Tikka economy rifles?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fassteel

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 99.1%
222   2   4
Location
Alberta
I noticed a couple of posts in the Tikka thread that had indicated that the T3 is an entry level rifle and therefore should be priced accordingly. I don't know of any European gun maker that markets product in Canada that considers themselves to be competing for the economy sector of the market place?
Your thoughts? FS
 
I don't know of any European gun maker that markets product in Canada that considers themselves to be competing for the economy sector of the market place?
Whether that was/is Tikkas intended market or not (obviously not given the price) the fact is the T3 with it's one size fits all generic length action, plastic bolt shroud, triggerguard and magazine are done to reduce manufacturing costs, not because it is better......despite what some believe.

I'm sure this is why most believe it is an overpriced economy rifle:wave:
 
Comparing it feature-for-feature, it looks a lot like a Finnish Savage or Stevens. I'd think that $500 would be a perfect price point for the blued/synthetic t3 lite; in the same bracket as other rifles with similar features, like the stevens, the Vangaurd, the remington SPS and the Mossberg centerfires.

Likewise, the ss/laminate shoud be sitting around $700-800 to compete with other rifles of it's same featureset.

And for the $1100 price tag of the tikka ss varminter, one could easily get an american-made varminter with a much more comprehensive set of features
 
Yeah but the funny thing of it all, is that the cheap rifles seemingly are shooting just as well outta the box as the more expensive stuff. And, to boot, I've not heard much about plastic parts failures (save a shroud failure on a T3 once). Don't get me wrong, I'm not promoting the cheaper stuff here, but even the fellow on a limited budget and the heart to hunt needs a chance to get out there and enjoy. I do own a couple of pricey guns and a few scopes myself, but must admit to stocking 3 - Stevens 200 and a Savage and loving it.
 
the hallmark of an expensive gun isn't accuracy. All guns nowadays are accurate.

Hallmarks of expensive guns have more to do with fit and finish - fibreglass stocks over plastic injection moulded; cut checkering, fancy wood, high-polish metal finishes instead of bead blasted or 'matte' blued; one-piece bolts instead of multi-piece; machined stock actions instead of lathe turned tube-steel actions; CRF over push feed; reliable double-stack magazines instead of single stack; metal trigger guards; glass or pillar bedding; high-quality iron sights. Look at a Sako, then look at a t3 and the differences will either be obvious to you.
 
Sorry Prosper, but I've read over your post and that of the originator's. You just lost me there and I don't know how to reply. Maybe Gatehouse was right...I have a comprehension issue after all. :D
 
the hallmark of an expensive gun isn't accuracy. All guns nowadays are accurate.

Hallmarks of expensive guns have more to do with fit and finish - fibreglass stocks over plastic injection moulded; cut checkering, fancy wood, high-polish metal finishes instead of bead blasted or 'matte' blued; one-piece bolts instead of multi-piece; machined stock actions instead of lathe turned tube-steel actions; CRF over push feed; reliable double-stack magazines instead of single stack; metal trigger guards; glass or pillar bedding; high-quality iron sights. Look at a Sako, then look at a t3 and the differences will either be obvious to you.

Oh wait a minute....brain storm. I've had a good inside look at the Sako 85's diminutive recoil "lug" and compared it to my M695. I must admit to not knowing much about the T3 (by choice). But' I'll take my M695 over Sako's 85 anyday.
 
I have hunting rifles that have cost anywhere from $5000.00 on down, before adding mounts, rings, scope, sling swivels and sling. Every rifle you buy is a crap shoot as to wether it will shoot well or not and wether it will favor one type of ammo or bullet weight over another. I've had some very expensive custom jobs that shot very poorly and some that shot everything put through them very well. That also includes the older Tikka models. I've had the opportunity to shoot 4 different Tikka T3 rifles in 243, 6.5x55, 308W and 7-08, all of them shot into an inch or less at 100 yds and weren't at all fussy about ammunition brand or bullet weight or wether they were handloads or commercial loads. I can't say the same for the few Savages I've had the opportunity to shoot, very good to abismal. The new Remingtons and Rugers seem to be very good as well.

I would say that for the most part, the new CNC equipment being used by most of the surviveing manufacturers of firearms components pretty much ensure that you're going to get a decent shooting rifle. Remember, it was'nt all that long ago when 4 inch groups was considered to be darn good and a 2 inch group would just about guarantee a win at most club shoots.
The quality of commercial bullets made and loaded these days, after the advent of the Juenke Gage, is exceptional, especially when compared to the offerings of 20 years ago.
With modern ammunition, many of the older rifles that we considered ho hum have become exceptional shooters as well. It can't all be blamed on the firearms manufacturers.
I wouldn't feel one bit undergunned with either a Tikka T3 or a Savage, although I do have a personal preference for the Tikka offering, probably because they fit my fat little body better.
I don't know how many times that I myself or one of my hunting partners dureing the late sixties or early seventies, would sight in our rifles, usually open sights mixed with scopes that were of questionable quality, would be happy with a 4 inch group at 100 yds. The scopes always had paralax issues and if you dropped the rifle and scope together, then there was usually trouble and the scope would have to be removed and sent away for repair or trashed, even some of the old Weatherby scopes suffered from these issues. A good scope sans paralax and a good crisp trigger that surprises you every time it breaks, removeing the anticipation factor and therefore flinch, on your rifle goes a long way to tighter groups and better shot on game.
By the way, if you really want to get the accuracy bug, get into Hunter Benchrest or long range varmint shooting, talk about starting an addiction for accuracy. bearhunter
 
Gd' it Bearhunter, I like what your saying, but reading it just took 20 years outta my eyeballs. Punctuations man, comas, periods and paragraphs. Phewwww. -:) Otherwise, I agree. :D
 
I have a couple of Tikka T3's and I do consider then an entry level rifle. They are entry level Sakos. The Sako offers much better fit and finish but the two rifles use the same barrels. Considering they are made in Finland, where labour is going to cost much more than Japan or USA, then they should be considered entry level rifles. Note that I did not say economy rifles - they will never be able to compete at a price point to something along the lines of the Stevens/Savage offerings. You will pay more for the Tikkas but for the extra money you get a better action/barrel/trigger combination - the heart of any rifle.
 
I have a couple of Tikka T3's and I do consider then an entry level rifle. They are entry level Sakos. The Sako offers much better fit and finish but the two rifles use the same barrels. Considering they are made in Finland, where labour is going to cost much more than Japan or USA, then they should be considered entry level rifles. Note that I did not say economy rifles - they will never be able to compete at a price point to something along the lines of the Stevens/Savage offerings. You will pay more for the Tikkas but for the extra money you get a better action/barrel/trigger combination - the heart of any rifle.

I couldn't have said it any better:D.
 
The tikka trigger IS better then the gimmicky accutrigger.

Both are adjustable. I found the tikka trigger broke cleanly and was adjustable to a lighter setting from factory.

I didn't measure it, but it sure felt like it.

And the tikka action is better. I had a 270 savage and I couldn't believe how long that bolt throw was. I'd buy a savage again, for sure... but it would be a short action.
 
Whether that was/is Tikkas intended market or not (obviously not given the price) the fact is the T3 with it's one size fits all generic length action, plastic bolt shroud, triggerguard and magazine are done to reduce manufacturing costs, not because it is better......despite what some believe.

I'm sure this is why most believe it is an overpriced economy rifle:wave:

Uh Huh.....:)


Don't get me wrong, I'm not promoting the cheaper stuff here, but even the fellow on a limited budget and the heart to hunt needs a chance to get out there and enjoy

Plenty of good quality, used guns on the market, and you may not even have to pay GST!!!:)
 
I have a couple of Tikka T3's and I do consider then an entry level rifle. They are entry level Sakos. The Sako offers much better fit and finish but the two rifles use the same barrels. Considering they are made in Finland, where labour is going to cost much more than Japan or USA, then they should be considered entry level rifles. Note that I did not say economy rifles - they will never be able to compete at a price point to something along the lines of the Stevens/Savage offerings. You will pay more for the Tikkas but for the extra money you get a better action/barrel/trigger combination - the heart of any rifle.

I couldn't have said it any better:D.

I would also have to agree. The trigger and action on the Tikka is ten times above the Stevens trigger and action. I have one of each and Tikka takes the cake. Thats not to say I don't like my Stevens, because I do, its just my Tikka is better.
 
I noticed a couple of posts in the Tikka thread that had indicated that the T3 is an entry level rifle and therefore should be priced accordingly. I don't know of any European gun maker that markets product in Canada that considers themselves to be competing for the economy sector of the market place?
Your thoughts? FS

I just spoke to the buyer for one of the big stores and he said that the price of the t-3 synthetic blue has been dropped significantly. The reason? Stoeger wants to compete with the Vanguard, Savage and Remington's cheaper line.
 
Last edited:
The tikka trigger IS better then the gimmicky accutrigger.
Both are adjustable. I found the tikka trigger broke cleanly and was adjustable to a lighter setting from factory.
I didn't measure it, but it sure felt like it.

i wonder how many people who bash the Accutrigger as 'gimmicky' have actually used one. it is simply a trigger thats user-adjustable in seconds to low pull weight with a safety feature included so that it doesnt go off accidentally when dropped or bumped. where exactly is the gimmick?

The trigger and action on the Tikka is ten times above the Stevens trigger and action.

what are you basing the 'Tikka action is 10x better' on, exactly?
 
i wonder how many people who bash the Accutrigger as 'gimmicky' have actually used one. it is simply a trigger thats user-adjustable in seconds to low pull weight with a safety feature included so that it doesnt go off accidentally when dropped or bumped. where exactly is the gimmick?

Do you always accuse everyone of bashing, who do not agree with you or uses a term that you define differently? Gimmick may a term used to describe the accu trigger that really does not show disrespect but describes a trigger that is different from the norm. Gimmic might be a way to described a trigger that as you say may be adjustable to a low trigger weight but is really not all that crisp feeling because there is no attempt to make a crisp trigger but just a safety trigger that can be set low. It is not everyones cup of tea. I have tried both. I prefer the t-3 trigger. Not bashing the accu trigger. Not saying I love the t-3.:D

You must really hate the t-3 to troll every t-3 thread? Have you shot one yet?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom