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

[Joel]

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".

Well, what I asked about in the first place would be a good start.

Whether or not one was technically more sound than the other. Tends to have a better barrel/chamber? Bolt/lug/chamber cut concentrically? Durability of parts and risk of breakage compared?

For example, if you take a Weatherby Vanguard and a Rem 700 and pull the barrells off and start taking measurements, you're going to find one could really benefit from some lug lapping, and other truing...I wouldn't really want to touch the other because its already square enough. Whereas most of the Remingtons I saw at that time were making 50-ish percent lug contact, sometimes as poor as 35% on one side and 50% on the other, and the barrel threads were smeared with loctite to make them fit tighter when installed. That's what I'm talking about. As the gunsmith pointed out earlier, Tikkas are remarkably square. Wondering if the Americans are the same, since the Predators and Ranch models I've had (and been happy with) really shoot.

Whether anyone likes a stock or metal finish, as long as its not going to break or rust easily?

That sort of thing.

So yeah, they can very much be in the same league. And I happen to like the Axis quite a bit too. Already have one. And I already know Savage does quite well, especially since their barrel work like thread cutting, chambering etc is all done with the barrel in ONE fixture and not taken out of it...although they seem to copper foul like a sum##### lol If I wanted another Axis though, I'd be buying one and not asking specific questions that people end up taking to mean "which do you like better?" or their personal recommendations or whatever.

 

[SHELL SHUCKER]

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.

I agree on yer assessment as a retailer of the Tikkas & Ruger Americans for the most part, but I've been tinkerin' on guns since '70 and don't mind smoothing actions, working triggers, bedding actions etc. Every gun I've owned got a full strip down, cleaning & lubing before range testing. No light primer strikes from my units.

I've not bought a Tikka because they don't make a 5-6 lb carbine (Bare gun) in the the chamberings I have. My Ruger American Ranch units in 450 BM, 350 Legend & 300 BLK be ideal for my uses & are easy to tweek for better performance & reliability. The buggers just plain fit me & handle sweet. Accurate little units they can be.

 

[Hitzy]

The Ruger bedding system is probably the worst system I've ever seen on a modern rifle with the recoil lugs molded into the stock. Very common to have the action sit crooked in the stock as a result. Barrel nuts...if you are a perfectionist, not ideal either for absolutely true/squareness.
Tikka has a floating recoil lug, causes the same issues with sitting crooked in the stock but not as horribly as the Ruger. At least they fixed the previous lug bending issues by changing to steel from aluminum.
But I'm sure you don't care about that sort of thing, because both could be pretty well squared up barrel to action, but the recoil lug assembly in the stock throws that out, and you don't care about the stock...and it only has to be hunting accurate anyway, so what's it matter if it's out a few hundred thou lol.
Everyone puts out lemons BTW, Tikka's and Sako's with exploding barrels, Bergara's with exploding bolt shrouds, Savage put out a run of Model 10 rifles with the bores so off center you couldn't even zero them at 100m, Winchester went pushfeed for 20 years, Rem 700's problems get amplified because they sold 10x more rifles then anyone else, you get the idea.
Seriously though, if a company is only going to spend 5 seconds on fit/finish like the American, do you really think they are going to spend any time making sure it's true/square? They kind of go hand in hand, the sloppy tool marks and zipper bolts are from worn out tooling being worked too fast, the same tooling cutting threads and machining lugs.
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...american-ranch-bolt-face-damage-!!-need-INPUT

 

[dead mike]

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.

Not in the same league across the board, literally. There are 100s of posts on feed problems with the rotary mag for example. My gun which they said is fixed still won’t feed. Customer service (from Ruger USA) is horrible.
Also the trigger is not in the same league. It’s a good trigger, but Tikkas have great triggers in comparison. Bolt operation is also much smoother. The stock on the Tikka is also better, but def in the same league. Anyway that’s my assessment, take it for what you will.

 

[Joel]

The Ruger bedding system is probably the worst system I've ever seen on a modern rifle with the recoil lugs molded into the stock. Very common to have the action sit crooked in the stock as a result. Barrel nuts...if you are a perfectionist, not ideal either for absolutely true/squareness.
Tikka has a floating recoil lug, causes the same issues with sitting crooked in the stock but not as horribly as the Ruger. At least they fixed the previous lug bending issues by changing to steel from aluminum.
But I'm sure you don't care about that sort of thing, because both could be pretty well squared up barrel to action, but the recoil lug assembly in the stock throws that out, and you don't care about the stock...and it only has to be hunting accurate anyway, so what's it matter if it's out a few hundred thou lol.
Everyone puts out lemons BTW, Tikka's and Sako's with exploding barrels, Bergara's with exploding bolt shrouds, Savage put out a run of Model 10 rifles with the bores so off center you couldn't even zero them at 100m, Winchester went pushfeed for 20 years, Rem 700's problems get amplified because they sold 10x more rifles then anyone else, you get the idea.
Seriously though, if a company is only going to spend 5 seconds on fit/finish like the American, do you really think they are going to spend any time making sure it's true/square? They kind of go hand in hand, the sloppy tool marks and zipper bolts are from worn out tooling being worked too fast, the same tooling cutting threads and machining lugs.
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...american-ranch-bolt-face-damage-!!-need-INPUT

If hunting accurate is sub MOA...then I've found it to be the norm with Tikka and the Ruger American Ranch and Predator. You're right, I really don't care much about aluminum recoil lugs because the T3x doesn't have em, and I thought the aluminum ones were only getting dinged up on larger chambered rifles. Either way, they're steel now, but "how many rounds before your aluminum lugged Tikka becomes less accurate" would be a real interesting data point.

Same-same for trueness/squareness of lug/barrel/boltface/threads. You usually don't just wind up with rifles that shoot under 1 inch at 100 yards when your internal machining is out of whack

As to which is better...well if anyone ever had one apart and took measurements, that I'd be interested in! For all I know they're close enough its surprising.

Maybe you could say in a sense its easier to make a small rifle shoot well because there's less rearward bolt thrust that's gonna show problems, less barrel shifting due to sloppy threads etc but sure, tell me how internally out of whack a .223 or 7.62x39 must be to routinely shoot sub moa and often well under that? Or was it just magic? Go ahead and fill me in on how off concentricity you can be and still have a very accurate rifle?

If buying them for $600ish meant they didn't polish up the outside all that well IDGAF at all, no. Really don't spend time admiring bolt smoothness or lack of a zipper sound if these work well enough. And they do for me.

That American bolt face up there is ass ugly. The 223s, 7.62x39s, 6.5 CM or 300 BLK I have had or still have do not look like that though. Nor do they sit noticably crooked in the stocks.

 

[Joel]

Not in the same league across the board, literally. There are 100s of posts on feed problems with the rotary mag for example. My gun which they said is fixed still won’t feed. Customer service (from Ruger USA) is horrible.
Also the trigger is not in the same league. It’s a good trigger, but Tikkas have great triggers in comparison. Bolt operation is also much smoother. The stock on the Tikka is also better, but def in the same league. Anyway that’s my assessment, take it for what you will.

Yeah, like I said earlier, I really don't like the rotary mags either. Thankfully only ever had one American with the rotary mag, a 300 BLK that worked. Sold that one to a good bud. looking forward to seeing what it does with light ammo very soon.

And I get the assessment, I really do. Its just...An issue of "feels better" and not "performs better" if you know what i mean? I do agree witih you. The trigger and stock on the Tikka are better. But since I find the American to be servicable enough, it doesn't bother me personally. There's no right or wrong answer for subjectivity cause its YOUR gun. Besides the feeding. Whoever designed that rotary mag deserves to be kicked in the pills.

I've not bought a Tikka because they don't make a 5-6 lb carbine (Bare gun) in the the chamberings I have. My Ruger American Ranch units in 450 BM, 350 Legend & 300 BLK be ideal for my uses & are easy to tweek for better performance & reliability. The buggers just plain fit me & handle sweet. Accurate little units they can be.

They sure can be!

Although a Battue model in 450 BM or 350 Legend would be pretty dang cool lol. Weight of a 20" barrel bored out to those calibers would be lower...maybe 6 lb or below for ya. Tikka! Get with it!

The Ranch is pretty dang accurate for sure though. At least the ones I've had. The 300 BLK is a peach alright. Really wouldn't mind throwing one's barrel on a 223 rifle set up for AR mags

 

[nowarningshot]

When I was in Langley, I made about part time money, wait for it....garage saleing. There was a sports replay store. I would buy little kids hockey skates and equipment for a dollar or two. Sell it on consignment for $50. People would buy cheap pot metal bicycles there new. Pass on a bike worth 5x more because it was pre owned/had a scratch. Then pile his/hers bikes on top of each other and drive home.

Never had a bad used bolt action rifle. Buy one face-face in a magnum, often you got part of the first/only box of ammo.

I'm a fan of Ruger 77, never owned a American, not interested. My father's last rifle is a T3 stainless 30-06. Only complaint is the hockey puck buttpad. Spend $50-70 on a good recoil pad, makes it a different animal. Cheap mountain rifle, which is beyond my broken body anyways.

Someone mentioned Savages. Down sizing now, and at its peak my collection was much smaller than some. Perhaps I've owned 80-100 rifles. Worst three were Savage; a 110 in 7mag, Axis in 22-250, and a Model 42(does that count....22/410). Perhaps some models of Savage are OK, I've just never owned any.

 

[PR Cook]

Quality is not a subjective thing but rather, the summation of many(each and every in fact) part, component and aspect of the product. Things like fit and finish are points of quality. As are smoothness, balance, accuracy, feeding reliability etc.
As I pointed out The Tikka's are built with high quality materials(both the steels used and the synthetics. I don't care for the synthetics(subjective) but they are much better and stiffer than North American offerings), The actions are straight, true and well finished. Finish is a point of quality workmanship and includes things like barrel straightness and OD-ID concentricity which directly affects point of impact consistency during heating/cooling. Something Tikka does well at, and something North American companies are doing very poorly.

I will admit I've only had one RA in the lathe (it wasn't particularly straight or concentric). The reason I haven't had more seems to be there are few RA owners interested in investing much of anything into this entry level budget platform.

I had another customer with an RA who couldn't get his scope adjusted far enough left/right to be within 5-6 FEET of the target at 100m. I set up the barreled action in the mill and ran a dial on the scope rail. It was true to the receiver. Next I ran a dial along the sides of the barrel... The OD was certainly headed left although that isn't to say the ID was following suit. Not a gun the customer deemed worth pulling the barrel off of( I did take note of the "hot glue gun looking" epoxy coming out around the barrel nut, oozing quality there...). I recommended some adjustable rings and the customer made it work.

Another customer came to me with a blown out extractor. A pierced primer had caused the extractor to blow through the end of its little race way rendering the bolt destroyed. He wanted me to tig it up and re-machine the slot in it as he'd spent the last year trying to get a replacement from Ruger. I said no.
Again, the gun wasn't worth the labor to do the job (and would leave me with the liability of a heat affected, welded up bolt head). In Ruger's defense, the customer admitted to running hot handloads. None-the-less, a rifle destroyed by a pierced primer is a poor design in my books and there was no parts/help offered by the company. In contrast I had another customer who blew the extractor out of his tikka (something about mixing up his powders while handloading. I know him, he should stick to factory ammo). Anyhow there was no other damage to the rifle, he called Stoeger and had extractor parts in a week. (Here's where I make a shameless plug for the Rem700 bolt/extractor design, but that's off topic)

As to "how badly miss-aligned a rifle can be made and still shoot reasonably well?" Remington has done everything they can to answer that question in their 700's for the last few decades... The answer is, PRETTY BADLY! Excellent and robust design, Terrible execution(And yet they usually shoot alright). But again, off-topic.

One can compare anything they like, but that doesn't mean the items are in the same league. The Tikka is a basic, mid grade hunting rifle; the Ruger American is an entry level, budget gun(neither one is a 10k Rolex). They both function and are, often, both accurate. But their similarities end there.

All that said, A gun's a tool. Ask a mechanic which brand of wrench is best... My Chinadian Tire specials loosen nuts just fine for my needs. Run what ya brung and enjoy it!

Regards,
Paul.

 

[Bad Bob]

Well that addition was just loaded with technical details lol

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

Yes they are but are you hearing what they are telling you? Have you heard enough "technical details" yet?

 

[LittleBoyLefty]

The Tikka manufacturing tolerances are consistent and tight enough that several custom barrel manufacturers offer shouldered prefits for the T3x action. Whether that's a benefit is up to the individual, but it does indicate impressive QC in mass production.

I've owned both the T3/T3x and RAs. The RA Predator 6.5CM I owned was one of the most accurate rifles, custom or factory, that I've owned. Ruger's QC can't be that bad, but over all I prefer the design of the Tikkas.

 

[Joel]

Yes they are but are you hearing what they are telling you? Have you heard enough "technical details" yet?

I could stand to hear even more....but its a good discourse no thanks to you.

As I pointed out The Tikka's are built with high quality materials(both the steels used and the synthetics. I don't care for the synthetics(subjective) but they are much better and stiffer than North American offerings), The actions are straight, true and well finished. Finish is a point of quality workmanship and includes things like barrel straightness and OD-ID concentricity which directly affects point of impact consistency during heating/cooling. Something Tikka does well at, and something North American companies are doing very poorly.

From someone who went to a gunsmithing school where they dialed in barrels using OD with no regard for ID? I have to agree lol.

I will admit I've only had one RA in the lathe (it wasn't particularly straight or concentric). The reason I haven't had more seems to be there are few RA owners interested in investing much of anything into this entry level budget platform.

That makes sense, although there does appear to be a following of using Axis receivers for long range target or F class style guns because the action is more rigid. But they likely do their own work as well.

Several members here have rebarreled their Ruger American with the variety of pre-fit barrels out there. I'll ask em about the barrel nut expoy. I haven't seen any coming out of any of my rifles. But I get the concern since at least one was lol.

Interestingly, the Rifeshooter site noted their American predator had the loosest barrel to receiver fit they've seen, although still satisfied with the performance before building their custom out of it. Doesn't seem to be any epoxy on that barrel nut either.

https://rifleshooter.com/2017/11/building-a-custom-ruger-american-rifle/

Another customer came to me with a blown out extractor. A pierced primer had caused the extractor to blow through the end of its little race way rendering the bolt destroyed. He wanted me to tig it up and re-machine the slot in it as he'd spent the last year trying to get a replacement from Ruger. I said no.
Again, the gun wasn't worth the labor to do the job (and would leave me with the liability of a heat affected, welded up bolt head). In Ruger's defense, the customer admitted to running hot handloads. None-the-less, a rifle destroyed by a pierced primer is a poor design in my books and there was no parts/help offered by the company. In contrast I had another customer who blew the extractor out of his tikka (something about mixing up his powders while handloading. I know him, he should stick to factory ammo). Anyhow there was no other damage to the rifle, he called Stoeger and had extractor parts in a week. (Here's where I make a shameless plug for the Rem700 bolt/extractor design, but that's off topic)

Honestly this has been the only thing so far that legitimately concerns me as far as long term durability goes. I'd expect any push feed besides the Rem 700 is going to need some new bits and bobs after that one. Having a broken bolt over it is something else entirely. Although for the sake of knowing, what would happen if the same took place with say a Win 70 push feed or some others?

As to "how badly miss-aligned a rifle can be made and still shoot reasonably well?" Remington has done everything they can to answer that question in their 700's for the last few decades... The answer is, PRETTY BADLY! Excellent and robust design, Terrible execution(And yet they usually shoot alright). But again, off-topic.

Its a dang shame is what it is lol. Looking at a 700, I like them more than some pricier rifles that were pretty much inferior copies in some ways, like a Bergara. Would prefer one to a Vanguard/Howa as well if the surface finish was a bit tougher. Wouldn't expect their sporter barrels to shoot as well as a Predator or Ranch though.

Thanks for sharing the firsthand experience. I've seen the photos from your shop and your work looks top notch.

 

[Joel]

The Tikka manufacturing tolerances are consistent and tight enough that several custom barrel manufacturers offer shouldered prefits for the T3x action. Whether that's a benefit is up to the individual, but it does indicate impressive QC in mass production.

I've owned both the T3/T3x and RAs. The RA Predator 6.5CM I owned was one of the most accurate rifles, custom or factory, that I've owned. Ruger's QC can't be that bad, but over all I prefer the design of the Tikkas.

Pretty much my thoughts/experience on the RA as well.

I love how it seems to rustle people's jimmies to ask how the two rifles compare in internal tolerances that lead to an accurate rifle lol. Or discuss specific points which may crap out.

One other thing I was wondering, but don't have both on hand to look at...The famous and ever important "zipper sound". Is it really the surface finish of the bolt? Or is it that the ID of the Tikka action is a little bit wider and not as much surface contact is being made? If the Tikka bolt was not brought to very high polish, would it make the same sound, or no, because essentially only the bolt lugs ride any points of contact inside the action and the bolt body isn't touching much?

 

[Hitzy]

I have dozens of 40's and 50's era rifles that shoot sub moa, they were made well before any CNC technology.
Sub MOA is not some magical alignment of CNC parts or modern technology.

 

[Joel]

I have dozens of 40's and 50's era rifles that shoot sub moa, they were made well before any CNC technology.
Sub MOA is not some magical alignment of CNC parts or modern technology.

Someone thought it was?

That's redarded.

We all know it also takes a sprinkle of eye of newt and a dash of tongue of frog. Suppose maybe rifles made before the year 2000 COULD have been sub MOA capable if enough were added. What did people shoot in the 40s and 50s anyway, flintlocks?

 

[jparent]

I have owned both, sold my Tikka's and only have Rugers now.

