Advice for a friend: new Tikka T3 or used Sako 75

Just an observation from reloading for many t3's. mags are too short and severely limit your ability to adjust your coal longer. Never had so many feeding issues as with the t3. Lengths that work in most rifles including the Sako, don't in the t3. I really wonder sometimes how the t3's seem to shoot so well looking at the joke of a bedding block. Might stir it up a little but a Weatherby Vanguard Backcountry or Lazerguard would be my choice. Once you own them you forget what a T3 even is. Sorry forgot about the question, 75 no question.
 
double gun said:
First off, don't misunderstand my post. The tikka is a great rifle. They shoot great, they are light, have a great trigger and are quite affordable.

That said, the sako is all steel, it has a superior recoil lug arrangement, it has a 3-lug bolt which is also 1-piece, and a mechanical blade ejector - not a spring loaded plunger like tikka. They are also made to fit the cartridge length, not one size fits all like the tikka.

The tikka has more aftermarket parts available - but the majority of them are simply replacing the factory plastic parts (that the sako doesn't have.) If the OP bought the tikka, swapped out the shroud, bottom metal (plastic) and aluminum lug he would have more in the tikka than the $200 more the sako costs and it's still a tikka.

They are made by the same company yet sold roughly $800-1000 apart - that should tell you something.

This is of course only my opinion.
Click to expand...

What he said!
 
double gun said:
Never heard the changes referred to as "refinements" before, but I will leave it at that. Obviously we don't see eye to eye, and I don't think that will change anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Agree. I will buy used 75's everytime over a new 85. I've owned a few 85's and have sold everyone of them after trying time and time again to give them yet another chance.
The 75 was superior in design, function and quality. The 85 was a marketing dept. answer to a demand that never existed.
 
Plastic isn't better than steel, and steel isn't better than plastic, in any kind of absolute sense. The application has to be discussed.

Magpul Pmags, all plastic, no metal whatsoever, are the universally preferred top quality magazines available for STANAG compatible firearms.

Making the, say, bolt on a bolt action rifle out of plastic would be not so good, to say the least.

The price difference between a Tikka and Sako doesn't need to be due to the ephemeral "quality". Increased cost and price can be due to bad design decisions. The tapered rail on Sakos... The whole rest of the firearms world doesn't do that. It's expensive and unnecessary. It's just a bad idea.

Also, look at brand prestige. The wrist strap on an Omega is all machined steel, made in Switzerland. The wrist strap on a Rolex is the same material, also made in Switzerland, but stamped and formed sheet metal, and notorious for stretching! Also more than twice the price of the Omega.

Sakos are nice, but in my opinion, they're not worth buying. Just in my opinion. Two of my hunting buddies shoot Sakos, and they both have brass marks all over their scopes. No such marks on any of my Tikkas.
 
Just to add... there are no bad or wrong choices if you're happy. I just dumped $4300 into a "dicked up parts rifle", and I am still not happy with it!! In comparison, I paid a "premium" for a non-refurbished IZH import '54 Tula SKS ($450) and I'm thrilled with it . Prestige and name recognition means fu@k all these days. My best precision rifle happens to be a $500 S&L M69 from Tradeex, and it out-shoots my Savage 10BA for a 1/4 of the price, and build quality is better on the M69!
 
I had and still have both but when price is similar Sako all the way then again if choose between new and used it is a tough question but again if Sako is in good cond.than by all means,it is much better gun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom