Gentleman

There is a mato for sale in the classified. It has my curiosity up. So I start looking for others on the auction sites. I found some on gunsamerica, and about every one said they were made by Dakota. Is this true.

Any way, opinions wanted good,bad &/or ugly on the mato.

Thanks
Shawn

The Mato is based on the Dakota 97 action. That action is a lower-priced, cylindrical receiver version of the Dakota 76.

Based on a Dakota 97 action. Lots dumped on market about a year ago when discontinued by Beretta (clearing inventory, etc.). I don't have personal experience with them, but was also tempted when they went on sale, but I hesitated and missed them on clearance at Gaylan's.

The action was built by Dakota for Beretta. I have seen Matos with Dakota on the action. They are built with the Dakota round bottom action. I own one very nice rifles.

Gaylans pronounced gal-yans, is a sporting goods chain. These went on sale right after I moved from MN back home. I had a pocket full of cash too I always miss the "deals"

dempsey, I will sell you Howard's. It is at my home and he has never even seen it. He won't miss it. A few weeks ago I had to remind him it had arrived. Give me a few weeks and he will have forgotten it again.

Customstox

I visited Kalispell last week and stopped by MRC and Acra-bond and no longer have a pocket full of cash. Like I said, I always miss the deals. I'll trade a savage in a Hogue stock, would Howard notice?

Who made the bottom metal for those?? I picked one up at the 2000 shot show and was quite impressed with the workmanship, but it didn't appear to be anything that Dakota had done.

Mine is a 7 mag and it is for sale.

PS a Savage won't cut it.

Well, I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I think I may know more than most when it comes to certain facts regarding these.

I HAD two for a shortwhile, and I have spoken directly with people from Dakota, Beretta, and Lothar Walther.

First, they are not exactly the same as the Dakota 97, pretty close though. Apparently the recoil lug system is different on the 97, or so I was told by them. Had to be a little different so as to not infringe upon the Mato patents. The venture was at first truly a joint venture between the firms, with the plans to turn over the operation to Beretta. Dakota built the first 1200 or so actions (I actually have a list of serial #'s somewhere). They are so stamped on the rear bridge. These are by all accounts FAR better than the later Beretta production. Dakota also produced, in much smaller #'s entire barreled actions featuring Lothar Walther Barrels. If the barrel has a "stepped-crown" it is most likely a Dakota produced bbld action, but not a guarantee. This would be a great find as most people cannot tell this, or simply do not know. Howard, if you have one, I would keep it if you like it! Contary to some popular rumor, only the first several hundered of these have the LW bbls according to Woody from LW. However, he told me that at least 2 to 3 revisions were made to the breeching during R&D that required setting back the chamber, and that he could then not guarantee, and even suspected, it may have not been up to their standards. The remaining barrels are pure crap in my opinion. The two I had fouled like mad and were not accurate. Woody said they (Beretta) were out to find the cheapest supplier possible. The trigger is shilen, was told this directly by Shilen people. However, Beretta wanted a higher trigger pull, and therefore required a design change in the "shoe" I beleive. You can therefore not get it set down to around 3 pounds. Shilen can fix this up for you for about $40 or so. The stock is made by B&C, and is not bad. It is their medalist version. Overall, they are not generally worth it. As woody said, it would have been worth $500 if it had a good wood stock.

There you go, more than you ever wanted to know about Mato.

Bob

I have one in .338 Win. Mag.

It did foul like crazy at first, but settled down quite a bit after a couple hundred rounds (cleaning every 12-20 or so).

It shoots about 3/4 MOA consistently with the 200-gr. Ballistic Tip. Also shot a 0.18" group with the 225 Hornady but 1 MOA is more like the "real" group size for that bullet.

The main problems I had (note past tense) were feeding and the trigger.

Feeding problems were fixed promptly under warranty. I do think the detachable magazine is the weak point of the design.

The trigger started out at about 4.5 lbs. on my RCBS scale but somehow mysteriously crept up to 7 lbs. (The Beretta repair people didn't touch it since 4.5 is within specs.)

I e-mailed Shilen and they faxed me adjustment instructions (same as the Rem. 700). I easily got it down to 3 lbs. and dabbed the screws with nail polish, as Beretta's repair manager suggested. My only complaint in that area is that the locknuts are too close together to get a wrench on easily.

John