Things i like about Ruger that made me choose them over Tikka

1. Fit their stocks just fit me better.
2. Accuracy. Always had the same or better accuracy from my Rugers than Tikka
3.Standardized and obtainable parts. The adoption by Ruger to use AR pattern and AI pattern mags, and good warranty service in Canada was a plus in longevity for me
3. While maybe not as refined as the Tikka , the hammer forged barrel, forged bolt and simple design are plenty durable
4. Redundancy. For the price of 1 Tikka and a spare magazine i can pretty much buy 2 Rugers... 1 is none, 2 is one, etc.

 

[Gatehouse]

I've been pondering how to answer this thread for awhile

I've never been a real fan of the T3 after their initial introduction (When they were a decent quality rifle for a low price point) Soon after introduction their price climb steeply for no real reason, other than popularity I suppose. They had crappy tupperware stocks and lots of plastic in areas that should me made of metal. But they were accurate and people gushed over how smooth the bolt operated. Accuracy is a good thing but I have more upper body strength than a 6 year old girl so the smooooth bolt didn't matter to me a bit. I was a huge fan of the T3 and thought it was an excellent choice before it got so $$$$

Now we have the Ruger American that has similar features minus the smooth bolt (which you can smooth out if you operate it enough) Again, lots of plastic, crappy tupperware stock. But just as accurate.

The only Tikka I have now is a a CTR in .223. With a McMilllan stock and Razor scope. It's accurate. But 2 out of the 3 mags I have don't feed #9 or #10 rounds reliably. For very expensive magazines, you would think they should work perfectly, but they don't. Actually, magazines can be one of the worst culprits in reliable rifle operation.

But the Ruger American Predator in .223 -right out out of the box- Is almost or just as accurate

That's one of my employees smashing 625 yard targets with the .223 Predator in the gusting mountain wind at a high angle. Once she figured out the elevation she was consistent hits making wind adjustments using the reticle. With an inexpensive gun.

And then I have a few Ruger American Ranch rifles

Which have been brutalized with thousands of rounds of .223 and they still run fine. And of course they are very smooth now

So, my experience with Ruger Americans is pretty good. But I have ONLY used rifles compatible with AR magazines. I've never used one in .308 etc class or used those magazines so no comment on that. I will mention though that I watched one of my clients repeatably hit targets with his bone stock 6.5 Creed Ruger American at 1500 yards.

In a way, they are both the same rifle. Built to a price point. Ultimately, I have way better rifles to take on a back country hunting trip so I personally wouldn't select either. But for screwing around at the gun range, I would pick the cheaper one. They are both accurate and both suck in their own ways that may or may not matter to the shooter/hunter.

 

[Joel]

When I first read this reply, in the first picture, I thought that was a casing that had been ejected (not hanging on the wall). I was thinking "WTF she works the bolt faster than The Flash"

Hadn't had all my first coffee yet

 

[cosmic]

Well - Here is an engineers perspective. As a technology matures, development efforts turn from true technological innovation, to optimization of manufacturing technique and cost. Whether it be downhill skiis, cars, golf clubs or firearms the trend is the same. Ruger was the first to utilize castings for their receivers, you can surmise why? The development of injection molded stocks was done for the same reason. When Tikka went from the 69X series to the T3 series, they went down to one action length - why? Additionally, the number of machining operations required in a Tikka has been reduced to an absolute minimum. Button rifling vs cut rifling?
Both of the subject rifles are nominally "fit for purpose". As stated previously, Tikkas seem to be overpriced for what one gets these days. Perhaps their marketing skills are better that Ruger...
From my perspective, Ruger is winning in the race to the bottom with offerings such as the American. I, for one, dont like the idea of exposing my mug to a casting. Details such as action squareness, bore concentricity, etc seem to be a secondary consideration when looking at the big picture.

 

[Sun_and_Steel_77]

Ruger is winning in the race to the bottom with offerings such as the American. I, for one, dont like the idea of exposing my mug to a casting. Details such as action squareness, bore concentricity, etc seem to be a secondary consideration when looking at the big picture.

RAR receivers are NOT cast they are cut from bar-stock.

 

[Grizzlypeg]

RAR receivers are NOT cast they are cut from bar-stock.

You sure about that? You would think Ruger would say so on their web site when they talk about that model's features.

Also, and old article, but it says the receivers are investment cast: https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/the-ruger-american-rifle-reveiw-a-new-american-rifle/99719

This article, however says machined from bar stock: https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/looking-at-the-ruger-american-rifle/