New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Sako 75 vs. 85
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Sako 75 vs. 85

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2007 at 15:50
hankd View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: November/01/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4

I'm brand new to this forum and need some advice.  I've been shopping around for a new .270 and last weekend I came across a Sako 75 Grey Wolf, and fell in love with it.  It is much more expenses than the other rifles I've been looking at and it was the first time I shouldered a Sako.  Now, I must have one.

 

My dilema, I see that currently the Grey Wolf is available in both the model 75 and 85.  I've been searching the net all week trying to find the differences.  Can anyone shed some light on the pros and cons of these two versions of Sako's Grey Wolf.  Which one should I get?  Mostly it will be used for whitetails in the Southeast.

 

Thanks for any and all input!

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2007 at 19:09
Obi Wan Kenobi View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: December/21/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Originally posted by hankd hankd wrote:

I'm brand new to this forum and need some advice.  I've been shopping around for a new .270 and last weekend I came across a Sako 75 Grey Wolf, and fell in love with it.  It is much more expenses than the other rifles I've been looking at and it was the first time I shouldered a Sako.  Now, I must have one.

 

My dilema, I see that currently the Grey Wolf is available in both the model 75 and 85.  I've been searching the net all week trying to find the differences.  Can anyone shed some light on the pros and cons of these two versions of Sako's Grey Wolf.  Which one should I get?  Mostly it will be used for whitetails in the Southeast.

 

Thanks for any and all input!

 

Welcome to the forums. I know the guns you are talking about & they are indeed both beautiful & good to shoot.

 

The biggest difference in the 2 models is chamber feeding. As I understand it, you can't load the Sako 75 from the ejection port like you can with several other bolt action rifles. You must load the 75 buy first loading the clip from the bottom of the rifle. The 85 you can load the gun through the ejection port.

 

This is the best way to learn about the 2 models & whats different. If you get one let us know. Good luck on your purchase.

 

 http://www.sako.fi/

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2007 at 20:24
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 21924
dont buy a .270, if you were going to buy a nef single shot waste that on a .270 if your looking at a fine rifle like the sako buy a good caliber say 7mm mag
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2007 at 20:55
hankd View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: November/01/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4

So what is it exactly about the .270 that you don't care for?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2007 at 20:56
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 21924
you name it
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/01/2007 at 21:04
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 21924
i will tell you this much sako knows how to build a damn nice rifle! you wont lose there.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 08:32
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
You know its kind of interesting, gun-tests.com just compared the Kimber Montana, Ruger Frontier and the Sako 85 stainless steel in the .338 Federal.  The Sako was rated a D and came in last place, the most expensive rifle of the three.  With a wooden stock, the rifle is about 100 dollars more.  They loved the Kimber.  I have a little experience with a 75, none with the 85 or Kimber, but both are suppose to have great reputations, but gun-tests.com is fair and I would take the time to read the article.  Here is a link through my account, I hope it works.  http://www.gun-tests.com/issues/19_11/features/5458-1.html
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 08:44
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 21924
i cant believe a ruger would be a sako in anything
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 10:37
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12558
Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

 

The biggest difference in the 2 models is chamber feeding. As I understand it, you can't load the Sako 75 from the ejection port like you can with several other bolt action rifles. You must load the 75 buy first loading the clip from the bottom of the rifle. The 85 you can load the gun through the ejection port.

 

 http://www.sako.fi/

 

I have 2 Sako 75's and you can indeed load them from the ejection port, no problem.  It will load from the ejection port the same as any non detachable magazine bolt action.  You can just as easily load the magazine from the ejection port as with the magazine removed.  The detachable magazine of the 75 is no different from the 85, except that the 85 has an improved magazine latch.

 

The differences between the 75 and the 85 are:

-- 85 has controlled round feed; 75 is push feed.  They simply milled away one side of the bolt face rim on the 85 so that the case slides underneath the extractor as it pops out of the magazine rather than the extractor snapping over the case rim as the bolt is cammed closed.

-- 85 has a new stock shape and checkering pattern.  The 85 has a straight comb with shadowline cheekpiece and oil type finish to appeal to the current trend back to a more "classic" stock style.

-- 85 has a new bolt shroud shape.  No functional difference; only aesthetics.

-- 85 has the new magazine latch mentioned to keep the magazine from being accidentally dumped.  Never had a problem with accidental magazine release on the 75, though.

-- 85 supposedly has improved bolt guiding surfaces to improve bolt operation smoothness.  75 bolt was extremely smooth as-is, so if the 85 is smoother, it must be phenomenal.



Edited by RifleDude
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 10:46
hankd View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: November/01/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4

Thanks for all the information Ted.

 

There doesn't seem to be a clear winner, except maybe price.  I've found the caliber I'm looking for in these two rifles and the 85 is just under $100 more than the 75, both NIB.  I did hear that the 75 comes with scope rings and the 85 does not.  So that adds to the practical price difference a little. 

 

Any difference in weight? 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 10:59
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Originally posted by Obi Wan Kenobi Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

 

The biggest difference in the 2 models is chamber feeding. As I understand it, you can't load the Sako 75 from the ejection port like you can with several other bolt action rifles. You must load the 75 buy first loading the clip from the bottom of the rifle. The 85 you can load the gun through the ejection port.

 

 http://www.sako.fi/

 

I have 2 Sako 75's and you can indeed load them from the ejection port, no problem.  It will load from the ejection port the same as any non detachable magazine bolt action.  You can just as easily load the magazine from the ejection port as with the magazine removed.  The detachable magazine of the 75 is no different from the 85, except that the 85 has an improved magazine latch.

 

The differences between the 75 and the 85 are:

-- 85 has controlled round feed; 75 is push feed.  They simply milled away one side of the bolt face rim on the 85 so that the case slides underneath the extractor as it pops out of the magazine rather than the extractor snapping over the case rim as the bolt is cammed closed.

-- 85 has a new stock shape and checkering pattern.  The 85 has a straight comb with shadowline cheekpiece and oil type finish to appeal to the current trend back to a more "classic" stock style.

-- 85 has a new bolt shroud shape.  No functional difference; only aesthetics.

-- 85 has the new magazine latch mentioned to keep the magazine from being accidentally dumped.  Never had a problem with accidental magazine release on the 75, though.

-- 85 supposedly has improved bolt guiding surfaces to improve bolt operation smoothness.  75 bolt was extremely smooth as-is, so if the 85 is smoother, it must be phenomenal.

According to that gun-tests article, while Sako claims to have a controlled feed action, it was very sloppy and did not control the cartridge well at all if you moved the bolt in a slow manner, like a Mauser.  You really should read the article prior to plunking down that much money, the Kimber clearly out classed the Sako 85.  Gun-tests.com does a fine job on giving you the skinny on what is wrong and what is right about any firearm they test and they do not accept any advertisements.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 11:15
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12558
Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:

According to that gun-tests article, while Sako claims to have a controlled feed action, it was very sloppy and did not control the cartridge well at all if you moved the bolt in a slow manner, like a Mauser.  You really should read the article prior to plunking down that much money, the Kimber clearly out classed the Sako 85.  Gun-tests.com does a fine job on giving you the skinny on what is wrong and what is right about any firearm they test and they do not accept any advertisements.

 

Just answering the O.P.'s question about the differences between the 2 models, Dolph.  Wasn't endorsing the 85, only speaking to it's differences vs. the 75.

 

Don't own an 85, so can't comment on the Gun Test review, but I certainly like the 75.  I take any review, even ones that don't accept advertisements like GT with a heavy grain of salt.  Not that their comments don't have merit, but first of all, their test rifle may have been a lemon, and secondly, even though they aren't bought by advertisements, they are still idividuals with an opinion, and opinions vary widely depending on who you talk to.  I may very well agree with everything they said about the 85, but until I handle one, I'll reserve my opinions.  I used to subscribe to GT, and while I agreed with many of their conclusions, they had one test in particular on various hunting bullets a few years ago that I completely disagreed with because I thought their test protocol was bogus.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 11:19
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 21924
i wouldnt have any trouble taking a kimber before a sako, but come on a ruger beating a sako?? the sako 75 is a class act
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 11:30
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:

According to that gun-tests article, while Sako claims to have a controlled feed action, it was very sloppy and did not control the cartridge well at all if you moved the bolt in a slow manner, like a Mauser.  You really should read the article prior to plunking down that much money, the Kimber clearly out classed the Sako 85.  Gun-tests.com does a fine job on giving you the skinny on what is wrong and what is right about any firearm they test and they do not accept any advertisements.

 

Just answering the O.P.'s question about the differences between the 2 models, Dolph.  Wasn't endorsing the 85, only speaking to it's differences vs. the 75.

 

Don't own an 85, so can't comment on the Gun Test review, but I certainly like the 75.  I take any review, even ones that don't accept advertisements like GT with a heavy grain of salt.  Not that their comments don't have merit, but first of all, their test rifle may have been a lemon, and secondly, even though they aren't bought by advertisements, they are still idividuals with an opinion, and opinions vary widely depending on who you talk to.  I may very well agree with everything they said about the 85, but until I handle one, I'll reserve my opinions.  I used to subscribe to GT, and while I agreed with many of their conclusions, they had one test in particular on various hunting bullets a few years ago that I completely disagreed with because I thought their test protocol was bogus.

Very true.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 11:38
Blackbird View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/10/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 278
One other difference between the 2 is the 85 has an integral recoil lug machined into the action. The 75's recoil lug is bolted to the action.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 12:13
hankd View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: November/01/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4
I appreciate the continued feedback.  I can't get the link for Gun-tests...it shows the teaser part of the article and then asks you to sign in for the rest.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/02/2007 at 13:31
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12558

Originally posted by hankd hankd wrote:

I appreciate the continued feedback.  I can't get the link for Gun-tests...it shows the teaser part of the article and then asks you to sign in for the rest.

 

I got the same thing.

 

Keep in mind one other thing about reviews of any kind.  Everything the reviewer says may be 100% true and valid, but they may also place more or less weight on certain aspects of a products performance than you or I would, and we may place more importance on other aspects of the same product than they do.  So, in the end, it all comes back to what you personally value.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/05/2007 at 17:02
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
I went back and tried the link and it does not work anymore for me.  My user name is doverton@wilcard.com and my password is bertram33.  That will get you into my account.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/07/2007 at 17:27
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12558

Hey, Dolphin,

Using your user name and password I was able to read the article this time.  Thanks for passing that along.  I thought they made some reasonable, valid points about the 3 rifles overall.  I agree with them about the synthetic stock styling on the Sako.  I don't care for its looks either.  I didn't think the previous 75 Finnlight's stock was all that bad, but I don't care for this one at all, and I especially don't like the recoil pad design and footprint. But then, if I were buying this rifle, I wouldn't get the synthetic stock anyway.  I think the new 85 wood stock design is very good looking. 

 

I also agree with them on the controlled round feed issue.  I haven't worked the bolt on the new Sako, but I do have a Ruger M77 MK II with CRF and it does capture the case rim a little later in the chambering stroke than other CRF actions like Kimber, Win 70 Classics, Mausers, etc.  Then again, even if the CRF doesn't work all that well, it just means that it's no different than a push feed action, which describes the majority of bolt actions.  The previous Sako 75 was a push feed as well.  But, bottom line, if you advertise it as a controlled feed action, then by golly, it should be true controlled feed.

 

I do disagree with their heavy emphasis on weight, though.  There are very few factory rifles outside of ULA that are as light as the Kimber Montana, so the Sako weight is more in line with most competing rifles.  It isn't exactly heavy, just heavy in comparison to the Kimber, which could be said of almost any other rifle compared to it.  While the lightweight Kimber would definitely be nicer to carry on a high altitude, physical hunt, for most other hunts, I don't think the weight difference is that big a deal.  If they thought the Sako was too heavy, I wonder what they'd think of the Mark V. 

 

I don't know that I would have given the Sako a "D" score.  Perhaps they gave the "D" based on the fact it was the most expensive of the 3.  Of the major criticisms, I think the CRF issue is the only major problem.  I agree there aren't many scope mount choices for Sako, but I like Talley's Sako mounts.  Weight may or may not be an issue depending on what the rifle is chambered for and what the intended use is.  The weird stock styling issue goes away if you get the wood stocked version.  I think they placed too much focus on the negatives and the Sako's strengths, namely smooth feeding, great trigger, and typically good accuracy evidently didn't weigh very heavily on their final conclusion.



Edited by RifleDude
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/07/2007 at 18:49
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
I agree with your points.  I would have never purchased the futuristic SS Sako stock and would have defintely purchased the wooden stock.  Reading gun-tests.com reminds me of reading Consumer Reports, both offer very good unbiased information, but they tend to put more emphasis in certain areas that alot or readers such as myself do not care about.  But, overall they provide information that can be used to make an informed decision before plunking down you hard earned money.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/09/2007 at 19:46
timber View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: June/03/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 354

I owned a 75 Hunter and now own an 85 Hunter - the Hunters are walnut stocked.  The 75's stock was regarded in some circles as being a pig, fat and heavy.  I think they went overboard on the redesigned 85 stock, making it too slim, especially in the buttstock.  It's roughly a 1/2 pound lighter than the 75.

 

I've said this elsewhere but it's recoil pad contact area, in conjunction with the slimmer profile of the buttstock, is over-powered by magnum rounds.  Even my 30-06 kicks pretty good, enough so that I had a Kick-Ezz (I also tried a Limbsaver and Pachmayr Decelerator) pad installed.  It's better now but still doesn't compare to a 700 CDL for example. 

 

The action is smooth feeding, the trigger is fantastic, the safety/bolt release is great, the short bolt lift is functional, the wood/finish is nice and the accuracy/precision is good.  The dovetail receiver is regrettable but the stock shape/design is the worst aspect of the rifle and can't be fixed, only modified.  Handle one, preferably shoot one, before you buy.  And stay with standard calibers.  I'd give it a B-.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/11/2007 at 02:28
storm2844 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: September/05/2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 44

i had the 85 i thought it was a really nice rifle but it had one problem. it wouldnt eject the brass. the brass would jump up hit the scope then fall back into the magazine well. i contacted stoger (importers) and they told me this is a problem for the new 85's. expecially for the short mags. becouse the ejector is at 6 o clock and the extractor is at 10 o clock. not every rifle will do this though as every rifle is unique. i suggest to anyone who buys an 85 to have a scope mounted at the store and try ejecting an empty case to see if it ejects properly. but all in all the 85 is a very nice rifle. well worth the money if it ejects properly. they have since took the sako back and refunded me of all my money. on which a purchased a weatherby ultra lightweight in 7mm weatherby mag, (very very happy with the weatherby)

i used to think sako was the #$!& but after this it left a little bitter taste in my mouth. although i still think the make a high quality rifle  if i had to go with a sako again i would go with the 75 if you can still get one.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/13/2007 at 10:15
timber View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: June/03/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 354

No problem here with extraction/ejection although I have a standard caliber.  I have about 100 rounds through it.  But it does seem that you have to give the bolt handle a pretty good hit up after firing to cock/open the bolt.  Anybody else notice this?

 

Another unusual thing I noticed is that I get copper build-up on every other land, not all six lands.  Accuracy doesn't drop off until about 20-30 rounds fired but that seems typical in my experience.  At that time I use a copper solvent like Barnes CR and all seems well. 

 

I called BerettaUSA ( the USA importer) and they couldn't explain the copper build/pattern of every other land.  They ask me to send it in after the hunting season is over.  I'm no gunsmith but it seems logical that the bullet may only be touching every other land.  Comments?

 

Edit: I'm not getting the 5 shot, 1" grouping at 100 yards advertised for Sako's but then again I'm not a great shot.  Mine is more like a 2" grouping.  Right now the rifle has a 10X max power scope.

 

timber



Edited by timber
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2007 at 10:35
Bender View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: December/30/2005
Location: Croatia
Status: Offline
Points: 80
Hi guys!
I have a same problem- can't decide between 75 and 85 Sako Hunter in .30-06,but after reading this I'm leaning towards 75 - I want to reload and brass hitting the scope would be bent.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/07/2007 at 12:05
timber View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman


Joined: June/03/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 354
Bender
 
All in all I like the 75 better.  The stock is much better and I'm not even a big fan of monte carlo's.  That's how much I think Sako missed with the 85's stock - way too slim, IMHO.  (Looks like Browning's doing this too with the new X-Bolt - but that's another topic).  There's really nothing you can do with it except installing a better recoil pad.  I did struggle with the 75's LOP which is 14 1/4" (13 1/2" fits me).  Instead of trying to adapt to this measurement by mounting the scope further back I should have just shortened the stock by 3/4".
 
I didn't have a problem with the 75 (260 rem) or 85 (30/06) with extraction/ejection.  I will say the brass doesn't eject with much force on my 85.  I've noticed this more at the range when I'm more relaxed and maybe not using as much force working the bolt.  While hunting I always slam the bolt and haven't noticed a problem.  I don't remember anything unusual about extraction/ejection with the 75.
 
There was one small problem with the 75's bolt binding.  If you didn't pull the bolt straight back it would hang up slightly.  Eventually muscle memory helps with this.  This is mentioned in the 2006/07 Beretta Annual on page 41.  Basically Sako "lengthened the rear bolt guide surface of the Sako 85".  They acknowledge this is more associated with the short actions so maybe a 30/06 75 wouldn't be affected as much, if at all.
 
Good luck with your choice.  I'd choose based on which stock fits you better, even if you have to tweak it a little.  All the other changes made with the 85 (bolt guide, magazine, CRF, bedding) wouldn't sway me either way as much as the stock design.
 
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Sako 75 vs. 85"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted sako 75 20 MOA rail Fotis Rings and bases 3
Talley's for Sako 75 Blackbird Rings and bases 5
Sako 85 & Pickatinny rail officework13 Rings and bases 9
Sako 85 Hunter Scope Rings manderson Rings and bases 12
20 MOA rail for Sako 75? Fotis Rings and bases 7
Sako 85 Finnlight 270 stainless fluted barrel for ccoker Firearms For Sale 2
Sako 85 vs. Weatherby Mark V timber Firearms 77 11/13/2007 11:46:30 AM
Best scope and mounts for my sako 85 30-06 bluefin Rifle Scopes 18
Sako 85 Design timber Firearms 66
Talley's for Sako 85 timber Firearms 2


This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.