oldelkhunter

I am betting Beretta is doing everything in its power to cut costs and they will eventually do in this fine line of Rifles. AS far as spending 1000 dollars and expecting better..I have unfortunately owned 3 Remington custom shop guns that cost just a little more then that and I can tell you they are still not anywhere close to a Sako in quality.

zac76156

OEH, have you bought a Sako since the buyout? Maybe too late to get in on that "Sako quality" I was looking forward to...

bigcountry

I think alot of people are jumping to alot of conclutions here. Automatically, saying they have bad quality cause another company bought them. Compounded with the recalls. I wouldn't worry about it just yet.

oldelkhunter

Nope did not..I would look one over before purchasing another but that is my MO anyway.

GRIZZLYMAN

I got my Sako L691 10 years ago. At that time the retail was around $1,100 (brother in law was a dealer and I got it for $715). Now the retail is around $1,200. In ten years materials like steel and wood have gone up significantly. I don't know how labor costs are in Finland, but it would reason to say that they have gone up also. With that said, with the price only going up $100 in 10 years wouldn't it stand to reason that they would have to cut somewhere? I'm not saying it is right, just that it stands to reason that they would try to maintain their margin.

oldelkhunter

I bought a Sako Fiberclass in 1985 at the time I paid 650 for it . I have no idea what retail was on it. Since then I have purchased Sakos used and with one exception no problems. The new ones are priced right 900 for a Hunter and 1100-1200 for a SS unless one happens into a discontinued lot like I did last year and purchase them real low. They have roughly doubled in that time but so has everything else. I mean Winchester charging 900 for a POS Supergrade come on now. Labor rates in Finland are probably higher then in the states FWIW.

GRIZZLYMAN

$900 is a good price for a Hunter. I'm assuming retail. Too bad I can't afford one right now.

rick_reno

All my Sako's are 10-15 years old, they were all perfect when new.

handwerk

I appreciate everybody's thoughts on this matter. I still like the sako and believe it is a well made gun. Before I bought it I had on order,then cancelled a sauer 202. Not that I have the sako in hand I still wonder if I should, or should have gotten the sauer. Anybody own one of these? My last couple rifles I've bought have been tikka t-3's and for the money I am very happy with them. But after saving up for so long I want to make sure I have the right ($1000) gun.

Solitary Man

I could be wrong, but I tend to believe that Sako will only benefit as a result of it being bought by Beretta. I say this because Beretta is a firearms related company pure and simple and they have a pretty substantial reputation for making quality products. I sure like their shotguns.

Metso, the company that owned Sako previously, on the other hand, is a large conglomerate whose primary businesses have nothing whatsoever to do with firearms. Sako was just a tiny speck on their balance sheet. I just don't believe Sako benefited from this relationship because Metso has no expertise to speak of in this industry.

I'll be watching to see how things play out from here. I hope it's for the better because I'd like to buy another Sako at some point in the future.