Tikka T3x vs Ruger American: Long term, technical, gunsmith opinions?

[Joel]

While subjective things do matter (its your gun and you should like it!) I'd like to try stripping them away and ask long term owners, or gunsmiths, or home gamers what they think about the Tikka T3x line of rifles vs the Ruger Americans.

Long and short, I've had both. Both I liked both. But I really wonder from a technical point of view, is one clearly a few hundred dollars superior to the other? Not "the stock feels cheap" or "this one has a better trigger" or "zipper bolt" stuff, but I mean long term durability, action squareness, etc. What kind of issues/problems have you had?

 

[PR Cook]

Growing up shooting them with friends, I thought the Tikka's were boring (I was a Remington guy). As soon as I started smithing and began opening them up and working on them, I gained a whole lot of respect for them! They're straight and true like no other current factory offering (current Jap built Winchesters and Brownings are also very good), they use high quality steel and their fit and finish are fantastic.

In MY opinion, Sako decided to create a 'budget line' under the Tikka banner and did so by developing an incredibly simple design with a single action length, VERY few parts, and almost most all of those parts being interchangeable regardless of caliber. Then they used high quality materials and excellent manufacturing practices to produce a very high quality, straight, true, accurate, reliable and long term serviceable platform.

Ruger (and Remington and Savage and Mossberg and......) took comparatively complex designs and said "how can we save on materials, fit and finish and pump these out fast enough to drop the price."
"Bubble gum steel", recycled "Rubbermaid" stocks, heavy tooling marks (and chatter) on barrels, actions and even bolts(hence zipper...) camouflaged by a coarse sandblasted finish and marketed by "anti glare" slogans.
I cant speak to action squareness as I haven't had a Ruger American owner interested in investing the value of a new barrel in the platform. (who rebuilds a Bic lighter? just get another!)

They both go bang, I won't argue that. And for some peoples needs, a Tikka is entirely unnecessary. Something like a Ruger American or Savage Axis can be just the ticket for a farmer's truck/mudroom gun.

If someone is shopping for a sporting rifle however, there is (in my opinion) utterly no comparison between the quality of the two platforms.

 

[Grizzlypeg]

I agree with PR Cook, there is really good quality of manufacturing on the Tikkas, and that translates into consistent MOA or better accuracy from every rifle.

 

[Joel]

I get the idea that a lot of the quality issues though, are aesthetic.

I can understand cheap finish being an objective and not subjective gripe because no one wants a gun that is going to rust comparatively easy. Same on the stock if it keeps the rifle from shooting up to a potential the end user desires....might be the case.

Otherwise though, I guess what I am asking is what's breaking/working worse on the Americans thats going to give you different results over long term ownership vs a Tikka, assuming they are both accurate enough to satisfy under stock config? When it comes to "quality of manufacturing" making each Tikka sub MOA, controlling for the perhaps cheap stock, I don't expect much different from a Ruger Predator or Ranch. Ruger hammer forges a good barrel, and they shoot.

Thanks for your take on smithing the Tikkas, PR Cook. It can also be said that the more simple design with less parts may, overall, have an objective superiority.

 

[Hitzy]

Why bother with new cheaply made crap and wonder if it will last?
For half the price, you can get a 50-70 year old HVA 1600 or FN 98, even Parker Hale 98's are great, nothing to break on them, way better built, already lasted 50-70 years without issue, it won't be new, but it will be better then those 2 new rifles, and shoot just as well.

 

[Joel]

Why bother with new cheaply made crap and wonder if it will last?
For half the price, you can get a 50-70 year old HVA 1600 or FN 98, even Parker Hale 98's are great, nothing to break on them, way better built, already lasted 50-70 years without issue, it won't be new, but it will be better then those 2 new rifles, and shoot just as well.

Had em, don't miss em. They are for sure a great value at the price you can get one for though.

Doubt I'll ever do anything with a T3x where I'm like "Oh, damn, if only I'd had a Mauser 98".

Unless I lose a mag and have to buy an $85 piece of plastic. That I could see myself doing. Otherwise, not really lol.

 

[thegazelle]

Had em, don't miss em. They are for sure a great value at the price you can get one for though.

Doubt I'll ever do anything with a T3x where I'm like "Oh, damn, if only I'd had a Mauser 98".

Unless I lose a mag and have to buy an $85 piece of plastic. That I could see myself doing. Otherwise, not really lol.

The Tikka T3x TAC A1 and CTR mags are close to $200 a piece. I guard those more than my passport...haha...

Would agree with the quality of Tikkas. I couldn't believe my eyes how amazingly accurate they are. And the bolt! Oh! Smooth like butter.

 

[Joel]

The Tikka T3x TAC A1 and CTR mags are close to $200 a piece. I guard those more than my passport...haha...

Would agree with the quality of Tikkas. I couldn't believe my eyes how amazingly accurate they are. And the bolt! Oh! Smooth like butter.

LOL yeah, I ain't messing with those mags. Too bad they ain't set up with AI mags.

The bolt smoothness, lack of toolmarks, etc are kinda what I consider "subjective" personally. But, I get ya!

 

[Hitzy]

Had em, don't miss em. They are for sure a great value at the price you can get one for though.

Doubt I'll ever do anything with a T3x where I'm like "Oh, damn, if only I'd had a Mauser 98".

Unless I lose a mag and have to buy an $85 piece of plastic. That I could see myself doing. Otherwise, not really lol.

$500 saved to spend on ammo/reloading is one thing you can't do with the Tikka vs a nice old 98 lol.
Or enjoy a day bench shooting 30'06.... Tikka's have something with them they recoil like a bastard.

 

[Joel]

$500 saved to spend on ammo/reloading is one thing you can't do with the Tikka vs a nice old 98 lol.
Or enjoy a day bench shooting 30'06.... Tikka's have something with them they recoil like a bastard.

Yeah, the larger calibers kick like a SOB that's for sure lol.

Some might call it heresy but I've been moving away from the 30-06 in general. Or anything bigger.

 

[SomebodyTookMyName]

While subjective things do matter (its your gun and you should like it!) I'd like to try stripping them away and ask long term owners, or gunsmiths, or home gamers what they think about the Tikka T3x line of rifles vs the Ruger Americans.

Long and short, I've had both. Both I liked both. But I really wonder from a technical point of view, is one clearly a few hundred dollars superior to the other? Not "the stock feels cheap" or "this one has a better trigger" or "zipper bolt" stuff, but I mean long term durability, action squareness, etc. What kind of issues/problems have you had?

Here's my two cents; I have been working in the firearms retail industry now for over ten years (at both sponsor and non-sponsor businesses), and in the time I have sold many hundreds of Tikka T3's and T3X's- with the exception of a few finicky magazines, and the early T3's having too much heavy grease on the striker spring, causing them to get light strikes in cold weather, I have never seen an issue with a Tikka T3-series rifle out of the box.

With the Ruger American, on the other hand, while I have not sold as many (I'd say a hundred or so), I have seen numerous issues pop up. Not a ton, and certainly not enough to keep me from buying an American, but certainly enough to say with 100% certainty that the T3 is a better rifle out of the box. Out of the box, I've seen Ruger Americans with feeding issues (mostly in .204 and .22-250 before they ditched the rotary magazine), little burrs/blemishes, moderate corrosion inside, rough bores (when viewed through a bore scope), triggers that couldn't adjust lower than 5-6lb, poor accuracy, and of course lots of complaints about flimsy stocks, off-center barrel channels, and the "zipper" noise when cycling the bolt.

Don't get me wrong, both are solid guns, but there's a reason the Tikka costs more, and in my "professional" opinion it's worth it.

 

[C.308]

The Tikka T3x TAC A1 and CTR mags are close to $200 a piece. I guard those more than my passport...haha...

Would agree with the quality of Tikkas. I couldn't believe my eyes how amazingly accurate they are. And the bolt! Oh! Smooth like butter.

If you dont mind modifying a polymer MDT mag, it will run in a CTR. I believe they're $40-50. I've even modded the ruger scout mags with the thicker lips. Needed more work but they run.

 

[Joel]

Here's my two cents; I have been working in the firearms retail industry now for over ten years (at both sponsor and non-sponsor businesses), and in the time I have sold many hundreds of Tikka T3's and T3X's- with the exception of a few finicky magazines, and the early T3's having too much heavy grease on the striker spring, causing them to get light strikes in cold weather, I have never seen an issue with a Tikka T3-series rifle out of the box.

With the Ruger American, on the other hand, while I have not sold as many (I'd say a hundred or so), I have seen numerous issues pop up. Not a ton, and certainly not enough to keep me from buying an American, but certainly enough to say with 100% certainty that the T3 is a better rifle out of the box. Out of the box, I've seen Ruger Americans with feeding issues (mostly in .204 and .22-250 before they ditched the rotary magazine), little burrs/blemishes, moderate corrosion inside, rough bores (when viewed through a bore scope), triggers that couldn't adjust lower than 5-6lb, poor accuracy, and of course lots of complaints about flimsy stocks, off-center barrel channels, and the "zipper" noise when cycling the bolt.

Don't get me wrong, both are solid guns, but there's a reason the Tikka costs more, and in my "professional" opinion it's worth it.

Now that is an interesting data point. Thank you.

Crap mags aside, there are definitely some things there that say okay, the extra money shows.

 

[Bad Bob]

It is absolutely ridiculous to even consider comparing these 2 firearms.

 

[Joel]

It is absolutely ridiculous to even consider comparing these 2 firearms.

Well that addition was just loaded with technical details lol

Gunsmiths, retailers and end users are comparing them just fine thanks

 

[dead mike]

I own both. The Ruger is simply not in the same league. On top of that ive had nothing but problems with feeding the Ruger. Its been to Quebec for service, new stock, new clips, and still it jams. I will say this though, the rifle is accurate. Regardless, Tikka all day long.

 

[PinnedTo5ive]

I've had a T3X in .308 for 5 or so years. Basic hunting rifle that gets the job done, good quality and fair priced. The Rugers are a more crude rifle built for the same purpose, I've seen some shoot pretty darn accurate but they just don't do it for me.

 

[Joel]

I own both. The Ruger is simply not in the same league. On top of that ive had nothing but problems with feeding the Ruger. Its been to Quebec for service, new stock, new clips, and still it jams. I will say this though, the rifle is accurate. Regardless, Tikka all day long.

Not in the same league how?

Mind you I wouldn't touch a rotary mag with a stolen pecker. AI mag and the Mini 14 mags have worked outstandingly well. DGAF about zipper bolts or the stock or the surface finish or tool marks TBH.

 

[Joel]

As I kinda figured, this is gonna be long on opinion and short of actual technical data point, but such is the nature of forums lol

 

[Hitzy]

Not in the same league how?

Mind you I wouldn't touch a rotary mag with a stolen pecker. AI mag and the Mini 14 mags have worked outstandingly well. DGAF about zipper bolts or the stock or the surface finish or tool marks TBH.

Fit and finish is pretty much miles apart on the metal work, stocks are pretty much bottom of the barrel on both, both made as quickly and cheaply as possible, OEM mags are stupid expensive for both, one just does it prettier and better then the other for a higher price.
If you don't care about that stuff, what exactly do you want input on?
Literally you should be happy with a $400 Savage Axis if your only criteria is "shoots good enough for hunting, and doesn't have rotary mags".