The future for Sako Oy

[Arian]

There have been some incremental improvements in powders since the late 1890's, and telescopic sights are a great deal better, but there have been absolutely no improvements in the design of cartridge-firing rifles in the last 125 years. Sure, manufacturers have modernized designs and equipment so that they can be produced by automated machines for less money, but no better than hand-machined firearms of yesteryear.

I'm amazed at how the industry has finessed much of the buying public into accepting and even preferring firearms made as cheaply as possible with black plastic and aluminum parts. An AR-15-type rifle costs a tiny fraction to produce compared to a quality wood-stocked bolt action, but they sell for similar money. It's easy to see why the industry works so hard to promote "Modern Sporting Rifles", "Chassis Rifles", and plastic pump shotguns with 8-round magazines, otherwise know as cheap crap.

i figured maybe barrels would have improved a bit tho, in terms of consistenct and metalurgy. On that note, completely unrelated, anyone know what kind of steel grade was used in early 20th century guns? A hunting buddy just dropped off a piece of his shotgun barrel that he wants made into a hunting knife, wondering if i need to laminate it or if it will harden to 56hrc (his preferred hardness) Normally id make a tesr piece but he only has enough for one knife and it has emotional value.

 

[stonecreek]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1038933236

Check out location of the safety. It appears that it would be difficult to use with a low-mounted scope. Wonder why they chose to put it there?

 

[bloorooster]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1038933236

Check out location of the safety. It appears that it would be difficult to use with a low-mounted scope. Wonder why they chose to put it there?

It appears to have a short throw…should be plenty of room with most popular 56mm optics!

 

[Arian]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1038933236

Check out location of the safety. It appears that it would be difficult to use with a low-mounted scope. Wonder why they chose to put it there?

thats almost a true 98 action, it wasnt designed for scopes but iam sure they kept that in mind building these. for me nothing beats the aestetics of that action. looks like they just changed the orientation of the original flag safety.

These are the Hermann rifles iam looking at as my large caliber close range option you can see what i mean.

 

[stonecreek]

i figured maybe barrels would have improved a bit tho, in terms of consistenct and metalurgy.

The cutting method was about the only thing available to rifle barrels a hundred+ years ago, and softer steel is easier to cut than harder steel. But plenty of early rifles were made with excellent steel. "Crap" steel is found in both early rifles and current ones (both in actions and in barrels). However, while more modern button rifling and hammer forging make it easier to make a good barrel, they don't necessarily make a better barrel.

As I said, there have been no real advances in the design or materials of cartridge firearms; just easier and less expensive ways to make them. For instance, Beretta has recently introduced a straight-pull bolt action and acts as if it is the result of artificial intelligence and computerized rocket science combined with gene-splicing technology after having spent Billions in Bitcoin for research and development. Check out the Ross of a hundred years ago -- among many others.

 

[stonecreek]

thats almost a true 98 action, it wasnt designed for scopes but iam sure they kept that in mind building these.

It is true that the original 98 was not designed for scopes (which were pretty much a novelty in the last decade of the 19th Century. However, this rifle has built-in scope mounts, so it seems odd that the placement of the safety would be awkward for scope use.

 

[Arian]

It is true that the original 98 was not designed for scopes (which were pretty much a novelty in the last decade of the 19th Century. However, this rifle has built-in scope mounts, so it seems odd that the placement of the safety would be awkward for scope use.

thats why it seems they kept the aestetics but changed the dimentions of the safety. Looks like a compromise, it does allow a scope but to maintain aestetics they accepted that it might be a little awkward.

 

[Bucktote]

Loading…

www.gunbroker.com

Wow!

Understatement! double WOW!

 

[paulsonconstruction]

It is true that the original 98 was not designed for scopes (which were pretty much a novelty in the last decade of the 19th Century. However, this rifle has built-in scope mounts, so it seems odd that the placement of the safety would be awkward for scope use.

It appears to me that the rifle is fitted with a bolt shroud/cocking piece that has the 3 position safety, like the Model 70 Winchester, if I am looking at the same rifle you are referring to. I have fitted several of these on Mauser actions. They cost nearly $300 & most of the time require some machining (millwork) to fit & operate properly. It moves forward, not up, & causes no interference with a scope. Check pic #6. The indentation to the right of the "S" is safety ON & the bolt is locked shut, the indent to the left of the "S" is safety ON, but you can cycle the bolt. Pushing the lever all the way forward so the indent is on the "F" takes the safety "OFF". If anyone is interested, New England Custom Guns sells them & they are made extremely well. They also sell the Buelher type wing safety that flips up & down, but from the right side & the movement is such that it will clear the scope's ocular bell. This safety is usually a plug & play part, that is if you know how to disassemble the bolt.

 

[stonecreek]

You are likely correct. When I first looked at the photo I thought that the safety sat on top of the bolt shroud, making the clearance between it and the scope ocular less. Now that I look more closely I see that it is inletted into the bolt shroud and is little if any taller than the shroud itself. I agree that this won't cause any additional interference with ocular clearance (and am grateful that a manufacturer -- especially a Eurpean one -- recognizes the utility of a scope mounted low over the bore). My apologies for my misinterpretation of the photo!

 

[pecosbill]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1038933236

Check out location of the safety. It appears that it would be difficult to use with a low-mounted scope. Wonder why they chose to put it there?

I used to live in Phoenix and frequent a popular and upscale gun shop. I happen to be there when the owner of GoDaddy was picking up his new custom Holland & Holland double rifles (yes 2!), for an upcoming trip to Africa. He was very personable and allowed me to shoulder and open one for inspection. He also bought a fancy Merkel O/U shotgun w/ 2 barrels off the rack for like $20,000. I'm sure he'd have no problem buying one of these, and heading to the bush lol.

 

[Arian]

You are likely correct. When I first looked at the photo I thought that the safety sat on top of the bolt shroud, making the clearance between it and the scope ocular less. Now that I look more closely I see that it is inletted into the bolt shroud and is little if any taller than the shroud itself. I agree that this won't cause any additional interference with ocular clearance (and am grateful that a manufacturer -- especially a Eurpean one -- recognizes the utility of a scope mounted low over the bore). My apologies for my misinterpretation of the photo!

the days of high mounted scopes are over i think. With modern glass allowing hunting in the moonlight and no rules on shooting hours having a 56mm or even 60mm low magnification scope is the standard. High mounts are relegated to old drillings and for the most parts red dot tubes with flip up magnification seem to be replacing those.

For alot of western europes history hunting was a big affair involving drivers and dogs in daylight. the german hogback combs are set up for quick use of iron sights. Northern europe has always been about subsistance hunting and often solitary hunts. You see it in the hunting weapons of different countries, Germans favoring maneuvrability and speed over long range accuracy can be seen in the drillings, Hermanns and 20th century mausers. While swedish and finnish guns always tended to be a bit longer barreled and heavier. But to cut this rambling histort lesson short, scopes are the norm nowadays and if not a scope a red dot sight is used. I am the only person i know who uses iron sights for anything.

The big difference between europe and america often cited is that on america fairness is the priority while in europe ethical kills are the main priority. Its all about efficiency, thats why 22lr is banned and 223 can only be used on small game, big calibers are required compared to america and regular shooting tests must be passed. Things like muzzle loaders are frowned upon and shooting 6.5mm at a moose gets you comments like "why wouldnt you use a 9.3mm"

Again, very long mildly beer influenced way of saying that nowadays high mounted scopes are not mutch of a thing over here

 

[South Pender]

the days of high mounted scopes are over i think. With modern glass allowing hunting in the moonlight and no rules on shooting hours having a 56mm or even 60mm low magnification scope is the standard. High mounts are relegated to old drillings and for the most parts red dot tubes with flip up magnification seem to be replacing those.

Boy, I don't know about that. The increasingly-popular scopes you mention with 56mm and 60mm objective lenses (with objective-bell ODs of 2.50” or more) simply rule out anything other than a high mount.

Arian, you also state:

"The big difference between europe and america often cited is that on america fairness is the priority while in europe ethical kills are the main priority."

Can you explain this? Not sure what you mean by "fairness." I think ethical hunting is a priority in North America as well.

 

[Arian]

I think we have a different interpreration of high mounted. when i see scoped rifles from germany from the 20th century thet sometimes have the objective bell a centimeter off the barrel. The fashion now is to mount it so you can stick a matchstick in between the bell and barrel. Thats what i meant

 

[gangsterofboats]

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1038933236

Check out location of the safety. It appears that it would be difficult to use with a low-mounted scope. Wonder why they chose to put it there?

It is a German Recknagel type safety, similar to the Winchester M70 design. It’s about the best you can get for a proper safety on a Mauser 98.

 

[icebear]

Does anybody recognize that scope mount, or have a picture of the rings that go with it? It's not your usual Suhl-type claw mount. The oblong slot on the front mount suggests a pivot mount, but unlike an EAW mount, the latch must be on the ring. I'm fairly familiar with European scope mounts, but this one has me stumped.

 

[gangsterofboats]

Does anybody recognize that scope mount, or have a picture of the rings that go with it? It's not your usual Suhl-type claw mount. The oblong slot on the front mount suggests a pivot mount, but unlike an EAW mount, the latch must be on the ring. I'm fairly familiar with European scope mounts, but this one has me stumped.

Yes, it’s a Recknagel Eramatic mount similar to EAW but uses a rotary lock on the rear mount:

Recknagel - Accessories for Hunting Rifles - Mounts › Recknagel

Our scope mounts, which are manufactured and sold under the trademark ERAMATIC, have proven themselves tens of thousands of times not only …

www.recknagel.de

 

[Spaher]

It is a Hexalock system. I had wanted the hard to find Ziegler system but am going with the Mauser recommendation. See attached. Although on the anniversary model they look like Ziegler to me.

 

[South Pender]

That's interesting about the scope mounts. Although I've been willing to spend a lot for top-of-the-line equipment over the years, I've just never understood the appeal of the complicated, over-engineered German EAW and Recknagel scope mounts that cost close to (or more than) $500. If they were superior in an important way, I could see it, but I can't see how they do a better job at all than a system like Talley's--which are sleek and attractive, rock-solid, and easily removable, and cost a fraction of the German mounts. Perhaps someone can point out the undisputed superiority of these super-complex German mounts.

 

[gangsterofboats]

That's interesting about the scope mounts. Although I've been willing to spend a lot for top-of-the-line equipment over the years, I've just never understood the appeal of the complicated, over-engineered German EAW and Recknagel scope mounts that cost close to (or more than) $500. If they were superior in an important way, I could see it, but I can't see how they do a better job at all than a system like Talley's--which are sleek and attractive, rock-solid, and easily removable. Perhaps someone can point out the undisputed superiority of these super-complex German mounts.

They really aren’t better than the Talley’s for most applications. I only have EAW on a dangerous game 458 Win Mag custom Mauser, and for that they are great to very quickly get to the express sights if needed.