Sako or WBY?

14 May 2002, 01:12

BER007

POP,

I wouldn't hesitate one second, Sako is the best choice regarding accuracy but not only. May be I'm too european

------------------
BER007
Keep the faith in any circumstances
------------------------
BBER007@HOTMAIL.COM

14 May 2002, 02:02

Bigdaddytacp

quote:
Originally posted by POP:
Strictly from an accuracy standpoint which do you prefer?

Both are good guns and can shoot but from my past and present Sako examples I would bet on the Sako as having a slightly better chance of out of the box accuracy and more smiths are familiar with them if they do need tweaking!enjoy the "hunt" and good luck and good shooting!!!

14 May 2002, 03:26

500grains

Sako, no contest.

If you want accuracy, do not get Wby.

14 May 2002, 04:26

jorge

500 grains,your statement about Weatherbys is based on what data, other thtn the fact that you don't like Weatherbys? I currently own three Weatherbys and off and on have owned many more. EVERY single one has been superbly accurate and reliable. My 7mm is a habitual 1/4" shooter, the "least" accurate one I have ( a 300) hovers around 3/4". If they don't perform, Weatherby makes them right. Sorry for digressing form the question. Sakos are also fine rifles and very accurate. So it's a matter of taste. Incidentally, the WORST piece of crap I ever owned in terms of accuracy was an old Sako Safari Grade in 375 H&H I bought back in 1985. I tried every load, both factory and handload and the best I could do was abou 2.5" I'm sure Weatherby has produced some lemons too, but not in my experience. LEt's stick to the facts, but then again, I'm sure he'll come up with some "facts."

14 May 2002, 04:57

<JBelk>

POP--

There's no generalizations when it comes to makes and models unless there is a design flaw in one that *precludes* accuracy.

Sako has the "best chance" to shoot well because the action is simpler and better designed for accuracy (Square, solid and straight).

HOWEVER-- The quality of *how* they're made determines how it shoots, not what name's on it.

If I wanted an accurate rifle I'd start with, C-- "None of the above".

14 May 2002, 05:23

<Eagle Eye>

Sako...I don't think you'll be disappointed.

14 May 2002, 07:00

Bubster

I too have several calibers in both. I have to agree with most of the other posts except 500 grains. The Sako will give you the best chance of being the most consistently accurate, however I hardly doubt you would be disappointed with either. My Weatherby SVM .22-250 will shoot into one ragged hole all day beleive it or not with factory Hornady 50 gr. V-Max ammo.

14 May 2002, 07:08

Stonecreek

Weatherby's have been made by contractors and with parts from all over the world at different times: Originally, FN Mauser, then Germany (Sauer), and Japan, and now U.S. So, it would depend in part on which version of Weatherby you compare. Also, the number 1 contour light barrels tend to be less accurate than the number 2 heavier barrels.

The biggest problem with Weatherby accuracy is not in the quality of the firearm, but in cartridge design. The standard freebore in Weatherby chambers does not normally promote accuracy. Perhaps it is of little effect, but I don't care for the radiused shoulder either.

Sako has been pretty much the same gun from the same factory since shortly after WW II. For out of the box accuracy with factory loads, the Sako has the advantage. Additionally, I believe that it is easier to improve the accuracy performance of the non-Weatherby cartridges by handloading than that of the Weatherby line.

14 May 2002, 07:57

POP

Man you're making this tough. I was thinking about the Wby MK V Ultralight in 300 WBY. Man that
paper thin barrel realllllllly gets me nervous as far as accuracy is concerned with such a "violent" round
like the 300 WBY. IF I can find a proven shooter (MOA or less factory or reloads) in this configuration, I
will buy it in a heartbeat! I have had WBY's before that could not accomplish this and they were
standard tapered barrels. Then again I have had some real WBY shooters! I believe deep in my heart
that the SAKO might shoot a little better, but it is a pig weight wise. Decisions.....

14 May 2002, 14:53

Dr. Lou

Although I primarily own nothing but Sakos (80+), I have owned several Weatherbys. Most of them shot OK (1-11/2")out of the box; I have never had a Sako shoot over an 3/4" out of the box with factory or handloaded ammo, with the average being about a 1/2". To my mind Weatherbys are more show than go. Besides being a little heavier than Sakos,I have never found any real-world difference between Weatherby rounds and traditional cartridges, especially if they are handloaded. For instance, my reloading manuals show almost identical numbers for the .338 Win mag and the .340 Wby mag. Moreover, I have always thought that if a pimp were to go big game hunting, he would probably choose a Weatherby because it most closely matched his chrome plated Jennings with phony mother of pearl grips. I am a firm believer in "pride in ownership," but there is no place for those goofy glossy laquered stocks, and glow-in-the-dark bluing in the woods - you might as well wear a neon sign that says 'Eat at Joes." IMHO I believe that one would be hard pressed to find a better rifle than a Sako for the price.

