Jørgen,

The M97-DL rifle is advertised on the S&L website as "a hunting rifle with no equal, the classic appeal." However, there is very little detail on the site as to its design features, nor photos of its design.

Since you were involved with its design, could you tell us more about the action and bolt design, and its precision level. Could you describe the design features for me please. If you could post some pictures it would be great.

I saw the video clip on the site and the barrel seems to be one of its outstanding features being rifle-cut made, which makes for a stress-free barrel. Would these barrels produce .5 MOA out of the box?

Then the trigger - what kind is it and what can you tell us about it.

Would you say it is better than the Sako 85, and if so in what respect in your opinion. This is merely to give me a relative comparison to better judge them, as I know the Sako 85 who is much more common here is Sa than the S&L rifles.

Also which calibers are being offered.

Tanks in anticipation.

Warrior

Warrior, Jorgen does not post a lot here and maybe a PM to him and a link to this thread will get his attention.

I'm fortunate to have met him in person and will attest to his credibility.....Jorgen is a first class man in my eyes......and I'd buy one of his guns sight unseen....but they are not exported to my country. They are also a bit spendy and justly fitting of their finish and features.

I've not seen one in person and look forward to Jorgen's reply....it seems he makes a very fine rifle!

The Sako 85 is touted as the production factory rifle today, an improvement over the model 75. However tose that own a Sako L61R "Finnbear" say they won't trade it for a model 85. Can someone please comment on this.

The Sako L61 was introduced way back in 1961.

Thanks
Warrior

The S&L rifles were/are fairly common here in Canada, especially in BC. I have handled many of them and shot a few, they are nicely finished, but, a poor design and I would not own one. There is more to a hunting rifle for game bigger than bunny rabbits than target accuracy and finely finished metalwork and the S&L rifles just do not have what it takes in DGR country or, where one climbs for sheep, goats, etc.

The new Sakos are OK, the L61R series are much nicer in finish, however, neither is equal,as a big game rifle to the Brno 21/22 and ZG series, the FN sporters or the nicer specimens of fhe P-64 Mod. 70. I actually own and have hunted for some 47 years with many specimens of all of these, so, my opinion is not based on speculation or maker's/owner's bias, it is what I have found in long, hard use.

Some info found on the their website:

History:

The Shultz & Larsen Rifle Company was foundered in 1889 by gunmaker Hans Schultz. He was keen target shooter and hunter but found that the quality he required for his own rifles was only available in costly custom-made guns. He therefore decided to start producing hunting and target shooting rifles where the emphasis was on first class craftsmanship and a high degree of accuracy. This tradition has been the hallmark of the company ever since, and to this day each rifle made still complies with the exacting standards set by Hans Schultz of quality, strength and extreme accuracy.

We are one of the only hunting rifle producers that have chosen to use cut rifled barrels. Which in every case is produced from completely straight and stress relieved chrome molybdenum steel, this we carefully bore and cut rifling with the minimum of stress on the steel. Further more, every barrel is internally polished with an individually cast tin lap and grinding compound to obtain perfect uniform smoothness. A small taper near the muzzle ensures a much longer barrel life and reduces sensitivity to fouling in the rifling. All this care creates a rifle that under all conditions produces maximum precision, a factor that makes top international shooters choose Schultz & Larsen barrels.

http://www.schultzlarsen.com/custom.htm

Warrior

I have a friend that has one, he loves it, but that thing has never worked properly (issues with feeding, safety etc) but to him it´s precious.

To me it´s a disaster just waiting to happen.

Now I´ll be a real old grump: Nobody in Finland wants the 85 and I´ve never seen one in the field (same goes for their 9.3x66). The 75 wasn´t to my taste but the L61R is a great action.

quote:

... Nobody in Finland wants the 85 ...

This is surprising to say the least - Sako rifles have a well respected name here in SA.

Just a QUESTION to ponder .... Would the Swedes, Norwegians and Finns buy American rifles in the main, or do they have a 'buy local attitude' being part of their national pride and to support their own industry?

Warrior

I do have a set of scope mounts and bases (a gift from Jorgen)......
They are on my VZ-24 in 9.3 X 62.....I love them....great bases and rings!

cewe,

I am under correction, but I can't remember seeing any American manufacturer charbering for the 6.5x55 mm Swede being still the number 1 cartridge in Scandinavia. That being so, which rifle makes are then the most popular in Scandinavia?

Warrior

Some info of interest on the S&L rifle: "Test in New Zealand from Rod & Rifle"

http://www.schultzlarsen.com/R...letestSandLM97DL.pdf

Warrior

shultz larsen rifles are great made rifles,if u get one u wont regret it

The Shultz & Larsen are good rifles! Many owners I know are fond of them. Especcially the 6,5x55 chamberings shoot well, I've heard.

The company is wide known for it's barrels here in Scandinavia.

M

Hi all!
S&L Rifles are not that common here, but they do have a reputation for making good barrels for targetrifles. And not that expensive either.

The rifles do lie in middel prizerange, but the importer here in Norway has had a little trouble with quality control wich has caused trouble for customers. They dont seem to market the rifles that much tough..

As for what rifles that is most common here in Norway, there is still a lot of Mausers around from the germans, most of them rebarreled and restocked. The most common calibers are still 6,5x55, 308 and 30-06 as they are suitible for all game here.
Other common brands are remington, tikka, sako, blaser, sauer and ruger.
Howa, weatherby, heym, merkel and browning i do see, but not that often.

Be aware that the construction of the rifle has been changed from the design with rear locking lugs, to a conventional three front locking lugs and fatbolt type. Im not tha into S&L models, so i dont know the name of the older model.

Hi all
I have just buy a 7x61 S&l and am reading about them just to start reloading for it.
Mine is one of the oldest , it has a 1 in 12 twist so what I have read is for bullets up to 150 grs ,I don't know if they could be of 150 grs or must be lighter than that.
Is a very good ,not to practical rifle, the action mounts when you go to the front so you must do more effort than with a standard one , you have to put one bullet in the rifle and the rest of them open the floorplate and load them by there.
But... when you shot really I have to look very well in my records if I have some rifle that put all the shots touching it so easily.
I could live with all the other things when I saw my groups in the paper and I have don't start reloading for it, I am using some loads that come with the rifle.
I love mannlichers and mausers so think that will be very proud of it in the future.
sincerelly
gtrotz

quote:

As for what rifles that is most common here in Norway, there is still a lot of Mausers around from the Germans, most of them rebarreled and restocked.

The most common calibers are still 6,5x55, 308 and 30-06 as they are suitible for all game here.

Other common brands are remington, tikka, sako, blaser, sauer and ruger.

Mastoideus79,

Thanks for your response. It confirmed my suspicion that the Scandinavian people buy mostly European brands. Custom built Mauser rifles are in fact more widespread in Europe than what is commonly known.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by gtrotz:
Hi all
I have just buy a 7x61 S&l and am reading about them just to start reloading for it.
Mine is one of the oldest , it has a 1 in 12 twist so what I have read is for bullets up to 150 grs ,I don't know if they could be of 150 grs or must be lighter than that.
Is a very good ,not to practical rifle, the action mounts when you go to the front so you must do more effort than with a standard one , you have to put one bullet in the rifle and the rest of them open the floorplate and load them by there.
But... when you shot really I have to look very well in my records if I have some rifle that put all the shots touching it so easily.
I could live with all the other things when I saw my groups in the paper and I have don't start reloading for it, I am using some loads that come with the rifle.
I love mannlichers and mausers so think that will be very proud of it in the future.
sincerelly
gtrotz

I've owned numerous S&Ls in 7x61 S&H (Models 60, 62, 65, and 68, IIRC,) and I ended up most commonly using 160 grain Speer bullets on top of H-4831 in mine.

Once the Norma 7x61 "Super" brass came out, mine were all right as hunting rifles, but prior to the development of the "Super" version of the brass, I couldn't get more than about 3 loadings per cartridge case before they began to incurr case-head separations.

Supposedly, that was because of the rear locking lugs but, heck, it could have been because of the phase of the moon for all I know.

I have one now (a Model 65DL), in their later chambering for the 7 m/m Remington Mag, and it is very accurate and does not seem to have case-head separation problems even though it DOES have the rear-locking lugs on the bolt. I use 160 gr NPs and H-4831 in it.

I think they are VERY well made and smooth operating.

The original family owned and operated company founded by Hans Schultz and Niels Larsen was sold to Jørgen Nielsen in 1994 and moved from Otterup, Denmark to Rask Mølle, Denmark. While Hans Schultz opened his gunsmith business in Otterup in 1889, the Schultz & Larsen company was not actually formed until 1917. Hans Schultz passed away in 1937 and Niels Larsen died in 1969. Beginning in 1960 the company was operated by Niels’ sons, Uffe, Fritz, Sigurd, and Torben. They too have passed away.
The first centerfire hunting rifle designed and built by Schultz & Larsen was the Model 38, but due to the advent of World War II, production on this model was stopped. The Model 38 was the first rear lug action design. After the war, Niels Larsen went on to develop the Model 54J hunting rifle and chambered it for Philip Sharpe’s 7x61 Sharpe & Hart cartridge and other calibers. S&L also built the Model 56A for Weatherby’s .378 Magnum cartridge. In 1957 improvements made on the M54J developed into the new Model 60 rifle. The main complaints with these models were the cock on closing design and the design of the magazine. In 1960, the action was further improved and the Model 65 was introduced, later becoming the Model 65DL. In 1966 the Model 68DL was introduced and was produced until 1970 when Uffe Schultz Larsen placed a hold on rifle production. Although the M54J and M60 rifles are very high quality, they do possess undesirable design features. The Models 65, 65DL, and 68DL are vastly improved designs and in quality are as good or better than any other high end rifle made during their heyday.
The rear lug action has been a source of consternation for gun writers more than it has been for hunters and shooters. In my experience, the accusation of cartridge case and bolt stretching is largely unfounded and mostly in the imagination of the gun writers who really just wanted to show how smart they were. The Schultz & Larsen actions are among the strongest commercial rifle actions ever made. I have seen case stretching in one S&L rifle, but in that instance, the owner was consistently loading 7x61 S&H to max or above and then wondered why his brass wouldn’t last. I have three 7x61 S&H chambered Schultz & Larsen rifles. A M54J, M60, and M65. The M65 is my go to hunting rifle and shooter and I have not experienced any problems with it. The last American importer of S&L rifles, Bob Fessler, had H.P. White Laboratories test the rifles for receiver/bolt stretch. The rifles were fired with loads well in excess of 100,000 PSI numerous times and no practically discernible stretch occurred. I also have not had a stretching problem with my S&L rifles chambered in .22-250, .308 Norma Magnum and .30-06.
Gun writers have also fussed over the loading technique for S&L rifles which is to release the hinged floor plate, turn the rifle upside down and dump the cartridges into the magazine box. Single rounds can be dropped into the loading port and chambered. Once a person is used to this procedure, it is extremely fast and less of a problem than stuffing 4-5 rounds one at a time through the receiver into the magazine of a Mauser type rifle.
As for S&L rifles not being able to take it. Well, I will dispute that. Although my S&L rifles don’t get abused they do get used. Danish guns and hunting writer Jens Perto can testify to the durability of S&L rifles, he has used the same S&L rifle chambered in .358 Norma Magnum for many, many years and has hunted virtually every game animal on the planet in every conceivable condition.
So, the old family company has been gone for many years, but the new S&L company seems to be carrying on the tradition of quality. If I am not mistaken the new Model 97 rifle is a continuation of the Model 100 rifle designed and built by the old company. The new Model 97 is a more conventional front lug design. I do not own one, but have handled one and the very high quality is obvious. These are rifles built with care and pride.

That was a highly enjoyable post, kriggevær!
- mike

My opinions on S&L rifles come from experiences with them in the BC bush and while they ARE nicely finished, I would not take one as a gift for such hunting/working. I have found that SOME gunwriters, notably Bob Hagel, Finn Aagaard and Phil Shoemaker, write from a great deal of practical field experience and I have found their comments to be far more valid in terms of working rifles in rough conditions than some seem to imagine.

Kriggevær gives a lot of good and resonable facts, but dont realize the real issues about rearlocking.
The m38, m54 were what i would call prototypes. The m56 and 60 were slight improovments, and the m65 and specially the m68, were high quality rifles, with a basic designfault (rearlocking)
The magasine and refilling of the magasine of those models, were best described by an Swedish journalist, when he tested a m100. He compared the proces with buying a brand new stationwagon, then welding all 4 dors, and asking the user to enter the care by the rear hatch.
Rearlocking is as strong as any lockingsystem. But dont have a consistent accurassy. A rearlocking system might werry well produce tiny groups if conditions is equal. But if parameters is changed, it werry often results in poi change.
We once testfiered a m68 cla 300winmag first we fired 3 rd of winchester 180 grains in a group of 1/4", followed by a 3 rd group of rem 180 grains. also 1/4" group. but 5" left of the win group.
Later a 3 rd group of 180 grains hornady. Same result 1/4" group, but 6"low.
We ended the test by adding 1 tiny drop of oil on the 4 hornady rd, resulting in a hit 10" further low. after another 3 rd without oil, the poi was back in the original hornady group. That is in my opinion an excample of a werry precise but usless design.

The m97, Classic and Victory models produced after 1994 is an entire diggerent design, with only werry limited inspiration from the former models. Althoug with an atempt to maintain or improove quality, combined with a more competitive price/quality ratio.
Generally the later models has a mutch more consistent accuracy, mainly in almost equal poi regardless of loads, oil or water on the case.

At the moment I still have an S&L M54 free rifle in .30-06 chambering. It is a VERY accurate rifle, putting U.S. military "white box" match ammo into VERY tiny groups at 100 and 200 yards, even though it has only iron sights. I have never fired it for groups at the distance it was intended for...300 meters.

I also had a M65 S&L in .358 Norma Mag. It was a very good working field rifle, and deadly as sin, but was definitely NOT anything exceptional in the way of accuracy. After about 18 months of experimenting with it I sold it because it didn't begin to shoot as well as my 1903 Buhmiller-built Springfield rebored and rechambered for the same cartridge.

I notice neither Jorgen or Mr.Kriggevaer mentioned the Model 62. I had a Model 62 free rifle in .243 Winchester. Of course as a free rifle it was a single shot, so I can't comment on its magazine....it didn't have one. But it (mine anyway) appeared the same as a Model 60 except that both the front and rear (micrometer) iron sights were substantially offset to the left. It was clearly factory stamped with the designation Model 62 and did cock on closing.

I have owned both a M65 (cock on opening) and then an M60 (cock on closing) Schultz and Larsen rifle in 7x61 S&H. I cannot praise these enough as the most accurate, and in 7x61 hard hitting, rifles I have owned. Smooth and very strong actions, 60 degree bolt lift so could mount a scope very low and superb adjustable triggers.

With the 26" barrel and a 6x Kahles scope they weighed in at about 10lbs but were just the ticket for Alps hunting on Chamois and Tahr.

gtrotz, the 1:12 twist will handle 160 grain projectiles easily but not so the 175 grainers.

My favourite was the 160 grain Sierra SPBT at 3000fps. Extremely accurate long range load but also performed well at short range.

The freerifles (m54 and m62) doesnt suffer from the rearlocking issues,
The rearlocking itself isnt the problem, the problem is the nonsymetric presurebearing design, of the action, with the openings for both magasine and ejectionport. This gives you a design with almost 80% of the strength in the left side of the action, and only 20% in the right side.
On the freerifle there is no magasinecutout, and only a tiny ejectionport. And the action is mutch beefier.

The calculated stretch of a m60 huntingreciever is 0,08mm in the right side, and only 0.03mm on the left side. this create a barrelwhip of 0.05mm on the basesurface of the rifle.

On the freerifle this is reduced to less than 0.005mm, and combined with a heavy barrel, it is of no relevance.

The boltopeningangle is apx 47deg on the lockingsystem. that might werry well be the reason why the first were cock on close, as they were not able to deliver enough cocking length.

quote:

Originally posted by jørgen:
The freerifles (m54 and m62) doesnt suffer from the rearlocking issues,
The rearlocking itself isnt the problem, the problem is the nonsymetric presurebearing design, of the action, with the openings for both magasine and ejectionport. This gives you a design with almost 80% of the strength in the left side of the action, and only 20% in the right side.
On the freerifle there is no magasinecutout, and only a tiny ejectionport. And the action is mutch beefier.

The calculated stretch of a m60 huntingreciever is 0,08mm in the right side, and only 0.03mm on the left side. this create a barrelwhip of 0.05mm on the basesurface of the rifle.

On the freerifle this is reduced to less than 0.005mm, and combined with a heavy barrel, it is of no relevance.

The boltopeningangle is apx 47deg on the lockingsystem. that might werry well be the reason why the first were cock on close, as they were not able to deliver enough cocking length.

Thank you very much for that information. I always regretted selling my Model 62....now I am REALLY sorry I did so.

BTW, my M54 .30-06 free rifle is one of the early ones where the ejection port is at top dead centre of the action. It does not eject the spent cartridge case, just extracts it from the chamber, then stands it straight up on its base, with the front half (or slightly more) of the empty case protruding from the action where it is easy to grasp and remove to be saved for reloading without it ever touching the ground or the bench.

quote:

The calculated stretch of a m60 huntingreciever is 0,08mm in the right side, and only 0.03mm on the left side. this create a barrelwhip of 0.05mm on the basesurface of the rifle.

Interesting post on the Schultz & Larsen design with regard to stiffness of the receiver and the imbalance between the left side and the right side of the receiver due to the cuts made for the magazine and the ejection port - an 80/20 percent split in strength is more than one would think, but it underlines an important aspect especially for target rifles where extreme accuracy is sought. The better balanced match actions are stiffer and warp less as these actions generally feature:

a) No magazine cut to weaken the receiver
b) Smaller ejection port making the receiver wall stiffer
c) Heavier receiver are used and made from superior high tensile steel like 4340
d) Making the receiver from 4340 provides higher tensile/yield strength than what 4140 can provide
e) Flat sides and bottoms (like the Panda) to prevent them from twisting in their bedding, like the round ones do
f) Some bolts have 3 locking lugs to provide better support all the way around the bolt face

All assisting in less warp due to the induced torque when a shot is fired.

In addition to the above factors making the receiver stiffer, match actions incorporate some other design features as well to make the whole action stiffer. There's a reason that the most accurate rifles in the world are built on solid bottom, heavy, stiff receivers for competitions. The single shot bolt rifles for F-Class and long range benchrest have heavier receivers than standard actions, so they are extremely rigid. These actions are designed and built to tighter tolerances and higher standards of quality. To site some examples:

Kelby actions have a square, flat-bottomed design to give a much greater and a longer-lasting bedding area.

Barnard actions have incredibly stiff round receivers, and are ground after hardening for better concentricity.

