A Tale of Sako, S&B, Bad Luck and Customer Service
- Thread starter owlowl
- Start date
- Status
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
It's from Brownell's. I read a post on another forum a couple years ago about it, I'll see if I can find it.
EDIT- Sent you a PM with the link to info. For those who are curious, it's Brownell's part number 309-000-009, Extended Sako retainer pin spring, made by Gre-Tan. Sounds like 2-3 coils need to be trimmed and the factory spring replaced, and everything works.
Last edited:
IMO its the spring in the extractor that causes the issue.
FWIW Cooper also had the same issue with the M52, but have switched to plunger ejectors in the current models, instead of the blade...Sako should follow suit.
heavenIsAlie
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Abbotsford
to bad about the issues, that is a very good looking rifle!
As I stated before, i think you were very fortunate in your outcome dealing with Stoeger. Their warranty dept. defines ineptitude in my experiences.
Mighty Peace
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Land of the Mighty Peace
Never a problem with any of my Sako m75 rifles....more the early m85's I do believe. IMO, since Berretta USA bought Sako/Tikka, their quality of work has dropped.
owlowl, sorry to here about your issues.
sharp shooter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Essex county (Ontario)
Get a nice minty Sako from back in the day...Pick one out from one of the sites in the States and have Clay bring it over for you. You can"t go wrong with that.
Or a 60's Browning Safari
or a M70. New or pre 64.
Or a 60's Browning Safari
or a M70. New or pre 64.
Last edited:
- Location
- Steel Town and The Peg
I have never had a problem with my Sako 85. It ejects just fine and ejected cartridges never did touch the scope. Must of been a bad batch made or maybe a former Savage employee works for Sako.
What an absolute beauty! As with you, my Zeiss scope is mounted in a similar position... everthing works perfectly. My 85 is one of the best rifles I've ever owned. Thankfully owlowl got a well deserved refund!! There's only one Al's that I shop at, and its not in Toronto! I hope a real heartfelt apology is posted instead of that lame a$$ response. Owlowl is too kind to have accepted that drivel.
I sure do agree with all you posted.
Easy mystery to figure out, that's for sure.
Threads as soft written as this get my backing 100 %.
Hope owlowl has a better time on the next one.
He sure has proved that lightening does strike twice.
Regards.
Just bumping this thread to add a similar story. Owlowl thanks for your detailed report. This issue needs to be discussed a bit more to have it out there more prominently for others to know of. I have found threads on other forums that address it, but I wanted to add what I have been able to discover for the benefit of anyone looking for an 85 in the future.
Firstly, Owl.... What a horrid feeling to find a new Sako in stock in a desirable calibre and pair it with an optic which does it justice and then realize something is wrong after spending a lot on what SHOULD be a perfect setup. I felt ill as you must have.
For my 30th bday I decided to splurge on a new hunting rifle. For years I had been mulling over what would be my next rifle. I had been looking at Sako 85's for some time and had shouldered them dozens of times when any local shops would have them in stock, however, they rarely had models I wanted in calibres I wanted. I liked how they felt and wanted an out of the box shooter I could enjoy for many years. I found my Finnlight 85 in .270 win at a local shop in early April 2014. The girl at the gun counter looked like she wanted to kill me when I asked her to double check that she was sure she had two Finnlight 85's in .270win in stock (I had asked for them endlessly for years and again only more obscure calibres were ever in stock). I placed it on hold for a day to mull it over and ended up picking it up the next day.
I was thrilled to have the thing finally and took a few proud new owner pictures of it and sent them to my shooting buddies. We were all excited for a new build and I proceeded to start narrowing the optics options. I ended up choosing a Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 BT 4W which I ordered from Wolverine. Prior to the scope arriving a friend suggested I pick up some A Zoom metal snap caps to cycle the rifle. I did this a few times and was almost immediately concerned with the angle of ejection. It was ejecting out of the rifle at 1 O'clock or 1:30, causing me to wonder how it would eject without hitting the scope. It was at this point that I read all of the threads about the poorly placed 6 O'clock blade ejector.... As a side note: The other forums essentially say that this ejection issue is commonly known on the specific action size used for the .270 and .30-06 (long action), is not present on the short action (.243, .308, etc) and the jury remains out on whether this is an issue on the magnum actions (which confuses me because it is relatively easy to tell if it is occuring or not).
So I placed a call to the large retailer I purchased the rifle from to arrange for scope mounting or remedy the problem if it arose. The first person I spoke with was knowledgeable and familiar with 85's but had not heard of this issue. He was leaving for the day and passed me off to a colleague, who owns a Finnlight in a magnum calibre. The colleague later told me he was immediately skeptical of my claims over the phone, but was very polite and invited me in to bring my rifle and scope and was confident we would be able to find a suitable mounting setup as he had all the Optilocks from "extra low" to "high". I arrived, asked for this pleasant fellow and was given his full attention for the next two hours..... First he tried to mount the Swaro with "low" Optilocks (using the more common bases and rings setup). Initially he did not think it was ejecting into the bottom of the scope, but it was. Next we tried with "medium" or whatever they call it, and again initially it did not appear to be hitting the scope but was after closer scrutiny. Same thing on "high", which should be called "too high" for optimum scope position, for me anyways. He had another .270 in stock and it did the same. He now believed me and had witnessed exactly what I was talking about. I am not a gunsmith or anything close but here is my conclusion by simply observing my rifle's ejection: the 6 O'clock ejector is poorly placed. At the moment when it works with the extractor claw to eject the spent case, it pushes the bottom of the case square in the middle (rather than a preferable push from say 7 or 8 O'clock if you're looking down the barrel) and makes the case stand up too far vertically, rather than ejecting it out more horizontally. You could do very slow, almost manual, range ejections without this happening but not a true field ejection for a quick second shot. The case stands up into the bottom of the scope, before being successfully ejected. I never experienced the snap cap not successfully ejecting, but it was unacceptable to ding up the new Swaro. The short actions apparently do not have this problem, not because they don't have the same 6 O'clock ejector, but because the length of the short action cases are short enough to allow more clearance. The fellow who helped me tried with a .243 and confirmed no issue.
So to speak to a few points which I came across attempting to reassure 85 owners with respect to this issue on other forums (just IMHO):
1. Raising the scope high will eliminate the problem: It didn' for mine and I am glad it didn't. Had it not hit on high setting I would have been tempted to accept my scope being mouned higher than would be optimal for comfortable use with good cheek weld. Optilock height labels are misleading, their low is high enough, let alone medium or high. This of course depends on each individual's preferred positioning but for me high was too high, even if it would have worked.
2. The ejection only hits the scope (and only on the turret) if you have overly bulky target turrets: This was apparently cited as the problem with a recent A7/Burris Scope package being sold together: Mine was hitting directly on the underbody of the scope tube itself, not an overly extended, oversized turret.
3. The problem is rifle specific (some 270's or 30-06's do it and others don't): I read many threads where people said their long action 85 was not doing this: I think theirs was ejecting so they either did not notice or were willfully blind to their scope getting dinged. Again, perhaps not an issue to everyone, but for me it was. It's the combo of the ejector location and length of the casing. I cannot see how anyone's is not doing it if you are actually paying very close attention, and care. I could be wrong and would be very interested to see a video clip of a totally clean ejection from an action of this size, specifically a 270win.
4. Changing and/or altering internal springs will help: I cannot speak to this as I did not try this but I felt it seemed like something a person should not have to do when spending this kind of money (similar to the suggestion of rotating your scope 90 degrees in the rings to move the turrets vertically as I have read Beretta suggested to some American owners). People had sent their 85's back to Beretta and to gunsmiths, who could not remedy the issue, so I am skeptical that the DIY spring replacement would solve the problem. I read the post where this was suggested and all the credit to the intelligent sounding creative fellow who shaved down a spring and re-engineered his 85, but I wanted to have this dealt with with the gun being new and within my initial purchase period, so I did not want to spend time and effort to try. Kudos to the DIY provider because I realize there will be many who do not have the return option and need to work with what they have.
