Too bad the old ones can't feasibly fetch the same price as the new ones. The 'value' is mostly wishful thinking in the occurrences I've seen over the past two years. Granted there are a few unique examples out there, as in any comparison, but the greater value may be more in terms of nostalgia than price.
Performance wise, I think that anyone would be hard pressed to find that either the new or older models are 'better'. I'm not convinced that Bofors steel barrels are anything more than a hook on a used rifle's ad. I can't imagine that modern metallurgy and manufacturing turns out barrels with lower quality than those produced in the 70's or 80's. Both old and new rifles seem to shoot exceptionally well out of the box in terms of factory rifles, taking into consideration statistical anomalies in manufacturing. Beyond that, in the past few years, Tikka (along with Savage incidentally) has somehow kept in step with 'fashion', offering uncommonly fast twist factory barrels in calibers like 223 and 7 mil, which is a nice reflection of the company as a modern player in the market.
The trigger is a feature that really deserves commendation. They're a fantastic factory trigger, tight, and very easily tunable to under a pound. I've done a few, and the best I've gotten to so far is 12 ounces, and that's without disassembly, polishing or any of the other usual actions. The only annoyance with the triggers out there for the Tikka's is the lack of interchangeability between the models in aftermarket triggers. The T3, Sako, and 595 factory trigger are all the same part., and are interchangeable between the models. The TRG trigger will fit the 595 and the Finnfire, but not the T3 without significant modification. The Jewel trigger will fir the Finnfire, but not the T3 or the 595. The Barnard trigger will fit the 595 but not the T3 or the Finnfire. The lack of interchangeability comes from lack of sear engagement after installment on the different models due to receiver dimensions.
The T3 recoil lug is an idea that works in concept and eases manufacturing, but I'm not convinced it functions in practice all that often without a little Finn ingenuity added by the user.
When it comes to price and 'plastic' parts, I'll make a forecast that we'll see more and more quality poly-composite parts coming out in the future across all rifle makes as raw material and machining costs continue to climb. The reluctance to accept that a composite 'plastic' part can function just as well as a metal part is deep seated but I'm not sure it's particularly well founded. I haven't seen any writing that shows Tikka magazine assemblies have any higher MTBF than a similar metal setup. Then compare the economics associated- I'd like to see a quote for a newly manufactured fullbore rifle, with all metal parts, a CISM style stock with both adjustable comb and buttplate, and a fast twist barrel for under 2k. Unpossible? I know I'd be highly impressed to see it.
I have a T3 Sporter and 595 Master Sporter currently, and I think that the Master Sporter edges out the modern version in classiness. I think that it would be fantastic to add an M55 or M65 Super Sporter to the fold as well. But, at the end of the day, the kicker that has me sold on the T3 platform is sheer availability. T3 mags might be expensive, but at least they are available. Try to find a high cap M55 or M65 mag, or 595 mag- they can take a lot of patience to locate.
