Soliciting opinions on a new firearm

7.62mm

7.62mm

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
91   0   0
Location
Some BBQ Joint, far....far...away!!!
Budget $4500-$5000...Rifle and scope combined.

Weight of Rifle and scope has to be under 7 lbs.

Parameters: looking for a one gun does all type of hunting gun. I live in SW Ontario, so it has to be under .275 caliber. Looking to varmint hunt (read coyote), to Deer, Bear and Moose. Also in the next year or two want to do an Elk hunt in Alberta or BC. My deer hunts usually have shots less than 100 yards, and thick bush, which is the majority of which this firearm will be used for, but would like to shoot comfortably out to 300 yards. I also can roll my own ammo.

Base line for what I am looking at is a Sako Finnlight in .260 cal, topped with a 1-6 Swarovski. I have some kind of affinity for 6.5 caliber for some reason that I can't really explain, and also an unfounded hate for .270 cals...I will be selling a number of firearms to help fund this purchase

Would like to get some opinions from the CGN knowledge base, to see if the are some better/different caliber/rifle/scope options that I should be looking at.

Thanks for your time and well reasoned opinions in advance.
 
Last edited:
For 1-6x I would rather get Razor HD Gen II 1-6x24. Warranty is better, some features like turrets are way better, more common and more desirable - easier to get, easier to sell if anything. I think price is better on vortex too.

For the Sako 85. Well, they have a tendency to throw brass into the scope. If you care about fast bolt cycles you may not like that. Especially if you put 1-6 scope as low as it could be. However if you go with shorter cartridge like 260 rem it should be less of a problem. Other than that Sako is a fine rifle, no argument.
 
260 rem is a good out to 300 and well with in your aspirations
With the budget you have a copper is within your budget you don't need to sink a pile of money into a expensive scope for a hunting rile your shooting out to 300 yards if your shooting pas that you will need a difrent calber for moose and elk and better scope
 
owlowl said:
For 1-6x I would rather get Razor HD Gen II 1-6x24. Warranty is better, some features like turrets are way better, more common and more desirable - easier to get, easier to sell if anything. I think price is better on vortex too.

For the Sako 85. Well, they have a tendency to throw brass into the scope. If you care about fast bolt cycles you may not like that. Especially if you put 1-6 scope as low as it could be. However if you go with shorter cartridge like 260 rem it should be less of a problem. Other than that Sako is a fine rifle, no argument.
Click to expand...


I like the Vortex 1-6, and have owned one, the only downfall it has is it is a heavy pig, if they could shave 8 ozs off of it, it would be a great option. Didn't know that the Sako's had ejection issues, thanks for that tidbit.
 
An all around SoOnt rifle with elk thrown in equals a .270... you could go WSM, but my preference would be the standard .270 Win... it won't let you down. Save yourself some cash and just buy a Winchester M70 Supergrade and top it with a Leupold VX-3 of your choice... I would probably choose the 2.5-8, but the 3.5 -10 would be good also.... spend the savings on your elk hunt.
 
Last edited:
hoytcanon said:
An all around SoOnt rifle with elk thrown in equals a .270... you could go WSM, but my preference would be the standard .270 Win... it won't let you down. Save yourself some cash and just buy a Winchester M70 Supergrade and top it with a Leupold VX-3 of your choice... I woukd probably choose the 2.5-8, but the 3.5 -10 would be good also.... spend the savings on your elk hunt.
Click to expand...

The only problem with the M70 is it about 2 lbs heavier than what I would want, I should have put weight requirements in my initial post....my bad
 
I would look for a used stainless sako 75 in 260 or 6.5x55, order a McMillan edge, buy a set of sako ringmounts and the scope of your choice. You will come in under budget by a fair margin.

Or you could buy the new sako carbonlite and skip the McMillan. The 85 ejection issue isn't as common as some would have you believe and was primarily experienced in the '06 length actions. I have also read it was easily remedied with a stronger extractor spring from gretan and/or brownells (a $3 fix).

Why sako? 1-piece bolt that's also field stripable. Integral bases, 3 locking lugs, awesome trigger, they all tend to shoot very well, all steel parts, I personally like detachable mags and theirs is second to none.

I don't want to get into a arguement, but vortex and Swarovski used in the same post - and the edge given to vortex?f:P:
 
Last edited:
double gun said:
I would look for a used stainless sako 75 in 260 or 6.5x55, order a McMillan edge, buy a set of sako ringmounts and the scope of your choice. You will come in under budget by a fair margin.

Or you could buy the new sako carbonlite and skip the McMillan. The 85 ejection issue isn't as common as some would have you believe and was primarily experienced in the '06 length actions. I have also read it was easily remedied with a stronger extractor spring from gretan and/or brownells (a $3 fix).



vortex and Swarovski used in the same post - and the edge given to vortex?f:P:
Click to expand...

So why the older 75 over the newer 85?
I like the Swede chambering, and have dies etc., was hoping to save some weight with the .260 Rem chambering by going with a shorter action.
 
Rifle is just part of the equation when it comes to waght if you keep the cost of your rifle and scope down it leaves room for equipment a light pack sleeping bag and tent is nice to have and this wear you save lbs
 
Personal preference. The 75's are my go to rifles. I have nothing against the 85's and the 85's are lighter.
I prefer the 75 recoil lug arrangement, the mag release, and the factory stock. Used 75's will also cost $1100-1300
 
pete dobinson said:
Kimber Montana 84L, 270 win, Swarovski Z3 3-10X42.
Click to expand...

I think we're on the same page here. The kimbers topped with as good of a scope as you can afford would be my suggestion, in 270 or 270wsm. I have to agree with Hoyt too, you could save a lot of money by getting a leupold vx3 2.5-8 and be looking at a little over $2000 for the rifle/scope combo, spend the rest of a good hunt.
 
jables said:
I think we're on the same page here. The kimbers topped with as good of a scope as you can afford would be my suggestion, in 270 or 270wsm. I have to agree with Hoyt too, you could save a lot of money by getting a leupold vx3 2.5-8 and be looking at a little over $2000 for the rifle/scope combo, spend the rest of a good hunt.
Click to expand...

Well make an argument...why are the Kimbers better...why go with 2.5 or 3.5 scope in a close in environment of most of the shots being 100 yards or less?
 
If you want to go light, from the factory, a kimber Montana is as light as you're going to get for under $2500 (as far as I know). The 2.5-8x36 will also help to keep the weight down somewhat and it will allow for a better cheekweld (for most) having the smaller objective diameter. I recently picked up a ruger m77 mkii ultralight in 308 and topped it with the 2.5-8, it makes for a light, compact, and fine fitting setup for me. At the end of the day you're the boss, and with your said budget you basically have the pick of the litter.As far as the kimber being "better", I'm just looking at the weight and how they seem to fit me in the gun shop, have yet to shoot or use one in the field. Most of my hunting involves shots 100 yards or less as well and I don't think any scope over 8 or 9 power gives you any practical advantage when taking shots around 100 yards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom