WOMBLEHUNTERS Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Hi all ,just got the .17 barrel for my sako quad, very impresive, only one thing, by the time I bought it , an extra barrel, scope, mounts, 2 moderators, ase ultra for the 17 ( they really do work well ) and a sak for .22, bipod , sling etc etc. I am a bit scared to count up how much it all cost, if anybody is thinking about a quad and more than one barrel, they should maybee think twice, a couple of cz's, 2 hawke scopes and mounts and share the sak moderator between both calibres and you are away and none of this re zeroing **** either, the sak moderator still works on the 17 not as good but you still get the sonic boom whatever one you buy, I have heard that the cz's are very good value for money , and a lot of people swear by them, somebody in my position should do there sums first, ( MY WIFE IS GONA KILL ME), saying that I would still buy the quad as the 17 will print half inch groups at 100 yards ( yes yes using a bipod and monopod ), and I don't think the cz would ? ( gona regret saying that probably), either way I'm not looking for an argument , It's just a heads up ..... p.s. those targets that go green round the bullet holes are the cats pyjamas, 17 bullet holes are very small ,,saved me miles of walking. a1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Well if you do your sums properly (assuming you haggled a deal) you shouldn't be far out the same price as two CZ's, I certainly wasnt! You didnt need to buy the ASE Utra as the Sak works good enough. Re-zeroing well yeah I go with that a little. However, get yourself zero'd and work out the clicks between them. After that you dial in and should be able to check your zero in just 3 shots. As for comparison to a CZ, well the action is far superior, smoother and easier to operate. The trigger is way ahead too, even if the Brooks kit is fitted to the CZ. Can you tell, I like my Quad. :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishapoor Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 ...or just buy the Burris scope designed for the Quad?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 5, 2006 Report Share Posted May 5, 2006 ...or just buy the Burris scope designed for the Quad?! Because it is only a 3-9x32 and extremely over priced.!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunganick Posted May 5, 2006 Report Share Posted May 5, 2006 you could buy any gun with target turrets and simply for 4 coloured dots on them showing the zero for each barrel. it would serve the same purpose as the burris scope does and be alot cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOMBLEHUNTERS Posted May 6, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2006 you could buy any gun with target turrets and simply for 4 coloured dots on them showing the zero for each barrel. it would serve the same purpose as the burris scope does and be alot cheaper. yeah yeah think you are all missing the point, if you go out lamping bunnies with a 22 rimmy using subsonics, and you see a fox at 80 yards and you have 2 cz's, 1x .22 and 1x .17 you have the chance for a go at the fox with the .17 without having to change barrels etc, etc, I would not have a go at a fox with anything less than a 222 but that is my opnion and I am entitled to it, my point being that 2x cz's may be a more versatile package for some people. The sak moderator is no use for the .17hmr I compared both before I parted with any money, and if you are serious about the job you need the ase, ask,jackson rifiles, A+D supplies, myself, the three keepers I know, we all have them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rarms Posted May 6, 2006 Report Share Posted May 6, 2006 Never really understood the point of the quad Fair enough if there was a massive price difference and you could only use one at once, maybe like an AR-15 lower with a .22 upper and a .223 upper, where each has its own sights built to it and is two pins away from a calibre change. But having the scope dis-connected from the barrel whilst changing would freak me too. If you get to where you are hunting and see a quarry species, I wouldn't be able to have a crack at it I don't think unless I had checked the zero on the gun if I had changed barrels since I last used it! They should have put a cantilever mount off the barrel for the scope, then you could have a scope on each barrel, but then I guess you might as well buy two stocks and be done with it :s Still, each to their own Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunganick Posted May 6, 2006 Report Share Posted May 6, 2006 you could buy any gun with target turrets and simply for 4 coloured dots on them showing the zero for each barrel. it would serve the same purpose as the burris scope does and be alot cheaper. yeah yeah think you are all missing the point, if you go out lamping bunnies with a 22 rimmy using subsonics, and you see a fox at 80 yards and you have 2 cz's, 1x .22 and 1x .17 you have the chance for a go at the fox with the .17 without having to change barrels etc, etc, I would not have a go at a fox with anything less than a 222 but that is my opnion and I am entitled to it, my point being that 2x cz's may be a more versatile package for some people. The sak moderator is no use for the .17hmr I compared both before I parted with any money, and if you are serious about the job you need the ase, ask,jackson rifiles, A+D supplies, myself, the three keepers I know, we all have them. you will get no argument from me, i love my cz and would love a hmr as well. However the money dosent exist to do so, so wont happen. my point was simply that the burris scope was a gimik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunganick Posted May 7, 2006 Report Share Posted May 7, 2006 and you dont need to **** about with it to make it work, unlike some popular makes. lets not start that argument again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted May 7, 2006 Report Share Posted May 7, 2006 and you dont need to **** about with it to make it work, unlike some popular makes. lets not start that argument again Been their, done that, bought the ticket, not worth arguing about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miffy Posted May 7, 2006 Report Share Posted May 7, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 8, 2006 Report Share Posted May 8, 2006 I have the Quad in both .22LR and .17HMR. I put 600 rounds of subs through the .22LR within a month and enjoyed it immensley. I then changed to the .17HMR and it hasnt been off since. Its a cracking bit of kit and does what I need it to do. I guess the advantage from the Quad is that if I want to take two calibres with me, then I only need to bring the additional barrel rather than an entire set-up. I could get quick release rings which would certainly help but at the moment i'm quite happy. It is a pain having to take the scope off, but then I didnt have to buy the scope I put on (6-24x56 30mm) and could of bought something smaller on high mounts. Anyway, I have plenty of room in the cabinet and love the action. Something I wouldnt have got if i'd have bought two rifles. But for me, if I had known what response the FEO was to say with regards .22LR and .17HMR, I would never have bothered buying the .22LR Barrel. So the way I look at it is this: I bought a .17HMR Quad was lots of nice bits on it with an action to suit and for then extra £120 I also got exactly the same again, but in .22LR. I guess its all down to how you view your purchase. If you rushed in and didnt consider that you might need two rifles side by side, then thats for you to deal with. I took my time and decided that the Quad meets my needs, as such I am extremely pleased with my purchase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted May 8, 2006 Report Share Posted May 8, 2006 (edited) I have the Quad in both .22LR and .17HMR. I put 600 rounds of subs through the .22LR within a month and enjoyed it immensley. I then changed to the .17HMR and it hasnt been off since. Its a cracking bit of kit and does what I need it to do. I guess the advantage from the Quad is that if I want to take two calibres with me, then I only need to bring the additional barrel rather than an entire set-up. I could get quick release rings which would certainly help but at the moment i'm quite happy. It is a pain having to take the scope off, but then I didnt have to buy the scope I put on (6-24x56 30mm) and could of bought something smaller on high mounts. Anyway, I have plenty of room in the cabinet and love the action. Something I wouldnt have got if i'd have bought two rifles. But for me, if I had known what response the FEO was to say with regards .22LR and .17HMR, I would never have bothered buying the .22LR Barrel. So the way I look at it is this: I bought a .17HMR Quad was lots of nice bits on it with an action to suit and for then extra £120 I also got exactly the same again, but in .22LR. I guess its all down to how you view your purchase. If you rushed in and didnt consider that you might need two rifles side by side, then thats for you to deal with. I took my time and decided that the Quad meets my needs, as such I am extremely pleased with my purchase. :blink: Its what makes you happy that counts. Edited May 8, 2006 by Frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.