You're an honest man if the tone of this is how I take it. Odds are I'd miss too- I simply sincerely doubt I'd miss any worse than the latest Tikka armed hunter. My plan would be to miss
better, and have a lot of fun and hopefully net a bill if somebody ever takes me on.
If I hit the 'hundred first shot I'm acting like I meant to, and will claim my Ruger .375 hits $100 bills all day long at 500 yards, even loaded with pistol powder, cast, or even 9.3 bullets.
Thing is, I believe the Tikka guys 100 yard claims- I just think they're stretched the slightest touch on how consistent that is. But it seems more Tikka owners than any other brand, though challenged by Savage, sit at benches and shoot short range trying to make holes touch, then proudly go to the internet with it as proof of Tikka's superior design. They often automatically assume a Winchester and especially Ruger couldn't touch those groups, but they'd be wrong. Do I believe a T3 is more intrinsically accurate than my favoured Rugers? Yes, but not always- my most accurate factory rifle, ever, in dozens of hunting rifles is a bone stock Ruger Model 77, it shoots like gravity is hauling the bullets to the same point of impact. I also am not misled into the impression that a rifle that shoots 7/8" at 200 yards kills big game better than one that shoots 1 1/2"- or even 4" for that matter. Plastic and cheap parts is a drawback, a pencil's width difference in groups is not, the shooter will always be more important than the rifle by a factor so huge it makes any Tikka accuracy edges insignificant.
If you don't own or support Tikka, my apologies, I've lost track of who's who and who's fighting for what and it's too late in the evening to go look. Perhaps that means I'm done in this thread!
Challenge stands, would love to go against a Tikka, 500 yards...
