$200 - $500 more taking into account ammo and time. Depends on the skill of the guy but he seems to have everything required on hand.

quote:

Originally posted by Jan Dumon:
Is anyone aware of video material on the internet that shows the correct way of regulating a double ? It boggles the mind that Sabatti could make such a stupid mistake and throw away such a good business opportunity. Honestly , how much more could it cost to do it right ?

In most cases the cost is coupled with the regulator's salary, and the cost of the ammo expended. A skilled regulator will usually get the sweet spot in just a few tries. Take a 470NE rifle the cost of ammo alone will cost about $16 per shot, and 600NE would likely cost in the area of $50 per shot.

The regulator will adjust the starting "line of sight" with a fixture with an educated guess as to convergence and solder a temp wedge in place. Then go to the shooting bench.

After the barrels have cooled to room temperature,he will then fire two shots at a target at the distance the rear standing sight is to be cut for. With most big bore that will be 50 yds. Then re-heat the barrel muzzles and wedge and make the first adjustments. The barrels need to cool back to room temperature again so the next two shots can be fired. This may take place seven or eight times before the sweet spot is found. Say the rifle is a 470NE and it takes eight tries, that is $250 for ammo alone, and if it had been a 600NE with the same 8 tries, we would be looking at $800 for the ammo. Add in the regulator's salary, and you are looking at close to $1000 for the regulation. Many regulators are very skilled, and will do the job with half the tries. JJ charges $750 plus ammo expended, so one could count on about $1000 for regulation!

I got to the range today to shoot my new Sabatti 470 for the first time. Ammo used was Hornady DGS 500gr solids. The first 2 were off sticks with my hand under the forearm. They printed 2" right and a little high and about 1" seperation. I slid the rear sight over and the 2nd 2 printed 2" right above the bullseye and both shots overlapped. For the 3rd group I took a slightly different sight picture and these were in the bullseye with about 1 1/2" seperation. The last 2 shots I took were off hand at 100yrds and both were inside a 6" circle. After that it wasn't fun anymore so I stopped! I need to shoot it more but so far I am very pleased with my $3200 rifle. I would like to add a recoil pad and a little weight and then I should have a good shooter

Excellent shooting.
As for the Sab factory; I think they actually didn't know that what they were doing was wrong. No business would knowingly sabotage their entire double rifle sales future prospects. I think Sabatti was skilled at making shotguns and didn't understand rifles. Their overall construction tells me that they are very skilled gun makers; they just blew the regulation part. Of course, to us, that is the most important thing.
Italian labor rates are fairly low and once you get into it, it would not have cost (relatively) much more to do it right. But I also think Cabelas was pushing them both on price and delivery schedule, and no one know how to regulate rifles. It is a shame but it is over now. Back to paying $12K minimum for a double.

Sounds like EAA did some shoddy repairs on these rifles also. That didn't help the situation either. Does anyone know if Sabatti or EAA ground the muzzles of the affected rifles?

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Excellent shooting.
As for the Sab factory; I think they actually didn't know that what they were doing was wrong .

There! I fixed it for you!

No, I definitely disagree; they do know how to build guns; nothing wrong with any part of them except the regulation. I assume you have never owned or seen one?

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
No, I definitely disagree; they do know how to build guns; nothing wrong with any part of them except the regulation. I assume you have never owned or seen one?

Never owned on. Seen many. I was actively looking to purchase a Sabatti about a year and a half ago. I've probably looked at and handled 30 or so in the Buda, TX Cabelas and I've lost count of how many I've looked at and handled at the Fort Worth Cabelas store. Several that I looked at had dremeled barrels. Others had regulation targets that were suspect or just not very good. In the end, I just couldn't justify one of these rifles, but I digress.

So, from a logic standpoint, if "they didn't know what they were doing was wrong", how is it that they "knew what they were doing"?

I said and I mean (and I stated in my previous post) that they, from a mechanical perspective, know how to build guns but did not know how to regulate double rifles. As we know, regulation is not rote mechanics; it is, to a large degree, art; one which somehow escaped Sabatti and everyone involved with the Sabatti double rifle program. I have owned three large bore Sabattis and have seen many as well and I can justify owning them because I wanted to see and test them for myself, and the ones I have perform to spec.
I am pretty sure you know what I mean.

Here's the deal, DCP. I'm not trying to get cross ways with you as this has all been covered before. But for me, I'm not willing to give Sabatti the benefit of the doubt at this point. I wanted one of these guns badly for my sons to hunt with.

Lipstick on a pig is nothing more than a nice looking pig, and that's what these rifles are. They are 100% engraved on the receiver, done by laser but none the less, not bad looking. What they should have done, if "they knew what they were doing" would be to have focused on building a well regulated rifle with a bit more "plain" looks, if hitting the price point was that important. Sacrificing regulation for looks is not what I'd call "knowing what they are doing"! Not when it comes to double rifles. Without being properly regulated, a double rifle is worthless. So no, choosing looks over function with a rifle that's designed to be taken into the thick stuff in search of Mr. Nasty is not what I'd call "knowing what they are doing"! And here is the real crime: when they found out that "they didn't know what they were doing", they tried to put another one over on all the consumers that "don't know what they are doing" by touching up the muzzles with a dremel tool instead of issuing a recall and getting the job done properly.

Personally, I see this as a scam played on those who are unfamiliar with double rifles. Now some evidently seem to work OK. You report that your's, "shoots to spec". Sam Rose had one as well that in his own words, he hunted with and bragged on after shooting 1000+ rounds and taking numerous DG animals. Then the barrels came apart, he was unable to get it corrected by the maker or importer, and now has no idea when he's going to get it back. His satisfaction with the gun seems to have been short lived. And the issue he reported concerning the barrels coming apart, was not just a regulation issue. He states that the barrels appear to have been joined with glue!

Just so you'll know I'm not "looking down" on the Sabatti's pedigree and am attempting to be accurate with my statements, I'll be the first to acknowledge that other rifle makes have issues from time to time as well. None are immune to problems, mine included. However, regulation in a double rifle is paramount. My new rifle, a VC, had an issue with regulation also. It just wasn't correct; close, but just not quite. But instead of trying to scam me and back door the thing with a dremel tool, it was corrected properly under warranty, in a timely fashion, and without hassle.

Again, not trying to get cross ways with you and I'm glad your rifle is performing well. I hope it continues to do so as it sounds like it will be difficult to get it repaired if something does go wrong. But again, JMO, and no one is expected to agree with me, but that business of trying to pull the wool over the consumers' eyes with the dremel tools just stinks to high hell.

Sabatti either didn't know what they were doing in building double rifles or they knew exactly what they were doing, which was to attempt and satisfy a market share with a nice looking rifle that doesn't perform properly. The dremel correction makes me believe it's a bit of both! Either way, I'm not impressed enough to justify spending 1/10th of the new blow out prices for one of these rifles. Shame as I really wanted one in the beginning.

Todd make some good points. For me it was simply a practical and economic desision. I paid $3200 for the rifle and it has a 1yr warranty. After shooting it I don't forsee the need for service but if it does I would bypass EAA and send it to a good gunsmith to have it re-soldered and regulated for around $1000. I still would have a 470 double rifle for $4200. I can do a lot with the extra 10k

And if they had spent another $1000 regulating the guns properly, they would have sold just as many, maybe more if people had liked the first one and gone and purchased more, without trashing the reputation of the company / brand and maybe as the volume increased the price could have come down.

Just look at bolt action rifle makers when a bad batch or low quality guns hit the market and they get a bad rap. Sales plummet. Get a good quality gun that shoots at a reasonable price and it goes off like a Rocket - Tikka t3 being a good example.

Agreed! No doubt they screwed up.

Even at that Nigel, if they had just built a well regulated gun and left off the engraving, maybe going for a nice tasteful border instead of full coverage, that could have gone a long way toward that extra $1,000 for a proper regulation.

Your points are spot on however. If they had turned out correctly, IMO, people would have flocked to buying them and they would have had a hard time keeping up with demand.

Todd

Very good point indeed. The engraving was nice but not necessary and as you say, could have been put into proper regulation.

I would have bought one, or two.

The other thing to factor in is at some point, someone else will do what they
should have done and take the market away from them. At that point they will
rue the decision they made.

Does anyone have any idea if Cabelas are really going to get out of them for good ?

quote:

Originally posted by Trapper Tom:
Todd make some good points. For me it was simply a practical and economic desision. I paid $3200 for the rifle and it has a 1yr warranty. After shooting it I don't forsee the need for service but if it does I would bypass EAA and send it to a good gunsmith to have it re-soldered and regulated for around $1000. I still would have a 470 double rifle for $4200. I can do a lot with the extra 10k

Any idea who you would send the rifle to if it needed to be re regulated?

Randy, there are several that can handle it easily. Dirk Schimmel. JJ, Ellis Brown, and Bob Hayden just off the top of my head.

JJ said he will no longer work on them. Has he changed his position on Sabatti?

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
JJ said he will no longer work on them. Has he changed his position on Sabatti?

I'm not aware that he's refused to re-work them...

Yeah, he stated he would no longer work on them about a year or so back. Something about the materials used to solder them and the lack of a mid wedge.

Great discussion.
Saved me from a Sabatti.
Soooo-eeeee!

So, you right handed guys can buy a 450, 470, or 500 NE for about $4K and then toss in another $1K if it needs to be re regulated.

I stand corrected, what's the gamble? Hell Todd, you just mentioned your last double had to go back to be regulated again and I am betting it cost at least twice the amount of the Sabatti. I am just trying to look at this with open eyes.

quote:

So, you right handed guys can buy a 450, 470, or 500 NE for about $4K and then toss in another $1K if it needs to be re regulated.

I stand corrected, what's the gamble? Hell Todd, you just mentioned your last double had to go back to be regulated again and I am betting it cost at least twice the amount of the Sabatti. I am just trying to look at this with open eyes.

My biggest fear is when I die my wife will sell my guns for what I told her they cost.

That is the way I see it. It is intersting to read back in the forums all the problems so many have had with thier doubles of all brands. Mine was on sale for $3800. I offered them $3200 and they took it. It is a new rifle with no X on the ser #. The ser# is cab 690 Cabelas said I could bring it back after 30 day and it has a 1 yr warranty. For that price I already knew when I bought it that IF I had any problems I would get it fixed instead of bringing it back. So far I am pleased with the way it shoots. Sabatti really screwed up some of these guns. It seems they will never be forgiven by some.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Great discussion.
Saved me from a Sabatti.
Soooo-eeeee!

I get it now, why buy a rifle for about $4k and maybe have to pay $1k to get it regulated when you can spend 3-4 times that much but get it fixed for free.
I am pretty happy with my existing doubles that include Chapuis, Searcy, and Heym and knock on wood they all shoot fantastic. But when others here finally leak issues with the bigger brand names you can bet your ass there are shooters with similar problems on the side lines afraid to open their mouth in fear of pissing off the builder or taking shit from members here. So we will never know the extent of problems with more expensive doubles.

I don't own a Sabatti, never even shot one. But if they made a lefty version I would jump on one. Until I found out from Mike they could be re regulated for a reasonable fee I was on the side to avoid them. Just trying to keep an open mind here.

I was in the local Cabela's gun library over the weekend. They had a handful of close-outs. In talking to the associate it sounded to me like Cabela's was relinquishing it's sole distributorship of the Sabatti DRs. If true, this may mean prices come down. That's not to say that the regulation quality will increase, and any future distributor/retailer may not be as 'liberal' with their return policy.

quote:

Originally posted by Snowwolfe:
I get it now, why buy a rifle for about $4k and maybe have to pay $1k to get it regulated when you can spend 3-4 times that much but get it fixed for free.

Well, that's one way of looking at it. From a dollars and cents view, it makes sense, but I do believe there are other benefits in purchasing a Mercedes instead of a Yugo, even though they both have 4 wheels, an engine, transmission, seats and a steering wheel. Both get you from point A to point B. The Mercedes isn't going to be free from the occasional need for maintenance expenditures just because it costs more. Then there is probably value in the price of a Rolls Royce over the Mercedes, even though it still has the same basic benefits of transportation (I have a friend that just sent his brand new bespoke H&H Royal back to the factory for re-regulation). If we are looking at it only in terms of practicality and dollars spent, is even a Sabatti for $4,000 justifiable over and above a CZ or M-70 in 458 Lott for $800 to $1,000, both being fully capable of taking the largest elephant or meanest buffalo with absolute 100% reliability?

Again, I don't look down on the Sabatti's pedigree in this manner. I wanted to purchase one in the worst way. That's why I handled so many of them at the two Cabelas stores near me. I tried very hard to justify the purchase, but it didn't come down to price in my case. For the record, I drive a 10 year old Dodge pickup with just under 300,000 miles on it. I don't need the most flashy, new, and pretty vehicle for the purposes of impressing the Jones's. I go with what works, has worked, and is honest value for the buck.

For me, it came down to the fact that Sabatti perpetrated a fraud on its customers. And as Tom states, I can't forgive them for that. IMO, they targeted guys who haven't been able to afford the entry level double rifles and as such, likely haven't put much time into studying the finer points of this type of gun. They hoped to slip it by the targeted customer base with the dremel correction, thinking that getting the bullet to strike the target at the proper point is all there is to the issue. And for most, it probably is as the vast majority of big bore rifle owners only shoot a box of shells a year or so and have zero plans to actually hunt African DG with it. But if you happen to be one of those guys who actually take the rifle into the jesse, looking for elephant, hitting the right spot is only part of the issue. That wobbling and yawing bullet is likely to have reduced penetration. A frontal brain shot on a big ele bull needs all the help it can get in reaching the brain, especially if one needs to shoot from an extreme angle upwards.

So for me, there is an element of danger in this fraud, remote as it is. More importantly, I just don't do business with crooks. And attempting to take advantage of their targeted customer base is crooked IMO. Yeah, for that, I'll not forgive them, regardless of whether or not the later model rifles are being properly regulated. The only reason any of the Sabatti supporters here have continued speaking in support of them is because of Cabelas's policy of making the transactions right, and providing customer service after the sale, something neither Sabatti nor the importer would provide. Cabelas has been a pretty good company to deal with overall and they certainly stepped into the gap here. But their decision to distance themselves from Sabatti instead of continuing to sell the "now correctly regulated rifles" speaks volumes to me. Sounds like Cabelas has an issue with "forgiveness" as well!

quote:

Originally posted by 2Barrels:
I was in the local Cabela's gun library over the weekend. They had a handful of close-outs. In talking to the associate it sounded to me like Cabela's was relinquishing it's sole distributorship of the Sabatti DRs. If true, this may mean prices come down. That's not to say that the regulation quality will increase, and any future distributor/retailer may not be as 'liberal' with their return policy.

Aren't they cheap enough ?

Not sure you would want the price to come down even more,
or you will end up in the territory of the Baikals.

Price isn't everything.

My only regret is that I probably won't use this gun for hunting as much as I would like. I have already taken 4 of the big 5 including a few buffalo. Wish I had it earlier or was made of money to do it all over again.

Todd, You make valid points on the Sabatti muzzle grinding issue that was done on some of them. Could you give us more info on the bespoke H&H regulation issue. This is even more shocking!!! Were the muzzle ground? Have they got some new kid doing the regulations? How bad did it shoot? Any info is appreciated. Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by 2kuduhunter:
Todd, You make valid points on the Sabatti muzzle grinding issue that was done on some of them. Could you give us more info on the bespoke H&H regulation issue. This is even more shocking!!! Were the muzzle ground? Have they got some new kid doing the regulations? How bad did it shoot? Any info is appreciated. Thanks.

Hello Kudu,

I'm sorry but I promised the gentleman that I wouldn't disclose any additional details concerning that rifle or who owns it. I don't know all of his details specifically, but he did say it was going back for some additional work to make it exactly right and H&H is doing just that under warranty, as would be expected.

I think the point being that none of the rifles are 100% guaranteed against needing work, either upon delivery or for issues related to use. They are all mechanical in the end and things break, etc. However, there is a right and wrong way of making corrections and handling warranty issues.

Here is an illustration and true story. Last summer, 2012, my young son who was a senior in high school, wanted to trade his Dodge Caliber car for something a bit more fancy. He found an Audi A-6 that was comparable in price. Against my advice, he went ahead and traded for the car, only having to come out of pocket a little to make up the difference. On the day he picked up the car, I received a call about 11:30 that night asking me to come pick him up on the side of the road where the car broke down on his way home. Having it towed to the nearest repair shop the following day, we found that the alternator was completely dead. Now on that Audi, the entire front end must come off in order to replace the alternator. So instead of doing the repair correctly, the used auto dealer that traded with him for the car, simply put a new and fully charged battery into the car in order to give it enough juice to start, drive around the block a few times for a test drive, and get partially home before it died. They had also disconnected the "Alt Warning" light! When pressed as to what they had done, of course they denied that they would stoop to anything so low just to sell a car without repairing it correctly. That's when I presented them with the battery that had their dealership's name printed on it in grease pen! Ruh-Rho! Needless to say, the car was repaired correctly this time, and on their dime.

I see nothing different here with the dremel tool fix than simply putting a new and fully charged battery in a used car with a known dead alternator in hopes of getting it off the lot and claiming "you bought it as is"!

I find this discussion very interesting and there seems to be strong arguments on both sides.
We talk a lot about regulation techniques, proper regulation, proper shooting technique etc. Any double purchase relies on a lot of faith in the maker and the seller regardless of whether it is an old classic, a cheap Sabatti or, as stated above a new H&H Royal. None are immune from problems. (actually, the poor regulation from H&H is more agregious than the sabattis IMO!)
As for shooting technique, new buyers should NOT take anything as Gospel.
I have seen a couple doubles shoot BETTER off bags than off a standing offhand rest. And I am sure we have all seen some known to be well regulated that in some hands cannot hit a paper plate at 50yds. My point is, you never really know until you try it all and these Sabattis give many buyers the opportunity to get in the game.

If they only shot as well as they look...

Rich

PS: RE the closeout not return thing, there is a federal "lemon law". In Idaho specifically, where I live, you have 72 hours after purchase to return for full refund, less our sales tax.

Gents:
I have had the opportunity to see, handle, shoot, evaluate, and appraise several Sabatti rifles. I am not impressed. A mate in Zim had his rifle come apart at the ribs, a gent in TN has his rifle shoot accurately with one barrel and the second is off by a couple of feet. I shot and evaluated a rifle at my home range in AK this fall for a lawyer who has many trips to Africa under his belt and vast shooting experience. He was unable to hit the target at 50 yards. Neither could I. Also, shooting between rain showers but in humid conditions, within an hour light rust began to appear on the breech face. A sign of low carbon steel. Cabelas would not give the owner the time of day until he threatened to file suit. Sabatti then agreed to repair the rifle--if it was returned to Italy. Subsequent communication and Cabelas agreed to a refund. For your entertainment is part of Sabatti's reply about the regulation:

"First of all, we want to point out that what explained by Mr. Cal Pappas it is not completely true and that our Company does not proceed to regulate the barrels of the double rifles express using that system.
What it is true is that only a few double rifles has been adjusted in that way owing to a young new worker, charged to regulate the barrels, who made a wrong job.
 
I confirm you that all the barrels of our double rifles are regulated with the traditional system to change the convergence of the tubes until they shoot in the right way.
 
In any case, does not matter how the rifles are adjusted, normally, those double rifle, shot well. We are sure, there is another reason if this SxS rifle does not shot right."


The bottom line, in my opinion, is this: it is impossible to make a quality double rifle in today's world for 3-4-5000$. They do look nice but the materials are sub standard. No, I do not expect a Holland for that kind of money, but there is a lot of area between. Poor wood to metal fit, laser or acid etched engraving, low quality steel, and poor regulation are some of the ways Sabatti uses to cut corners.

Remember the wholesale and retail price markup. If Cabelas sells them for 5K they buy them for half that and Sabatti still makes a profit.

That said, many swear by them.
Just my three cents.
Cal

quote:

Also, shooting between rain showers but in humid conditions, within an hour light rust began to appear on the breech face. A sign of low carbon steel.

Cal

That is very interesting.

I use Carbon Steel skives and as you say,
Carbon Steel rusts easily.

Not a good look all round and some of the communication
coming though now and being shown on forums doesn't give
confidence.

Interesting that your guys rib came loose. The same happened
to a gun here in Aus. Not too sure what the outcome was.

[QUOTE}BY CAL PAPPas
For your entertainment is part of Sabatti's reply about the regulation:[/QUOTE]

quote:

"First of all, we want to point out that what explained by Mr. Cal Pappas it is not completely true and that our Company does not proceed to regulate the barrels of the double rifles express using that system.
What it is true is that only a few double rifles has been adjusted in that way owing to a young new worker, charged to regulate the barrels, who made a wrong job.

I confirm you that all the barrels of our double rifles are regulated with the traditional system to change the convergence of the tubes until they shoot in the right way.

In any case, does not matter how the rifles are adjusted, normally, those double rifle, shot well. We are sure, there is another reason if this SxS rifle does not shot right."

Cal It is clear that Sabatti has zero idea of how important regulation is to a double rifle! If they did, they wouldn't have let a young inexperienced employee be responsible for regulating a double rifle. Their lack of knowledge in this area says volumes, with the BOLD passage above in their response.

................................................................................................................