[This message has been edited by DOCTOR LOU (edited 05-14-2002).]

15 May 2002, 09:15

HHI #4694

Doctor Lou,

You spout off so much nonsense that I felt compelled to check your profile. Professor/Chief of Police, isn't that an oxymoron?

Remarkable, you have 80+ Sakos and not one has ever shot over .75 of an inch. By the way, what is 80+ Sakos? Does that mean you lost count of your precious Sakos, or you have half rifles or pieces that would not count in the full tally?

Odd, I have always found the Sakos to be heavier than Weatherbys. Most people who actually handle the rifles seem to agree. I realize this isn't the case in Doctor Lou's make believe Finnish fairy land.

I have eight Sakos and six Weatherbys. I find the Sakos no more accurate the Mark Vs.
I would surely say the Weatherby is at least as accurate and ceratinly better made, particularly as compared to the new junk Sako 75s.

I would hardly call the newer Weatherbys pimp rifles. At least the Weatherby folks don't cut costs by using cheesball cast parts and bolts like Sako does.

Just stating the facts Doctor/Chief whatever. Don't mean to shake up your 80+ Sako Finnish fairy land.

15 May 2002, 04:35

<Eagle Eye>

quote:
Originally posted by And then you Awoke:
I have eight Sakos and six Weatherbys. I find the Sakos no more accurate the Mark Vs.
I would surely say the Weatherby is at least as accurate and certainly better made, particularly as compared to the new junk Sako 75s.

Several observations here..first of all, for someone that says he owns eight Sakos, you sure do slam them....sounds to me that your post is the one that is questionable here, not Dr Lou's (he has posted many times, unlike yourself). Secondly, since you think the Sako 75 is junk, it is obvious that you haven't been shooting one or you would know that they are in fact, a superb rifle in many respects. As outlined by many others in this string, the accuracy of the Sako 75 is superior. That has also been my experience. If you can't tell the difference between them on the range, perhaps it is the shooter rather than the firearm. As for the Weatherby being better made...well, that also has not been my experience. The one Mark V I had was very disappointing to say the least. Since Weatherby doesn't make their own rifles, how can you make such a bold statement and keep a straight face? They have changed manufacturers many times over the years and only recently returned production to the USA (which is likely the reason you are so supportive of them). Having a machine gun manufacturer from Maine make a supposedly high quality rifle hardly provides proof of your superior quality claim but it certainly does explain why they are so expensive.

15 May 2002, 04:43

Stonecreek

Weight: A Weatherby with the thin 24" barrel will weigh a bit less than the typical Sako in a similar caliber, while a Weatherby with the heavier 26" barrel will be some bit heavier than the Sako.

I have owned a couple of dozen Sakos and must admit that while my Sakos' accuracy has been extremely good, Dr.Lou has had extraordinary performance from his rifles compared to mine (but I do live in a windy part of the world). I suspect that most, if not all, of his rifles are pre-model 75, and maybe pre-Garcias. As I said in an earlier post, you have to specify which generation of Weatherby you're talking about, and to a lesser degree, which Sako.

16 May 2002, 07:32

POP

Thanx guys. I must say this is the most difficult choice I ever had to make.

------------------
"Hope for the best.....Expect the worst!"

[This message has been edited by POP (edited 05-15-2002).]

[This message has been edited by POP (edited 05-16-2002).]

16 May 2002, 10:11

<Eagle Eye>

POP -

I went back and re-read the posts in this string....I noticed your concern about the weight of the Sako 75. You are correct...they weigh more than most. If that is the issue for you, take a look at the new Sako 75 Finnlight. They are available in magnum calibers (7mm RM & 300 WM) as well as the standards like 243 through to 30-06). A short action model, such as the 7mm-08, weighs in at 6 pounds and the long action models are 6 7/8#. As I recall, the magnums are 7# or so. They are pretty well the same as a regular 75 SS except for a shorter, fluted barrel and a different color stock. All reports about them have been great, as one would expect from a Sako product. They are not cheap though.

[This message has been edited by Eagle Eye (edited 05-16-2002).]