Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Should this have happened?

Friend came over today with his SAKO A7 .308. He has been practicing for a last minute elk hunt and had been practicing off a bipod...









When this happened a couple of days ago he called Beretta and spoke to a CS rep... The rep told him that "A7s were not made to shoot off a bipod". When my friend asked if that warning was in the owners manual the rep said "No, but we don't tell you not to run over the stock with a car and you wouldn't do that either would you?".



My friend was so stunned by this answer he didn't say much except how could he get a replacement stock. The rep then transferred him to...Brownells...

The rep from Brownells checked and a replacement stock would be $650...for a rifle he bought new for $725. But they had none...and was then told that they had been discontinued by the importer...Beretta.

So my friend has ordered a B&C replacement stock that should be here Thursday...

Needless to say my this will be my friend's last SAKO...

Bob

No,that should not have happened.

Poor QC IMO.

BerettaUSA has an absolutely horrible customer service reputation.

From what I can gather, they're "okay" elsewhere in the world, but I have never, ever heard anything good about the USA import outfit.

They seem to think that their obligation to the customer ends at delivery. That's it, nothing else.

I don't buy anydamnthing from 'em.

Poor fu cking excuse for a stock, more like it...

Well, its too bad, but bipods have been breaking synthetic stocks for quite some time. Just too much torque and recoil to be sustained by the stock.
The learning curve is short, expensive and untimely.

Beretta CS is fuuking terrible. And replacement parts ridiculously priced. Been trying to tell the Tikka crowd that for 10 years.

Good luck.....

Not much "meat" there that's for sure. I'd break out the JB Weld and put plenty inside the forend around that post.

Yup,exactly right.

That reminds me of Kimber customer service I have had....

Yep and that looks like a glass filled stock as opposed to a regular tupperware and it still snapped. The minute Beretta turned over their parts department to Brownells is the moment I lost complete interest in buying another Beretta anything. I will buy a Benelli SB since they haven't managed to [bleep] them up.

Not any less then a run of the mill synthetic. I would fix it and use it on the hunt without the bipod.

If it woulda been me on the other end of the phone when they said that it would not have been pretty.

Not surprising though. BTDT. Beretta CS is a total goat rope, in every single way. Parts cost a fortune, take forever to get, and you gotta fight with a moron first. Count me out....

Apparently my plastic Savager stocks don't know they are not suppose to work with a bi-pod.

Banging away over and over with a bipod on a bench, where the legs pretty much stick and don't move, causes that stud to absorb a lot of the recoil. And tupperware is tupperware. It ain't rocket science........

'Should it have happened'? Probably not.

But, 6-8" of leverage, on a small portion of the plastic, absorbing the recoil, probably produces a good bit of torque.

Not sure I am overly surprised...

JMHO

When my friend asked if that warning was in the owners manual the rep said "No, but we don't tell you to run over the stock with a car and you wouldn't do that either would you?".

With the growing popularity of long range shooting it seems Sako isn't in the game ....

^^^This^^^

Sounds like Beretta needs to take some Customer Service lessons from Ruger. They damn sure want be getting any of my money!

Sling swivels were designed to hold slings, not bipods..

ratsmacker - et.al.

I've had zero trouble with my Tikka (Beretta), and I've not heard about their CS being so terrible.......

I will not buy/trade for another Sako/Tikka/Beretta.

This really disappoints me.


Jerry

I've had personal experience with their crap CS.

Complete BS. They need to stand behind this.

I don't think all "plastic" stocks are created equal. I've fired hundreds of rounds from Remington, Ruger and Savage plastic stocked .308s using a bipod and have had zero issues.

Also know a LOT of friends who shoot almost nothing but bipod and have never seen or heard of this happening.

Didn't pull the action out of the stock but from the piece that pulled out it doesn't look like it was well supported in the stock.

Bob

You do realise that your friend has applied an after-market device that is not warrantied nor allowed for in the design parameter of the original equipment manufacturer.

If you think this is anything like a warranty issue then you may suggest to your friend that he should take his nice new car for a spin across a lake, then see how quick the car manufacturer replaces his non-floating vehicle.


Short answer: suck it up princess and take responsibility for your stuff-ups.

And I was strongly considering getting a Tikka for myself. This changes my mind. That ain't customer service.

Jerry you just posted multiple times in a thread where I (and others) stated multiple times how bad Beretta CS service is.

I also stated that people only hear what they want to hear😉

As for bipods and stocks, I have some thoughts of my own. Had them last night but did not care to get into it this deeply. But, I am pretty coffeed up right now and have a trigger job to go do before I cut the lawn. Sooooo fuggit.

RJM stated above that he does no believe that all "plastic" stocks are created equal. Well that is the truth. You have some that are glass filled or reinforced and others that are just injection molded. The former being the better of the 2 and better for just about anything except shooting from a bipod. They don't flex like the IM ones do. The IM ones are less prone to breakage. However, less rigid for accurate shooting. I usually have pressure on forend tip with such stocks or full length bed. Especially with thin barrels, they are better this way than floated. Hope I needn't say more.

That said, shooting big boomers off a bench with a stud attached bipod or even worse yet, a monopod, is not a great idea. Really anything that kicks harder than a 243 IMO. I don't do it. Have seen the evidence why. I limit my bipods to field use in such cases. But for rifles that get shot a lot in field, I don't use stud attached bipods. Match rifles for prone shooting, not hunting rifles. I have yet to see a rail mounted bipod, that is glass bedded and screwed/threaded rip free from a stock. Something I cannot say of stud mounted bipods and monopods.

As someone stated, the sling stud really is for holding a sling. Just because bipods were invented later that mount to it, doesn't change this fact. If you want to shoot with a bipod off a bench, I suggest only shooting smaller cartridges, or using a bipod system that does not force the recoil onto the sling stud. There are plenty out there. I suggest not using a monopod ever. Unless you like prying sling studs from your stock and/or ganking up threads. Because eventually, you will do just that.

That said, a front rest and rear bag is usually best for most rifles. For smaller chambered ARs with aluminum forends, I use bipods off bench sometimes. But they are drilled and tapped into aluminum forends and don't kick much at all. And round forends don't sit in rests too well without canting.

JMO......

I am thinking having some more of these made up. This was before I painted it black....

My problem with that is if the relatively gentle recoil of a .308 did that while sitting on a bipod, I certainly wouldn't have much faith in the integrity of the stock/sling stud to hold my rifle on my shoulder using a sling and hold up to any serious josteling. And what if a guy wanted to shoot supported with the sling? That puts a fair bit of pressure on that stud. I'd call it a manufacturer defect for sure.

How many sharp, repeated backward jolts does the stud receive while slung on your shoulder or while using as a shooting aid? Not really the same thing IMO.

Bipods buggering up stocks/stud threads or shooting them loose due to recoil is nothing new......

Even if the stock should have been expected to brake,Beretta CS still sucks.

2mg -

Yes CS was mentioned 'some' BUT that thread was about Tikka Owners Experience with their rifles. The focus of that thread was about Tikka rifles' performances. The focus of that thread from the Title and most participants was not about Berett C S.

Jerry

Jerry, I understand what the focus was, and poor CS is part of the Tikka/Beretta experience. Unfortunately.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. At least you have heard it from some others and not just myself, whom you consider a hater

When hunting in the mountains, it happens lots. And I certainly wouldn't want the sling stud letting loose on me when I'm hiking the spine of a 3000' cliffy mountain...

shooting the stud loose isn't the same as busting a chunk out of the stock. Either way, it doesn't inspire much confidence in the strength of those stocks.

When I say shooting the stud loose I mean buggering it up so it no longer tightens properly or blowing the threads out.

I would think the sling stud should work fine as a sling stud. But I understand your concerns......

