JohnGalway Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 (edited) . Edited September 3, 2009 by JohnGalway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WGD Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 I seem to hear more negatives than positives about the Sako Quad; for the money you wouldn't expect problems like those described here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 This is a minor problem though and I would guess goes away with use, to me they are too gimicky I just wouldn't be able to swap a barrel and adjust a scope without at least checking zero which just adds to the ammo cost and reduces your ability to just pick the gun up and go for a wander. Undoubtably they are a nice gun and appear to shoot well but I'd bet once the novelty has worn off that you just stick with the one caliber and hardly ever change barrels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted July 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 (edited) . Edited September 3, 2009 by JohnGalway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Cheers for that John. I have suggested in the past on here or the BBS that may be the problem, caused primarily by the fact that the claw is optimised for the larger diameter 17hmr/22wmr shell and probably strikes the slot when a .22 is used. It's one of the things I intended to do but as I rarely use the .22 it never got done. Shame Sako didn't correct the flaw because thats the only negative aspect I know of or have read about the Quad. I'm also thinking it might be easier to take the slot back a tad with a dremel and cutting disc - and discussed that possibility with someone at the importers who said it's probably a good idea but be careful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted July 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 (edited) . Edited September 3, 2009 by JohnGalway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WGD Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Negatives such as Fantastic rifles Ok, maybe a bit dramatic but this is a flaw which would irritate the hell out of me. The "quad" principal seems good but like Al4x I would probably resist changing barrels to save the hassle of having to re-zero, and from another thread I believe there are few scopes short enough to mount leaving the barrels interchangable without removing the scope - major pain in the ***. I'm sure they are great rifles mate, just not for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 Negatives such as I would thinkif anything other than the barrell has a problem you have no gun to out with. at least with 2 rifles you can still get out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted July 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 (edited) . Edited September 3, 2009 by JohnGalway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeymagic1969 Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 I agree - i have a Sako Quad in .17machII & .22, its fantastic and would shoots the balls of a gnat ( if i can do my part) Never had a single problem with the extractor either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fo5ter Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 I only get a very rare problem extracting live 22lr rounds and since i only need to eject live rounds at the end of the night it doesnt bother me - thts what fingernails are for. The quad is a superb gun - as Sakos only current rimfire it covers all the calibres without having to make different guns which means that it a lot easier to buy the different calibres without worrying about limited production runs or less popular calibres being difficult to find second hand. The changeable barrels dont make the weapon any less stable or reliable. My only gripe is that I have synthetic but I want a walnut stock and cant seem to find one anywhere! :look: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRDS Posted October 16, 2009 Report Share Posted October 16, 2009 The Quad is a great rifle and you can swap the barrels with confidence. Best is to use a weaver rail and QRW mounts, either use two different scopes or adjust the zero and note the settings. I have done alot of swapping and not had an issue, its a great concept that really works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavman Posted October 16, 2009 Report Share Posted October 16, 2009 I keep mine on 17HMR and have shot about 2000 rounds with no problems what so ever at any time, for me its been a great rifle, i clean it reg inc the mod and check zero about once aevry 6 weeks or so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted October 16, 2009 Report Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) I can't remember the link that John put up but the basic gist of the original post is that the ejector claw doesn't get fully behind the rim of the .22 case to pull it out. The shape of it allows a high point to contact the base of the barrel claw recess before it gets in far enough. The 17 hmr and .22 wmr have wider cases and rims that the claw will fully engage. I have not measured the depth of the claw recess's in each barrel but I'd guess they are the same, the LR case is a few thou further away from the edge of the barrel/claw recess. Two fixes are: (1) file down the outer profile of the claw so it goes deeper into the barrel recess. (2) make the barrel recess deeper. I did a mixture of both and have started using the .22 more frequently again now the cases eject reliably. I'm amazed Sako did not see this oversight and act on it. Edited October 16, 2009 by Dave-G Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WGD Posted October 16, 2009 Report Share Posted October 16, 2009 My quad is new and I have had no .22 extraction problems, long may it continue. Incidentally, why was JG's info all deleted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Galore! Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Ok, maybe a bit dramatic but this is a flaw which would irritate the hell out of me. The "quad" principal seems good but like Al4x I would probably resist changing barrels to save the hassle of having to re-zero, and from another thread I believe there are few scopes short enough to mount leaving the barrels interchangable without removing the scope - major pain in the ***. I'm sure they are great rifles mate, just not for me. I had some major probs with mine, like not ejecting unspent rounds from the breech[22lr] and the last round sticking in the mag[17hmr] sako not that good for the money, only good thing about them is the gun fit, my cz seems like a small kids toy when compared to sako. had the 22 sorted but cost me a few quid, 17 mag got replaced free. made a new stock for the cz TRG42 stylee! and dont bother with the sako 22 barrel. the scope they made specifically for the quad is a piece of **** too, too complicated to set up and not v ery good light transferance, ended up with an edgar brothers opti mate fixed mag sniper scope which i have to say is better than leupold i used to own. As you may have guessed i'm not too happy with GMK, over rated and over priced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted October 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) .... Edited October 22, 2009 by JohnGalway 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.