Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My Sako Quad arrived today [one barrel---.17 HMR]. Because I live in Kalifornia, I can't take possession for 10 more days. Here are my overall impressions of the rifle.

The receiver, with scallops on either side, reminds me alot of the Sauer 200. It is very attractive. Along with the interchangeable barrel feature, it is the only thing I like about this rifle.

There is lots of plastic on this rifle. Beretta/Sako must have hired some fired Remington engineers. The bolt shroud is plastic!! Granted, it is knurled and very similar in shape to the Sako 75 shroud and nicely executed but since it is plastic, who cares. We can only hope some talented CNC programmers out there will give us an after-market shroud [to say nothing of other components] which are worthy of the Sako name and the very nicely done receiver.

The barrel is a cold hammer forging. The tag which comes with the rifle says the barrel will do 1 MOA. Is this a guarantee of one MOA accuracy? I don't know and we shall see. The exterior finish of the barrel is the roughest I have seen on anything short of a cheap Marlin or Savage. I am not kidding here. The barrel looks like it was finished on a barrel spinner and belt sander with about 120 grit. It is very, very disappointing. I have already made arrangements to have mine mirror polished and matte finished so it will at least match the matte receiver.

The OD of the muzzle looks to be about .600" to .615". I am guestimating 'cause my calipers are at the shop. One good thing---the barrel machining at the breech is not so complicated that talented machinists will be unable to make aftermarket barrels. If this rifle sells, I have no doubt we will see aftermarket drop in barrels. That is a big plus.

The floorplate/trigger guard is a cheap plastic item that looks like it was subcontracted to Remington. It is very disappointing. Again, we must hope for someone to provide us a quality steel aftermarket product worthy of the Sako name and to complement the nice receiver.

The trigger is adjustable from 2-4 lbs. Sako has always made nice triggers. Hopefully this one carries on the tradition. Mine seems crips enough. I presume the pull is about 4 lbs.

The cocking indicator is a piece of plastic which protrudes at the rear of the cocking piece. In function it seems identical with the Sako 75. Unfortunately it is plastic. Yuk!!!

The bolt handle is some sort of synthetic material. I won't use the word plastic here because I actually like the bolt handle's shape and the appearance and texture of the material alot. The black synthetic stuff gives a nice contrast. I can live with it.

The bolt root is steel and locks the bolt in battery along with a lug about 50 degrees directly opposite on the bolt. When the bolt is at the top of its throw [rotation], the opposed lug is at bottom dead center. When the bolt is cammed downward, the bolt root and the opposite lug lock into battery with the opposite lug resting in a lug recess on the inside wall of the receiver. The machining work is nice and intricate.

The magazine well is a hideous black plastic. It is truly cheap stuff. It reminds me of the exact same stuff the Rem 597 magazine used to be made from. Again, we can only hope for an aftermarket steel upgrade worthy of the Sako name. Even a quality synthetic offering from Sako would satisfy here, but the plastic material from which the factory offering is constructed is just plain cheap and weak. [Sorry to repeat myself].

The magazine itself is a clean design and looks to be well made. The follower is plastic as is the bottom of the mag, but the body is steel.

The bolt has an extractor on one side. There are tooling marks on the underside, but what rimfire bolt does not have those? I wonder if the bolt is a casting and then machined? It has that look [for want of a better description], but I could be wrong here. I am no metallurgist. The flat edges on my bolt are not as crisp as they should be.

The stock is a cheap plastic offering, but then we already knew that. Let us hope that McMillan gets in the game here. The stock is adjustable for pull length using spacers. The ergonomics seem fine. There is lots of float [space] between the barrel and barrel channel.

If this rifle shoots from the box and if after market components are forthcoming [barrels, shrouds, floorplate], then with its nicely scalloped receiver and interchangeable barrel feature, the rifle could be a classic. However, as offered and for the price, I am disappointed.
Rather than steel and walnut, Sako has gone the way of Remingon here with lots of plastic---and cheap plastic at that.

Let us hope that the basic components work well and that a market for custom accessories develops at reasonable prices.

Jordan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
G/Day
I have to agree with Jordon. I waited to see a Quad luckily as I had the intent of buying a 4 barrel set. I was very dissappointed with the quality of the rifle. In the ad's it looked like it had inserts in the stock like the 75 and just looked good, alas it wasn't the case. I like sako's, I've owned various models over the years (even a custom on a 46 action) and I think that the Quad if better quality would of been the monumental advancement that was promised. Please Sako go back to your old style of building things as I'm sure people will pay the price of the Quad if it was built better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,099 Posts
Jordan,
sounds like your describing a Finnfire, except the Finnfire might be of better quality?
Flat finish receiver with plastic mag well, bolt shroud, cocking indicator, and triggerguard. Adjustable trigger (probably in the range you mentioned, but tuneable to sub 1 lb). Polished barrel in sporting taper with or without sights, or in bull sans sights. At least three different stock styles, from standard sporter, to varmint, to adjustable 3-P target, in euro walnut with either checkering or decent stippling, and oil-look finish. 5rnd mags were plastic, 10 rnds in alloy with plastic followers. After market barrels available, and Jewell used to make a trigger, various custom stocks if benchshootings your game.
I swear these guns feel and hold nice, but for the traditionalist (ie. wood and steel lovers) this just makes the P72 and P78 even more desirable.
Appreciate the review, let us know how she groups.
Take care,
warren
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
They should have put the Tikka name on it.

My T3 has lots of plastic, the reciever is matte and the barrel is satin, the magazine is plastic (but works better than any other bolt action mag I've used), but the machining is amazing. Accuracy (mine is a 308) is fantastic for a sporter with groups from 0.3-0.7MOA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
obx22:

I had no idea the Finnfire had so much plastic. I knew the Finnfire trigger guard was a polymer of some kind. I had never had one out of the stock but more or less assumed that even if it was a polymer, it was a pretty substantial piece of material much like the trigger guard on an HK 300 and that therefore, the Finnfire was a quality rifle. It also had the virtue of a wood stock. The trigger guard/floor plate on the Quad looks fine in the stock. But once removed, it is just a flimsy and very unsubstantial piece of polymer and unfortunately, the Quad does not even have a wood stock.

So perhaps I would not have been so critical had I known the Finnfire had so much plastic and thus accepted the concept of a plastic Sako. But for some reason I had it in my head that the Quad would be a typical Sako---quality steel and no corner cutting ala Remchester. Obviously I was wrong. I am still disappointed.

So, one way to look at this is that the Quad is no different than the Finnfire, except for the plastic stock, and is a switch barrel too boot. On the other hand, if you are a die hard Sako aficionado as I am, you are never going to get used to the idea of a plastic Sako.


Jordan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,483 Posts
The polymer trigger guard on the Finnfire is a quality piece. When I modified mine to take a Jewell trigger I discovered that it wasn't at all brittle and was quite strong.

I briefly looked at a Quad two weeks ago, but really couldn't get past the stock and the barrel finish. It's just not something I want or need.

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,968 Posts
Let's see, from Jordan's review, we would need to:

1) polish the barrel to a decent finish... cost $25 and up
2) replace the stock with a decent one..cost $ an arm if it's macmillan
3) metal magazine for those who don't like polymer...cost ~$30
4) trigger guard to replace the cheap one....cost $astronomical because of limited sales.

All this is added to a $900 rifle..... I believe your review of the rifle you recieved, and if they're all like yours, then Sako should never have discontinued the Finnfire. They'll never, never sell in this country unless they are of superior quality. That's the only reason Sako/Tikka sell so well here. If the Quad is not top notch in most every way, it'll fall flatter than the Rem 710.

It's hard enough to sell a Sako 75 that only shoots "pretty good" against a Stevens 200 that shoot really good for 1/3 the price. What in the world is Beretta/Sako thinking??????
Let's see the competition for the price of a Quad is...
*Anschutz, a darn nice rifle
*Kimber, sounds better than a Quad
*CZ, will beat the pants off them no matter what they do, cause they shoot and are well made and reasonably priced.
*Cooper, for a few bucks more than a Quad, you get twice as much, or more, rifle.
*Marlin, cheap rifles that don't look as cool as a Quad, but will probably outshoot the Quad, and definitely outsell them.

Good Luck Sako, I'm glad I've got all the Finnfires I want, cause it looks like I won't be buying a Quad.
Funny thing is, I like, shoot and own Beretta shotguns and love them. I think they're some of the best O/U's and semi autos available right now, I just hate to seem them screwing with a fine gun like Sako and ruining their reputation.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
36,633 Posts
I love Sakos, always have. The only "Custom" gun I've ever owned is my little L46 .222 with custom stock and Apex barrel. I wanted to like the Sako Quad. I'll never afford one anyway, but this is sad. I blame Beretta. They have cheapened every thing later except their own high super expensive guns.

The Finns made fine rifles for over 60 years without anyones help. Now......it's sad...... who knows.......... :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Use of Polymer (or "plastic")

I have 2 Finnfires. I have had NO problem with the polymer parts. The magazine feeds better than many steel magazines. I DO feel that at $39.00 list it is incredibly overpriced for a molded piece. I used the first Finnfire for over a year before I realized the shroud was polymer.

I prefer polymer over the other "cheap" alternative, aluminum. Polymer, if scratched, can be polished and will always be the same color underneath. Aluminum is very difficult to match anodizing and painting is just tacky. The aluminum floorplate that is stock on the Remington 700 is a major demerit in my book, and after-market steel ones start at $200.00. I replaced mine, but Joe average is NOT going to pay +$200 for the steel part.

Steel would be nice, but given the price pressure on rifles these days, unlikely. Steel parts is one reason CZ's are popular, but even they have the polymer magazines now. But given the "premium" position Sako is positioning itself in, I am surprised the new Quad is cheap looking. I always thought the Finnfire was a wonderful looking rifle, especially the HB Varmint and Range. The wood stocks on my two are exceptional.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
They shoot really well. Mine straight out of the box in .22 is well inside .4" at 65yds even with a slightly creepy trigger set at the factory setting. Hopefully it will settle down though.
I posted earlier but got no reply on this: Does anyone have any idea how I should go about finding a replacement stock. I know next to nothing about the U.S custom stock scene but was hoping to find somewhere that would be able to inlet a stock for me to a quad action. Any advice or suggestions would be very much appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
I love Sako

When I was stationed in Europe,I went to Finland to see friends.One of my friends,Heigo,lives in the town where Sako is located.He also is a gunsmith for them.He arranged for me to go on their tour and I was impressed.I purchased (3) rifles.One is a .223 Heavy barrel with nice wood.The second rifle is a 7MM Magnum in their custom deluxe model.The final one is my love .It is a 6MM custom built at the factory.The stock is full fiddle back Black Walnut.All were fitted to me and the workmanship on these rifles is fabulous.The price for thes rifles in Finland at that time was reasonable for what I gained in quality and accuracy.Its sad to see a great company like Sako that can produce arms that are as good if not better than most of their competitors lower their standards.Its a real shame.****,please forgive me for such a long write up. I'll get off of my soap box. HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
A new Beretta Store has opened in London - having read the various posts here I went in yesterday to see the Quad. I made the comment that people seemed to be particularly disappointed with the synthetic stock etc - for what its worth the sales guy said that Sako have picked up on this (criticism) and will be producing a wooden stock...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
I heard a similar rumour in Melbourne Australia today - though they said it would be some time away. The shop was saying that Sako was obviously having trouble meeting demand and that supplies of rifles with even one barrel were difficult to obtain - with large back orders.

There impression was that Sako started with the syntetic stock partially to get the rifle out quickly

To add to the reviews from people who have not actually fired one....

I tried one in the shop and it seemed fine to me - the rifle seemed well balanced around where my I would hold it on the forearm of the stock, and the butt was shorter than most so the weight of the rifle would be well supported and close to my body.

In relation to the shortness of the butt, the experienced coaches at the range have been suggesting that most rifles are too long in the butt for most shooters for offhand shooting. They have been suggesting that I shorten the butt on my P94 vamint and my cz452 (a little) for some time - and others who have followed thier advice are happy with the results. In that context trying the "short" stock on the quad comes to my shoulder (wearing only a polo shirt) with enough length that my thumb on the butt was still well away from the face. So while the stock is shorter than most it is likely to actually to what I am told should fit most better, come to shoulder and shoot better for them. Note I am 6' 2" so if it is not too small for me it probably won't be for most.

I suspect this must be intentional - they would not have shortened the stock from previous designs without some thought - If so it is laudable to challenge tradtion to improve functionality, though smacks of poor communication not to tell interested parties why.

I like the concept - I recently bought a blaser R93 centrefire with a match (heavy) .223w and a sporting profile 308 so to have an easily packable and securable centrefire when travelling.

The Quad seems a a nice compliment for similar reasons as a good portable pack away able and securable rimfire field rifle. For me though I won't change till they come out with more options like match barrels in .22, set trigger and other stocks - hey possibly even a thumbhole stock. If they did I could ultimatly see a place for it in my safe with .22lr match and .22hmr barrels.


In the short term they seem to have left their "benchrest" style customers behind - I wonder why they dropped the P94 varints that suited that market - they are now selling here second hand for around the same price as when new ones did.

Would it be within RMF rules to Invite the product manager at Sako to address the thread? (Though I would personally be surprised if the did not monitor it anyway)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,553 Posts
Jordan,
Well written! Geeze, why can't we get this kind of honesty in gun magazines? It doesn't matter what a manufacturer offers, the writers always give glowing reviews.

Jordan said:
My Sako Quad arrived today [one barrel---.17 HMR]. Because I live in Kalifornia, I can't take possession for 10 more days. Here are my overall impressions of the rifle.

The receiver, with scallops on either side, reminds me alot of the Sauer 200. It is very attractive. Along with the interchangeable barrel feature, it is the only thing I like about this rifle.

There is lots of plastic on this rifle. Beretta/Sako must have hired some fired Remington engineers. The bolt shroud is plastic!! Granted, it is knurled and very similar in shape to the Sako 75 shroud and nicely executed but since it is plastic, who cares. We can only hope some talented CNC programmers out there will give us an after-market shroud [to say nothing of other components] which are worthy of the Sako name and the very nicely done receiver.

The barrel is a cold hammer forging. The tag which comes with the rifle says the barrel will do 1 MOA. Is this a guarantee of one MOA accuracy? I don't know and we shall see. The exterior finish of the barrel is the roughest I have seen on anything short of a cheap Marlin or Savage. I am not kidding here. The barrel looks like it was finished on a barrel spinner and belt sander with about 120 grit. It is very, very disappointing. I have already made arrangements to have mine mirror polished and matte finished so it will at least match the matte receiver.

The OD of the muzzle looks to be about .600" to .615". I am guestimating 'cause my calipers are at the shop. One good thing---the barrel machining at the breech is not so complicated that talented machinists will be unable to make aftermarket barrels. If this rifle sells, I have no doubt we will see aftermarket drop in barrels. That is a big plus.

The floorplate/trigger guard is a cheap plastic item that looks like it was subcontracted to Remington. It is very disappointing. Again, we must hope for someone to provide us a quality steel aftermarket product worthy of the Sako name and to complement the nice receiver.

The trigger is adjustable from 2-4 lbs. Sako has always made nice triggers. Hopefully this one carries on the tradition. Mine seems crips enough. I presume the pull is about 4 lbs.

The cocking indicator is a piece of plastic which protrudes at the rear of the cocking piece. In function it seems identical with the Sako 75. Unfortunately it is plastic. Yuk!!!

The bolt handle is some sort of synthetic material. I won't use the word plastic here because I actually like the bolt handle's shape and the appearance and texture of the material alot. The black synthetic stuff gives a nice contrast. I can live with it.

The bolt root is steel and locks the bolt in battery along with a lug about 50 degrees directly opposite on the bolt. When the bolt is at the top of its throw [rotation], the opposed lug is at bottom dead center. When the bolt is cammed downward, the bolt root and the opposite lug lock into battery with the opposite lug resting in a lug recess on the inside wall of the receiver. The machining work is nice and intricate.

The magazine well is a hideous black plastic. It is truly cheap stuff. It reminds me of the exact same stuff the Rem 597 magazine used to be made from. Again, we can only hope for an aftermarket steel upgrade worthy of the Sako name. Even a quality synthetic offering from Sako would satisfy here, but the plastic material from which the factory offering is constructed is just plain cheap and weak. [Sorry to repeat myself].

The magazine itself is a clean design and looks to be well made. The follower is plastic as is the bottom of the mag, but the body is steel.

The bolt has an extractor on one side. There are tooling marks on the underside, but what rimfire bolt does not have those? I wonder if the bolt is a casting and then machined? It has that look [for want of a better description], but I could be wrong here. I am no metallurgist. The flat edges on my bolt are not as crisp as they should be.

The stock is a cheap plastic offering, but then we already knew that. Let us hope that McMillan gets in the game here. The stock is adjustable for pull length using spacers. The ergonomics seem fine. There is lots of float [space] between the barrel and barrel channel.

If this rifle shoots from the box and if after market components are forthcoming [barrels, shrouds, floorplate], then with its nicely scalloped receiver and interchangeable barrel feature, the rifle could be a classic. However, as offered and for the price, I am disappointed.
Rather than steel and walnut, Sako has gone the way of Remingon here with lots of plastic---and cheap plastic at that.

Let us hope that the basic components work well and that a market for custom accessories develops at reasonable prices.

Jordan
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top