They're probably a good gun. I've had a few, none of which ever really endeared themselves to me. Beretta/Sako has handled the blow-ups all wrong, which only reinforces my indifference to them. The ones I had shot ok, but not any better than some of the Rugers, Remingtons and Winchesters I have a keep. Now with all the hubbub over the blow ups, I'll probably steer way clear of them from now on. I really don't think they're worth the extra bucks. The Finnlights I had, had crummy synthetic stocks, (but so do a lot of others), and weren't worth $1200 compared to what you can get for a lot less. Scope mounts suck and are expensive, and way too high, in position. Sako needs to go with direct receiver mounting rings like Ruger.
I guess for the bottom line, there's a lot out there for a lot less.

I bought my 75 stainless synthetic for $699.00 brand new. Mounts are high in position compared to other brands(medium vs. medium). They have a chart which shows the which one you should buy for which scope. Most people assume if the buy a 50mm scope the need a high mount. A 50mm scope will work with a low(not medium but low) sako mount. I use a medium with my 50mm. 40mm owners......they have an extra low. I've had optilocks on my sako and after riding in a gun mount on the roof of a truck over ROUGH terrain for countless hours, they have never moved. I can still put 3 shots though the same hole @ 100. Thats in .300 ultra mag. Just my two cents.

They are, and I don't know why anyone would bash them, other than the ones that BLEW UP. I know several people that actually own one and have never heard a complaint.