Tikka T3 Lite Vs Weatherby Vanguard S2 Whats the difference?

I

ihaem

Member
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Canada
Tikka T3 Lite Vs Weatherby Vanguard S2 Whats the difference?

Just curious to read what peoples opinion are and what the actually differences are between these 2 guns. Why would someone choose one over the other? What do you like about them. And make sure you state which one you would buy if given the choice.

I have shouldered both guns and they both feel good. Just trying to make that final decision.


Thanks !
 
I have a Vanguard S2 that I purchased last summer. I just bought my dad a T3. Here are what I noticed between the two.

- My Vanguard has a Synthetic stock, the T3 was wood. Dad chose the T3 solely because it has a wood stock and that's how he rolls. He does like the way the Vanguard feels when shouldered as well.
- Both bolts operate smoothly and cycle shells like butter. Initially the T3 seemed a little gritty until we cleaned it, I do not recall my Vanguard ever feeling gritty, not that this matters.
- The Vanguard is a bit heavier when weighed on a scale, mind you mine is a .300WinMag, the T3 is a .30-06 and most of the weight difference feels like it's in the barrel.
- The T3 was better balanced out of the box, I attribute this to the wood stock. However a $10 butt-stock shell holder balanced my Vanguard right out after loading it with 9 .300WinMag shells. The weight of both rifles with scope, sling and loaded was not noticeable while shouldering them or slung over the shoulder.
- The Vanguard does not come with a removable magazine, the T3 does. A removable magazine can be added to some caliber's of the Vanguard for about $130. Considering the starting price on the 2 rifles however a Vanguard + Magazine kit is still cheaper than a T3 if money is an issue.
- We did not get the T3 out to the range, it was -40 outside, so I can not comment to it's accuracy. My Vanguard will shoot sub MOA if I do my part (inb4 pics or it didn't happen, I'll get something up in the spring when I'm not chattering my teeth while trying to shoot).

I love my S2, I also really like the T3. If I had the money at the time I'd be stuck in the same boat you are, trying to decide between the two. The Vanguard was half the price of the T3 however. If you like both, and have the money to drop on a T3, I would consider buying the S2 and sinking the extra $400-$500 into an awesome scope :D
 
The Tikka has plastic floorplate, triggerguard and bolt shroud. All of these parts are metal on the S2. The S2 action is machined from a forging with a flat bottom which is a good way to bed a rifle.

Tikkas have an exceptionally smooth bore that doesn't foul much. S2 bore is still good but not as good as as the Tikka.

They are both excellent rifles but I lean towards the S2.
 
Last edited:
I can't speak for the Weatherby, but I've owned a Tikka T3 Lite for a year now, and I've taken it moose hunting, deer hunting, and to the range a half-dozen times. It's a good gun all-around; durable, light, accurate, and relatively inexpensive. I'd recommend it.
 
One con for each that I've noticed. Tikka doesn't have a true short action, vanguards are throated long. Not really a big deal for either, just one of those things that might irritate a guy.
 
ihaem said:
Tikka T3 Lite Vs Weatherby Vanguard S2 Whats the difference?

Just curious to read what peoples opinion are and what the actually differences are between these 2 guns. Why would someone choose one over the other? What do you like about them. And make sure you state which one you would buy if given the choice.

I have shouldered both guns and they both feel good. Just trying to make that final decision.


Thanks !
Click to expand...
There are tikka haters out there but for us lefties they are a great option. My left hand 6.5 is accurate and fun to shoot. In the accurancy department I have never heard of tikka not performing.
 
The tikkas fall apart.
Small ejecting port, difficult if you want to load single shots.
The only "good" reason I can think of for a detach mag is speed in loading. (truck hunting)
I've never lost a mag from a floorplate model gun.
Vanguard everytime.
 
guido said:
The tikkas fall apart.
Small ejecting port, difficult if you want to load single shots.
The only "good" reason I can think of for a detach mag is speed in loading. (truck hunting)
I've never lost a mag from a floorplate model gun.
Vanguard everytime.
Click to expand...

The other "good" reason that you are forgetting is that it's way more convenient to put in or take out. I have always hated the floorplate mags because of the wasted motions and complete awkwardness. It's not a deal killer by far, but give me a detachable mag any day of the week.
 
The Vanguard has a 2 stage trigger if you like that sort of thing I think it's stupid.

The Tika has a detachable mag.

