Schultz and Larsen model 65 DL
- Thread starter Gonewild
- Start date
Beautifully made. Rear locking lugs so use factory ammo or decent reloads. Parts may be tough to find. I would venture a nice clean one might be had for $1500, I don't really know. The last clean one I had went for $1000 years ago. Those chambered in 7x61 can be successfully rechambered to 7mm Rem Mag if desired.
The stamp on the bawrill mentioning what ammo to buy is a serious consideration on value.
I'd chawp awf a Heuy or Deuy for one in .308win.
As Dennis mentions, they are fetching north of a g-note now in good condition.
You buying or selling?
I'd chawp awf a Heuy or Deuy for one in .308win.
As Dennis mentions, they are fetching north of a g-note now in good condition.
You buying or selling?
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
The Shultz&Larsen's are very well made rifles, they have a rear locking bolt that's smooth as glass. Some say the rear locking bolts stretch brass, I haven't experienced any stretching. My rifle's a 308 norma and I've shot some of my best groups with that rifle. I haven't shot it for some time now, I moved on to lighter rifles cause I mainly hunt deer, so the 308 norma sits in my safe.
No, they definitely are in a different class than say a SMLE or Remington 788.
The quality and design of the action, and the fact all 4 lugs were hand-lapped, created a very strong action which is the reason Roy Weatherby used the design for his first 378 Weatherby Magnum rifles. Philip Sharpe - while designing the 7 x 61 S&H cartridge - had an original M54J fired repeatably with proof rounds loaded to over 100,000 psi.
- Location
- Western Manitoba
I have a S&L m60 and "cleaned up" a younger guy's inherited m65 - both were 7x61 S&H. I suspect is what "old school" good looked like - no evidence of epoxy bedding, etc. - appears to be careful scraped fitting of the wood - to fit the metal. The bolt has to be circa twice the diameter of Mauser 98 - very snug fit into the action raceway - so not much for wobble, and with the rear locking is very short bolt length throw. A fairly thick walled tubular receiver - no doubt to handle the breach pressures imposed on a rear locking action - I believe I saw a reproduction of a newspaper ad - probably saw it somewhere on Internet - in the ad, Remington 700 and Winchester Model 70 were circa $129 or $139 - S&L and Weatherby rifles were circa $359.
Is a bit of curiosity if loading for 7x61 - there were two versions of Norma brass - original is head stamped 7x61 Re - is thicker walls and case heads - then is "Super 7x61" - has more internal powder room - exact same size on outside - same reloading dies, fired in same rifles, apparently the same maximum pressure ratings - Norma's attempt to catch up to Remington's belted 7 mm - did not quite make it, although the barrel lengths probably made the velocity difference to be "moot". I do not think is wise to "work up a loading" for the "Super" brass, and then substitute the "Re" brass - maybe a bit like some commercial 308 Win versus some military 7.62 NATO. I think Phil Sharpe's initial design for the 7x61 was to use 160 grain bullets and IMR 4350 powder - even gumpy old Elmer Keith commented in one of his columns how well that cartridge was balanced for the case volume, bore diameter, etc.
I think the original 7x61 often came with 26" barrels - meaning was not much difference to a 24" 7 mm Rem Mag - but I think many 7x61 rifles were converted to 7 mm Rem Mag because was easier to find ammo. For some reason, it seems B.C. mountain areas had more exposure to 308 Norma Mag and 7x61 S&H - at least most of the new Norma brass and factory ammo that I ended up with appeared to come from out West. I am not sure if any one other than Norma made brass or ammo for those cartridges.
Is a bit of curiosity if loading for 7x61 - there were two versions of Norma brass - original is head stamped 7x61 Re - is thicker walls and case heads - then is "Super 7x61" - has more internal powder room - exact same size on outside - same reloading dies, fired in same rifles, apparently the same maximum pressure ratings - Norma's attempt to catch up to Remington's belted 7 mm - did not quite make it, although the barrel lengths probably made the velocity difference to be "moot". I do not think is wise to "work up a loading" for the "Super" brass, and then substitute the "Re" brass - maybe a bit like some commercial 308 Win versus some military 7.62 NATO. I think Phil Sharpe's initial design for the 7x61 was to use 160 grain bullets and IMR 4350 powder - even gumpy old Elmer Keith commented in one of his columns how well that cartridge was balanced for the case volume, bore diameter, etc.
I think the original 7x61 often came with 26" barrels - meaning was not much difference to a 24" 7 mm Rem Mag - but I think many 7x61 rifles were converted to 7 mm Rem Mag because was easier to find ammo. For some reason, it seems B.C. mountain areas had more exposure to 308 Norma Mag and 7x61 S&H - at least most of the new Norma brass and factory ammo that I ended up with appeared to come from out West. I am not sure if any one other than Norma made brass or ammo for those cartridges.
Last edited:
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
Not to mention the receiver almost totally shrouds the bolt with a narrow loading port making the action very stiff.
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
Potashminer, your right about the wood to metal fit being very precise, my rifle isn't glass bedded and I'm afraid to do it simply because its so accurate as is.
