• Hey All! Lately there has been more and more scammers on the forum board. They register and replies to members requests for guns and/or parts or other things. The reply contains a gmail or hotmail address or similar ”anonymous” email addresses which they want you to reply to. DO NOT ANSWER ANY STRANGE MESSAGES! They often state something like this: ”Hello! Saw your post about purchasing a stock for a Safari. KnuckleheadBob has one. Email him at: [email protected]” If you receive any strange messages: Check the status of whoever message you. If they have no posts and signed up the same day or very recently, stay away. Same goes for other members they might refer to. Check them too and if they are long standing members, PM them and ask if the message is legit. Most likely it’s not. Then use the report function in each message or post so I can kick them out! Beware of anything that might seem fishy! And again, for all of you who registered your personal name as username, please contact me so I can change it to a more anonymous username. You’d be surprised of how much one can find out about a person from just a username on a forum such ad our! All the best! And be safe! Jim

Sako full wood just sold - but is it an L46 or L461?

Sako Collectors Club Discussion Forum

Register Log in
B

Branxhunter

Well-Known Member
This .222 just sold here in Australia for $AU1600:

image.jpeg

The advert states that it has a 4x MSW Wetzlar scope. It also says that it is an L46. The shape of the butt/cheekpiece looks more like an L461, but I know that there is some cross-over as I have seen an late L46 sporter .222 with this shaped butt in a local LGS:

image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg


From these photos you can see that it is not always obvious from side-on photos whether the rifle has an L461 floor plate or an L46 detachable mag. What I think I can see in the photo of the full wood is the red paint on the bolt shroud which indicate it is an L46. Also I wouldn't expect the advertiser (Graeme Spraggon) to make a mistake in identifying the model.

Marcus
 
Not my forte, but this looks like an old Rhiimaki long-barreled FS. Which makes me think L46.
 
Rifle is a later L46, from my poor memory, serial in the mid 50,s seller has had it at a few gun shows , last at maitland here in nsw.
 
Yes, the stock configuration (Monte Carlo) was the same on the late L46's and successor L461's. I'm sure they were not exactly simultaneous, but the stock update, change to forged bottom metal, advent of Bofors Steel mark, and offering of the Deluxe version L46 all occurred around the same time.
 
If only it were the carbine length fullwood it would have sold ages ago. It’s been for sale on usedguns once before a while back.
Spraggon gets a few good ones. He had an anniversary fullwood .30-06 a while back for sale. Some photos of it here on SCC I posted up somewhere.
 
deergoose said:
Depends. Just my opinion, but I'd pay more for an L46 Carbine than a rifle full stock, and pay more for an L461 rifle full stock than a carbine.
Click to expand...
Agree. The carbines in the L46 are much more rare and vs versa in the L461 in my experience. The carbines make nice hunting rifles when paired with short cases like the .222 and .308.
 
stonecreek said:
Yes, the stock configuration (Monte Carlo) was the same on the late L46's and successor L461's. I'm sure they were not exactly simultaneous, but the stock update, change to forged bottom metal, advent of Bofors Steel mark, and offering of the Deluxe version L46 all occurred around the same time.
Click to expand...

Around 1956-1957, Sako built an investment casting foundry and utilized lost wax technique.

I am not sure if they used Swedish Bofors steel for other parts than the barrels but it is possible at least.

Maybe the Finnish steel they used before wasn’t up to par for the investment casting? It came from the Lokomo foundry which is still operating today.

I also read somewhere that they tried to use investment casting for receivers but it didn’t turn out well.

I have a source who might be able to shed some light to this and more and I will get back to you guys when I know more.

Jim
 
L61R said:
Around 1956-1957, Sako built an investment casting foundry and utilized lost wax technique.

I am not sure if they used Swedish Bofors steel for other parts than the barrels but it is possible at least.

Maybe the Finnish steel they used before wasn’t up to par for the investment casting? It came from the Lokomo foundry which is still operating today.

I also read somewhere that they tried to use investment casting for receivers but it didn’t turn out well.

I have a source who might be able to shed some light to this and more and I will get back to you guys when I know more.

Jim
Click to expand...
The Bofors steel mark is widely misunderstood, especially in the U.S. The reason that Sako used Bofors barrel steel in the postwar period was war reparations to Russia. Finland was obliged to send most of its domestic steel production to the USSR for several years after the war, resulting in a shortage of domestic steel in Finland. To get around the shortage, Sako procured material from Bofors in Sweden. There was never any question of Swedish steel being any better than Finnish steel, it was just a question of availability. When high-quality Finnish steel was once again available, Sako switched to the domestic product. The common belief in the superiority of Bofors steel in Sako rifles probably is because the Bofors name was well known in the United States because the U.S. Navy used a lot of Bofors-designed antiaircraft guns during WWII. Americans had heard of Bofors, it helped win the war, therefore it must be better.
 
Another reason that the Bofors Steel stamp is important to Sako enthusiasts is that it happens that the Bofors stamp was dropped approximately at the same time that Sako started making their sporter barrels and stocks a bit heavier. Therefore, the Bofors stamp is closely (if only accidentally) associated with the more slender, lighter contours of earlier Sako sporters.
 
icebear said:
The Bofors steel mark is widely misunderstood, especially in the U.S. The reason that Sako used Bofors barrel steel in the postwar period was war reparations to Russia. Finland was obliged to send most of its domestic steel production to the USSR for several years after the war, resulting in a shortage of domestic steel in Finland. To get around the shortage, Sako procured material from Bofors in Sweden. There was never any question of Swedish steel being any better than Finnish steel, it was just a question of availability. When high-quality Finnish steel was once again available, Sako switched to the domestic product. The common belief in the superiority of Bofors steel in Sako rifles probably is because the Bofors name was well known in the United States because the U.S. Navy used a lot of Bofors-designed antiaircraft guns during WWII. Americans had heard of Bofors, it helped win the war, therefore it must be better.
Click to expand...
That's about the tenth different take I've run across about Bofors steel & Sako, any one of which "sounds" plausible. Finland being "obliged" to send it's steel production to the USSR is suspect to me. Why would a country short it's own military arms maker of the raw materials needed for it's own defense by selling it all to a country they fought a war with to gain their independence? It will probably always have some mystery associated with it, but it really doesn't matter. It never was about the steel anyway, but, like Deergoose said, the cool little "Bofors Steel" stamping. Image is everything. The truth is boring.
 
Last edited:
Finland payed off the war reparations to USSR in late 1952. After that there were no obligations. I'm not educated enough in the subject to say more than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top