The stock on the Tika is much stiffer than the Vanguard in the forend, this may make a difference when shot off a bipod.

Both are the best value for money right now if one wants a gun that will shoot and function well out of the box. Very low chance you will have to tinker of fix either one of them to get it to work right.
 
stuckon308 said:
The other "good" reason that you are forgetting is that it's way more convenient to put in or take out. I have always hated the floorplate mags because of the wasted motions and complete awkwardness. It's not a deal killer by far, but give me a detachable mag any day of the week.
Click to expand...

tylerjwitty said:
X 2.. mags are very handy . I have a ruger w floorplate and a Blr 260 . It's annoying having a handful of shell when unloading
Click to expand...


I have guns with, and without detach mags. I much rather hunt with the floorplate model.
Yes, I agree, it is much more convenient to load the gun with a detach mag. When I'm hunting the gun usually gets loaded in the morning and unloaded in the evening, not that big a deal. When I hunt with the detach mag guns, I always find myself checking to see if the mags in. Might be hunting with a single shot all day. Which isn't a bad thing, but if your carrying a repeater, you might as well have more than 1 shot.
 
I have both and in my humble opinion they are two different rifles as far as MY USES are concerned. The tikka doesn't get used much anymore except for backpacking, it's one of the lightest factory rifles in that price range, and very accurate, perfect for hunting the open high country. Vanguards are heavy..... but I like that, much more fun to shoot at the range. But not at all too heavy for long hard day trips, just not my first choice for luggin up a mountain with a bunch of other gear, that's all. I actually prefer to hunt with a heavier gun, I think the extra weight keeps those cross hairs just a little bit steadier. Not all Vanguards have long throats, mine don't anyways, actually I wish the throat on my 300wsm was longer, but the 270 win is juuuuust perfect.... and we'll find out about my new 308 next week when I start loading for it. They're both good guns man just depends on your type of hunting
 
Ive had 4 tikkas. Never had an issue with the plastic, but there is something more ensuring about having a rifle made with metal. Vanguard is a robust rifle that you will never have to worry about. The older ones had poor triggers, newer ones are supposedly better. Tikkas all have good triggers and are accurate, but the prices have climbed a bit.

These days I would likely go vanguard and put the extra $$ into the scope and rings.
 
I've got/had many of both and vastly prefer the Vanguard for myself, especially the wood stocked deluxe versions. If lighter weight is very important, then the Tikka makes sense. My daughter's T3 7/08 seemed to be a good compromise between light weight, quality, recoil and price.

The old style triggers on the Vanguards were consistently lousy, but easily fixed with a little light honing.
 
blargon said:
Ive had 4 tikkas. Never had an issue with the plastic, but there is something more ensuring about having a rifle made with metal. Vanguard is a robust rifle that you will never have to worry about. The older ones had poor triggers, newer ones are supposedly better. Tikkas all have good triggers and are accurate, but the prices have climbed a bit.

These days I would likely go vanguard and put the extra $$ into the scope and rings.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with buying the Vanguard and putting better optics on it if one was considering the Tikka.

Dogleg said:
I've got/had many of both and vastly prefer the Vanguard for myself, especially the wood stocked deluxe versions. If lighter weight is very important, then the Tikka makes sense. My daughter's T3 7/08 seemed to be a good compromise between light weight, quality, recoil and price.

The old style triggers on the Vanguards were consistently lousy, but easily fixed with a little light honing.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct, the series 1 Vanguards had poorer triggers than other rifles and a lot of people were dropping Timmeny(sp?) trigger kits into the rifles to improve them. The S2 has an adjustable 2 stage trigger that is smooth and breaks cleanly and sharply with 3lbs (.5 then 2.5) combined pull weight from the factory. I love the trigger on this rifle :D
 
I lean towards the Vanguard, they just seem to fit me well and I prefer hunting rifles with a floorplate. Any annoyance in having to handle four cartridges pales in comparison to the annoyance of losing your mag in the woods IMO. That being said, it weighs a bit more which is not necessarily a bad thing if magnum calibers are being considered. I can't think of much to say against the Tikka, both are typically good shooters, I say play with both and figure out which suits you better.
 
I have or have had both. I find the Weatherby style stock to fit me better. I even decided on that style of stock for my custom 6.5x55AI. The Tikka is very accurate and a joy to carry due to the light weight. Found it easy to get loads that would go 5/8". I am not a truck hunter so a detachable mag over hinged floorplate is a moot point for me. I would go with fit...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom