I am trying (with little success) to set up QR scope mounts on a Sako 75 chambered in .416 Rem Mag. I have tried Warnes QR mounts built for Sako's integral dovetail system. The recoil lug keeps peeling off and the mounts slide forward. I'm currently using Leupold mounts for Sako, they aren't QR and after a few rounds the screws tighten so much it takes a very large long handled screwdriver to get them off. Is there another QR mount for Sako or do I have to mount Weaver bases and got to Leupold QR RIngs??

Do you mean the lug on the Warne rings is being physically stripped off the base of the ring??? The Warne rings have a very good reputation for handling recoil. Something must be very wrong.

What size scope do you have on that thing? Is it one of those expensive European boat anchors?

How much does the rifle weigh? How much does the scope weigh? Are you using high rings? Can you get the scope lower to the rifle?

Is the stock bedded? The action may be flexing if the stock is not a good fit, or is not rigid. Tough on stocks, action, scopes, and scope mounts. If it's not bedded pull the action and check if the wood is split between the magazine and the trigger well.

I would only fire a 416 about three shots before bedding it. Just enough to verify that you can get it on paper (i.e. barrel is not bent, and it is relatively on axis with the action.) The Sakos usually have a better fit to the wood than the US mfg, but 416s hammer hard.

It sounds as if it is hammering or bending the mounting screws on the Leupold rings as well. Once you get them broken loose do the screws spin out handily, or do they drag?

Don

[This message has been edited by Don G (edited 04-24-2001).]

Don

The scope on the rifle is a Leupold 1.5 - 5 Vari X III. The rifle weighs 10pounds. The stock is bedded and there is no indication of flexing. Warne has yet to respond to the problem. I had great luck with Warne rings in the past but this rifle is giving me problems.

...Peter

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Peter Walker

Peter,
I've had the exact same problem with the Warne QD rings on my Bruno 602 chambered for 450 Ackley. Warne replaced the first set and the same problem showed up with the second set. The 602 action has a locking recess for the rear ring to lock into. I think that Warne didn't make the portion of their rear ring that engages in this recess thick enough. With recoil the locking portion would just peel away and allow the scope to move forward. I eventually went back to the very solid Bruno rings and made up a short T wrench that I could take the scope off with in a hurry. With the 1.5 to 5 Leupold scope you'll probably never find a reason to take it off anyway.

Peter and 470 Mbogo, Did you send the Warne QD rings back again. Warne has redesigned the rings and they look a lot like the Talley rings with double studs. If you send them back you might ask them to exchange them for the new style.
Steve

Santala

I'll mention the new rings to Warne when I talk to them tomorrow.

470

Did Warne offer your money back after the second set failed???

....Peter

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Peter Walker:

Peter,
I sent the first set back through the local gun shop and they were replaced. The gun shop closed down before the second set went bad. I gave them to a friend that had a rifle that didn't kick quite as hard. 470 Mbogo

470

I've been dealing with Warne directly. I'll see if I can recoup my cash and I'll stick to the Leupold mounts and my big screwdriver. Your probably right about never taking the 1.5 - 5 off the rifle.

....Peter

I'm used AEW QD mounts for the last 20 years in big calibers (.338 WM / 9,3 x64 Brenneke /
.375 H&H / .416 Rigby (AEW lateral mount)and .458 WM) without problems. I recommended this german mounts and rings.

I fully support Hector. Have had AEW on my .375 for the last 15 years and over 4000 rounds. A fairly heavy Zeiss 3-9x42 scope but not a problem. On and off with a flick of the thumb with no tools - and no change in impact. But - as you are into Sako - why don't you try the SAKO Optilock mounts. They are very solid - and with a hexwrench they come on and off easy with no change in impact. I only have one on my Tikka 30-06 (with very heavy 3-12x56 scope) and am quite pleased. Lots of my friends have them on 9.3's through 338 Lapua Mag.
Rgds.,
Peter
PS. web address for SAKO; www.sako.fi

[This message has been edited by Ronnberg (edited 05-07-2001).]

Thanks all for your thoughts. I received a call from at Warne Manufacturing yesterday and in a very sincere and proffesional manner the fellow told me that he was refunding my money and that at this time Warne did not have a scope mount that will take the recoil of a .416 in a Sako rifle. The metal holding the recoil lug is to thin where the rear mounting screw is placed. Warne is designing a new Maxum mount to deal with this problem. Due to his sincerity and manner I will use my current Leupold mounts until I can get a set of Warnes new mounts.

....Peter

Peter,

At least you got a reply from Warne! I e-mailed them last week about similar problems, but have heard nothing as yet. In fairness it could of course be down to the problems aassociated with e-mails going astray.

With respect to Warnes non QD mounts, I have come to the conclusion they are not best suited to holding a heavy scope on a Sako of deer calibre or above. If you look at the design, under recoil the wedge shaped dovetail is driven back trying to force the vertically split mounts apart and all the forces are on the screws & threads which are the weak point. On a Weaver style rail which is parallel, you do not have this "wedge" effect. It could be compensated with longer front screws on each mount but I still feel all the recoil forces are focused on the weakest part ie the screw/thread. Unlike yours, my Warne did not even have a rcoil lug
to assist absorb the recoil. I was very dissapointed as I liked the style of the Warne, and they were exactly the right hieght
for my application.. A friend and I speant two evenings try to get them to hold with no succsess...they shot loose and partially stripped the front screw threads each time
after fireing only two or three rounds from a
.308.

I now have some Sako optilock on order.

Pete

Where can I find the AEW QD rings?

------------------
RC

Thats EAW !! not AEW and you can get them through New England Arms...Europeans like them, but Harold Wolfe of SAfari Times states the cannot handle hard recoil....and I know Warnes won't....One cure is to drill and tap a set screw into whatever mount you choose...

Conetrol R&B's will work on a Sako..and they come with a set screw in the dovetail....and they will take a lot of recoil, and are not as high as EAW..

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

A friend had some of these EAW on his .243
and he had trouble because they were not installed properly. I don't know all the in's and out's, but apparently they are fairly complex to install/ adjust correctly.
His scope ended up quite high off the barrel, but taking to other 'smiths afterwards, he was advised he could of got lower ones. Again it goes back to the person who sold them to him. With reference to recoil, I was talking to a smith who works for a famous British rifle builder, he said that they do come across problems with them on big kickers ie .375H&H and above. Having said that he did not like any QD system mounts other than the one they and another British customer maker used; and they retailed at around $2000 (fitted) and thats not a miss print!! Actually, I tell a lie, because he did say the old American Griffith & Howe(sp?) were very good as well.

Ray

Where would one find a set of Conetrol R&B's?? I spoke again to the fellow at Warne and he indicated he might have been premature with his development of a new improved Sako mount.

...Peter

Pete,

You are right. I omitted in my praisal of the EAW that they do need a good gunsmith to install them properly. Thus they are a bit more costly, but if done properly it is worth it. They do different heights etc. My 3-9 zeiss is as low down as physically possible. I like my scopes further ahead (than most Europeans) i.e the back end of the scope just slightly behind the back end of the bolt (of a mauser type rifle) - thus you don't get the scope in the eye if shooting fast. To do this with a European scope (zeiss etc) you need a back mount that is angled forwards. Thus with the EAW my backmount is actually a forward mount reversed.. so you need the gunsmith.
But - then again - if you are playing a lot yourself with different rifles and scopes and want to do the mountings yourself - you are better off with something simple and solid (i.e the Sako Optilock's etc).
Rgds.,

Ronnberg,

I fitted my new Optilocks last week and I am
very impressed. Although expensive compared to Hilver etc, the quality and the fit is perfect. My old Hilver bases need tapping with a rubber mallet to get them on the rail and even then they did not go 100% home. The sako mounts however slid on under finger pressure and sort of just clicked into place.
I'm wondering if the recoil stud means that they will retain there zero if they are removed??? I might try this next time I'm at the range....

Regards,

Pete

The answer is Leupold QRW rings & bases (all steal Weaver style). I drill and tap the receivers, and counterbore the bases, for larger 8-40 screws, I use Torx screws. The really bad boys get 10-32's. And a added plus, the Leupold QREW rings have a thumb lever, allowing the scope to be removed and replaced, if one needs the iron sights in a tight spot. These are bullet proof mounts, the large cross screw fits in the slot in the base and prevends sliding. We use them on the 50 BMG's with the heavy NightForce scopes. Plus you can use the QRW rings on the heavy tactical style one piece bases available.

John,

I suspect the trouble with this approach is
that by the time the rail has been installed and then the rings, it can lift a scope pretty high??? Not so bad if your using a big Euroscope like me, but probably not whats wanted on a DG rifle.

Peter,

When somebody asked a similar question about
fitting QD mounts to a Ruger, Ray suggested
have levers ect added to the original mounts.
If the recoil lug on the Sako ensures it returns to zero, maybe this would be feasable
here??? A gunsmith might be able to order just the levers/screw from either Leupold or Warne???

Pete

Pete

That just might be the wisest move I've heard. Shall see if I can make it happen.

Thanx....Peter

With respect to Leupold detachable mounts, is there any advantage to the QR mount verses the QRW mount?

The QR mount is basically two Redfield style mounts. While the Redfield mount may work well on a rifle of moderate recoil, I would not consider them as appropriate for either a rifle of heavy recoil, or even a rifle of average recoil with a high mount heavy scope.

I believe that the scope under recoil would have more of a leverage advantage to rock the QR mounts fore and aft. I believe that the Weaver style QRW mount offers more resistance to this rocking motion.

What I have done is mount steel weaver style mounts and hand lapped Leupold Mk 4 rings to hold a large Leupold LRT scope on a .338 Ultra mag used for long range target shooting and for hunting. The recoil of a 300 gr bullet at 2850 is significant. It has stood up to over 2000 rounds so far. With a 1/2" spin-tight or socket, it is easily removable, and returns to zero adaquately. It is certainly strong.

Granted, it is not a Sako mount, and it would entail modifications to your receiver. If there has been one thing about Sako that has irked me over the years it is their proprietary and problematic mounting system.

Would someone please give Peter the address of Control Rings and bases, I havn't got it handy...If not I will somehow get it for you Peter.....

Controls are very very strong mounts and will work on any gun but they are not detachable...

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Rust,

"Sako that has irked me over the years it is their proprietary and problematic mounting system." ????

Would you care to qualify that?? I've never known any of the modern sako mounts to cause problems. Just curious if there are problems I need to watch out for!

Pete

Rust and Pete E,

Rust

You and I must be about the only two people on the forums that don't like the Sako mount setup.

Pete E,

One problem is that you are simply restricted by what you can use. Secondly normal bases epoxied and screwed work perfectly. They are far easier to shim if necessary. The bases can also be sweated to the action.

The tapered dovetails sound great in theory. However, unless the bases are really belted on the base can "rock" as you only really have point contact.

Problem with really belting them on is that the tapered dovetails can crack the mount base.

Actually part of the bad reputation of Sako mounts comes from their older mounts which had a screw each side to clamp onto the dovetails. This was to provide a windage adjustment.

Many years ago in Australia one of our gunsmiths had some bases made out of a very high tensile steel. I think it was called Wibrac steel. The bases were wider than normal and mild steel shims were fitted so that these shims were between the bases "V" and the dovetail. When belted on the mild steel shims just swaged for a perfect fit.

But a lot of trouble.

In my experience from years of shooting larger calibers and trying to extract maximum accuracy, scope mount problems always relate to how the ring attaches to the base, not how the base attaches to the rifle. This assumes epoxied bases and the scope correctly fitted to the rings by either lapping the rings or bedding the scope in Decvcon Titanium and then heat curing the Devcon Titanium.

To me, Sakos are like a 9.3 X 64 compared to a 375. If there are lots things that you like about a 9.3 X 64 then get one. But life will be a lot more difficult than if you own a 375.

Of course my opinion like other opinions on these forums has to be taken in the context of the standards used for assessment.

Thus if someone says to me that they used the XYZ scope or mount and fired off 24 shots at the target and killed one deer at 376 yards, then that does not mean much to me as an assessment of the scope or scope mounts.

On the other hand I go to the extreme so my assessment of something not being so good, would have no effect on the asctivities of our hunter who killed the deer at 376 yards and fired 24 shots off testing his gear out.

Mike

[This message has been edited by Mike375 (edited 05-26-2001).]

Mike,

"Actually part of the bad reputation of Sako mounts comes from their older mounts which had a screw each side to clamp onto the dovetails. This was to provide a windage adjustment."

I actually agree with that as I have used these and was never really sure how to set them up accurately. Still, even setting them up by eye they appeared to function ok, but I prefer simplier systems with less screws ect. I also tried Hilver mounts, which are or were from your kneck the woods. They did need tapping on with a hammer and I never could get them 100% on. When I switched to the new Sako system I was very impressed; they slid into place as if made by a watchmaker.

In general I like integeral dovetails and could never understand all this need for drilling and tapping recievers. I will say that that approach is more flexable. In the end I suppose it depends on whether your a straight forward user or someone who links to tinker in search of a better mouse trap.

Pete

Pete,

Hillver mounts frequently crack on Sakos on the front base where the metal is very thin. You will not necessarily see the crack, but it will and does happen and causes accuracy problesm with very accurate larger calibers.

I have not seen the new Sako mounts so can't comment. I have only seen pictures of them on their website.

Mike

My problems came with the old style Sako mounts. They would shoot loose under heavy recoil and did not come in enough heights to always mount a given scope as low to the bore as possible. I am not a proponent of mounting a scope any higher off the bore than absolutely required. It adds stress to the mounts and scope.

I prefer a plain old Weaver style mount, preferrably steel. In most instances two piece as, with the exception of certain very well made and relatively expensive specialty one piece mounts, one piece mounts can cause trouble. Most one piece mounts will not add any strength either unless they are quite substantial.

I epoxy the mounts in as further insurance. Golf club head epoxy has a very high resistance to shear and is well suited to this application. The weaver style mounts allow what is perhaps the largest selection of rings of any system, up to and including the massive Badger 50, with six screws per ring. Normally this would be used on a .50 BMG rifle but if one feels the need, it is an option.