I have shot thousands of rounds out of rifles on Harris Bipods, thousands. I have never seen a stud fail except the boat-paddle Rugers where the woodscrewd would pull out of the stock in hot weather.

My last few McMillans have an EXTRA stud specifically so that you can use your bipod without removing the sling. I have use bipods with MPI, MicMillan, Ruger, Winchester, Savage, Brown Precision, Bell&Carlson and Ramject or whatever they were called; these are just the synthetic stcoks. I have used them in countless wooden stocks. This is completely unacceptable. The CS comparing it to running the stock over is also unacceptable. The bipod is a common accessory and if they didn't want you to use it they should have stated such. Running it over is obviously abuse.

I guess I am shocked at how many of you defend Beretta in this case. Wow.

The mistake you are making Dennis is that you are thinking Sako makes their rifles to accept a Harris bipod...they make their rifles to shoot with or without a sling, and they supply them without provision for attachment of a bipod. Further, such attachment of an aftermarket device is solely at the risk and discretion of the purchaser.

Now if the company specified that the rifle were to be used with such a device you would have some standing, as it is you have none.

Dennis--- I am not defending Beretta in any way. Their CS is horrid. They should send the man a stock IMO, and certainly not charge $650 for one. What shocks me is that guys willingly buy guns from such a company. This is old news.

Many of the guys I know who shoot a ton or competitively will not use bipods that attach to studs. And even though a company may put in an extra stud for a bipod, doesn't mean there is no risk involved in using it. I have a $700 McMilllan that got the stud blown out from trying to use a monopd in a prone match. It seemed a lot easier than toting a rear bag around. I knew better, and it bit me in the a$$. I still have to glass it back in. It didn't take a chunk out of the stock, but the stud is not useable nonetheless. Truth is, I don't need it anyway. I don't need to send it in to fix it, but I would have a lot more confidence in McMillan taking care of me than Beretta, if I did.

Beretta products are not the only ones prone to such breakage. Have seen it on plenty of brands. However, the glass filled or reinforced stocks in question, may be the most susceptible IMO. Or at least the most susceptible to an actual blow out like the OP experienced.......

If a CS rep had said that to me, he'd be in for a string of very bad luck.

I guess I learned something new here - never knew a bipod could cause that much stress on a stock.
OTOH, it's a $30 piece of injection molded plastic.

You are being much too generous with the 30 dollars. I am done with Beretta and their lousy customer service. The next and last from them will be a super black eagle, Still disgusted that they managed to buy Benelli,Franchi and Sako

Oh BTW the 625 dollars for a replacement is rich very rich and falls right in line with those idiots

If that had been said to me I'd have referred them to Dolomite for my response:

Exactly!, As stated it's a cheap stock. the least CS could have done is sold the customer a new stock at the discounted price of $30 which would have cost them nothing and made the customer relatively happy.

Looks like a fine elk rifle.

Damn! Every time I see that 'T' word I get a case of the schits!!

What can you expect from a low-end, cheap, plastic stock?

When my friend called he didn't think the stock would be replaced under warranty as it was 10 years old...but one can always try... What bothered him was the snide remark by the CS rep...

When he called B&C to order the replacement he told their CS rep what had happened and was assured that their stock could be used with a biod.

The only reason my friend was using one was at the suggestion of the guide who it sounded like recommends them to all his hunters.

That is retarded. Bipods are commonly put on rifles. It is reasonable for a manufacturer to foresee customers putting them on there and should build rifles accordingly.

This is 100% Sako's fault. Even a $300 RAR will rock a bipod.

2mg-

You ? might ? be right ? ? ?
I know you were telling us their CS was ....poor.

Tomorrow I will re read that thread to see what I ? might ? have missed or what didn't sink in.

I know that I was focused on Tikka rifle's performance and dependability.

Also at the moment I don't remember hardly anyone saying that their Tikka wasn't accurate or that they were not dependable.

We'll see ? ?


Jerry

That is irrelevant, the company is not making their rifle to accommodate bipods, evidenced by lack of inclusion in the owners manual (the same manual that doesn't include a lengthy expose on how to insert the barrel into your mouth)...and the company is not responsible for what the purchaser does outside the provisions the firearm is speced for.

It is reasonably common for people to suicide in cars...good luck holding the manufacturer responsible for what some dill does with the product, nor is it reasonable to expect firearms manufacturers to be held responsible for people being shot with the firearms those same companies manufacture.


At some point we all have to take responsibility for our actions...and stop looking for a free handout.

Furthermore you cannot even reasonably expect the manufacturer or seller of the bipod to be held responsible for the damage as the onus is on the purchaser of the product to ensure the firearm attachment is speced for the product.

I find this so damn maddening, it just ticks me off. Sako prefers to lose a customer, while acknowledging there is no warning which shouldn't be necessary btw. You can use a bi pod with a savage, ruger cheapest, but not a sako costing twice as much? All for a stock that would cost sako about $30 to replace? Stupid

For supposed capitalists you lot seem to have real difficulty getting off the tit.

Even if the rifle with the [bleep] stock is a Sako?

That stock is obviously a POS and should be replaced gratis.

Position shooting with a sling strains the fugk out of the front stud as well. To claim it can handle one and not the other is horse schit.




Travis

You should work for Beretta,you would fit in perfectly.

Excellent retort. I love it.

2muchgun -- You still with us ?

I just RE read that WHOLE thread, "Tikka Experience".
Guess what ? In ALL 18 PAGES <<<YOU>>> were the ONLY 1 to mention Beretta CS.

AND you didn't mention CS until P 16


This thread is where I've heard the MOST criticism of Beretta CS and it seems justified. I'm really NOT trying to say I told you so. I wanted to double check for myself.

We can still be friends !

Jerry

No thank you, the company has nothing that I am interested in...and I wouldn't take a new Sako or Tikka if it were given to me.

I agree. Back in the day when riflemen knew how to use a sling for shooting, rifles commonly had barrel bands to take the pressure of a tight sling.

If the OP's buddy had used the sling stud for its intended purpose, that rifle would have lasted for several generations. Don't blame the manufacturer for a failure of that nature when subjected to the usage it was put to.

Any fool would have examined the structural integrity of his fore arm before bolting something like a bipod to it, right? Right? To not do so, and then blame the stock maker for a failure related to that is ludicrous and narrow minded. On the other hand I agree that their response was uncalled for. They could have at least told him to take a hike in more friendly terms.

I wonder if a guy could spread a little epoxy in the front end of a tupperware stock to strengthen it a bit for bi-pod shooting.

Good morning Jerry. I just read this and it did not seem right to me. Go back and check page 3 and page 5

Anyway, it doesn't matter. I didn't check any further than that or to see if anyone else chimed in. The guy bought his rifle, so I don't see any need to continue the other thread or
make the man second guess his purchase. I hope it serves him well and that he never has to deal with Beretta...

If it were mine I would either go Bell and Carlson or Accraglass Gel........

A stock should be able to handle a sling used for position shooting as well as a bipod.

They sold him an overpriced POS.



Travis

A barrel band has never helped a single rifle on the planet shoot better. I'd not bitch about the lack of one on anything.

I agree that position shooting with sling stresses the stud also. But it is not in the same manner. If shooting from a bench with a bipod, or prone in tough field conditions, you are asking a lot of a tupperware or glass reinforced stock. Period. Get a rest, or a different stock, or or a different bipod system.

That said, Beretta still sucks balls, and yes it is an overpriced POS IMO......

I feel much the same way, Travis. But, in reality, how many guys use a sling for position shooting anymore? Hardly anybody. Can't really blame a stock maker for ignoring the possibility in this day and age.

Kinda like blaming the car maker for installing a plastic sleek/sexy front end on a car instead of a good old heavy duty solid steel bumper when you bump something and incur $2000 worth of damage- when you bought the car for its looks instead of its utility.

Agreed, they don't, per se. But it does in the respect that they provided a superb foundation for anchoring the front sling swivel, which in itself can make up for a lot of other faults by enabling a steadier hold.

Beretta may suck balls, but you can find someone who thinks the same way about every other gun maker, too. There's an ass for every seat.

I agree. And I do shoot that way. I can remember my good bud telling me 30 yrs. ago about how his dad showed him how to use the sling for support on offhand shots.

That said, I have never yanked out a sling stud doing it, nor has he. I have seen plenty of damage done by bipods though......

Ha ha, I should never have stepped into this conversation because I don't even use slings on my rifles for carrying them. (They ride in my game pocket or backpack to be used if I have my hands full with something else.) And I think bipods are for guys who don't mind the extra weight and nuisance of one hanging on them just for a few seconds of utility every now and then. Of course, I hunt exclusively with rifles made pre-WWII which aren't adaptable to them and which would look stupid with one on them. To each his own - I certainly don't expect others to follow my example as I don't choose to follow theirs. It's all good.

The d-bag told him it was designed to be used for a sling and that's how a lot of people use slings.

If Beretta's stance is that their swivel stud is there for the sole purpose of transporting the rifle via sling, then they are raping their customers.

That's ridiculous IMO.



Travis

And to add insult to injury, I have a Tikka CTR with their cheap ass stock on it and it has seen thousands of rounds of .308 and almost all of them have been off a bipod.

If they can make a serviceable stock for that POS, they should certainly be including one with an A-Gay.




Travis

Hint:

If you have to use ridiculous analogies like suicide to support your argument, you're probably losing.

Nope, not the purpose of a barrel band. A barrel band mount with a tight sling is asking for a POI change.

The benefits of a barrel band are to allow the use of a shorter forearm and to keep the front sling in the proper location, and for rifles with significant recoil it prevents having a front stud that will smack your hand under recoil.

I do not particularly give a shit.

I believe we're picturing two different things. You, I believe, are referring to a small steel band that wraps around the naked barrel. I, on the other hand, when referring to rifles of yore with stout bands to hold a tight sling am referring to bands that encompass the stock too. Think Winchester M52A, Springfield M1903 NRA Sporter, Savage M19 NRA, etc. A slight case of diverging definitions.

gnoahhh,



You say. The original poster doesn't seem to be a fool so he wouldn't examine the structural integrity of his fore arm before bolting something like a bipod to it. He is probably exactly like the fast majority of posters on this sight.

Expecting Sako to warranty a 10-year old plastic rifle stock is just laughable.

Jerry,

Saying Beretta customer service can suck is being kind. Sometimes it may not, but you best know someone. Most of the time it will. Many examples exist in the shotgun group. Guessing, but it seems rifles are included.

To their credit that did do this:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-beretta-moving-20140722-story.html

And to the other side of the MDL. Should make Steelhead happy and I can see why.

I bought an A7 when they first came out.

It had the lightweight plastic stock.

Anyway, I shot this chit out of it and it took roughly 600-800 rounds from a bipod before I happened to notice that the front stud was starting to crack out.

Mine is a 300 WSM and it was/is a slick rifle.

Replaced the factory with an EDGE and stuck the tupperware in the closet.

Caught the Montana bug and pretty much forgot about anything Sako/Tikka.


(FWIW have a Sako 85 in 300 WSM with well over 1k from a bipod and no issues)

Yeah. I was too harsh. My apologies.

Sometimes I ascribe personal traits to the world at large. If I were to to do something like hanging a bipod on a new rifle, I would check the web thickness of the material it would be attached to and any other structural characteristics that would effect the installation. It's the engineer side of me that drives me to be anal like that. I realize most guys just trust stuff to be ok.

Thnx Battue.
I've had NO trouble w/my Tikka T 3 Lite SS 270 in 13 yrs. I certainly hope I don't either. However after 10-13 yrs I would not expect a warranty, especially on the stock.

