Ruger vs. Tikka... Thoughts?

D

drakes only

Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Guys-

I'm trying to decide betweent the Ruger M77 Hawkeye All Weather and Tikka T3 Lite Stainless/ Synthetic in either .243 or .25-06. Thoughts? I currently own a T3 Lite.

Thanks
 
Yup.................:wave:

I have one of each in the older wood/blue styles.
As Tony would say, "They're GREEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
8.5 lbs vs 7lbs, tang vs wing, Pseudo-CRF vs Poosh, Detachable mag vs floorplate. Double stack vs single stack.
Two very different rifles.
The Tikka will shoot tighter due to the trigger alone.
Rugers LC6 is still a 5lb "lawyer" trigger no matter how crisp or clean it breaks.
 
I bought a T3 lite in 223 3 years ago. Early this year i bought a T3 SS Laminate in 308. once i bought Tikka there was no other rifle that would do. The only thing better now is another Tikka. They feel great, look great, and shoot great. Why risk the disappointment of buying something else?
 
For me I can't can't get a warm fuzzy with the extensive use of non metallic critical parts and the feel of a toy more than a rifle to me on the Tikka. I like the extremely robust mauser type action, the excellent hinged floor plate and included scope mount systems of the Ruger. Accuracy and smoothness of the action probably go to the Tikka out of the box but with use the Ruger just gets better and better as time goes on on those fronts IME. Weight wise they're both in the same league. Price wise they're also similar. Sight systems and extra mags can be a pricey for the Tikka; non issue for the Ruger.

But its a personal choice. You may have guessed mine is for the Ruger no question. I have two mk11 model 77s same as the hawkeye minus the better trigger that they have. One of them I bought new and the trigger and action were on the rough side out of the box to be sure. Several hundred cycles of the bolt later and a little honing of trigger parts and I'm more than happy with it. It took about 30 rounds for accuracy to settle down. My last 3 shot group at 300 yds was just over 2 inches and that's the norm.
 
I bought a tikka in .243 for my son and it is a great little rifle and a good shooter right out of the box . In hindsight now that he is a little bigger I might rather have gotten a 7mm-08 /.270/308 just because in some areas you are limited legally as to what you can shoot with the smaller diameter projectiles.You have to pay extra for scope mounts but you can transfer the ones you buy to most rifles and if you break /lose/damage the ruger mounts they are pricey to replace .
 
I like my Tikkas for all round hunting and being able to make the shot, I can shoot it fairly well off and hand even better off a bipod. It always hits the same place and has never given me any trouble with accuracy, holding zero or mechanical.

I like my Rugers for being robust and tough. With a bedding job and a free floated bbl I have had good luck with them for being beaten around and still holding Zero. But all the ones I have had DID require a bedding job as well as free floating the bbl to be able to hold their zero. Out of the box they were not good enough for me. They all needed trigger jobs and lapping jobs for the scope rings as well. None of them shoot as well as my Tikkas.
 
I realize that there are far more Tikka fans on here than Ruger fans, but from my experience both in the field and in the shop, I much prefer Ruger firearms over Tikka. Ruger 77's have been a very solid dependable rifle for a LONG time. Strong, reliable, simple to work on and repair in the event there is an issue. Almost the whole Ruger lineup is quality, again, I said "almost". There are a few I wouldn't purchase these days, new 10-22's, American, etc....

My $0.02.
 
I have 4 Ruger bolt actions. I have not done any work to them, other than normal cleaning. They work reliably, shoot very accurately and just feel good in my hands.
 
Just take a look at what Tikka manufactures compared to Ruger. Tikka is a decent rifle, but Ruger is a well built rifle, for a better price. Isn't Tikka a cheaper Sako, possibly made with cheaper parts.
 
MattLS said:
Just take a look at what Tikka manufactures compared to Ruger. Tikka is a decent rifle, but Ruger is a well built rifle, for a better price. Isn't Tikka a cheaper Sako, possibly made with cheaper parts.
Click to expand...

Basically, yes. It's a Sako style rifle put together with inexpensive plastic parts. There was a thread here about replacing the plastic bolt shroud with aluminum ones, the guy making them couldn't keep up to the demand.

About the only remarkable thing about the Tikkas is that they are usually accurate and some people like to gush over how "smooth" the bolt is. Of course, every Ruger bolt action I've owned has been accurate- capable of much more accuracy than required for hunting. And the bolt isn't as "smooth" but that isn't saying much, as I have yet to encounter a bolt action rifle that can't be operated by a full grown man. :)

The older Tikkas were good rifles, and a huge bargain for the cost. The T3's are bargain rifles using bargain parts but cost about the same as any other rifle.
 
MattLS said:
Just take a look at what Tikka manufactures compared to Ruger. Tikka is a decent rifle, but Ruger is a well built rifle, for a better price. Isn't Tikka a cheaper Sako, possibly made with cheaper parts.
Click to expand...
Yes but tikka's do one thing better than a ruger and shoot better and more accurate. Just what a rifle is suppose to do. For that my next rifle will be another tikka.
.
 
I couldn't buy the Tikka after handling it, and the Ruger synthetic fit and finish was lacking, so I chose a Browning Xbolt, and have no regrets.

If I were looking at wood I probably still would have gone Browning, but the Ruger is very nice.

Take a look at Browning......... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom