In a recent thread regarding a comparison of Sako to another rifle, I realized how little I knew about Sako dovetail mounting options. The few Sakos I've owned over the years came with scopes or I sold them before needing to mount anything.

Since I'm possibly in the market for a new Sako 85, I'd appreciate seeing what options are available, and their advantages and disadvantages. It'll likely be a blue steel Hunter in 7mm-08, and I prefer low mounts, but don't limit my education to just that.

Thanks.

Jaywalker: Check out the Sako Collector Club forum. With a little searching, some good info there. I know the Sako Optilock rings tend to be considerably higher than other rings and very expensive.

Know that Sako used several different tapers on their dovetails. It drives the mount manufacurers nuts. The old Sako ring system was overly complex, and they had a tendency to stay put whe the rifle went south, meaning they fell off.

I like the Warne mounts for Sako, but not the Leupolds. If Talley makes a Sako mount, I'm sure they'd be excellent.

quote:

Originally posted by Brice:
Know that Sako used several different tapers on their dovetails. It drives the mount manufacurers nuts. The old Sako ring system was overly complex, and they had a tendency to stay put whe the rifle went south, meaning they fell off.

I like the Warne mounts for Sako, but not the Leupolds. If Talley makes a Sako mount, I'm sure they'd be excellent.

Brice: I don't know how to put this that it won't come out seemingly insulting, but you're just wrong in virtually every way.

1. The Sako dovetail dimensions are universal to all Sakos from "then" until "now". All mounts for the dovetails fit all dovetails. The exception is that the dovetails on the longer actions are longer than the dovetails on the shorter actions (duh!), so some bases are specific to one or the other. I have seen bases that were mis-sized for the Sako dovetails, but that is a problem with the base manufacturer, not with the rifle manufacturer.

2. The "old" Sako ring system, like nearly all ring systems for the Sako dovetails, is simpler than most in that it needs no separate base. Properly installed, they can only get tighter with use, not looser (that's why the dovetails TAPER, duh!)

3. One of the few mounts made for Sakos that was actually insufficient was the aluminum Warne. They would wedge apart under recoil. The steel Warne works okay.

I currently own some two dozen Sakos, my first having been bought in 1965. I still have the 1965 model, and its original Redfield mounts have never moved since the day I mounted them, some 42+ years ago. I have Sakos mounted with the origninal Sako rings, Redfields (and the similar Burris), Millett, and Leupold. ALL work very nicely and are rock-solid when properly installed.

Of all of the mounts, the trim, light, and simple Leupold Ringmount is my favorite. Unsophisticated observers think that they are delicate simply because they are made with a minimum of metal. Fourteen years of service on a .375 H&H, hunting from New Mexico to Canada speaks otherwise. The Leupold ringmount has proven itself to be tough and dependable.

The obsolete Weaver mount looks as if it might actually work, but it is abysmally ugly and has no place on a Sako. The current Sako factory Optilock mount is unnecessarily heavy, unnecessarily tall for most hunting scopes, and unnecessarily expensive when better alternatives are available.

Bottom line: The Sako dovetail mounting system is one of the strongest and most reliable ever designed for a centerfire rifle. A number of excellent mounts are made for it. As with any scope mount, poor mounting brings poor results. Unfortunately, many "sporting goods" stores relegate scope mounting to junior employees who understand little about what they are doing. Either mount your scope yourself (if you are competent), or seek out someone who is compentent to do this relatively simple but critical task for you.

Jaywalker,
I have used the "old Style" Sako ringmounts on 3 Sakos I own, Sako 75, Sako 85 and an L57 from 1959, and they work great. The Optilock style is higher than the old style, so you may have to get the X-Low Optilock one piece ringmounts. I have used the X-Low with room to spare with a 40mm objective scope!

The old styles can be found on an E-bay and Gunbroker and are pricey ($75+). Here's a pic
of the mediums on a Sako L57 with a Leupold 3X9X40 VX-II.



Good Luck... Rob

First off, Stonecreek has done a good job of summarizing

I also have a large number of Sako's, over 20.
Talley does make a dovetail base and like all Talley stuff, it is excellent. One issue with Talley rings (for any base!) is that they have a tendency to mark scopes, some of mine have, some haven't. They stand up to recoil as good or better than any system available. They do not have windage adjustment, which I prefer.

The Burris and the one set of Redfields I tried do. This is OK, but I just don't like that system.
The Burris bases are just a tad to long for the rear dovetail on short action Sako's, which I also don't like. I have seen one set of Burris rings shear off of the bases on a 7 STW M-75.

In terms of mounting the Talley's I have found that if you just mount Talley bases, you can just tap them forward onto the dovetails, and they are always square, which I think has a lot to do with the quality of the Sako action as well as the Talley bases and rings. I have NEVER had a Sako action that was out of square, when putting Talley bases on, and then mounting the scope in the rings, the windage has always been within a few clicks of center--elevation has varied a good bit depending on a lot of factors obviously.

I agree with Stonecreeks thoughts on Optiloks. They do have the nylon inserts, like Burris signature rings, which protect your scope from any marring, and I believe help them hold up to heavy recoil too....As someone said, in EXTRA LOWS, a 44 mm Objective will clear with no issues, meaning they are taller than necessary often. The finish on Optiloks will obviously match the finish on current Sako rifles spot on.

I actually agree with Stonecreek on the Leupold ringmounts, but I know of a couple of folks that have experienced slippage with them, and these are damn knowledgeable experienced riflemen, who I KNOW knew how to install these rings. One of them is a fellow who posts here as DJPaintless.

The Leupold QD system is pretty good, but it doesn't have a whole lot more 'meat' for the levers to engage on the rings than the front ring on a Burris system, although I know of no one who has had an issue with the Leupold QD's. They offer an extra low which is actually pretty low, it will just barely allow a 44 mm Objective to clear on a long action with factory barrel, or a SM action with factory contour barrel. The rear base is just a frog hair longer than the rear dovetail on a short action, but it doesn't overhang the dovetail like a Burris will. I have had good luck with the couplle of sets of Leupy QD's I've used--as well as the one set of Leupold 'Ringmounts' which are on a Finnlite .270

I have used the Warne rings without incident, both the older milled steel ones, and the newer sintered steel ones. I don't like the new sintered ones. They have been weeded out, all but one set, and replaced with Talley's.

I've seen one set of Conetrol's, and they looked nice. I tried to order several sets from Conetrol, and they were literally so ridiculously brutal (read retarded) to deal with, that I finally through in the towel. I have heard 2 guys that have had them, say they were nice, but very complicated--they are also very expensive.

My ultimate set of rings and bases would be Talley's with nylon/plastic inserts like Optiloks or Burris Signatures!! Maybe I can take a set of 30 mm rings and rig something up!

Thanks.

Do any of the aftermarket setups have set screws that mar the finish?

Is there any advantage to the windage adjustment capability on the Optiliks? Do they line up square?

Jaywalker, the Talley bases actually have 'set' screw that screw down vertically onto the top of the dovetails. The can make a small mark on the surface of the dovetails, the screw are 6x32's I think. I actually have several sets of bases that I didn't use the sets screw to secure, if you tap the Talley bases up good and snug, they will only get tighter with firing of your rifle, I've got some done like that in big banging rigs, and some lightweights (like a 223) and none of them have ever moved at all.

Almost all other non Optil-lok bases I know of, have 'pinch' style systems where one side of the base is loose and tightens down and pinches the dovetail. Warnes are kind of a Hybrid, they are one piece setups (integral base and ring) symetrically split vertical rings where the bases pinch down on the dovetail from above. I guess --technically-- using the 'side-pinch' style rings to adjust windage, which many do, would mean the bases have been slightly misaligned from dead square to compensate for windage is a desire of some folks--not me--but despite that small differential, I would say that the optiloks, and others of that operational design, are square--or square enough

I prefer the always dead centered Talleys, despite the fact that their rings are known for ocassionally marring scopes, and the base set screws can put a small 'ding' on your dovetail tops--never a factor to me.

Thanks. I have Talleys on other rifles, but have never much cared for vertically-split rings. They're difficult to square up the crosshairs when mounting. I may try the Leupold ringmounts first, then the Leupold QDs, knowing that there's an effective backup in the Talleys. I appreciate it.

quote:

Do any of the aftermarket setups have set screws that mar the finish?

The Redfield bases originally came with a set screw that dug into the finely checkered top surfaces of the dovetails. Redfield eventually dropped the set screw when they figured out that if you properly install the dovetail bases by tapping them firmly forward into place, they ain't comin' off by themselves, escpecially after absorbing a few rounds of recoil. I've broken a sweat a number of times in removing Redfield bases from Sako dovetails. I'm sure that the same thing is true of the Tally's, although I've never used any.

However, insofar as marring the dovetails, I think that's kinda academic. I have a 1965 Finnbear which I installed the Redfield bases on as a teenager, foolishly screwing the set screws down nice and tight. I'm sure that they marred the dovetail surfaces, but after 43 years I've don't really know since they've never needed to be taken off.

It's kinda like being under-equipped in the, ah, "organ" department; hardly anybody will ever find out -- except for the "buyer", for whom the news will be too late !

How do you tap them into place? I'm trying to get a picture of the metal-to-metal contact - is the width determined by machined metal of the base or do you set these things to a width with a screw then tap? And how do you actually tap them? I presume you tap the base portion rather than the ring itself, but is it with something like a sight drifting tool?

quote:

Originally posted by Jaywalker:
Thanks.

Do any of the aftermarket setups have set screws that mar the finish?

Is there any advantage to the windage adjustment capability on the Optiliks? Do they line up square?

I use Talley's on just about everything BUT Sako's. They do have set screws that if you tighten them will mar the cross hatching on the dovetails.
I like the Optilocks best on Sako's for several reasons though they do have a couple disadvantages. The disadvantages are that they are a little higher than most like, A 50mm objective will fit in Lows. They aren't that light, aren't cheap and the screw heads need a little extra care taken with them.
The advantages of the Optilocks IMHO outweigh the disadvantages. They perfectly match the Sako finish. The inserts prevent scope ring marks. They are windage adjustable. They don't have to be hammered on and can be taken on and off with little loss of zero - something that can't be done with other types of rings. They don't slip since they have a recoil stop, and don't need a few shots to "take a set".
I had 2 sets of Leupold rings one on a 300 Weatherby and the other on a 375 H&H, both slipped. I use a certified calibrated torque wrench on scope rings so I know 100% sure they were properly tightened. Others haven't had this problem, maybe they were using lighter scopes - I just switched to Optilocks and never had another problem. I wouldn't use Leupold rings on a Sako for anything larger than 22 caliber.
So none of them are perfect. I think Optilocks are the best overall. I can understand why lots of people like Talley's on them (I'm one of the largest Talley Dealers in my State), I just think that on dovetails the Optilocks offer more advantages..............................DJ

quote:

Originally posted by Jaywalker:
How do you tap them into place? I'm trying to get a picture of the metal-to-metal contact - is the width determined by machined metal of the base or do you set these things to a width with a screw then tap? And how do you actually tap them? I presume you tap the base portion rather than the ring itself, but is it with something like a sight drifting tool?

For Redfield-type bases: If the base is equipped with set screws, throw them away before you start. Slide the base as far forward on the dovetail as it will go -- the Redfield bases are designed to work ONLY in the extreme forward position. Trying to place them further rearward won't work in any form or fashion. Place a small block of hardwood against the rear portion of the BASE ONLY (without rings attached). Tap the base forward using a light hammer of any description to bump the hardwood block. Be as aggessive as you wish, so long as you don't miss the block with your hammer swing and hit something you don't want to. Once you've tapped the bases firmly into place you can mount the rings as you would on any Redfield-type base. To remove, simply place the wood block in the front side of the bases and tap them off. This can take some significant pressure once they have been in place for a while.

quote:

I like the Optilocks best on Sako's for several reasons though they do have a couple disadvantages. The disadvantages are that they are a little higher than most like, A 50mm objective will fit in Lows. They aren't that light, aren't cheap and the screw heads need a little extra care taken with them.

DJ: I think we pretty much agree on the Optilocks, but I just can't abide a mount so tall that it clears a 50mm objective when I need to mount my Leupold VX-III 1.5-5 with a straight tube. Even if it weren't so aesthetically displeasing, when my eye aligned with the scope's sight picture, my head would be bobbing around in the air with my cheek nowhere close to touching the cheek piece.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
.............. when my eye aligned with the scope's sight picture, my head would be bobbing around in the air with my cheek nowhere close to touching the cheek piece.

That would depend on you shooting stance and your physical confirmation. For some people they will come to the eye well also depending on which style stock Monte Carlo/Classic....................DJ