Tikka are ugly

you are 100% correct, that's why so many guys in your neck of the woods would rather forgo quality and hunt with a savage axis package rifle
 
I've owned two. Bolts like butter. Decent trigger. BUT that stock....I hated them. Made them just too homely for my safes. Down the road they went. Nothing wrong with them. I am sure an aftermarket stock might have swayed me to keep one of them. I Wasn't a huge fan of the plastic bolt shroud either come to think of it.
 
The change in the checkering on the wood stock models between t3 and t3x has made them a lot less ugly. Same for the lite, as long as you don’t slap the parts on the fore end and pistol grip.

A lot better looking than the American, rem 783, axis or 110 (especially the new synthetic ones, not even a mother could love something that ugly)
 
I buy rifles to shoot, not to look at, but A good stock is a nice improvement for a Tikka. But for the money, Tikka rifles do shoot well, and they are reliable.
 
I used to have a whole list of complaints against tikkas when I didn't own one. Yet I overlooked savage and remington problems. Now I have tikkas and moved most of the remingtons and savages. Never looked back. Yes they cut corners like long action only and expensive yet cheap plastic mags but, the action works, isn't clunky like the savages, bolt can be lowered with 1 finger unlike my remingtons, the stock, compared to all other injection molded synthetics is very stiff(savages are a wet noodle) and there triggers are simply the best on any factory rifle. Stock design plays a big part in felt recoil and shoot-ability. The tikka stock design gives alot of felt recoil. Alot more than a x bolt stock for example. But its an easy to shoot tiny groups stock design. The stock design has alot to do with tiny groups out of the box. In my opinion.
 
I've owned a few. All are gone. Not a fan of the aesthetics. None fit me well. My Ruger Americans fit me much better and are all more accurate than the Tikka's i replaced with them.
 
Back
Top Bottom