I've decided that I " need " a new rifle in .243 Win. I did a little research and I like the looks of the Tikka T3 Stainless Laminated and the Sako A7. I've handled the Tikka but have not seen any A7's in the flesh. Both are about the same price. What do you guys think would be the better choice?
Tikka T3 or Sako A7
- Thread starter jperos
- Start date
I have both and you know if the A7 is more money it's not worth it I really don't like it any better. The stock is a little nicer but the spare mags are 120 bucks or so, ouch. They both have the same crappy recoil pad, but in 243 it should not be an issue.
The Sako has a 3 lug bolt face, the Tikka 2. As best as I can tell, the barrels are the same (and the same as a Sako 85) but everything else is close but different. Is it worth more money? Probably not. Of course I'm looking at a synthetic/blued comparison. The Tikka is about $800, the Sako $1000. Stainless brings it up to $900 and $1100. Not sure how much the laminated stock is, but since the sako isn't available with it, I won't count it.
Pathfinder
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northeast Ontario
Depends where you shop, I got the A7 in Stainless for 1000$ so I though it was worth it.
Another big difference is the scope mounting...the A7 comes with weaver bases....the T3 comes with the dove tailed receiver, a question of preference but I was happy to trow on a pair of burris rings and a leupold scope the second it came in.
The A7 has the 5 shot MOA garantee which I cant dispute.
Last edited:
Homesteader
CGN Regular
- Location
- In a Wallow West of Edmonton.
I like the way the A7 stock feels in my hands compare to the T3's, but I like the look of the T3's better. I would also say that the T3 has a stiffer forend over the A7. The T3 is fully floated, where the A7 has a small pressure point. The A7 comes in two action lengths where as the T3 makes do with one, so your 243 would actually come in a true short action on the Sako not that it's a big deal. I'm not sure the 3 lug bolt makes much difference, they both shoot well, and the actions feel equally smooth to me. When the T3's were a lot less money I would say no brainer go T3, but now they are almost similar in price. We're still getting hosed up here, I saw A7's stateside advertised last week for $550, can't remember if they were blued or stainless though.
Good luck.
Good luck.
Have owned both. They both handled similarly and shot very well. The differences are noted above, other than that the Sako has steel feed lips on the mag which the T3 does not. Both have very smooth actions/bolt cycling. I did slightly prefer the A7 but it was by the smallest of margins and the T3 Lite I own now (7mm-08) is just fine with me.
The A7 was too light in a heavier recoiling cartridge (7mm RM) and pretty much every shot was 'ouch' if I wasn't wearing a heavy coat. in 243 this will be a non-issue.
Most of the A7's around now are available in a package with a 3x9 scope for around $1000, as they are trying to clear out stock to make room for the redesigned model. Good deal in my mind.
The A7 was too light in a heavier recoiling cartridge (7mm RM) and pretty much every shot was 'ouch' if I wasn't wearing a heavy coat. in 243 this will be a non-issue.
Most of the A7's around now are available in a package with a 3x9 scope for around $1000, as they are trying to clear out stock to make room for the redesigned model. Good deal in my mind.
I Got the A7 stainless in 7 RM and my buddy has a T3 in 223. the stock is a little nicer on the A7 but the biggest difference and advantage for the A7 for me is that its a pain to load cartridges on the T3 from the receiver because off the "roof" on the action. with the sako you can load them in the mag or from the top. as a side note, I putted on a limbsaver pad on the sako and i shot over 20 rds on the bench without any pain.
