|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,415 Likes: 51
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,415 Likes: 51 |
It’s a very bad design and worse customer dis-service. I had CS straight out lie about product complaints i.e. there were none. And that was the BEST response. He was all about being right and me being wrong. I remember distinctly him saying, to paraphrase, “the rifle ejects the case from the action, that is all that can be guaranteed. We can’t be responsible for problems caused by every combination of scopes and mounts”. I was using medium Leupold mounts and a 1” tube Leupold scope. My 85m failed to properly eject every time. No problem repeating. The case mouth was hitting the tube not the turret or cap, then falling back into the action.
It’s easy to understand. The extractor pulls the case head rearward by the rim. As the case mouth clears the chamber the case head is pushed against the 6 o’clock ejector. The case mouth then rises until stopped by the scope tube and can rise no further. But since the case is still moving rearward against the ejector with nowhere for the case mouth to go, the case rim is pushed from under the extractor and flops onto either the next round or the follower. I watched this happen time and time again and repeated the process to CS with no success.
Take a good look at that extractor placement. It bears a strong resemblance to the position of 1894 Winchesters. The Winchester is designed to eject the case straight up and does that well. So can the 85M though unintentionally. Sure, there are ways for a handy man to respring or redesign the extractor but you’re still dealing with a faulty design. Every time a reworked extractor manages to hold the rim, it almost didn’t. What if you were dealing with something that wants to bite, claw or hook you? It’d be a bad time to have an empty case blocking the ejection port. And there is absolutely no excuse for Beretta to disavow responsibility. TMSAISTI. Good post buddy. The funny thing is they will also tell you to run the bolt with more authority. Really pull back on it hard and quick. A good rifle will feed, eject and control the cartridge no matter how fast or slow you run the bolt. Tikka's and pre 64 model 70's are both great examples of this function..
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,712 Likes: 12
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,712 Likes: 12 |
Ran it fast&hard, slow&soft. With my rifle it didn’t matter. Now REALLY hard pulling on the bolt would rattle the case up and down and side to side and it would sometimes fall off the rifle. But not because of engineering. Blind squirrel / acorn deal.
“When Tyranny becomes Law, Rebellion becomes Duty”
Colossians 3:17 (New King James Version) "And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him."
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,763
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,763 |
Most 3 lug bolt guns have some ejection issues because of the location of the ejector and extractor between lugs. Empties go up more hitting the scope caps , rather than out. You usually can't use low rings or target caps. Really? I have owned a dozen or more Browning A/X bolt rifles and every one ejected perfectly...Its not the 3 lug bolt its the location of the ejector @6 o'clock thats a poor design......Hb
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527 |
They should bring back the 75.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,098 Likes: 6
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 3,098 Likes: 6 |
I only own one Sako 85. it's a 260. I guess I'm one of the lucky ones. I haven't had any problems with it what so ever. Then again it is a short action. My long actions 270, and 30-06 are Tikka T3x Lite's. They shoot every bit as good as the Sako 85. Imo, you get the most bang for your buck with the Tikka.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,188
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,188 |
I imagine Sako selling Tikka’s 3-4:1 to 85’s has to be wake up call. It isn’t because we are all about “budget” rifles.
I would gladly pay more for the finer points of the 85 when they re-design the ejector.
Stuck in airports, Terrorized Sent to meetings, Hypnotized Over-exposed, Commercialized Handle me with Care... -Traveling Wilbury's
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,763
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,763 |
Ha! I bet Sako sells 10:1 Tikka T3x rifles over Sako 85's....Hb
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 4,609 Likes: 13
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 4,609 Likes: 13 |
There's no place to move the ejector to unless they split a lug. That'd be fine. It need to be directly across from the extractor. A grooved lug doesn't hurt in a Mauser.
Last edited by 10Glocks; 01/21/22.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 963
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 963 |
Sorry, I did not know that Browning even had 3 lug guns. Sounds like Browning has better engineers. I do know Sako and Cooper had troubles with ejection in 3 lug guns.
|
|
|
|
529 members (12344mag, 1234, 17CalFan, 160user, 10Glocks, 10ring1, 50 invisible),
13,553
guests, and
943
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,195,116
Posts18,542,193
Members74,057
|
Most Online21,066 May 26th, 2024
|
|
|
|