So in the end, it appears to be a design flaw, which luckily does not manifest on short actions. I guess the choice to make actions sized to chamberings has allowed some 85's to escape this issue. Time will tell whether the .308 I ordered will have this issue also. I noticed that Owl also was thinking .308, was this also because you believed it would not happen in the short action? Anyways, all of the above is just my experience upon care observation. I was shocked and feel it's something to get out there more prominently.
Some specific questions:
1. Has anyone else discussed this with Stoeger/Sako? What was their explantion? I wonder if any actual fixes are possible?
2. Does anyone have a short action or magnum action who can speak more definitively as to whether this is present on their rifle?
Thanks for reading, and best of luck to anyone who is dealing with this or any other design flaw on a brand new setup.... Less than ideal to say the least.
Firstly, Owl.... What a horrid feeling to find a new Sako in stock in a desirable calibre and pair it with an optic which does it justice and then realize something is wrong after spending a lot on what SHOULD be a perfect setup. I felt ill as you must have.
For my 30th bday I decided to splurge on a new hunting rifle. For years I had been mulling over what would be my next rifle. I had been looking at Sako 85's for some time and had shouldered them dozens of times when any local shops would have them in stock, however, they rarely had models I wanted in calibres I wanted. I liked how they felt and wanted an out of the box shooter I could enjoy for many years. I found my Finnlight 85 in .270 win at a local shop in early April 2014. The girl at the gun counter looked like she wanted to kill me when I asked her to double check that she was sure she had two Finnlight 85's in .270win in stock (I had asked for them endlessly for years and again only more obscure calibres were ever in stock). I placed it on hold for a day to mull it over and ended up picking it up the next day.
I was thrilled to have the thing finally and took a few proud new owner pictures of it and sent them to my shooting buddies. We were all excited for a new build and I proceeded to start narrowing the optics options. I ended up choosing a Swarovski Z5 3.5-18x44 BT 4W which I ordered from Wolverine. Prior to the scope arriving a friend suggested I pick up some A Zoom metal snap caps to cycle the rifle. I did this a few times and was almost immediately concerned with the angle of ejection. It was ejecting out of the rifle at 1 O'clock or 1:30, causing me to wonder how it would eject without hitting the scope. It was at this point that I read all of the threads about the poorly placed 6 O'clock blade ejector.... As a side note: The other forums essentially say that this ejection issue is commonly known on the specific action size used for the .270 and .30-06 (long action), is not present on the short action (.243, .308, etc) and the jury remains out on whether this is an issue on the magnum actions (which confuses me because it is relatively easy to tell if it is occuring or not).
So I placed a call to the large retailer I purchased the rifle from to arrange for scope mounting or remedy the problem if it arose. The first person I spoke with was knowledgeable and familiar with 85's but had not heard of this issue. He was leaving for the day and passed me off to a colleague, who owns a Finnlight in a magnum calibre. The colleague later told me he was immediately skeptical of my claims over the phone, but was very polite and invited me in to bring my rifle and scope and was confident we would be able to find a suitable mounting setup as he had all the Optilocks from "extra low" to "high". I arrived, asked for this pleasant fellow and was given his full attention for the next two hours..... First he tried to mount the Swaro with "low" Optilocks (using the more common bases and rings setup). Initially he did not think it was ejecting into the bottom of the scope, but it was. Next we tried with "medium" or whatever they call it, and again initially it did not appear to be hitting the scope but was after closer scrutiny. Same thing on "high", which should be called "too high" for optimum scope position, for me anyways. He had another .270 in stock and it did the same. He now believed me and had witnessed exactly what I was talking about. I am not a gunsmith or anything close but here is my conclusion by simply observing my rifle's ejection: the 6 O'clock ejector is poorly placed. At the moment when it works with the extractor claw to eject the spent case, it pushes the bottom of the case square in the middle (rather than a preferable push from say 7 or 8 O'clock if you're looking down the barrel) and makes the case stand up too far vertically, rather than ejecting it out more horizontally. You could do very slow, almost manual, range ejections without this happening but not a true field ejection for a quick second shot. The case stands up into the bottom of the scope, before being successfully ejected. I never experienced the snap cap not successfully ejecting, but it was unacceptable to ding up the new Swaro. The short actions apparently do not have this problem, not because they don't have the same 6 O'clock ejector, but because the length of the short action cases are short enough to allow more clearance. The fellow who helped me tried with a .243 and confirmed no issue.
So to speak to a few points which I came across attempting to reassure 85 owners with respect to this issue on other forums (just IMHO):
1. Raising the scope high will eliminate the problem: It didn' for mine and I am glad it didn't. Had it not hit on high setting I would have been tempted to accept my scope being mouned higher than would be optimal for comfortable use with good cheek weld. Optilock height labels are misleading, their low is high enough, let alone medium or high. This of course depends on each individual's preferred positioning but for me high was too high, even if it would have worked.
2. The ejection only hits the scope (and only on the turret) if you have overly bulky target turrets: This was apparently cited as the problem with a recent A7/Burris Scope package being sold together: Mine was hitting directly on the underbody of the scope tube itself, not an overly extended, oversized turret.
3. The problem is rifle specific (some 270's or 30-06's do it and others don't): I read many threads where people said their long action 85 was not doing this: I think theirs was ejecting so they either did not notice or were willfully blind to their scope getting dinged. Again, perhaps not an issue to everyone, but for me it was. It's the combo of the ejector location and length of the casing. I cannot see how anyone's is not doing it if you are actually paying very close attention, and care. I could be wrong and would be very interested to see a video clip of a totally clean ejection from an action of this size, specifically a 270win.
4. Changing and/or altering internal springs will help: I cannot speak to this as I did not try this but I felt it seemed like something a person should not have to do when spending this kind of money (similar to the suggestion of rotating your scope 90 degrees in the rings to move the turrets vertically as I have read Beretta suggested to some American owners). People had sent their 85's back to Beretta and to gunsmiths, who could not remedy the issue, so I am skeptical that the DIY spring replacement would solve the problem. I read the post where this was suggested and all the credit to the intelligent sounding creative fellow who shaved down a spring and re-engineered his 85, but I wanted to have this dealt with with the gun being new and within my initial purchase period, so I did not want to spend time and effort to try. Kudos to the DIY provider because I realize there will be many who do not have the return option and need to work with what they have.
So in the end, it appears to be a design flaw, which luckily does not manifest on short actions. I guess the choice to make actions sized to chamberings has allowed some 85's to escape this issue. Time will tell whether the .308 I ordered will have this issue also. I noticed that Owl also was thinking .308, was this also because you believed it would not happen in the short action? Anyways, all of the above is just my experience upon care observation. I was shocked and feel it's something to get out there more prominently.
Some specific questions:
1. Has anyone else discussed this with Stoeger/Sako? What was their explantion? I wonder if any actual fixes are possible?
2. Does anyone have a short action or magnum action who can speak more definitively as to whether this is present on their rifle?
Thanks for reading, and best of luck to anyone who is dealing with this or any other design flaw on a brand new setup.... Less than ideal to say the least.
Last edited:
Sad to hear, unfortunately I cant tell you anything optimistic.
Yes it is definitely a design flaw, yes it may or may not be an issue depending on cartridge length, extractor spring tension and the way you personally cycle the bolt. It seems to me way to many variables together in order to predict what your rifle will do. Anecdotal evidence I mostly saw was that long non magnum cartridges are most likely to have ejection issue.
Will an aftermarket spring fix this for you? No one can tell. Would you have better luck with a different caliber? Same thing - too many variables to predict that.
I personally can't trust a design which can fail with 100% working new parts and I'm not buying another $2k bolt rifle with cycling problems looming every time I'm too fast or too slow with the bolt. But your mileage may vary as they say.
Yes it is definitely a design flaw, yes it may or may not be an issue depending on cartridge length, extractor spring tension and the way you personally cycle the bolt. It seems to me way to many variables together in order to predict what your rifle will do. Anecdotal evidence I mostly saw was that long non magnum cartridges are most likely to have ejection issue.
Will an aftermarket spring fix this for you? No one can tell. Would you have better luck with a different caliber? Same thing - too many variables to predict that.
