Something New That This Ruger Fanboy Already Dislikes: 5.56 Scout Rifle

My Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle in .308, has it should be.

There's no denying I am a big fan of Ruger. I've own several Ruger rifles most of my life. They have been proven, reliable and rugged performers for me, both on the range and in the woods. I am a Ruger fanboy for sure.

I am also a nearly lifelong student of Jeff Cooper. His four rules if gun safety were hammered into my mind at an early age. I've always enjoyed his writings. I've lost count how many times I've re-read The Art of the Rifle and To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth. And taking a class at the famed Gunsite school he founded is on my bucket list.

So of course we Ruger teamed up with Gunsite to make the Scout Rifle a few years back, that rifle instantly became a must have for me. As I've written here before (and will write more about in the future) earlier this summer I finally got a Scout Rifle of my own and it is a favorite of mine.

Now this morning, I see this at the Shooting Times website:

First Look: Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle .223 Rem. / 5.56 NATO

This really made my head spin. With the late Cooper's dislike of 5.56 and other intermediate rifle cartridges, I was really surprised this has Gunsite's name on it. Besides Cooper's opinion on the round itself a 5.56 Scout Rifle doesn't seem like a good fit to me anyway. The whole premise of a Scout Rifle is a small, lightweight, handy rifle that "can do it all well." A bolt action in 5.56 can't do that.

Time Out for a Side Track for Caliber Talk & the Scout Rifle Concept

The reason why the US and other militaries switched from .308 Winchester / 7.62 NATO to .223 Remington / 5.56 NATO is (basically) for two reasons. One: as troops started to be given select fire shoulder fire rifles (M14's FAL's, etc.) they found the 7.62 NATO was not that great for the average troop to fire rapidly and still be somewhat accurate. The 5.56 was found to be more controllable is rapid fire and still deadly at close and moderate ranges. Two: since the round was smaller, more rounds could be carried by troops. Which comes in handy since they tend to shoot more of it (one of the things Cooper didn't like).

To sum up, military speaking, 7.62 NATO is great for belt feed machine guns and bolt action or semi auto long range shooting; and 5.56 NATO is better for individual shoulder mounted select fire rifles and carbines.

This is where Cooper's Scout Rifle concept comes in. It's the general purpose rifle that could fill all rifle roles (short to long range shooting) an individual soldier may face well. Not the best choice for each specific task, but one that could do well.

As the name implies, perfect rifle for a scout. Someone who is out in the field for extended periods of time with little or no support, who may encounter the enemy at close or long ranges. A lightweight fast handling rifle that is both functional at short ranges and has the power and accuracy to hit man sized targets at extended ranges would be a useful tool for the classic scout.

Back to the Subject

Now on today's modern battlefield, the role of the classic scout has greatly been diminished, but there is a civilian market for Cooper's scout rifle concept with outdoorsman and hunters.

The Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle chambered in .308 is an ideal weapon for the Whitetail hunter of the Northwoods and just about the perfect pack rifle for the mountains or brush. If you were a "one gun man" it would fill the roles of a range toy, home defender and tool to put meat on the table.

A .223 version is not a great option in my opinion. Of course it would be fun to shoot, but not much of a tool for the hunter. Some find .223 is marginal even at close range for deer, while many don't think it's up to the task at all. Forget about larger game like bear or elk that .308 would handle along with game taking typically at moderate to long ranges like mule deer. A if a varmint hunter is going to use a .223 bolt action, they will most likely use a model with a longer, heavier barrel.

I really don't see a use for a .223 Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle for anything more than a range toy or maybe coyote hunting. And there are already plenty of options for that in .223. Most in a semi-automatic form.

I can't see a big interest from tactical shooter either, considering it's a bolt gun. A large caliber bolt action carbine, like the original .308 version would interest more than a few weekend run & gun warriors, but I don't see a bolt action .223 cutting it for them. At least not in numbers large enough to make it worth Ruger's time producing.

To wrap it all up, my opinion is very simple.
Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle in .308 / 7.62 NATO: awesome, awesome little rifle.
Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle in .223 / 5.56 NATO: dumb move by Ruger & Gunsite.

If they wanted to offer this rifle in another caliber, the logical choice should have been .243 Winchester. Same action as the .308, just a different barrel for the necked down .243 round that has the .308 as it's parent cartridge.

What do you think about this new offering by Ruger?
Please comment below or join the conversation at the free West Marshland Forum at the below link:
Something New That This Ruger Fanboy Already Dislikes: 5.56 Scout Rifle