Surgeon actions feature design aspects like, a 37% increase in receiver threads over the Rem 700 action, increasing the thread contact between action and barrel, a strong one piece bolt and handle, precise and tight tolerances. Their Repeater version has .007 clearance when the bolt is on its way to battery and the last 3/4-inch this clearance is reduced to .004 clearance (.002 per side), and their Single-shot version has .007 clearance when the bolt is on its way to battery and .002 (.001 per side) clearance when the bolt is in position. Their integral recoil lug does away with the washer type lugs that some use. Also the integral scope rail stiffens the receiver further and no need for bases to be screwed to the action. Their Tactical action is machined from a solid piece of 4340 and the bolt from 4140. The bolt is designed so that the area just behind the locking lugs and in front of the bolt handle are slightly larger than the standard diameter of the bolt. This forces the bolt into perfect alignment parallel to the bore when the bolt is closed.

In lighter hunting rifles the above is somewhat impractical, and thus we have to live with less accuracy and more convenience. So we have to make trade-offs in terms of accuracy at practical hunting ranges, and less so for tactical rifles at extended ranges, but not quite the heavy benchrest rifles that can hardly be carried for the former application. The K98 action, being a military action is a sloppy action so it can function in all sorts of conditions, but it suffers greatly with regard to the above parameters set in terms of stiffness - it features;

a) A magazine cut as it is a repeater rifle
b) A large open ejection port with a thumb-cut, weakening the left receiver wall
c) Commercial Mauser actions are stiffer as it features no thumb-cut
d) Made from pre-war carbon steel ,which is not comparable with today's modern steels

Another fantastic design recently launched for an accurate hunter rifle is McMillan's G30 design.

Warrior

Interesting points, Warrior.

A few other points....

Some fairly popular target actions, such as the Paramount, and the Quad-lite use 4-lug bolts, to get even more balanced distribution of firing pressure transfer to the action body.

There is also some thinking that the degree of strength/rigidty "balance" from side-to-side and top-to-bottom MAY be less important in front lug actions than in rear lug actions. Other makers strongly disagree.

Of course, benchrest-accuracy type actions are not possible in some target rifle applications either... In some U.S. "hi-power" applications, a competitor may be required to use the same rifle from 100 to 1,000 yards and several of the shorter range stages are fired "rapid fire". In those applications, magazines must be part of the design.

Even the allowing of "sighter" shots or not may influence where the compromises in building a most effective target rifle can be made. If no sighters are allowed, then stable maintenance of point of aim is very important.

Where sighters are allowed, grouping ability may be more important than maintenance of an unvarying point of impact for the first shot or shots. Group centering can be adjusted as required if sighters are allowed.

As in everything else, lots of compromises are usually made. Otherwise, all target rifles would likely have become identical some time ago.

Alberta Canuck,

If your M54 has the ejection port on top and finger grooves on the forestock, it is actually a Model 48. And, the M62 is a work of art. The free rifles are a very different rifle from the hunting rifles as Jørgen has pointed out.

quote:

Originally posted by kriggevær:
Alberta Canuck,

If your M54 has the ejection port on top and finger grooves on the forestock, it is actually a Model 48. And, the M62 is a work of art. The free rifles are a very different rifle from the hunting rifles as Jørgen has pointed out.

Thank you for that information. Mine does have the ejection port at top dead centre, and has finger grooves on the forestock. It also has a slight schnable at the tip of the forend. The sights are the original S&L globe front and micrometer rear, as was the case with my other S&L free rifles also.

At one time I had four S&L free rifles all at once...one each in .243 Win, 6.5x55 Swedish, .308 Winchester, and my current .30-06.

Now all I have left is the .30-06. A fellow in Texas bought the .243, M. Maxberry bought the 6.5, and I can't recall who I sold the .308 to....


Edited to add: All four of my S&L free rifles were very, very accurate, had/have excellent S&L double-set triggers, and would presumably hold their own in competition pretty much anywhere.