- Location
- Western Manitoba
Somehow I read the S&L User Instructions - that port is called an "ejection port" - a bit unusual rifle - insert one cartridge through that port into the chamber - close bolt and engage the safety, then flip it over, open hinged floor plate and drop in three rounds - the follower is "ambidextrous" - does not matter if first cartridge is on left or right side - that follower handles either way. I believe one could lose a lot of skin trying to fill that magazine through the ejection port.
Thinking - the two that I worked on (M60 and M65) were chambered in the belted 7x61 - so is possible that one chambered for smaller case - like 30-06 - might be able to put four or five in the magazine - and I do not know if those type had an ambidextrous follower or not - maybe becomes important which side the first one goes in the magazine?
Last edited:
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
My mistake your right, I haven't touched my rifle for some time, now that you mention it I remember reading that.
Yeah, some people could break an anvil. The Schultz & Larsen is very strong, very smooth and very rigid. It will easily stand up to all factory ammunition and any tested published reload. There is no sane reason to push beyond this for a few feet per second on these or any other rifle. I doubt that you could find a factory made rifle that was as well designed or made to a higher standard. Today these rifles are older than many of the owners, there has been lots of time for neglect and abuse so each must be judged individually but the original quality exceeded anything made in North America and only a very few European rifles could equal it.
I agree with most of what's been said about the Schultz & Larsen rifles of the 1950s and 60s (the M54J, M60, M65, and M68). They were really excellent rifles in just about every way. As noted, a super-smooth action, extremely fine build quality, excellent trigger, and really superb (single-point cut-rifled) barrels. I don't recall another factory rifle that equaled the S&L in overall quality and desirability.
The M65 was the first of that series to offer ####-on-opening, considered a big improvement. The M65 was a fine rifle and was slightly improved with the M68. The latter had the fully-shrouded bolt sleeve (a mild improvement), had a slightly different floorplate release, and did feature one practical improvement--that being the lowering slightly of the ejection port to permit better ejection. Many M65 owners had experienced ejection failures, with the case being ejected too vertically and hitting the bottom of the scope, with the case falling back into the ejection port (a similar problem to that experienced with the Sako 85).
One thing to check with any M65 is the rifling twist. Some 7x61 S&Hs had the slower 12" twist. For general use (particularly with bullets 160-grain and heavier), the 10" twist is preferred. Barrel lengths varied. Some were 24", some 26", some 25" (my M68DL has a 25" bbl.) and some 24.5", 25.5", etc. I have read that S&L machined their barrels (and they currently state this with their new-series rifles) with a slight constriction at the muzzle (as Anschutz does), and the final barrel lengths may have been determined once the desired length of constriction had been established.
There was never a question about the S&L's ability to handle high pressures. As ‘Boo has mentioned, Weatherby had no hesitation in using a M54J action (dubbed the M56) for his first .378 Wby rifles. A M65 action was tested by the H.P. White Laboratory and was found to withstand 129,000 PSI pressure—undoubtedly well in excess of what a Mauser 98 or similar action would have handled.
The only drawbacks that I can see for the M65 and M68 S&Ls are (1) the rear-locking action that can lead to brass stretching (so a concern only for the handloader) and (2) their somewhat heavier weights. The massive cylindrical receiver, with its very thick walls and narrow ejection port, along with its all-steel construction, make for a somewhat heavier rifle than a similarly-chambered rifle from most other makers. My M68DL in 7x61 S&H,for example, weighs about 8.4 lbs. bare. Non-magnum S&Ls will run a little lighter with lighter barrels.
The issue of brass-stretching with the rear-locking arrangement is real. We get some bolt-compression in an action like this. This is found with all rear-locking actions, such as the Steyr-Mannlicher, Golden Eagle, and others. When I fired some factory Norma 7x61 S&H ammunition (clearly loaded to the max) in my M68DL, I had real difficulty in rechambering the fired brass. On reloading, the shoulder has to be set back, and, if you continue with similar loads and pressure, the sequence of shoulder set-back and firing will lead to case head separation over 5-6 loadings. Excessive brass stretching will occur with continued really stiff loads, so the solution is to stay below true maximum loads and try to go with neck-only sizing as long as possible, or, at the least, partial F-L sizing.
As for prices back in the day, I looked these up in my 1971 Gun Digest, and found the S&L M68DL listed at $485 (US). In comparison, the Weatherby Mk. V was listed at $329, and the Winchester M70 at $170. The extensive hand work with the S&L rifles, such as the single-point cut rifling and labor-intensive fitting and finishing, led to their demise. They were no longer commercially competitive alongside the competition that had gone to far-less labor-intensive manufacturing methods, and their production stopped somewhere around 1970. In the end, only 4,720 M65/M65DL rifles were made, and even fewer, 2,238, M68DLs were ever made.
For those interested, there is the Schultz & Larsen Club website that contains more information about these rifles. Actually, there are two club websites (both links below), with each containing slightly different information. The more recent website is given first below.
https://schultzlarsenclub.dk/language/en/welcome-to-schultz-and-larsen-club/
https://schultzlarsenclub.dk/language/en/project/the-m68dl/
Edit. I forgot that the OP inquired about price. I think guntech has it about right--about $1500 for one in really good original condition. I recently sold a very-good-original-condition M65DL in .264 Win. Mag. for $1700, but that included scope bases and reloading dies. You will see them for less, but, in many cases, they will be rechambered, rebarreled, glass-bedded, or in poor condition. Also, you'll see M60s and even M54Js for less, but they are not quite as desirable as the M65s or M68s, and will be older and have ####-on-closing operation.
The M65 was the first of that series to offer ####-on-opening, considered a big improvement. The M65 was a fine rifle and was slightly improved with the M68. The latter had the fully-shrouded bolt sleeve (a mild improvement), had a slightly different floorplate release, and did feature one practical improvement--that being the lowering slightly of the ejection port to permit better ejection. Many M65 owners had experienced ejection failures, with the case being ejected too vertically and hitting the bottom of the scope, with the case falling back into the ejection port (a similar problem to that experienced with the Sako 85).
One thing to check with any M65 is the rifling twist. Some 7x61 S&Hs had the slower 12" twist. For general use (particularly with bullets 160-grain and heavier), the 10" twist is preferred. Barrel lengths varied. Some were 24", some 26", some 25" (my M68DL has a 25" bbl.) and some 24.5", 25.5", etc. I have read that S&L machined their barrels (and they currently state this with their new-series rifles) with a slight constriction at the muzzle (as Anschutz does), and the final barrel lengths may have been determined once the desired length of constriction had been established.
There was never a question about the S&L's ability to handle high pressures. As ‘Boo has mentioned, Weatherby had no hesitation in using a M54J action (dubbed the M56) for his first .378 Wby rifles. A M65 action was tested by the H.P. White Laboratory and was found to withstand 129,000 PSI pressure—undoubtedly well in excess of what a Mauser 98 or similar action would have handled.
The only drawbacks that I can see for the M65 and M68 S&Ls are (1) the rear-locking action that can lead to brass stretching (so a concern only for the handloader) and (2) their somewhat heavier weights. The massive cylindrical receiver, with its very thick walls and narrow ejection port, along with its all-steel construction, make for a somewhat heavier rifle than a similarly-chambered rifle from most other makers. My M68DL in 7x61 S&H,for example, weighs about 8.4 lbs. bare. Non-magnum S&Ls will run a little lighter with lighter barrels.
The issue of brass-stretching with the rear-locking arrangement is real. We get some bolt-compression in an action like this. This is found with all rear-locking actions, such as the Steyr-Mannlicher, Golden Eagle, and others. When I fired some factory Norma 7x61 S&H ammunition (clearly loaded to the max) in my M68DL, I had real difficulty in rechambering the fired brass. On reloading, the shoulder has to be set back, and, if you continue with similar loads and pressure, the sequence of shoulder set-back and firing will lead to case head separation over 5-6 loadings. Excessive brass stretching will occur with continued really stiff loads, so the solution is to stay below true maximum loads and try to go with neck-only sizing as long as possible, or, at the least, partial F-L sizing.
As for prices back in the day, I looked these up in my 1971 Gun Digest, and found the S&L M68DL listed at $485 (US). In comparison, the Weatherby Mk. V was listed at $329, and the Winchester M70 at $170. The extensive hand work with the S&L rifles, such as the single-point cut rifling and labor-intensive fitting and finishing, led to their demise. They were no longer commercially competitive alongside the competition that had gone to far-less labor-intensive manufacturing methods, and their production stopped somewhere around 1970. In the end, only 4,720 M65/M65DL rifles were made, and even fewer, 2,238, M68DLs were ever made.
For those interested, there is the Schultz & Larsen Club website that contains more information about these rifles. Actually, there are two club websites (both links below), with each containing slightly different information. The more recent website is given first below.
https://schultzlarsenclub.dk/language/en/welcome-to-schultz-and-larsen-club/
https://schultzlarsenclub.dk/language/en/project/the-m68dl/
Edit. I forgot that the OP inquired about price. I think guntech has it about right--about $1500 for one in really good original condition. I recently sold a very-good-original-condition M65DL in .264 Win. Mag. for $1700, but that included scope bases and reloading dies. You will see them for less, but, in many cases, they will be rechambered, rebarreled, glass-bedded, or in poor condition. Also, you'll see M60s and even M54Js for less, but they are not quite as desirable as the M65s or M68s, and will be older and have ####-on-closing operation.
Last edited:
I had one in '06. Wonderfully accurate and well made .I sold it to a friend whose only complaint was the small loading port because he had big stubby fingers .
He still hunts with it however and has killed a pile of moose and elk with it.
Cat
He still hunts with it however and has killed a pile of moose and elk with it.
Cat
- Location
- Western Manitoba
Your friend ought to read the pamphlet, or at least Post #12 - that is an "ejection" port, not a "loading" port. The S&L is not loaded the same way as a Mauser 98. I suspect the odd Norwegian, Swede or Dane also had "big stubby fingers".