OTOH too many have given examples of P P customer service so I don't plan to be a future Beretta customer.

Thnx again

Jerry

They do make excellent shotguns that seldom cause problems-especially their O/U's-but if something does occur then quick is not part of their reputation. Their semi-auto shotguns are also fine. However, when something does go wrong, it normally involves an easy parts swap which are available from a variety of sources once you figure out what broke.

Had a brand new Beretta semi that the forend cracked. Beretta had a display tent at the shoot and I took it over. They looked at it and said I would have to send it in for them to look at. Now they had maybe 10 of the same model on display. I said just give me one off of one of them. No, can't do. OK, I'll pay you for one. No, can't do, have to send it in. I duct tapped the crack and to this day it remains the same.

Now if I had been one of the known shooters, it would have been a done deal. 😀

And them wanting $650 for a tupperware is hilarious. 😏

Sucks thats you guys have such [bleep] Beretta CS. Here (Australia) they are probably one of the best in terms of after-sales support and general CS/warranty stuff. Seems they can't do enough to help the end user. Hope it improves for you guys soon.

B P -

I'm glad their C S is good there. Maybe ? it'll get better here.

Jerry

JStuart, your analogy is one of the stupidest ones I have ever seen. You need to quit defending this mess. Bipods have been very mainstream for over 30 years now. EVERY manufacturer has seen them. IF they don't think their stock can stand up to one, they should put a disclaimer on the stock or owner's manual. Pretty simple. This is more like putting a steering wheel cover on the wheel and having the steering wheel break off. After seeing that photo, I would never sling that rifle! If they had simply said that they didn't want to warranty a 10-year-old stock I could live with that.

As for the McMillan stocks. I can't see how you can possibly damage the stud with a bipod. They are threaded into STEEL T- nut which is carefully inletted into the stock and epoxied in place. You would have to rip a 3/4" whole all the way through the stock to get one out. I can also guarantee that McMillan would have no problem fixing you stock for free if you bipod stud pulled out- even if it was a 375 H&H.

They do make nice shotguns although a silver pigeon purchased 10 years ago had to go back immediately and the plating was cheap, the stock finish brittle.

I certainly hope Beretta never buys Cesar Guerini

Read the posts and agree that manufacturers should anticipate the use of front swivel studs for bipod use....but have never used a bipod on the bench. Seems to me that there is too much "bounce." My cousin used to shoot a .25-06 from the bench using his bipod...groups were about 2 inches for three shots. Took the bipod off, shot off sandbags, groups were barely over an inch. I could see the rifle rebound from the bench when he used the bipod.
I also am distrustful of threaded front sling swivels in wood stocks. My main hunting rifle came with a threaded front swivel with barely 1/2 inch of threads. I had the forearm drilled through and countersunk for a machine screw swivel and a nut. I am much more confortable carrying the rifle slung now...and also feel better about attaching a bipod when hunting.
I put a Williams brrrel band swivel on a Savage 99A I had as a kid. Missed some shots using the sling in the field....years later it occurred to me it might be changing point of impact. Long story short...about 4 inches low and left when shooting from a snug sling compared to without. My current rifles are free floated with the swivel in the foreend...no change in POI that I can discern using sling for a shooting aid.
I presently own no synthetic stocked rifles....went back to wood just cause I like it better, and hunt in a dry climate so don't really need the moisture stability of synthetic. But if I ever get one, I'll be careful of using the front stud for bipod attachment!

Oh okay, have it your way...the manufacturer should warranty your personal rifles til the day your grandchildren bury you, even for things and actions the manufacturer did not design the firearms for...they should also include a nice big soft tit for you to suck on so that you do not have to fend for yourself in this big nasty world, and a lovely soft ball of cotton wool so that you can nestle inside and not have to take responsibility for your own decisions and mistakes.

Satisfied?


Good grief you lot are a pack of gimmethat fairies.

I like that tit idea.





Clark