Useless for combat - but beautiful

[Jaywalker]

This is a Sako L579 .243 bolt action rifle from about 1970 - 71. It's gorgeous - the only part that isn't steel and wood is the plastic buttplate with "Sako" written on it. The guy i bought it from says it had fired only 95 rounds and it does look like it's been cleaned and stored for a few decades. The wood to metal fit alone would have to come from a custom stockmaker these days, let alone the borderless checkering.

I'm struggling to decide whether to put a receiver ("peep") sight on it and stay close to its seven-pounds-two-ounce weight, or to scope it and see how it shoots. I use to shoot irons, but a scope is much easier on my eyes these days.

I guess I'm more a wood and steel guy than a modular aluminum guy.

26742

26741

[Kyle Reese]

Gorgeous rifle.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

Beautiful. How about a 1.5-5x Leupold? Not big and clunky but just enough magnification.

[Jaywalker]

Beautiful. How about a 1.5-5x Leupold? Not big and clunky but just enough magnification.
Was actually thinking of the indestructible Leupie 2.5x20, but if I scope I'll have to give the nod to a gloss Leupold 2.5x8 that isn't otherwise mounted. That'll run it up slightly over eight pounds, which still isn't too bad.

[David S.]

A classic gold ring Leupold LPV, 2-7x or 3-9 seems like it’d make a nice setup.

[Cheap Shot]

Very nice! She's a looker

[Greg]

Old Sakos can really shoot. Agree with the above sentiment about a low power scope.

[Willard]

I would not say useless. Equipped with the proper optic, this could be very useful in certain circumstances.

[Lester Polfus]

I would not say useless. Equipped with the proper optic, this could be very useful in certain circumstances.

For years, my only centerfire rifle was a bolt .308. I took it seriously as a "general purpose" rifle and made quite a study of the material in Cooper's Art of the Rifle.

An acquaintance once sneered and posited some kind of apocalyptic, TEOTWAWKI scenario and said: "I bet you'd wish you had an AR-15 then!" I replied "Maybe, but I guarantee some people will wish I didn't have a bolt .308."

That's a beautiful Sako. I've done good work with a Leupold 1.75 to 6 and never felt like I needed more glass.

[jellydonut]

I would not feel undergunned with this thing. Certainly not useless for combat.

Could it be lighter, could it be optics-ready? Sure. But it's still a very good rifle.

[Rex G]

OK, I have seen the photos of the beautiful rifle. :) Sweet!

You forgot, however, to post the pics of the “useless for combat” rifle. ;)

[HCM]

It’s not a combat rifle so “useless for combat” isn’t really relevant.

It is a good example of what it was designed to be, a hunting rifle.

.243 is a very capable round, I would want more than 2.5x on an optic for something like this.

[Jaywalker]

It’s not a combat rifle so “useless for combat” isn’t really relevant.

It is a good example of what it was designed to be, a hunting rifle.

.243 is a very capable round, I would want more than 2.5x on an optic for something like this.
Depends what you're shooting at, I've always thought - the smaller the target, the higher the power. For deer I always have the 2.5x8X set to 2.5 unless I'm developing loads. That's always been plenty to pick a spot on the rib cage after I've counted tines with binoculars. I don't shoot at deer more than 200 yards away anymore, so a broad field of view is better for me than magnification.

[Gater]

Beautiful rifle. I'm fighting aging eyes, too, but were I lucky enough to be in your shoes I'd go ahead and pick up a Sako peep (if you don't already have one) and give it a shot, so to speak. Completes the rifle to me.

[ccmdfd]

As others have said, a classic and absolutely beautiful rifle!

All rifles don't have to be "tactical " looking.

As much as I like my AR's, when it comes to hunting I use a Sako 85 or a Win 70, both with wood.

Enjoy!

[Duelist]

Nice! My .243 has a 3x9 on it. I carry it around set to 3x, but have shot a deer at 300yds with it set to 9x. Just depends.

[HCM]

Depends what you're shooting at, I've always thought - the smaller the target, the higher the power. For deer I always have the 2.5x8X set to 2.5 unless I'm developing loads. That's always been plenty to pick a spot on the rib cage after I've counted tines with binoculars. I don't shoot at deer more than 200 yards away anymore, so a broad field of view is better for me than magnification.

1.5-5x
2-7x
2.5-8x

All would be good choices. My experience with fixed 2.5 has been with scout scopes so that may color my experience.

The usefulness of higher magnification (>5x ) tends to depend on the ability to go prone with a bipod or find field expedient rests for other positions.

[Jaywalker]

1.5-5x
2-7x
2.5-8x

All would be good choices. My experience with fixed 2.5 has been with scout scopes so that may color my experience.

The usefulness of higher magnification (>5x ) tends to depend on the ability to go prone with a bipod or find field expedient rests for other positions.
Yeah, I agree. I'm primarily a woods/whitetail hunter when I go, so even a 1X peep would work okay, probably.

[Chuck Whitlock]

As a youngling, I had a Remington 600 in 6mm with a 4x Redfield wide angle. A good fixed 4x would be a viable contender.

[LtDave]

I have a ‘66 vintage .243 like the OP’s. Mine came with a vintage Redfield 3-9 in older style Redfield bases and rings. My preference would be Sako rings that slide onto the receiver directly. You can mount a scope very low using them.

[Rosco Benson]

It is "optics ready". The receiver has cuts for proprietary Sako rings.

https://www.brownells.com/optics-mounting/rings-mounts-amp-bases/scope-rings/sako-ring-mounts-prod55732.aspx


Rosco

[Wayne Dobbs]

I love the .243 and have killed a ton of deer with it. It calls for a nice scope and while lots of folks, including me, love the various variables (is that redundant?), I think a fixed 4x or 6x might take care of your needs with less expense, weight and complexity. What a great rifle!

[okie john]

I love the .243 and have killed a ton of deer with it. It calls for a nice scope and while lots of folks, including me, love the various variables (is that redundant?), I think a fixed 4x or 6x might take care of your needs with less expense, weight and complexity. What a great rifle!

Agree 100% with this. A 2.5x scope unnecessarily limits a rifle that can reach out several hundred yards but doesn't offer much additional speed in return.

Disagree 100% with your comment that this rifle is useless for combat. A skilled, determined shooter with a scoped 243 could make a real nuisance of himself in a guerrilla warfare setting. The trick would be to fire once from somewhere near the far end of that cartridge's effective range, then slip away. See also Hathcock, Carlos.


Okie John

[Odin Bravo One]

I once convinced an upper echelon boss to let me carry a lever action .357 Magnum.......... he bought off on it.

The great thing about combat is that it comes in so many forms that it can be only loosely defined. And I’ve done substantially more combat damage using my thumbs than I ever did with my trigger finger.

[Jaywalker]

I love the .243 and have killed a ton of deer with it. It calls for a nice scope and while lots of folks, including me, love the various variables (is that redundant?), I think a fixed 4x or 6x might take care of your needs with less expense, weight and complexity. What a great rifle!

The 4X compared to 2.5x8-36 - less weight, yes, but by only two ounces; less complexity, yes, by a lot; less expense, no, since I'd have to buy a 4x, while there's a proved, unmounted Leupold 2.5x8-36 sitting available in my closet. Funny thing, I thought I had a spare 4x in the closet, but when I went looking for it I found a Simmons air rifle scope I don't remember having. Packrats? In any case I no longer have (or can find) a 4x as cheaply as a variable.

I'm still tempted by the Leupold 2.5x20. Phil Shoemaker, noted Alaska bear guide, has had one on his 458 for 25 years or so - he finds it sturdier than his backup iron sights. They're also nearly half the weight of my variable. They are not, however, free, so the variable it is. Another oddity I just discovered is how rare it is for an optics company to offer a 4X fixed power cope; they used to be the standard.

[JRB]

Agree 100% with this. A 2.5x scope unnecessarily limits a rifle that can reach out several hundred yards but doesn't offer much additional speed in return.

Disagree 100% with your comment that this rifle is useless for combat. A skilled, determined shooter with a scoped 243 could make a real nuisance of himself in a guerrilla warfare setting. The trick would be to fire once from somewhere near the far end of that cartridge's effective range, then slip away. See also Hathcock, Carlos.


Okie John

A quality .243 is nothing to sneer at for work.

