Sako 85 discontinued

Duncan Idaho said:
This modular trend strikes me as just another dumb millennial thing and Beretta jumped on the bandwagon. Rather than adjust and tweak a good build as they did moving through from the L61, to the A1 through A5, the 75 and 85, they reinvented the wheel and started all over again with another economy Tikka base.
Click to expand...
Aside from their appeal to European gun owners because of their ability to represent several rifles counted by authorities as only one, there is some additional benefit in switch-barrel guns in having the same basic rifle and scope in several different chamberings so that it comes to the shoulder and eye identically from one chambering to another.

As for aesthetics, I personally prefer a one-piece stock over the two-piece version on the Sako 100 (and some other European switch-barrel rifles) as seen on this Schultz & Larsen Victory switch-barrel model:

5PsjdRd.jpg
 
Last edited:
South Pender said:
In North America, where we can own as many guns as we want, there is no real need for a switch-barrel rifle, but in Europe, where in many countries the number of guns one can own is severely limited, they make sense, since a single rifle can have several barrels, with the rig counted by the authorities as only one gun. Sako has a very large market in Europe, and so going the switch-barrel route makes sense for them. I suppose there is some small additional advantage in having the same basic rifle and scope in several different chamberings so that it comes to the shoulder and eye identically from one chambering to another.

As for aesthetics, I personally prefer a one-piece stock over the two-piece version on the Sako 100 (and some other European switch-barrel rifles) as seen on this Schultz & Larsen Victory switch-barrel model:
5PsjdRd.jpg
Click to expand...

funny some countries in europe changed that and now you need to register as well the barrels ... sr21 and sr30 were good for changing barrels with a more traditionnal look if needed.
 
Its too bad they couldn't get the sako 85 working right, I always thought it was an inconsistancy with the ejector/extractor dimentions. Top loading capable actions are great for pest/culling type shooting. Some of the austrailian pig hunters(like hunting with stu) absolutely clean house with various top loading bolt guns.
 
4fifty8 said:
My 85's all work fine as is.
Click to expand...
Mine too. And a buddy's 85 has also been free of any ejection issues. So maybe a small number had the problem. I wonder whether this was something that Sako quietly fixed without any announcement during the run of the 85s after complaints surfaced. I bought mine about 4 years ago, and my buddy's was bought about a year after that, so both were relatively recent purchases and late in the 16-year production run of the 85. It's not unusual at all for gun makers to make minor unannounced tweaks during the production run of a model. Sako did this with their L- and A-series rifles, as did Schultz & Larsen with their M65DL and M68DL models, and others have done the same.

I've owned a fair number of Sako rifles over the years and consider them to be top-tier guns. The real die-hard Sako aficionados consider the L-series rifles to be the most-desirable of the lot, with the A-series next. I’ve owned both, but in my opinion, the 85 is a superior action (as long as it ejects;)).
 
Last edited:
I’m not aware of any other rifle that puts the ejector, either blade or spring plunger type at 6 o’clock on the bolt face. Why did they do this on the sako 75/85? It was a mistake imo.
 
Buckmastr said:
I’m not aware of any other rifle that puts the ejector, either blade or spring plunger type at 6 o’clock on the bolt face. Why did they do this on the sako 75/85? It was a mistake imo.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the problem . Why they don't fix is most euro's shoot with open sights and the scope is a non issue
 
Putting it at 3, 4, 5 o’clock like the old Sakos, Winchesters, Rugers, Remingtons, Mausers, Springfields etc would have in no way affected iron sight use. An otherwise great (and expensive) Sako rifle with a flaw.

Sacko. Sacko ####.
 
Bucky you can't hide your love for SAKO. Even in your takedown of the 85 you reference how great the old SAKO's are lol.

The only issue is they are heavy.
 
Not that it should be necessary on an expensive rifle, but I gather that the fix for the 85s that had ejection problems was to modify the extractor (obviously not much could be done to the ejector). Giving it a stronger spring and slightly heavier claw enabled it to hold the cartridge case more tightly to the bolt face on extraction, and this has seemed to fix the problem in most cases where it occurred.
 
3 actions lengths. Multiple factory stocks (glossy, oil, laminate, McMillan,etc), different barrel contours, iron sights or not, beautiful triggers… the Sako A series was the best of the best at the time and it’s been all downhill since imo.
I don’t care how much it weighs when I have a quality Sako in my hands.
pLfnbTBl.jpg
 
Slimbo said:
Bucky loves heavy guns. Light guns are for little girls like me
Click to expand...
As for weight of the various Sako models, the L-series rifles made from the 1950s through 1967 or so tended to be lighter than later models. Many of these had "Bofors" stamped on the barrel, indicating that the barrels were made of Swedish Bofors steel. The barrel contours of these rifles were lighter than those of the A-series rifles that followed, and the overall rifles were a little lighter and faster-handling than those that followed with heavier barrels and beefier stocks.

I'm not sure at what point rifles start being described as "heavy," and I guess it depends to some extent on chambering. My 85 in .270 Win. tips the scale at 7 lbs. 4 oz., and so would not be described as a lightweight (perhaps as a "medium-weight"), but it certainly doesn't feel heavy to me. Scoped it runs about 8 lbs. 6 oz. if I'm remembering correctly.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom