Sako Quag Vs. Anschutz 1517 ZG

[webber]

I went to Lancaster on business today, and naturally worked things around a visit to Malmo. I have recently received my variation for .17HMR, and was seriously considering the Sako Quad. Unfortunateley the shop did not have one, but did offer a competitive price. The assistant enquired if I had considered the Anschutz, and a conversation developed.

 

I am now therefore seriously considering an Anschutz 1517ZG, which is heavy barrel, thumb hole stock, which I really do like the idea of. My dilema is that I have neither seen nor shot either, and would therefore appreciate your views.

 

webber

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

Webber

 

I have exactly the same dilemma

 

Best price that I have seen for a Quad is £435 or so.

 

Best price for the wooden stocked version (due June) is £553 so far.

 

The thumbhole stock on the Anschutz sounds attractive (and looks good), but would it be an advantage on a 0.17 hmr with which you will probably be using a bipod most of the time to take the best advantage of the 100 yards+ range of the calibre?

 

Hope that this makes sense.

 

I also prefer a heavy barrel, but again would you need it?

 

Don

[dunganick]

 

"Sako Quag Vs. Anschutz 1517 ZG"

 

Sako Quag Axe will cry when he reads this

 

in my honest opinion (tin hat on)

 

the sako quad's stock is cheaply made (although it is anything but to buy) there is alot of plastic on the quad which dosent effect the function, but just dosent represent a gun of that cost in my opinion. I have not tried one with an amazing trigger, but they still are better than out of the box cz's by a long way.

 

The anschutz is very accurate, has an amazing stock trigger, has almost no plastic on it. My one criticism is that if the bolt is just touched up it wont strike the primer, now you wont find a anschutz owner who says this is a problem, but it did put me off (but not as much as the price)

 

both guns will be accurate as you can shoot. Maybe the anschutz slightly more so.

 

The quad is also a gimik in my honest opinion. 99% of the users will only use one barrel, those who own two barrels normally end up trying to get rid of the .22lr barrel but find no-one actually wants a used sako quad .22lr barrel.

 

Sorry Axe

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

 

"Sako Quag Vs. Anschutz 1517 ZG"

 

Sako Quag Axe will cry when he reads this

 

in my honest opinion (tin hat on)

 

the sako quad's stock is cheaply made (although it is anything but to buy) there is alot of plastic on the quad which dosent effect the function, but just dosent represent a gun of that cost in my opinion. I have not tried one with an amazing trigger, but they still are better than out of the box cz's by a long way.

 

The anschutz is very accurate, has an amazing stock trigger, has almost no plastic on it. My one criticism is that if the bolt is just touched up it wont strike the primer, now you wont find a anschutz owner who says this is a problem, but it did put me off (but not as much as the price)

 

both guns will be accurate as you can shoot. Maybe the anschutz slightly more so.

 

The quad is also a gimik in my honest opinion. 99% of the users will only use one barrel, those who own two barrels normally end up trying to get rid of the .22lr barrel but find no-one actually wants a used sako quad .22lr barrel.

 

Sorry Axe

 

I agree in part. That's why I think (so far) that I will go for the wooden stocked Quad.

 

The bolt is **** on the Anschutz - looks like a toy.

 

Well, got that off my chest. All the Anschutz owners out there are wrong!

 

Don

 

 

Whoops, pressed the wrong button in the previous reply - my comments are after Dungannicks

 

Don

[dunganick]

ive not yet seen or heard of a wooden stocked quad in this country, would be intrested to see one. Sako make lovely wooden stocks. on the 75 and finfire

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

ive not yet seen or heard of a wooden stocked quad in this country, would be intrested to see one. Sako make lovely wooden stocks. on the 75 and finfire

 

Due in the UK 1st week in June.......

 

I have a 75 0.223 and a Finnfire varmint

 

Don

[Dunkield]

I all fairness..

Some stocks can look and sound horrible but actually be quite good.

When I first saw the T3 lite I was horified by the stock, and tapping it was obvious it was very hollow.

BUT I understand it has strands of glass in it which means it is stable, light AND strong so probably a pretty good thing to mount a barrel in.

[Axe]

Well in fairness the two rifles have good points and points but are both worthy od being compared to each other.

 

Stocks

The Anshutz stock like the Quad is shorter than most but very comfortable to use. If I had the choice or the money I would go with the Thumbhole option in either, as I much prefer the pistol grip. The synthetic stock of the Quad is very light indeed and makes the Quad a dream to walk over long distances. Some might say it throws the balance at the rear, but I don't find it so. Either way it could be weighted with ballast if you need it.

 

Bolts

Again both offer a smooth and well engineered feel to the operation but as Nick mentions, if you catch the bolt on the Anshutz, you could suffer a weak strike. Apparantly it is designed as a second safety, who knows. Once you are mindful of this, you'll have know problems as you get into a routine of double checking the bolt being home.

The Quad has a very positive feel and the plastic shroud of the bolt fits neatly along side when thrown and feels great. It also uncocks the firing pin when uncocked without firing, which I found an advantage. The safety, IMO is also more positive and easier to use, especially with gloves on.

 

Trigger

The Anshutz trigger is a very nice two stage and can be adjusted to give a very light pull weight. It feels positive in operation and touch. The Quad trigger is a single stage but also available with a set trigger option. Again it can be adjusted to give a light pull weight and feels almost identical to the Anschutz.

 

There is very little in it for me but the Quad just feels better engineered. Both rifles give similar results so its just down to your prefference. The advantage of the Quad giving you the option of other calibres with the purchase of a barrel only. The disadvantage, not having a heavy barrel option, if you consider that to be essential, which I do not.

 

Anyway, thats just my opinion.

[webber]

Thanks lads; it looks like I'm going to have to kick the tyres of the Anschutz. I just hope that my wife doesn't find out that its German, as she's not to fond of them, and they really did bomb our chippy!

 

webber

[deadeye ive]

Thanks lads; it looks like I'm going to have to kick the tyres of the Anschutz. I just hope that my wife doesn't find out that its German, as she's not to fond of them, and they really did bomb our chippy!

 

webber

I said the same thing only recently webber ...............So I went out and bought a CZ 452 .........IMHO having had the two infront of me I could,nt fault the CZ and at £235 cheaper my choice was made .

 

Hated the Stock on the Quad and I'm glad an alternative wooden version is coming out ........The example I saw showed a stock that was flimsy,warped and touching the barrel all the way down one side .

 

I was quoted an additional £400 for the thumbhole stock for the Anshultz

[rabbitron]

I have a 1517zg which I've had for six months,I went for anschutz mainly because I have owned a .22lr anschutz for 25 years and its been a very reliable and accurate rifle used in all conditions.

The 1517 zg is well made and its a cracking looking rifle fitted with an Ase Utra moderator.

I can imagine anyone bothering to read this will be thinking - so what about the looks ,does it do the job?

I've used the rifle mainly for clearing out hares on large fields cause the landowners have been complaining about the dog lads tresspassing ,the .17 Remington magnum round and the rifle accounted for a lot of hares through February and March from 20m out to a 150m.This time of year I've been clearing up magpies and crows again out to 150m.

When out shooting the hares I got the rifle completely coverd in mud on one occasion and next day whilst cleaning it I thought,why didn't I go for a all weather type .17 rifle...so before you buy I would say it depends what sort of shooting your gonna do with it..if its out lamping in mid winter ,fields covered in mud and snowing etc.don't buy a 'pretty' thumbhole stock version.

[miffy]

I have a 1517zg which I've had for six months,I went for anschutz mainly because I have owned a .22lr anschutz for 25 years and its been a very reliable and accurate rifle used in all conditions.

The 1517 zg is well made and its a cracking looking rifle fitted with an Ase Utra moderator.

I can imagine anyone bothering to read this will be thinking - so what about the looks ,does it do the job?

I've used the rifle mainly for clearing out hares on large fields cause the landowners have been complaining about the dog lads tresspassing ,the .17 Remington magnum round and the rifle accounted for a lot of hares through February and March from 20m out to a 150m.This time of year I've been clearing up magpies and crows again out to 150m.

When out shooting the hares I got the rifle completely coverd in mud on one occasion and next day whilst cleaning it I thought,why didn't I go for a all weather type .17 rifle...so before you buy I would say it depends what sort of shooting your gonna do with it..if its out lamping in mid winter ,fields covered in mud and snowing etc.don't buy a 'pretty' thumbhole stock version.