THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM MEDIUM BORE RIFLE FORUM


Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Re: Sako Finnlight?
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
My buddy has the Sako Finnlight in 30-06. It has the 20" barrel and he has mounted a stainless Leupold 2.5-8x in stainless Sako mounts.

He does not reload and just uses the cheap Remington 150 Corelokt factory ammo. It shoots under 1/2" in his gun at 100 yards. Most groups he shoots with this factory load have 3 shots touching at 100 yrds. He is actually a firearms instructor for the LAPD and a pretty good shot with almost any weapon he picks up.

Below is a pig he took this spring on his first "big game" hunt (he mostly hunts birds). We spotted the pig feeding across a small valley. We lasered the pig at 318 yards. Chris used a fallen branch for a solid rest and I told him to hold on the pigs spine. He fired and the pig ran down the hill. A perfect double lung shot.

Here is the result of what the Sako Finnlight can do:



Seems to work for him.

Tim
 
Posts: 1430 | Location: California | Registered: 21 February 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I love both Sako's and Kimbers, my suggestion would be to buy a finnlite for rainy days and a Kimber for sunny days where you can admire the wood.
Finnlite's can shoot pretty well:








- Some of you will note that there was 1 1/2 to 2" of left wind blowing that day...

The 270 with a 20" barrel shoots a little below normal velocity but not bad. For some reason the 300 WSM shoots about 100fps slower than my other 300 WSM's with the same load even with a 24 3/8" barrel (I think the bore may be a little fat).
I think that people who like to shoot with a tight cheek weld will find the Kimber fits them better those who shoot with their head more erect will fit the Sako. Good Luck.......DJ
 
Posts: 3976 | Location: Oklahoma,USA | Registered: 27 February 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I've shot and admired both rifles. I'd go with the Kimber. They are classy, accurate and use a tried and true action, there's really no downside. The Sako, is more expensive, an ok action, and a really weird way of mounting a scope. Both are accurate, so that's a wash. I've seen .22s with better scope mount arrangements than the Sako. My shootin' pal and I have had 2 Sako Finnlights, both are gone, that should tell you something. Sako rings and mounts are far too high, even the lowest ones, and cost $120 for the set. Leupy rings for Sako, mount like .22s, and can slip, and cost $70. I will admit the Sako does feel good, UNTIL you start looking through a scope on it. We've had 3 Kimbers, and still have all of them. They use traditional scope mounts, with no problems with height, and the fit and feel is MUCH better, at least that's the way we both feel about it. I realize, though, that's why they make Ford and Chevys, because we're not all alike, so "you milage may vary".

Good luck in you decision.
 
Posts: 619 | Registered: 14 November 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I can't comment on the Sako because I haven't owned one. I looked at Sako recently when looking for an ultra light rifle, and narrowed it down to a New Ultra Light Arms rifle at $2700, or a Kimber Montana at $865. I now own a beautiful little Kimber. The Kimber kevlar/graphite stock was designed by Malcom Forbes, of New Ultra Light Arms, for Kimber. As stated in an earlier post, it is pillar bedded and free floated. I spoke with a tech at Kimber and he told me that it was reasonable to expect to find a load that would go half MOA. We'll see about that. He also suggested that the trigger could be safely adjusted down to 2lbs, which it has. So far I've not had time to do any real load development with this .243, but I have high hopes for it as an above timberline marmot rifle. If it won't shoot half minute it will go to Pac-Nor for action trueing and a new match barrel. Which ever way you chose you are sure to have a good rifle.
 
Posts: 866 | Location: Western CO | Registered: 19 February 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Bobby'

What,s wrong with the Sako scope mount system? Its absolutely rock solid and foolproof. I have both Sakos and Tikkas and have had the scope in the mounts off several times (for transport) and when refitted them the scope has even returned to the original point of impact. And I have never had the mounts or scope move under recoil.

Also the rings are very strong and come with a synthetic sleeve which protects the scope. I will admit that the low are a little high but then I personally have no problem with that.
 
Posts: 789 | Location: Australia | Registered: 24 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Quote:

Ken Waters in his "Pet Loads" says he can't even get the 7x57 to match the 7-08, although it's close, in modern guns.




I am a big fan of both 7x57's and Ken Waters. I am presuming you are referencing the article Pet Loads Vol 1.
Mr Waters was a very good reloader and I respect his work and writing a lot. That said this article has always puzzled me, I have reread and studied it a lot. Something never jived in my mind. Mr Waters wasn't getting consistant data with several of my reloading manuals, and usually with other calibers he was spot on, so what gives?

First I don't own a chronograph so I have no data to back up my suspicions. I think there were a couple of issues he was experiencing though. In one article he was using old military mausers which had long throats for 160-175 gr bullets, so freebore had some effect when he was shooting the smaller bullets. That doesn't explain the other article where a new Remington 700, and the Ruger #1 were used. He was getting about 70-120 fps more out of the 7mm-08, some of which can be explained in the different barrel lengths on the rifles and a loss 25-35 fps per inch shorter in barrel length is customary. That doesn't explain it all away though and the 7x57 still was not matching the 7mm-08 but the diffence is less than 100 fps when the above is factored in.

I think the problem was his choice of brass, he used Federal and Remington which are soft. The problems he was having was the primer pockets showing pressure signs, and I suscpect that shifting to Winchester brass as a minimum, or Norma brass would have given different results. Norma is a harder brass and I don't think the primer pockets would have expanded like they did when he used the Federal.

One other item could be that the reamers for the US made guns is a little wierd and they aren't like the Europeans are chambering the 7x57, but I would need several rifles and chamber casts to figure that out.

I don't think after reading the article that the 7x57 is quite as effecient on powder burn as the 7mm-08 but that is a different issue. I have often wanted to get on a chrongraph and test out my theories on this, and eventually I will get the time and money together in the same place to get this done, just not anytime soon ( time problem ).

Note: I don't think you can get 280 Rem velocities out of a 7x57 unless a very short barrel was handicaping the 280. In my opinion if you are looking at the most performance from a short barreled 7mm, get a 284 Win. It matches the 280 but the chronograph work was done with 24" barrels on the 280 Rem vrs 22" barrels on the 284 Win. Both are fine cartridges though.

If anyone else has done some work on this I am all ears, as this has bugged me for over 8+ years, the 7x57 with the larger powder capcity should beat the 7mm-08 by 100 fps with all things being equal, and up to 150 fps with some loads. My reloading manuals says this is correct but I have admitably no proof.
 
Posts: 1486 | Location: Idaho | Registered: 28 May 2004Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia