussion really centers around three things:
*Cost of Ruger Scout vs. AR - 10
*Magazine capacity
*Bolt vs. Semi Auto

I went to three sites (RRA, Stag, DPMS) and two of them had any AR 10 offerings for a out-of-the-box rifle (RRA and DPMS). The cheapest I found was $1300 and $1169. The MSRP on the Ruger is $995. Next, is the issue about magazine capacity.

I have to ask what battle are you planning to fight? In my limited opinion, 5 shots should do the trick for most of the situations in which you and I would find ourselves; Ruger gives us 10.

And this is where I have to place some of the blame on the gun media that has pushed, and pushed, and pushed the AR platform to be the "utility rifle" for us all. And one of the things they kept harping on was.....magazine capacity. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind having more bullets, but let's keep things in perspective. The AR was designed for what? Combat- as in military combat. As used in the civilian world it really is a tool that gets the job done where a "lesser" tool will suffice as well. It's like using a 48" walk-behind mower (I have one) to mow your 1/10 acre postage stamp lot.

Finally, the issue about semi auto vs. bolt action. It's really not an issue. If you can shoot, the platform doesn't matter.

Have we finally beat this horse slap to death?

[billt]

"Handloaders should be aware that they should reduce the amount of powder when using military 7.62 NATO cases by about 10-12% and work up to safe pressures with corresponding velocities."

This is the biggest difference shooters who handload should be aware of. For everyone else who shoots factory ammunition there shouldn't be any concern.  Bill T.

[billt]

This is not a big deal to a military organization with its huge logistic tail, or even to the civilian shooter who can simply go to the store and buy more.
What about when those options are not available ?

It all simply comes down to preparedness. The key is to buy more before you NEED them. You either are, or you aren't prepared, it is just that simple regardless of one's needs. Money, food, water, clothing, guns, ammunition, or magazines. Any part of any firearm can break. For example, it is considered good preparedness to keep a spare, complete bolt carrier group on the ready for most any AR-15 rifle, just in case. This will allow the shooter enough parts in the event of a common failure. It is also considered good preparedness to have a large enough supply of ammunition on hand. You cannot depend on anyone to have, give, or sell you anything. Magazines, extractors, firing pins, ammunition, or lubrication. You take into consideration what breaks, along with how often. And the likelihood of any such event happening. You then prepare accordingly. Magazines are included in this loop of supply. If they are not it is the fault of the individual, not the firearm, or what it may or may not require.  Bill T.

[tombogan03884]

"Scout" rifle implies use on the move, Like possibly while "Scouting". The primary use envisioned by previous posters has been hunting, which generally entails a certain amount of movement, at least from vehicle to stand, if not something more. Bearing in mind that most states limit hunting rifles to 5 rounds or less,in which case the magazines are useless, just how much crap do you want to be carrying ?