Sako Carbonlite

sheephunter

sheephunter

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
It looks like Sako is getting in on the lightweight game as well. For all those that think the Finnlite is heavy, here's Sako's answer.
33203d1421702019-sako-carbonlight-new-2015-image.jpg
 
Not bad to hit 5 lbs. with a magazine. $2850 US means around $3500 here in all probability, that's too much for that rifle. $2500 I could understand,but not more. The indent on the butt of the stock looks fugly, other than that I like it. At least they didn't camo up the stock.

But weight wise, Kimber's still in the lead! :dancingbanana:
 
I am likin' this one. Not expecting to see one in a shop any time soon, though it would be nice... 2.3kg is a hair over 5lbs so its definitely something to compare to the lightweights from Forbes, Kimber, etc... but from Sako
 
Any link to specs?

I hope it has a quality stock. The biggest let down of the finnlite (aside from it's not so light weight) is the cheap tuberwear stock.

A quality composite stock with a slimmer barrel profile and some machine work to lighten the reciver could be a hit. However it doesn't really look like they did that from the picture. We'll see.
 
cam1936 said:
Any link to specs?

I hope it has a quality stock. The biggest let down of the finnlite (aside from it's not so light weight) is the cheap tuberwear stock.

A quality composite stock with a slimmer barrel profile and some machine work to lighten the reciver could be a hit. However it doesn't really look like they did that from the picture. We'll see.
Click to expand...

http://www.sako.fi/rifles/sako-85/85-carbonlight
Stock is carbon fiber, I don't think it would need an "upgrade".
 
double gun said:
That's impressive for sako for sure.
Click to expand...

Yep, I'd like to see what they did to make it so trim. Slim barrel and a lighter stock wouldn't chomp 1.5lbs off a finnlite.

Still not as light as a Kimber for lots more $$$. However, it is in the same league weight wise and for those that really like the 85 action it should fill a niche and sell.
 
sheephunter said:
Isn't the Kimber 5 pounds 2 ounces? The new Sako is coming in at 5 pounds 1 ounce I hear.
Click to expand...

Kimber Mountain Ascent is 4 lbs 13 oz, with a 22" bbl. in the short action calibers.
Montana is 5 lbs 5 oz, also a 22" barrel and a whole lot cheaper.
Regardless, this Sako is nice, just too much money for what you're getting, IMO, but same with the Mountain Ascent and that one has a really ugly stock.
 
bearkilr said:
Not bad to hit 5 lbs. with a magazine. $2850 US means around $3500 here in all probability, that's too much for that rifle. $2500 I could understand,but not more. The indent on the butt of the stock looks fugly, other than that I like it. At least they didn't camo up the stock.

But weight wise, Kimber's still in the lead! :dancingbanana:
Click to expand...
I'd have to agree its a got a slicker look to it over the Kimber Mountain Ascent (and all other camo'd rifles IMO)
 
Kimber could simply save that extra 1 oz on the weight of their rifles by not painting the stock. The bare carbon look is ###y on the sako and paint just adds weight
 
StevieK said:
Kimber could simply save that extra 1 oz on the weight of their rifles by not painting the stock. The bare carbon look is ###y on the sako and paint just adds weight
Click to expand...

The camo paint Kimbers are already lighter. No manufacturer will market a rifle with an unfinished rifle stock, even if it saves 1 oz.
The Sako has the soft touch coating according to the website, so it's not bare CF, and likely adds weight as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom