Sako 85 accuracy - poor / help?
- Thread starter GSP84
- Start date
Brilliant news ! I'm glad it has all been sorted out. Cant tell you how many times I've trolled through these pages for your updates, and may I say well done for keeping us all so well informed.
BC...
BC...
Hi GSP,
Glad you've got a suitable outcome- especially in the variation time. That's one of the most irritating things about it. Agreed the 'certificate of accuracy' or whatever they call it is no better than toilet paper if your rifle slipped through the net at the factory. They must have serious confidence in their manufacturing line
Glad you've got a suitable outcome- especially in the variation time. That's one of the most irritating things about it. Agreed the 'certificate of accuracy' or whatever they call it is no better than toilet paper if your rifle slipped through the net at the factory. They must have serious confidence in their manufacturing line
+1 well done, and please let us know how your replacement shoots.
Nelson
Well, variation was finally sorted this week, replacement picked up and spent Saturday and Sunday bedding in and testing ...
Replacement groups worse than the original rifle. ��
I followed the normal bedding process despite Sakos apparently not needing it.
Zeroed at 50m where it grouped ok.
Took it out to 100 and this was the result after a lot of playing about with multiple brands and bullet weights. The Sako 180gn shot best but displayed the same result as last time. 1st shot from cold on its own and then all the rest elsewhere andwell outside of the sub 1 MOA guarantee.
Now to start with the ******** of trying different scopes and shooters again before heading back to the shop ��
I have two hours book tomorrow at a well respected independent range where it will be last chance time. The range owner is a Sako retailer and a renowned shot and has said he will witness.
Replacement groups worse than the original rifle. ��
I followed the normal bedding process despite Sakos apparently not needing it.
Zeroed at 50m where it grouped ok.
Took it out to 100 and this was the result after a lot of playing about with multiple brands and bullet weights. The Sako 180gn shot best but displayed the same result as last time. 1st shot from cold on its own and then all the rest elsewhere andwell outside of the sub 1 MOA guarantee.
Now to start with the ******** of trying different scopes and shooters again before heading back to the shop ��
I have two hours book tomorrow at a well respected independent range where it will be last chance time. The range owner is a Sako retailer and a renowned shot and has said he will witness.
Attachments
Last edited:
I've not had to undergo the grim trial of testing diffferent factory loads since I started reloading a few years ago.
However, I think I might be most interested in the SAKO 150gr load, based on the pictures you've put up - and thinking about the effect of my hold and the rest used (and perhaps stock-screw tightness) on the vertical spread?
Does anyone else think that seems sensible?
Edit - unless that's one of them in at 8 o'clock in the Federal target?
However, I think I might be most interested in the SAKO 150gr load, based on the pictures you've put up - and thinking about the effect of my hold and the rest used (and perhaps stock-screw tightness) on the vertical spread?
Does anyone else think that seems sensible?
Edit - unless that's one of them in at 8 o'clock in the Federal target?
Last edited:
No there was only 4 shots with the Sako 150gr. Horizontally they are good, but vertically the second two shots were 1 1/2" to 2" higher.
It has to to be with the bedding / torque setting on action / heat after first shots / all of these factors combined.
I'll go through everything again with all brands and weights tomorrow, plus will triple check all torque settings. I'm not about to start going beyond that and messing about with the bedding of the action in the stock incase I start voiding warranties / guarantees.
For reference I can shoot better groups at 100m prone with just a sling with 100year old vintage rifles on iron sights.
This was shot essentially bench rested.
Please forgive if I'm teaching my grandmother to suck eggs, but...
Are you bench-resting using a bipod, and are you holding the forend? I ask because I have a SAKO .308 which changes from 3" groups when it's fired using the dreadful 'crossed arm' non-hold to 1" groups if you actually hold the forend and allow the bipod to steady it only, rather then hauling down onto it.
If it's the polymer or laminate stocked version, tighten the stock screws to 65 inch lb.
they come from the factory barley snugged. Me and 2 mates all had the same, not sure it was as bad as yours though but made a massive difference, and they all started shooting as one expects with high end rifles.
Defo, something is moving around, even a fraction will cause these issues.
UK Guy
they come from the factory barley snugged. Me and 2 mates all had the same, not sure it was as bad as yours though but made a massive difference, and they all started shooting as one expects with high end rifles.
Defo, something is moving around, even a fraction will cause these issues.
UK Guy
Its rested bags and a Harris bipod. Same bipod and bags I use on all my rifles when testing like this. My HMR sako quad shoots 5p sized groups at 100m using this method so I'm fairly happy that it's not the technique.
Its a carbon stock, I did check the torque on the previous one, that is the only bit that hasn't been checked on this one as my torque screwdriver is out of calibration.
I will check these tomorrow on the final test.
I heard the Sako factory setting was 35in/lb... 65 sounds high. It could either be to loose or to tight. I don't particularly like tweaking bits like this when the out of the box accuracy is guaranteed.
kenbro
Well-Known Member
It sounds like the stock on your first gun was acting as a pressure point on the barrel, hence the first shot being to poa. and subsequent shots warm the barrel enought to raise the point of impact.
Have you checked the new one for clearance between barrel and forend?
Ken.
Ps. I've had new Remingtons with a raised section in the barrel channel to act as a pressure point to ensure the first shot from a cold barrel went to p.o.a.
Have you checked the new one for clearance between barrel and forend?
Ken.
Ps. I've had new Remingtons with a raised section in the barrel channel to act as a pressure point to ensure the first shot from a cold barrel went to p.o.a.
monarman
Well-Known Member
First of all..... ditch the bipod and use sand bags...
Second..... get a few business cards and pack them under the barrel at the tip of the forend.. so they exert some upward pressure on the barrel..... essentially stopping it free floating and creating a 'pressure bedding'.
Use the rounds that shot the best and shoot a group of 3....
Then report back the results.
I did the same with my rifle after having a lightweight sporter barrel fitted.... I was unhappy with the groups... they were inconsistent. I ditched the bipod and did the business card thing and my groups shrank from 2 and half inches to around inch and a half... and remained consistent from cold. Any more than 3 shots in succession caused the barrel and mod to get very hot.
I then full length bedded the barrel with more pressure on the tip of the forend and it now shoots hornady factory into3 quater inch 3 shot group off a sandbag. My stock is a mcmillan and the barrel is a lightweight sporter 20 inch lothar walther fitted by Steve kershaw..... and it was very freefloating until I tried the forend tip bedding. I torque my stock screws 40 inch pounds.... which is the general recommended setting.
And before the experts start spouting on about point of impact shift through stock warpage etc....... that applies to wood not synthetic.
Try it before you give up hope..... lightweight barrels are whippy and more often than not react better when that movement is tamed consistently.
Second..... get a few business cards and pack them under the barrel at the tip of the forend.. so they exert some upward pressure on the barrel..... essentially stopping it free floating and creating a 'pressure bedding'.
Use the rounds that shot the best and shoot a group of 3....
Then report back the results.
I did the same with my rifle after having a lightweight sporter barrel fitted.... I was unhappy with the groups... they were inconsistent. I ditched the bipod and did the business card thing and my groups shrank from 2 and half inches to around inch and a half... and remained consistent from cold. Any more than 3 shots in succession caused the barrel and mod to get very hot.
I then full length bedded the barrel with more pressure on the tip of the forend and it now shoots hornady factory into3 quater inch 3 shot group off a sandbag. My stock is a mcmillan and the barrel is a lightweight sporter 20 inch lothar walther fitted by Steve kershaw..... and it was very freefloating until I tried the forend tip bedding. I torque my stock screws 40 inch pounds.... which is the general recommended setting.
And before the experts start spouting on about point of impact shift through stock warpage etc....... that applies to wood not synthetic.
Try it before you give up hope..... lightweight barrels are whippy and more often than not react better when that movement is tamed consistently.
Last edited:
Fair comments, would seem weird to have to do all that to a brand new rifle which comes with a 5 round sub MOA guarantee. If the barrel is so light it can't perform in that calibre as free floating then that is a design failing.
monarman
Well-Known Member
Barrel harmonics are a science...... suffice to say that if your bullet is exiting the muzzle at a different 'harmonic poit' each time..... it will be inconsistent in its accuracy. That's why heavy barrels 'generally ' shoot better and are nearly always free floated.
You have to take each barrel at its own merit and find what makes it shoot..... even a different moderator can make a difference in a rifles accuracy.... as it alters the harmonics and therefore the changes the bullets exit.
A different mod is something else to try..... but not from a bipod!
You have to take each barrel at its own merit and find what makes it shoot..... even a different moderator can make a difference in a rifles accuracy.... as it alters the harmonics and therefore the changes the bullets exit.
A different mod is something else to try..... but not from a bipod!
Tom D
Well-Known Member
I just posted this on your DSUK post, tbh, while it's still worth checking, having read the rest of this thread it does sound like a bedding/ action to stock issue.
Still check the crown..Might sound obvious but take a very close look at the crown, I have a semi custom .20 that went from shooting single hole groups to 4". After much messing around like you have done it was no better. Then I noticed a tiny, and I mean tiny, bit of damage to the crown. I had a smith skim barely 1mm off it and back to single hole again. Talking to the guy who built the rifle he said that a tiny bit of debris that falls down the bore, (usually carbon from the mod) can chip the crown as it is fired out with a shot. This is exactly what mine looked like, a tiny flake of steel was missing, looking like it had been pushed out from the inside. Maybe yours has been damaged somehow? Get a magnifying glass and have a really close look at the muzzle, check the lands inside the muzzle too. This is the last thing to touch the bullet before it's on it's own so in a way it's the most crucial part of the gun. Good luck with it!
If the crown is ok, as has been mentioned it's worth trying a temporary pressure point bedding at the fore end just to see if that improves things, if that improves things then you know it's a bedding issue.
Still check the crown..Might sound obvious but take a very close look at the crown, I have a semi custom .20 that went from shooting single hole groups to 4". After much messing around like you have done it was no better. Then I noticed a tiny, and I mean tiny, bit of damage to the crown. I had a smith skim barely 1mm off it and back to single hole again. Talking to the guy who built the rifle he said that a tiny bit of debris that falls down the bore, (usually carbon from the mod) can chip the crown as it is fired out with a shot. This is exactly what mine looked like, a tiny flake of steel was missing, looking like it had been pushed out from the inside. Maybe yours has been damaged somehow? Get a magnifying glass and have a really close look at the muzzle, check the lands inside the muzzle too. This is the last thing to touch the bullet before it's on it's own so in a way it's the most crucial part of the gun. Good luck with it!
If the crown is ok, as has been mentioned it's worth trying a temporary pressure point bedding at the fore end just to see if that improves things, if that improves things then you know it's a bedding issue.
Cawdor118
Well-Known Member
Send it back. Sako shouldn't be sending out crap at the price they charge for their kit. At the end of the day if you wanted all this hassle you would have bought a semi custom. Sako and tikka seem to have crap machining tolorences in my experience... Just look at the bolt slop on them.
Atb anyway, it must be ultra frustrating!
Atb anyway, it must be ultra frustrating!
Having wasted far more time and money than is rational chasing accuracy problems in a succession of rifles over the last few years, I'm increasingly inclined to believe that this sort of mediocre performance is actually entirely normal.
I suspect a lot lot of manufacturers rely on the fact that very few people test their guns systematically, and are generally happy to shoot a group of 3 and call the shot that goes 2 inches out a flyer, assigning it to shooter error or conditions rather than the gun.
The small proportion who do test systematically are then usually happy to spend more time and money fettling the gun or fine tuning the load. They end up with genuine sub-MOA guns, but only after going well beyond the factory gun.
I can't think of ANY other tool where actual performance falls so far and so frequently short of expectations and advertised performance. If our cars were this erratic, we'd be furious.
I suspect a lot lot of manufacturers rely on the fact that very few people test their guns systematically, and are generally happy to shoot a group of 3 and call the shot that goes 2 inches out a flyer, assigning it to shooter error or conditions rather than the gun.
The small proportion who do test systematically are then usually happy to spend more time and money fettling the gun or fine tuning the load. They end up with genuine sub-MOA guns, but only after going well beyond the factory gun.
I can't think of ANY other tool where actual performance falls so far and so frequently short of expectations and advertised performance. If our cars were this erratic, we'd be furious.
Similar threads
