Every once in a while I go back to an idea of a general purpose rifle and massage it a little.

I suspect that the reason I keep on coming back to it is that many years ago I read a good number of Colonel Cooper's work and always thought that his idea of a scout rifle was very interesting.

In a nutshell, Cooper's scout was a bolt action rifle of less than 40" long, chambered for 308Win or similar, set up with a scout scope (he seemed to like to use stripper clips and needed access to he action) and a Ching sling.  It was supposed to be capable of hunting animals the size of a cow elk out to 400 yards while weighing in at less than 8lbs.  

Fixed power scout scopes are very light, so that weight was achievable.

While I like scout scopes, conventional LPVOs and MPVOs knock the socks off any scout scope in terms of real world performance, so I am willing to accept a little extra weight.

On top of that, I am a firm believer that all rifles should be suppressed, which adds length.

Then, there is the case or various modern attachments that did not really exist when the good Colonel was refining his concept.  While I do not need a thermal clip-on to be on the gun all the time, I do want the capability of adding one in.

Last consideration is whether to go with a bolt-gun or semi-auto.  

I have been pursuing this "General Purpose Rifle" concept for quite a long time.  That was the reason I bought my original Fix boltgun.  I thought of it as a conceptual reincarnation of the scout idea.
My original Fix started life configured with a 16" 308Win Barrel.  It was light, handy and awesome.  This was the exact configuration except with the full length rail: https://eurooptic.sjv.io/k4EvKx

Then, I succumbed to temptation and swapped that 16" Bartlein barrel for a 24" carbon fiber Proof barrel in the same caliber.  It is still my favourite gun of all I have.  I have taken precision classes with it, hunted with it and shot matches with it, but it is no longer a scout rifle.  The barrel and suppressor together add up to more than 30".  It is not very heavy, but it is also not very short.

For a little while, I had another Fix configured with a 16" barrel and chambered for 8.6BLK.  It is an incredibly versatile cartridge and that was a perfect scout rifle.   I shot a cow elk with it at 338 yards to prove the concept.  

Since it worked really well and I can't leave anything well enough alone, I took it apart when I started shooting matches and rebuilt it as 22" 6.5CM precision rifle that you have seen in many pictures since.
The other idea I had was to see what can be done with a truly short barrel, so I built myself another 8.6BLK Fix (I really like these guns, in case you havn't caught onto that yet) around an 8" barrel I already had.  It is surprisingly capable with supersonic ammo and exceedingly handy.  I have not yet decided whether I am willing to shoot a cow elk at 400 yards with it, but I am taking it on an axis doe hunt in a couple of weeks.

When Cooper first defined his scout concept he was not opposed to semi-auto platforms per se, but had some misgivings on whether they can be made sufficiently accurate and reliable.

Technology keeps getting better though and when Q announced their Boombox semi-auto in 8.6BLK, there was a faint echo of "is this my modern scout rifle?" reverberating in far reaches of my brain.

Compared to the Fix with the same length barrel, the Boom Box is about a pound heavier and does everything very well.  Mine has been perfectly reliable.  Primary Arms PLxC 1.5-12x36 is a perfect match for its general purpose nature.  https://alnk.to/b7D6rbe

Together with the suppressor and a flashlight, the Boombox clocks in at just under 11lbs.  If I drop a thermal clip-on onto it (usually Leica https://eurooptic.sjv.io/PO317X ), it is a bit over 12lbs

It is, however, even more expensive than the Fix.  While Boombox price is comparable or lower than that of other semi-auto rifles of comparable quality (Seekins SP10M, etc https://eurooptic.sjv.io/n4x64A , it is still a lot of money.  As much as I hate to admit it, it is kinda difficult to say with a straight face that a gun carrying a price tag that makes the vast majority of gun enthusiasts' hearts skip a beat is any sort of "General Purpose".  As configured above, it is over $7k (before you add the thermal).

That made me step back for a moment and remember that there are three commercially available scout rifles out there that I happen have pretty good familiarity with.  The least expensive ones that I messed with are from Ruger and Savage.  They have had a few iterations over the years, but you can generally pick one up for somewhere in the $700 to $800 range chambered for a few different cartridges, 308Win and 6.5CM among them.  They work well enough, but they are not what I would call polished.  Still, if price is part of the equation, these are nicely robust and very "general purpose" guns.  I have seen quite a few people use them as truck guns.

I have set up a couple of these for my friends over the years and have no complaints of how well they perform for the money.  I think Mossberg also makes their own variant that is even less expensive, but I have no experience with it.

Neither Savage nor Ruger, however, is the original scout.  Cooper made several prototypes and then teamed up with Steyr to make a commercially available scout rifle.  The first Steyr scout rifle went on sale in the 1990s right around the time I was becoming interested in firearms.  It was far out of reach of a broke college student and then my priorities shifted.  Some longing still remained.

Price-wise, Steyr scout usually clocks in somwhere in the $1600 to $2000 price range.  While not inexpensive, it is closer to the Savage/Ruger/Mossberg than it is to the Fix and the Boombox.  I think I'll go ahead and decree that it then qualifies as a general purpose rifle.

Rather importantly for me, it has a longer top rail than any of the less expensive options offering significant flexibility.  It also has a simple bipod built into the stock and exta magazine storage in the buttstock.  

All of that is nice, but more importantly, Steyr's SBS action and hammer-forged barrel are absolutely world class.

I am planning to take it with me on a hunt in a couple of weeks (I am going for axis deer and bringing three new hunters to hunt hogs on the same property).  I have four rifles to set up and one of them is the Steyr Scout in 6.5CM.  Since I also have a Leupold Mark 5HD 2-10x30 to test, I needed to go sight it in with hunting ammo.  I did not have time to shoot longer shot strings (that thin barrel needs time to cool), but here are three shots at 100yards using Hotline Munitions' 124gr VLR4 ammo https://discreetballistics.com/shop/hotline-munitions-6-5-creedmoor-124gr-hunting/

Three shot groups do not tell the full story of how accurate the rifle really is, but this is an indication that the mechancial accuracy of this gun is rather promising.  At some point, I will explore it more carefully, but for the time being this is plenty for shooting hogs inside of 200 yards.

As configured, this rifle clocks in at 10.2lbs with the optics, suppressor, two empty magazines and an RS1 sling (it is kinda like Ching sling, but better):

While I am testing the Mark 5HD 2-10x30 with CMR-MIL reticle https://alnk.to/4XAA7at this gun will also be a test bed for N-Vision's new clip-on that should be here in a few days.  

I rather like the baby Mark 5 and it is not a bad match to the rifle.  However, I have other long term plans for it since it has enough elevation adjustment for my long range subsonic hobby.  I waited to test the 2-10x30 Mark 5HD for quite a while since I wanted it with the CMR-MIL reticle

It remains to be seen which scope will end up on the Steyr scout, but Element Theos 2-10x42 is probably the front runner at the moment.  That's the right magnification range for the scout and 42mm objective is a good balance of size and low light performance.  

My Steyr Scout is a couple of pounds above Cooper's weight cutoff in exchange for a built-in bipod, suppressor and a significantly more capable optic.  The barrel is 19" and the suppressor adds another five to it.  It is accurate, robust, and sufficiently light for almost everything I do.  While not a budget build, it is also not unreasonable price-wise.  I think that makes it a true general purpose rifle.

Yesterday was the annual charity match at Del Norte range an hour or so from Albuquerque.  We had fairly ridiculous amounts of water falling from the sky in the last few days and all the unpaves roads leading to the range did not take it well.  Still, it stopped rainign for a day so that we could go shoot.

This is a one gun match where you shoot some combination of paper and steel.  Steel plates are a bit further out.  Paper is all close in.  You are scored based on hits and how fast you run the stage.  I am old, fat and slow, so I am terrible at this, but the match is a lot of fun.

It does not help that I have been so focused on precision last couple of years that I have somewhat neglected the fast stuff.  I should really fix that.  There are some two gun matches at Legacy Ranch (an hour in the other direction from Albuquerque) on a fairly regular basis that I should try for practice.

This year, for shits and giggles, I decided to shoot it with an AK-74 which slowed me down even further, but it was definitely fun.

Last year's match was themed after John Wick movies.  This year, it was a Chuck Norris theme.

While some of the shooters are out to win, since it is a charity match, the atmosphere is very laid back and people do funny things here and there.

For example, one gentleman in my squad dressed as a tactical wizard (I think):

Tactical wizard next to a kilt wearing RO was, I thought, a nice scene.

He had a suppressor enclosed by a Monster can on his AR.  The whole thing was a hoot.

Another gentleman insisted on running stages with the bayonet attached to his AR.  One one of the paper targets that was really close, the ROs let hime bayonet it instead of shooting it.  It was a ncie A-Zone stab.

The carbine I brought for this was an AK74 from Palmetto State Armory https://alnk.to/bEnbIaI with AKML handguard from TDI Arms, DFCO grip, Zhukov stock and Primary Arms PLxC SFP 1-8x24 scope in an RS Regulate mount.  If you are looking for a nucelar bright SFP LPVO with a fiber dot, I will go on the record that at current discounted price, this is the best deal I have seen in a while https://alnk.to/88424vv

As shown, this rifle clocked in at 9.3lbs.  It is definitely not a lightweight, but it was not too heavy either.  I put it through several experiments with different stocks and pic rail dust covers that did not work out well enough for my purposes.  MOst annoyingly, the 1913 stock adaptor kept on getting loose, so I finally slapped Magpul's Zhukov stock on it and went back to the normal AK side mount for the scope.  It is not as slick as I wanted it, but it works.  Another experiment that failed was with getting a suppressor on it.  On this AK-74, the muzzle device is threade donto the side block.  It is not straight enough for a suppressor.  I was getting baffle strikes on a 6mm can.  I coule try a growwly oversized can, I suppose, but I decided to leave it along and put the original muzzle device on.  I still maintain that all guns should be suppressed, but they are not all designed to be suppressed.

In principle, if I wanted to shoot more matches, a longer handguard would go a long way toward helping me drive the gun, but I intentionally decided to run everything as if it has an 11" barrel and a correspondingly short handguard.  I think that muscle memory will translate optimally between different platforms I have.

I will be the first to admit that I may have overscoped this AK a little bit, but on the other hand, given that the scope is pretty light, I do not really see a problem.  At this match, the furthest plates were about 300 yards out, so I appreciated being able to zoom in a little, while on 1x with that bright fiber dot, this scope is fast.

For an AK, this gun has a decent ALG trigger, but having spent the last couple  of years with precision rifles and match triggers, it gave me fits.  It was also very hard to get myself out of the "precision" mode.  I could definitely go faster if my head was not getting in the way.  I think I will do some work on that in the next few weeks.  In the grand scheme of things, 5.56 plining ammo is now cheaper than 5.45x39, but I think I should practice this with different platforms.  I still have some AK specific muscle memory, but I was definitely rusty.

With Wolf 60gr Military Classic ammo launching at 2750fps (with 18fps StDev) the rifle shot groups in the 2MOA to 2.5MOA range standing tripod (I almost never shoot off of a bench any more, so I popped a bag on a tripod and shot off of that) which is plenty good enough for this type of a match.  Intrinsic accuracy of the gun did not get in my way.  However, managing the long spongy trigger pull for longer shots and for offhand shots was a little tricky.  Still, it is my own fault that I neglected practicing with my AKs.  

The match was originally supposed to be eight stages.   I was in quad six, so we shot 6, 7, 8, 1, 2 and 3 before we had to stop.  I have a couple of videos that I am going to look through, stitch together and post.

Just as we were about to shoot stage 4, everyone was told to stop and the range went cold.  Apparently, one of the ROs on a different stage was clearing his handgun (ROs were allowed to have handguns) and shot himself in the hand.  I did not witness it, but that is what I was told.  He was taken to the hospital and seems to be doing OK.  However, our day was done.

It is an unfortunate accident and it sounds like it was self-inflicted.  One of the board memebers from the range went and visited him in the hopsital.  He will need surgery.  Someone also mentioned that this is the second time this gentleman shot himself.  I am not sure what to make of that.  I do not know him personally.  We'll see if there are any further repercussions for the range or for the event moving forward.

There was also a night event (for stages shot with night vision), but I could not participate in that one due to various family obligations.  We are in the middle of a Jewish hoiday of sukkot and my wife already made plans for it.

Watching people bring different guns to this match was very interesting.  Some used ARs on longer stages and a PCC on close range stuff.  It never occurred to me to have multiple guns with me.  One gentleman had what looked like a suppressed PS90 SBR.  A couple of peopl had AKs.  I saw a CZ Scorpion and a B&T SBC9.  I am sure there were a few other unusual choices there, but most people were shooting AR-15s of all sorts.

I have some time to figure out what I will bring next year, but a P320 in a Flux Raider chassis could be an interesting option.

It has been raining cats and dogs here which is very unusual for Albuquerque and also very welcome.  

Between travel, weather, Jewish holidays and a new virus the kids brought from school, I have not managed to spend any real time at the range.  That is unfortunate since I have a long queue of stuff to test.

All that sitting in various airport lounges did give me a chance to browse through a couple of forums. That is a mix of amusing, educational and disheartening in roughly equal measures.

One thing that drives me up the wall is when someone makes an ironclad absolutist assessment based on a single experience or a single piece of data without applying any critical thinking to either.  Now, we all have our prejudices, but sometimes it is a good idea to step back from those and recalibrate.

For example, there is a guy on the Hide currently sticking his negative opinion on Leica in every other post based on a bad customer service experience with his older Geovid 3200.com  

I have no idea what happened with his Leica interaction, but the way he describes it sounds a bit fishy. It also does not help that I know who that guy is and take it with a little grain of salt a priori.  There might have been some poetic freedoms taken with his account of events.  On the other hand, it is entirely possible that he called Leica CS and pissed someone off there within the first three sentences with his attitude.  Some years ago, he used to say all sorts of interesting things that he later claimed were influenced by late night and alcohol (he had many interesting things to say about me when he learned that I am Jewish and an immigrant and was stupid enough to say it to people who showed me the screenshots).  Be that as it may, even if he was a royal d!ck to the CS people at Leica, they still should have taken care of him and even if he had a bad experience he should still have enough perspective to understand that there is a reason Leica has been in business this long.

Yet, that is not how the world works.  

On a different topic, Leica Geovid MAX is en route, so I'll have some impressions soon.

That diversion aside, I have seen a good number of threads recently where people were looking for crossover scopes, without quite using the term and unsure how to select one.

I figured I'll use the example of two riflescopes I am looking at currently and offer a few different scenarios of why I would choose one over the other in some situations, but not in others.  This goes far beyond a simple: the glass is better here vs there.

Let's start with the spec table.  The two scopes in question are in the second and third columns:

Vortex Razor Gen3 4-24x44 and Primary Arms PLxC 2.5-20x48.

They are within a couple of ounces of each in terms of weight.

PLxC is an inch shorter.

PLxC has a slightly larger objective.

Razor has significantly more elevation adjustment.

Both have 10mrad per turn adjustment.

Here is a question for you: which one has wider field of view?  That is not a trick question, yet the answer depends on how you define it.

If you are talking about FOV on the same magnification, Razor Gen3 is wider (larger Apparent FOV). 

If you are talking about real FOV on the lowest magnification, then PLxC is a good bit wider since it goes down to 2.5x vs the Vortex' 4x.

Here is a different way to tabulate it:

On the same magnification, Razor Gen3 has about 9.5% wider real and apparent FOV.

However, on the lowest magnification, PLxC has  49% wider real FOV.

In which situations is one preferable to the other?

Vortex Razor Gen3 4-24x44 and Primary Arms PLxC 2.5-20x48