Tikka 698? vs Tikka T-3 lite

Homesteader

Homesteader

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
229   0   0
Location
In a Wallow West of Edmonton.
Hi All,
I am looking at getting a 338wm in a bolt action for general hunting of moose/elk. I looked at a blued wood tikka today with open sights and detach mag, I think it was a 698? or 598?. It had a plastic sleeve at the back of the bolt. Does anyone know if this older gun was as accurate as the new t-3's?
I'm not keen on the plastic bolt sleeve, but maybe it doesn't matter. What does everyone think, should I get the used one I looked at or go with a new t-3?

Thanks in advance, Homesteader
 
Do you mean the 695 and the 595. The 695 is the longer action, the 595 the shorter. The bolt shroud on the back of the bolt is sythetic. Never heard of it being a problem and it's becoming the norm. Manlichers even have them.

The newer T series only has one size action.

Both shoot very well and have one of the best out of the box triggers. Both (at least the newer vers.) have a few synthetic parts including an overly pricey magazine if you were ever yo replace it.

The only thing about the T3, which I'm not sure about is the smaller ejection port. Not sure if you could get cold fingers in there to clear a jam, but the actions are slick as they come so that may never happen.
 
My 695 in 300 Win Mag is a nice gun. But, topped with a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9X40 it weighs in at one metric ton!!!
I think the accuracy is on par with the new T-3, if not better.
These things are very accurate and well machined. Smooth action!
Also, I wouldn't be concerned about the "plastic" parts. That's an "old-school" prejudice. This isn't normal "freeze and crack in cold temps" plastic. It's not really plastic, it's a glass fibre composite polymer. (I have to go have a sit down after saying that...) Given the choice between the two, go with the better price - they're both excellent rifles.
 
My son shoots a 695 in 270, very accurate, the gun isn't that heavy, about 7.5 lbs before mounts, super smooth action, his only beef is the single stack clip cant be top fed.
We both handled the T# as well and felt the 695 was a considerablt nicer feeling gun, the montecarlo style stock fits us better.
 
Snow Dog said:
Go with the heavier one! A .338 WM in a 6 1/2 lb T-3 is going to come back to you with some enthusiasm!
Click to expand...
Good point. I guess that's why my 300WM doesn't bother me, because it weighs a metric ton!!! :p
Actually, I quite like the weight. It swings nicely. And, it's still lighter than my buddy's old Mauser... :eek:
 
Last edited:
Interesting. I would have thought the action for the .223 would be different than the .300WM. Hey, I've been wrong once or twice. :)
 
"As you know, almost anything in a Mag is heavier - longer bbl, etc. I've got a Win 70 in 270 - would your son like to trade?"

I hav gone through a recent exercise to rid myself of guns I have to F..k around with endlessly to make shoot well and the two model 70's were the first to go.

Tikka's and Sako's (my preference, the kid doesn;t qualify yet) are so much easier to get great results from, no work generally needed to get sub MOA results.

Martin
 
GrBear, for the T3, Sako/Tikka decided that to save some costs to the customer by only making one action size. For the different length cartriges they use a bolt stop of different lengths to make it a short, medium or long action. The cycling of the bolt then is shorter in a .223 compared to a .300WM. But the action is the same length, and as dustin mentioned the bolt face and magazine is cartrige specific.
 
My only real complaint about my T3 Lite .243 (in wood) is the high capacity magazine is apparently only available in the larger calibers (.270 and up), and of course they are freakin 'spensive ($100) for the standard cap (3rnd) factory mag. The high cap (5rnd) versions are only $10 more.

Nice rifle though, and once I get it back from Rick performing his voodoo on it, it should be even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom