From a functional point of view what flaws or inherent design problems is there in the older SAKO rifles (1970-1990).

I've had 3 Sako's on which the screws that attach the ejector to the action were sheared off. This is probably from the forces that occur when the bolt is pulled back hard while reloading. The screws has probably unscrewed themselves before they broke. After fixing this hasn't happened again.

Has anybody had other problems like broken extractors, or dirt locking up the action or ???

PCH,

I have a Sako L591and have never had any problems with it. I have never heard of any generic problems with the design apart from some people not liking the tapered dovetails milled into the top of the reciever. The only problem I encountered was when trying to use Warn mounts on my Sako. Under recoil, the dovetails acted as a "wedge" and the Warnes would come loose after only 2 or 3 rounds. It seems that the design totally depends on the screws for providing strength and these stripped very easily.

Previous to that, I used the more conventional Hilver mounts and while a little "agricultural" they were rock solid. I'm currently using some of sako's own brand mounts...expensive, but very, very good.

Regards,

Peter

[ 06-06-2002, 14:11: Message edited by: Pete E ]

PCH,

Patially agree with you on the bolt stop/ejector. In fact one day at the range I had the bolt fall in the dirt. That was a 308. But the problems I have seen was the spring breaking and the ejector blade/bolt stop no longer poking into the action to do its job.

The tapered dovetails as Pete has mentioned.

With mounts like the old Australian Hillvers they would frequently crack on the rear as the metal was thin on the rear mount.

For larger calibers like 375, one of our gunsmiths had bases made from I think what was called Wibrac steel and you could bash them on to the bases without fear of them cracking off on the rear base.

Many years ago they made round top actions for Beretta and now that Beretta own them (I think??) perhaps that tapered dovetail problem will be fixed. One of the difficulties is that it looks great in theory and only a small percentage of shooters fire enough shots to cause a problem.

Many years ago in Australia, would you believe that you would see mounts welded to the Sako action when used by pro roo shooters. By the way, those welding jobs did not look like they came from Purdey, H&H or D'Acy Echols

Mike

[ 06-06-2002, 12:27: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

Mike,

I don't think that the taper dovetail is a bad idea, its just that the mounts need to be designed with care.
With the modern Sako mounts and the Hilvers I have seen you have a tapered mount slide onto a tapered dovetail. The whole thing locks up solid with the screws required to provide very little of the holding power. That of course is providing the steel is up to the job. I disliked the old Sako mounts as i could never work out how you were sure they were "centred" properly and again they replied on the holding power of the screws.

I have never seen Hilver bases break, but they were a bit hit or miss with quality control. We tended to take the rifle and scope to the shop and try a variety of them until we found the one that fitted the best.
Are they still made in Australia? I was under the impression they had been bought out a few years back, but I might be wrong....

Regards,

Peter

Peter,

Hillver have long gone.

The first Hillver ones were of the Redfield type with opposing windage screws. The next ones were called Lynx over here and the rings were attached to the base by to small opposing screws locking down the rings.

The idea of the bases sliding onto the tapered dovetails and then being positioned by a screw is not good. Actually, they were supposed to take up on the thinner rear dovetail which of course would mean the rear base took everything and was thicker because the rear dovetail on the Sako is much smaller.

As I said before and this is probably what you are saying, the tapered dovetails are great in theory. Of course what is supposed to happen is the bases tighten as the rifle is fired. But then that can't happen if the mount has the little lug that fits into the notch on the rear dovetail.

I have not seen in the flesh the current Sako mounts but the previous ones with the big windage screw either side were terrible both in design and practice. The previous sako mounts had the little lug to fit into the small notch in the rear dovetail. This only highlights had ill thought the design is. A taper that can't be used if the manufacture's own mounts are designed so as they can't slight forward.

The previous Sako mounts, unlike Ruger, never had a solid side.

Personally, I would take ordinary bases screwed and glued or screwed and soldered everytime.

Sako would have bee better to have the dovetails higher on the action so they could be machined off as has often been done on BRNOs.

Mike

Mike,

I totally agree with regards the old Sako mounts with the windage screws on each side...I bought some mail order (second hand) sight unseen and hated them from the moment they arrived.

To be honest, I had never considered the recoil lug negating the wedge shape, but it makes sense. The new Sako mounts have the two solid sides and I am pretty sure the rear has a recoil lug too. With the old Hilvers I had, they needed to be tapped into place with a rubber mallet although once on, they held zero perfectly, but were higher than I preferred. In contrast the new design Sako mounts fitted perfectly and just slid into place with finger pressure. They went together like a Swiss watch in fact, but then they were x3 the price of the Hilver...

For a hunting rifle, I actually like the Ruger mount system. A minimum of screws to come loose and pretty much bomb proof. Milled dovetails may not be a great idea for the tinkerer or gunsmith who wants to build on an action, but I feel that for Joe Average they offer less to go wrong with minimal hassle.
I guess they could be milled out of square, but there again the holes on the receiver could be drilled incorrectly just as easily.

Regards,

Peter

Peter,

There are two advantages I can see in the Ruger and especially the CZ and Sako mounting system.

Firstly, I think it forces the manufacture to go to some extra trouble so that barrels and receivers are lined up. especially with Ruger and then non adjustable mount. Secondly, with the Sako and CZ, if the rifel is a high class gun with open sights it looks much better when scope comes off and no bases left behind.

Back to the Hillver mounts.

Quite often these mounts use to develop a crack that you would not see but accuracy would go off, especially on the 375s.

From what you say about the new sako mounts they should correct all problems if they are solid either side and made of good steel.

The bases we had made form the Wibrac steel were hit on real hard but with steel shims between the base and dovetail. The steel shim was softer than the action and mount. This achieved two things. Firstly, it virtually bedded in and secondly it prevented any damage occuring the action.

On the new Sako mounts how do the rings attach to the base or is the bottom ring and base one piece. Now that would be something if that was the case.

Mike

Mike,

The Sako bases come in both versions in 1", 26mm and 30mm rings and the usual range of heights. I prefer the all in one ring-mounts rather than the seperate rings and bases simply because I believe there is less to go wrong.
Interestingly Tikka which is part of Sako offer a similar range of mounts/rings but their dovetails are parallel so maybe Sako could move in that direction....

Regards,

Pete

My ejector screws busted off also. I caught the bolt in the cheek, nice cut there. I ended up having to get them drilled out and re-tapped for a larger size as the company rep I called told me it would be a minimum of $200 and about four months for the factory to do it. I love the rifle but having to deal with the customer service center sucks. That alone is the reason I will never have another unless it is given to me. In addition the receiver is miss milled, but that is another story.........One to be told with pictures..............C

Mike 375,

The new optilock Sako mounts still attach the rings to the base by means of a big screw tightened from underneath the base.

They are not 1 piece. They also have the plastic inserts like Burris.

Regards,
JohnT

John,

Do the bases just slide on and are stopped by the tapered dovetails?

Mike

The front one stops with the taper,the back one has a pin that matches the receiver. On my L61R a VIII 2.5 X 8 just fits between,no adjustment left. In low mount they are bit high.

downwindtracker2,

Is the rear base clamped against the dovetail by an opposing screw.

Mike

Mike, & John

Take a look at :

http://www.tyko.com/sakooptilockinfo.htm

You will notice that both base mounts and ring mounts are listed. I " assume" (fatal I know!) that the
ring mounts are all in one units. When I was looking into these mounts I found a web site with some good pictures, but true to form I can no longer find it...

Regards,

Peter

Mike375,it's not really a screw as much as a bolt! Both bases clamp with them.They cost about $150 CDN,which is twice the cost Leupold,Burris or Redfield Jr. bases and rings.They are high and long.When I looked at the Millets and Leupolds for Sakos,I paid the price.

I had the Original Sako mounts on my 22-250, and while they look pretty classy, there are 2 major beefs I have with them.

1: If you reef on the righthand Large windage screw with a screw driver, you bend the screw shaft upwards. This causes the two little wedge "runners" (for want of a better word) to be out of alignment. After that the base of the mount does not rest flat on the dovetail, which means that in order to get alignment on your scope, the elevation turret must be wound all the way down.

Solution: Replace with the original Lynx Mounts I had taken off a decade ago.

2. 4 SCREWS per ring is totally unnecessary. It's like fitting a goddam tyre to a car.

I even went to the Leupold SAKO mounts but they are equally suspect because of the misalignment problem.

Cheers

pete

Would it be possible to drill a hole thru the bottom part of a leupold mount and drill and thread the action. The screw would then hold the ring to the action and acting as a recoil lug, the standard screw would hold on to the dovetail as usual???

hEY'
Dave Talley is now making Bases and rings for the Sako.I have a set and they work fine.Have several Sako's,only problem,was bolt release screws work loose.
1geejay
www.shooting-hunting.com