New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - need help with this one!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

need help with this one!

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 01:28
Fotis View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: January/09/2011
Location: Wyoming
Status: Offline
Points: 241
I just bought this

Sako   M995   30-378 wby

 

OK.... one very interesting hindrance with the TGR-S.

I had one in the past.  I mounted a 4.5x14x40mm LR 30mm with M1 dials.

After taking it to the range and firing it I discovered the following.

The angle path that the gun ejects the brass, coincides with the windage turret which results with the brass getting kicked right back in the gun perfectly!

Now that sucked!
So I have to be careful with the size of turrets

BTW I just tried a 4.5x14x40mm with the CDS turrets.  Same deal.  Pending on the position of scope it will or will not eject.  Cases (fired) fall back in.  If scope is placed very forward then it will.....but rear ring hits rear ocular!


Looking around on the net I found this.
I guess his answer was to turn the scope 90* off?

http://forum.gon.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=195463&stc=1&d=1224113084

Wacky looking thing!









Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 03:28
Brad4213 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: January/26/2012
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Status: Offline
Points: 188
if its turned 90degrees off all it will do is make your elevation your new windage and your windage your new elevation, and in theory would work, may also be confusing unless you could switch turrets around. Or i would consider maybe getting some taller rings, thats only a suggestion/option i have, im not sure what the more knowlegable people on here would say. i know they will be more help than i. other option  maybe a leica, they seem to have super tiny turrets that i believe may allow clearance for the ejected brass. Big Grin good luck!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 04:59
budperm View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
show me your sheep!!

Joined: January/01/2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 27625
Another possible option would be to look into having the geometry of the ejector changed just enough to change the trajectory of spent rounds as it leaves the action.  I have no idea how feasable or expensive that would be.  I'm not familiar with that action.  How wide is the ejection port?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 05:20
Fotis View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: January/09/2011
Location: Wyoming
Status: Offline
Points: 241
I think I will try the higher rings suggestion.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 06:51
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
 
   Something I've been wondering about for a long time.  Why design a scope so that a turret is over the ejection/loading port?  Kinda seems like a DUH.  No big deal for a nondangerous game rifle or target rifle I guess.  I've noticed over the yrs a few pics where guys have turned the scopes 90* on their dangerous game rifles.  Phil Shoemaker being one that comes to mind.  Am I missing something in the design features of a scope or something? 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 07:02
Fotis View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: January/09/2011
Location: Wyoming
Status: Offline
Points: 241
Then my SF would be on the bottom!  Bandito
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 07:13
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
 
   Wasn't meaning for you to do it!   Big Grin
 
 
   Thinking mainly of your std hunting scope although if the designers would have taken into account that NOTHING should be over the ejection/loading port they could have come up with something.
 
    Maybe?
 
 
   Also.  VERY NICE rifle by the way!
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 08:18
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7176
Just to twist your question why design a rifle that requires a scope, to eject into the scope. I do not see this as a scope problem but a rifle problem. . I would contact Sako about the problem. A knowlegable smith may be able to grind the ejector to swing the case to the side rather than with so much upward direction

Edited by 3_tens - February/25/2012 at 08:23
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 08:50
300S&W View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: January/27/2008
Location: Burlington,WV
Status: Offline
Points: 10592
 
  BUT,even on rifles w/no such problem as Fotis (for instance my 98 Mauser has the scope mounted LOW w/no ejection/loading problem) if the turret wasn't in that position over the port there would be ALOT MORE room for FAST loading if needed.  Especially nice if wearing gloves or simply having cold hands.  I'm guessing that's why some turn their scopes 90*.  Is there a reason the turret HAS TO BE on that side?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 10:02
oldguy View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: April/10/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Personally I would try higher rings,actually I find higher rings give me a better cheek weld in most cases
I'm not as concerned with looks but function.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 10:32
helo18 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: December/02/2006
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 5429
Cheapest option would to be trying different ring heights.  If that doesn't work, either get a scope you can rotate, or ask a good gunsmith what can be done.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 12:20
bugsNbows View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
bowsNbugs

Joined: March/10/2008
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Points: 9285
Seems to me that this "problem" has surfaced on Sako 85's (sometimes) also. Most have done the ring switch or scope rotation, but I'm thinking that Sako has been made aware of but refused to acknowledge the problem (in public). I may be confused, but I am also thinking a re-designed or altered ejector has been the best fix.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/25/2012 at 20:08
Fotis View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: January/09/2011
Location: Wyoming
Status: Offline
Points: 241
Thank you gents for all the input.  I ordered high rings for it.  I will keep you advised.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/28/2012 at 06:04
budperm View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
show me your sheep!!

Joined: January/01/2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 27625
Originally posted by 300S&W 300S&W wrote:

 
  BUT,even on rifles w/no such problem as Fotis (for instance my 98 Mauser has the scope mounted LOW w/no ejection/loading problem) if the turret wasn't in that position over the port there would be ALOT MORE room for FAST loading if needed.  Especially nice if wearing gloves or simply having cold hands.  I'm guessing that's why some turn their scopes 90*.  Is there a reason the turret HAS TO BE on that side?
Righthander conceit....
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: February/28/2012 at 09:18
Glock View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: November/06/2005
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 1275
Originally posted by 300S&W 300S&W wrote:

 
  BUT,even on rifles w/no such problem as Fotis (for instance my 98 Mauser has the scope mounted LOW w/no ejection/loading problem) if the turret wasn't in that position over the port there would be ALOT MORE room for FAST loading if needed.  Especially nice if wearing gloves or simply having cold hands.  I'm guessing that's why some turn their scopes 90*.  Is there a reason the turret HAS TO BE on that side?


If it was on the other side the guys with left handed rifles would have the problem, to be honest I have never had any issues.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "need help with this one!"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Trijicon 3-9x40 scope ID help needed waltham41 Rifle Scopes 10
Seemingly Rare Binoculars: Need Help with ID! Nightsurf13 Binoculars 2
Need help identifying vintage scope 67goingthing Rifle Scopes 4
Help!Need to know if my scope would work on a rife V8Mechanic Rifle Scopes 6
Sako 85: Help Needed Hunter84 Rings and bases 6
Need help with multi purpose scope estes640 Rifle Scopes 25
need help laser sighting my rifle docryan61 Rifle Scopes 7
5x25x50 Zeiss HD5 sighting in oddities - need help Fat Dave Rifle Scopes 10
need help finding red dot mounts for remington 597 CaliShootin Tactical Scopes 6
Need help with .460 scope decision TaylorMiller Rifle Scopes 4


This page was generated in 0.375 seconds.