I personally can't trust a design which can fail with 100% working new parts and I'm not buying another $2k bolt rifle with cycling problems looming every time I'm too fast or too slow with the bolt. But your mileage may vary as they say.
- Location
- Steel Town and The Peg
Just as this beat-to-death thread has been resurrected, I will re-state my experience... 100% positive!
I am sure the vast majority of Sako owners are in the same boat. Every production firearm will have some issue in combination with some set-up or technique. Many firearms have come and gone in my collection, but Sakos always seem to remain.
oh... 30-06 Sako Bavarian Carbine, Sako low QD base/rings, Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10x44
My only problem is that it's hard to keep walnut ding free in the field!
I am sure the vast majority of Sako owners are in the same boat. Every production firearm will have some issue in combination with some set-up or technique. Many firearms have come and gone in my collection, but Sakos always seem to remain.
oh... 30-06 Sako Bavarian Carbine, Sako low QD base/rings, Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10x44
My only problem is that it's hard to keep walnut ding free in the field!
Last edited:
Dear Kurgan, you have been praising your Sako Bavarian for years, how good it is, how it functions flawlessly and so on. Don't you? Every thread about Sako has your "expert opinion"on it. Don't you mentioned that even in this very thread once it was started year ago? On 08-17-2013, 10:00 PM you said:
Yet a on the 04-22-2014, 10:13 AM you have said, and I quote:
You said it yourself - you took your Sako to the range for the first time this spring. For the first time since 2011 when you bough it. You were bragging about it for 3 years never making a shot! So your experience in keeping a Sako in a safe - 100% positive, maybe.
But it seems, my dear Kurgan, for the real shooting experience with Sako is... negligible.
PS
I took a screenshot of that, so please don't bother changing you old posts. It will show the last edit time anyway.
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/956108-A-Tale-of-Sako-S-amp-B-Bad-Luck-and-Customer-Service?p=9018496&viewfull=1#post9018496The Kurgan said:
Yet a on the 04-22-2014, 10:13 AM you have said, and I quote:
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1069723-Any-aftermarket-synthetic-stocks-that-fit-a-Sako-85-Bavarian-Carbine?p=10009201&viewfull=1#post10009201The Kurgan said:
You said it yourself - you took your Sako to the range for the first time this spring. For the first time since 2011 when you bough it. You were bragging about it for 3 years never making a shot! So your experience in keeping a Sako in a safe - 100% positive, maybe.
But it seems, my dear Kurgan, for the real shooting experience with Sako is... negligible.
PS
I took a screenshot of that, so please don't bother changing you old posts. It will show the last edit time anyway.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Holy crap dude....You with the frickin' CIA? WTF! If yer so observant on things, why don't you look up at the sky and see the daily chemtrail bombardment we have been undergoing for the past 20 years? I, at least have been filming & documenting this outrage since 2002 and I couldn't give a flying fook about a guy's passion fer
a particular banger. Oy Vey!
stickhunter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Victoria, B.C.
My Sako experience is limited to AV's, so not relevant to this discussion. However, if I recall reading correctly, Kurgan actually has two Bavarians and had posted one of them for sale on the EE as being his safe queen. I think in the quote above he's referring to taking the safe queen to the range for the first time. Presumably his other Bavarian has been used more regularly.
No I doubt this is the case. Before buying carbine, he consulted CGN here
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/627324-I-need-your-informed-opinions-cause-the-wallet-opens-on-Saturday-!
He clearly had no previous Sako experience and was going to buy Weatherby. Then he bough the carbine you can see it here:
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/628305-The-aftermath-of-opening-my-wallet-Sako-85-Bavarian-Carbine-in-30-06?highlight=sako+85
Then I can't find any reference to any other Sako he had but Carbine. His picture collection at
https://www.flickr.com/photos/25437334@N02/sets/
show us every single nut and bolt in his gun safe. Only carbine appears, no other Sako's in sight.
You probably confused it with his Tikka Sporter, which was also talked about a lot and was sold as you say. But T3 is not the same action is Sako 85, so this does not apply.
PS
Making 2,744 post on the forum since 2010 is free. But an ability to search posts by user name is PRICELESS )
- Status
