Hello

I have a Sako L61R in a 7mm Rem Mag and I was wondering can it be rebarrelled to a .375 Weatherby or .375 H&H same 3.600 COL.

Thanks

Steve

I can't see why not. The case head is the same and the magazine plenty long. As conjecture, I wonder if the 'improved' shape of the Weatherby case shape might feed best.

Sako offered that action in 375 if I remember correctly...so can't see why not

And I've got a set of 375 Wby dies collecting dust if you go that direction, PM me

I barreled an L61R 300 Win to 300 Weatherby and it feeds well from the right side. The left side rounds have to be cycled more slowly and deliberately so you may have feeding issues with the improved 375 case.

I have had the H&H and the 375 WBY and didn't really get much more excitement from the WBY version. It would be a cool classic in an original rifle but it won't do anything better than th H&H can do,

Gentleman

The magazine doesn't seem long enough to except the COAL of 3.600. 300 Weaherby is 3.560.
Can one get a longer magazine box for the Sako.
Maybe as mentioned above Sako made a rifle for the .375 H&H, go that route.

Thanks for the help

Steve

I ran into a similar issue with a custom bottom for an Interarms Mk X in 375 (that was the rifle I re-chambered to 375 WBY). Zastava opened their 98 clone action in the front so no aftermarket trigger guard assemblies matched the action opening exactly. The rear was no problem but the front had to be extended. I was too poor (or cheap, if you will) at the time to pay for welding and associated metal work. The old school solution was to mill off the front of a standard magnum magazine and let the stock be the new front. If the stock opening is too far forward it can be shimmed with a wood, metal or fiberglass shim and fitted accordingly. Sounds a lot worse than it looks; that action and stock have survived the 375 WBY, 300-8MM Magnum wildcat and right now it is a 458 AccRel with no issues regarding the magazine or feeding.

What you don't know is where SAKO used different steels or had a different heat treat for the more powerful cartridges.

I am more or less pondering this issue for a Ruger #1, whether a 45/70 Ruger #1 could take 458 Win Magnum level pressures. Externally, the 45/70 action has the same breech block, sidewalls, but, is there something different about the steel and heat treatment?

If the answer is there is no difference in the steels and heat treatments, and the actions are dimension ally identical, then, you could chamber your action for the more powerful cartridge.

quote:

The magazine doesn't seem long enough to except the COAL of 3.600.

Why do you say "seem" long enough? The box measures just a tiny fraction over 3.6" and will readily accept a COL of 3.56 to 3.6. I have an L61R chambered in .375 AI. No problem with magazine length.

quote:

Originally posted by SlamFire:
What you don't know is where SAKO used different steels or had a different heat treat for the more powerful cartridges.

Now that's a novel idea. Please disabuse yourself of it. Sako (and all other manufacturers) use the same steel and same heat treatment for all of their actions of the same model. An L61R Sako has the same basic receiver whether it was originally chambered for .30-06 or .375 H&H. Besides "more powerful" cartridges may have a lower SAAMI spec maximum pressure than a cartridge of lesser power.