I've heard quite a few stories about Afghan insurgents doing some impressively terrifying work with old Mosins and Enfields. At 600+M engagements in hilly terrain I know I'd prefer a solid .243 bolt gun with a decent optic over a 14.5in select-fire 5.56.

There's a reason they dusted off M14's and figured out how to put ACOG's on them.

[Jaywalker]

I did find the Weaver 4X - it was in a Leupold box.

This Weaver has been a really good scope. Back when I was reloading I shot some remarkable groups with it on a Ruger 77 MkII 6.5x55 at 100 yards. One five shot group had four shots in 0.26" with the fifth shot taking it out to .75. The next group was four shots in 0.31 inches with the fifth shot also took it out to 0.75 inches. I blamed it on the primers and changed to bench rest primers after that, but it could have been me all along. I'll never know.

27213
Here's my setup.
I have two of these useful Tipton Range Boxes for scope mounting and other light gunsmithing. Those are Leupold Ringmounts. That's a Segway Reticle Leveler, the best $10 I have spent on tools - I've had it for 15 years. If you haven't used one, you square it up on the flats of your receiver then un-focus your eyes so that you can see the reticle and the flat lines in the same image, twisting the scope until both are level. An inch-pound torque wrench lets you tighten just right, without marring or damaging the scope. Leupold says 14 inch-pounds for the mount and 15 - 17 inch-pounds for the scope screws. There's also a Leupold Bore Sighter tool in there in its bag under the grip on the table.

27214

27215

I didn't think to weigh the rings, but the rifle by itself is 7 pounds 2 oz. The Weaver scope is a sturdy 10 oz. Mounted, the rifle and scope weighs 8 pounds 0.1 oz. I'm pretty happy with it. Looks like I really did need Medium height rings.

[HCM]

A quality .243 is nothing to sneer at for work.

I've heard quite a few stories about Afghan insurgents doing some impressively terrifying work with old Mosins and Enfields. At 600+M engagements in hilly terrain I know I'd prefer a solid .243 bolt gun with a decent optic over a 14.5in select-fire 5.56.

There's a reason they dusted off M14's and figured out how to put ACOG's on them.

1) Don't believe everything you read.

2) The M14 is a classic case of "bird in hand." /"its in the system" that doesn't mean it's good.

In fact a 243 bolt gun might well be. better choice than a .308 at longer range. It was 6mm ish before it was. cool.

[HCM]

The 4X compared to 2.5x8-36 - less weight, yes, but by only two ounces; less complexity, yes, by a lot; less expense, no, since I'd have to buy a 4x, while there's a proved, unmounted Leupold 2.5x8-36 sitting available in my closet. Funny thing, I thought I had a spare 4x in the closet, but when I went looking for it I found a Simmons air rifle scope I don't remember having. Packrats? In any case I no longer have (or can find) a 4x as cheaply as a variable.

I'm still tempted by the Leupold 2.5x20. Phil Shoemaker, noted Alaska bear guide, has had one on his 458 for 25 years or so - he finds it sturdier than his backup iron sights. They're also nearly half the weight of my variable. They are not, however, free, so the variable it is. Another oddity I just discovered is how rare it is for an optics company to offer a 4X fixed power cope; they used to be the standard.

I have several older rifles with fixed 4x scopes. Weight is a factor but the bigger issue is reliability and durability. Prior to the 1990s, fixed power scopes were significantly more reliable than variables. However, like everything else, technology Marches on. Time was 9mm hollow points sucked and you had to get tune ups and new tires on your car every 15,000 miles.

Same with the 2.5 x. It still works but it is filling a niche now dominated by RDS and 1x low power variable scopes.

[willie]

I would love to have an old school Weaver 2.5 power scope which gave a wide field of view and served admirably for its intended use, short range hunting. Regardless of the rifle/scope combination that I might have had over the years, I would not shoot at deer past 150 yards. Past that distance I have small confidence in my ability to kill deer humanely. I admit it. Some don't.

[SecondsCount]

Beautiful rifle. I have a "varmint" version in 25-06 with a 6X Redfield that was given to me. I need to sit down at the bench and make some ammo for it.

The Weaver looks perfect on yours :cool:

[Jaywalker]

Beautiful rifle. I have a "varmint" version in 25-06 with a 6X Redfield that was given to me. I need to sit down at the bench and make some ammo for it.

The Weaver looks perfect on yours :cool: Thanks. I like longer barrel and sight hood on it.

[JRB]

1) Don't believe everything you read.

2) The M14 is a classic case of "bird in hand." /"its in the system" that doesn't mean it's good.

In fact a 243 bolt gun might well be. better choice than a .308 at longer range. It was 6mm ish before it was. cool.

I said 'heard' not read.
My point was that such a rifle as this Sako is certainly not 'useless for combat'.

While it's rare, having spent 10 years in the Army has put me around enough other Soldiers with the occasional story about one or two Iraqi's or insurgent MF'ers making a real pain in the ass out of a situation because one or both had SVD's or some other scoped rifle and actually had some idea of how to shoot.

I don't have any romantic notions about the M14 and I honestly don't care much for it as a working rifle, but if I'm regularly engaged by assholes with PKM's and SVD's at 400M+ I'd much rather have a 22in M14 with an ACOG than a 14.5 M4 with a CCO.
But in a pinch, that Sako .243 with a decent piece of glass would certainly do.

[Jeep]

I said 'heard' not read.
My point was that such a rifle as this Sako is certainly not 'useless for combat'.

While it's rare, having spent 10 years in the Army has put me around enough other Soldiers with the occasional story about one or two Iraqi's or insurgent MF'ers making a real pain in the ass out of a situation because one or both had SVD's or some other scoped rifle and actually had some idea of how to shoot.

I don't have any romantic notions about the M14 and I honestly don't care much for it as a working rifle, but if I'm regularly engaged by assholes with PKM's and SVD's at 400M+ I'd much rather have a 22in M14 with an ACOG than a 14.5 M4 with a CCO.
But in a pinch, that Sako .243 with a decent piece of glass would certainly do.

My view is that while the M-14 is heavy-ish, as is its ammo, new or reasonably lightly used ones were nice, accurate and reliable rifles. I can't speak to the ones that remain in inventory, but I can speak to the ones in inventory the better part of 50 years ago. They were good weapons (although the ones made with fiberglass stocks by H&R were treated with some suspicion).

And a Sako .243 from the same era could be a terrific combat weapon, particularly if you are engaging at some distance.

[okie john]

27214

Something about that setup looks exactly right.


Okie John

[Hambo]

Looks good, Jaywalker, but you got me started looking at vintage rifles on GunBroker last night.

[Stephanie B]

My “Frankenrifle”:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180619/cb69e8a2dbff79416f467893640b671c.jpg

Interarms Mk-X long action, .30-06 FN barrel, Weaver K4 scope and an Interarms stock. All but the action were bought from ads in Shotgun News, back in the day.

[Jaywalker]

My “Frankenrifle”:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180619/cb69e8a2dbff79416f467893640b671c.jpg

Interarms Mk-X long action, .30-06 FN barrel, Weaver K4 scope and an Interarms stock. All but the action were bought from ads in Shotgun News, back in the day.

I always liked those Mark X actions and had considered having a sporter built on it when I decided to go with the Sako. Is that a steel Weaver?

[Stephanie B]

I always liked those Mark X actions and had considered having a sporter built on it when I decided to go with the Sako. Is that a steel Weaver?

Indeed it is, circa ‘83.

[MistWolf]

My “Frankenrifle”:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180619/cb69e8a2dbff79416f467893640b671c.jpg

Interarms Mk-X long action, .30-06 FN barrel, Weaver K4 scope and an Interarms stock. All but the action were bought from ads in Shotgun News, back in the day.

Very nice rifle! I loved SGN, back in the day. Unfortunately, my dreams were bigger than my wallet.

[Lost River]

Glad to see this thread come up.



I have a strong affinity for rifles built by the Scandinavians/ Finns and Tikkas and Sakos are at the top of the list.

My Sako TRG is by far my most prized possession as far as target rifles go, but the older Tikka hunting rifles and newer Tikkas have proven to be exceptional in their craftsmanship/accuracy.

Ithica imported one produced by Tikka known as the LSA 55 and 65 (short and long actions). They had Bofors barrels and were Mauser actions. They are one of the best kept secrets of the "old rifle" world. Exceptional accuracy and being Mausers, they are exceptionally reliable. The downside is that magaizines are next to non existant, so don't lose the one that comes with the gun (which I have never actually heard of anyone losing a mag).

Mine is a 30-06 and shoots 155 Scenars into very small groups (Scandinavian bullets for a Scandinavian rifle naturally).


https://i.imgur.com/w3MzyLn.jpg


I think whoever designed the stock also invented the word ergonomic before the word even existed. Flat bottomed stock and a superb wrist.

https://i.imgur.com/3YnOQ6O.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/jiTF7WZ.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/8Ds36dS.jpg


https://i.imgur.com/4KBpnIU.jpg




I am not sure about its peak combat utility today, but to be honest, I would not feel poorly armed with using it in a precision rifle role, and the Finnish Legend Simo Häyhä might think that the Sakos and Tikkas are far from useless, even though he used something slightly different (SAKO M28/30).




I know that I would be not consider myself poorly armed if it was my only bolt action centerfire rifle.

A man could do much, much worse.

[Lost River]

The funny thing is though that these days I never actually hunt with such a fine rifle as the old Tikka/Mauser.

I have my 2 regular Tikka T3s in .300 WM and .308 Win that I dropped into McMillan stocks that meet my needs perfectly for the conditions/terrain I hunt.


https://i.imgur.com/Dq1jbaR.jpg?1

https://i.imgur.com/jG2d2zI.jpg

I honestly could hunt the rest my days with these two and call it totally good.

I have considered multiple times trying to find a suitable person who would appreciate such a classic rifle and sell it, but then I drag my feet, stick it away and a year or so later go through the same mental hurdles over and over.


Rifle loonyism...

[ECVMatt]

An accurate, bolt action .243 is one of the most useful rifles arounds. For years I used my 6mm Remington on a ranch daily. I can't tell you how many varmints were controlled with that rifle. That is beautiful!

[blake_g]

I owned the twin to that rifle in .308 and very stupidly sold it. I got double what I paid for it but less than half what I could get one for now. False economy...

[deputyG23]

There is a .308 L579 Sako actioned H&R Ultra Rifle at a LGS close to me. I am guessing early to mid ‘70s vintage.
Has some finish wear on the wood but appears in really good shape. It has Williams open sights which enhances its appeal to me since I can buy it and go shoot without immediately having to decide on optics.
It appears to have a external Mauser type extractor and hinged floorplate magazine.
The stock is retro ‘70s with the slant forend tip and grip cap a la Weatherby and rollover cheek piece.
They are asking $599.
Really tempted to go back tomorrow and offer $500 cash just to see how it goes. I just came into hundreds of prepared and primed .308 brass and a literal crap ton of bullets and powder.

[UNM1136]

Not really pertinent, but my deer rifle is a CMP sporterized '03A3. The wife's grandfather's gun. I drop about 100 rounds of 30-06 a year through it to be sure that I know the dope rounds 1-10 (as the non free floated barrel heats), and can call my shots from 100 to 500 yards. The gun likes 150 gr and lighter bullets....

Them old guns are kewl...

pat

[Unobtanium]

I would not say useless. Equipped with the proper optic, this could be very useful in certain circumstances.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4

[HCM]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4

All true, but what everyone’s Jeff Cooper inspired fantasy leaves out is that Simo Häyhä was an exceptional individual and “you ain’t Simo Häyhä.”

[Unobtanium]

All true, but what everyone’s Jeff Cooper inspired fantasy leaves out is that Simo Häyhä was an exceptional individual and “you ain’t Simo Häyhä.”

Which would imply that the rifle is not the "problem"...

[Duelist]

Not really pertinent, but my deer rifle is a CMP sporterized '03A3. The wife's grandfather's gun. I drop about 100 rounds of 30-06 a year through it to be sure that I know the dope rounds 1-10 (as the non free floated barrel heats), and can call my shots from 100 to 500 yards. The gun likes 150 gr and lighter bullets....

Them old guns are kewl...

pat

My grandfather’s deer rifle was a sporterized DCM ‘03A3. Stolen from my cousin’s house about ten or fifteen years ago along with grandpa’s Ithaca 37 Featherlight 20 and Browning .22. And all of my cousin’s guns as well, except the pocket pistol he was carrying when it happened.