Tikka vs Sako
- Thread starter ENFIELD1911
- Start date
Really? Which model? The pad on my 85 Black Bear was a cruel joke. It looks nice and thick, but it's just a thin layer of rubber over a plastic skeleton. It's absurd. Insane really. Why go to all that trouble of designing and manufacturing a composite non - padded recoil pad? It was basically identical to the one that came on my T3 Varmint and Light.
Shot it once just to confirm it was going to be as bad as it looked, and it was. Worse. Binned in favour of a Limbsaver. But Limbsavers are not as attractive as a recoil pad could be (my opinion only) and if there's a better Sako OEM option I'd be interested.
Last edited:
Funny, I was just coming back to remark on the ejection issue with the medium 85 actions, see it's already sort of been addressed.
Only a few quibbles with the accuracy of the below -
Quantatative performance? Yes. Qualatative aesthetics? No way. But I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. Sakos are assembled by a single worker, Tikkas are assembled on a line, so there's that difference too.
Ah yes, I forgot to mention that the Sako has a feature to open the bolt with the safety applied. Not exactly a 3 position safety, rather it's a release button right in front of the safety. I forgot to mention it because I don't care either way, and see a 3 position of no benefit really, but the OP may have a different opinion. It's a pretty neutral feature for me.
Or less, even. Closer to 1/3 the cost depending on model. A T3 lite is still around $750, an 85 Finnlight is around $2k.
I've never heard of this myself. There is the issue with EJECTION from medium (and medium only, as I understand it) length 85 actions - indeed, it's no issue, it's a fact. They flip the empty case right up into the bottom of the scope. I find it no problem during range use, as one tends to open the bolt slowly and catch the empty anyway (well, at least I do, as opposed to flinging them off into the next shooter, or the bushes) and no practical issue firing it in anger either; it's never been a problem in over a thousand rounds. It certainly can, and does, drive some nuts. I put a little piece of flat hook side industrial velcro on the bottom of my scope and called it a day. Neither bothers me nor effects the functioning in the least. YMMV!
Extraction issues though? Never heard of them. In fact, when I googled "Sako 85 extraction" google auto corrected and asked me if I meant "Sako 85 ejection." I mean, installing a Sako type extractor is a common modification to improve extraction reliability in a Rem 700...
Between the plastic mags, cheap feeling stock, plastic bolt shroud, plastic bottom metal, plastic mags (that also pointlessly limit OAL in the .223 models), one size fits all action length, deforming aluminum recoil lugs and inability to top load, people seem to find PLENTY of fault with the T3. I don't actually agree with any of those criticisms except of the lug, but people do definitely seem to find fault with the Tikka.
My impression was that wasn't quite right at all, and a look at the specs would seem to bear that out. The most extreme difference between comparable models is .55 of a pound - near enough as makes no difference in my books. I also don't believe you can characterize a 7.25 lb 85 Laminated Stainless in .30-06 as "heavy," but it's a very subjective term of course. Usually what I hear in regards to weight, if anything, is that the Tikkas can be a bit sharpish in recoil given their weight, rather than any complaints about a Sako's porkiness.
85 Hunter Synthetic, M action - 6.4 lbs
T3 Laminated Stainless, .30-06 - 6.82 lbs
85 Laminated Stainless, M action - 7.25 lbs
85 Finnlight, M action - 6.8 lbs
T3 Light, .30-06 - 6.25 lbs
85 Black Bear - 7 lbs
T3 Battue light - 6.82 lbs
and then there's the 85 Carbonlight, at 5.3 lbs, which has no comparable model with Tikka.
I suppose if the reason one buys a hunting rifle is to collect it, that could be a consideration. If one bought it to employ however, I'll confess I don't understand the relevance. I'm also not sure it's much of a point of comparison; the T3 doesn't have a religious collector following as far as I am aware, but I could be mistaken.
Couple of hundred dollars? A set of Optilock 1" rings and bases will set you back $143 at Al Flaherty's. Talley bases and 1" detach rings from Prophet River will set you back $151.
So, er, the Optilocks are actually the cheapest suitable option I am aware of.
It's again highly subjective, but I think they look a darn sight slicker than the Talley rings and bases. They also have the huge advantage of being easily dismountable with perfect return to zero. Heavy? You always hear this, but it's lost on me - a set of Optilock rings & bases is no heavier than a set of Leupold ring mounts. The Leupold RMs additionally don't have a recoil stop, so I consider them unsuitable.
I don't however, like the soft Torx screws the Optilock rings come with - that's a weak point on them. They're always listed as steel too, but so help me god, the non stainless "blued" ones are aluminum. Maybe I'm on crack, but I Cerakoted and tapped out a set to 8/32 a while back, and I am sure they were aluminum. I went so far as to test bluing solution on them, and it had no effect.
Ohhhh - and it hasn't come up yet, but you can load a Sako through the top, the Tikka you can only load by dropping the magazine. It's a minor detail, but I greatly prefer to just top load. As always, YMMV.
I like - no - LOVE both brands. OP, you'll be thrilled with either I think, but I would definitely finger #### a Sako long and hard before shelling out the coin for one.
Only a few quibbles with the accuracy of the below -
Quantatative performance? Yes. Qualatative aesthetics? No way. But I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. Sakos are assembled by a single worker, Tikkas are assembled on a line, so there's that difference too.
Ah yes, I forgot to mention that the Sako has a feature to open the bolt with the safety applied. Not exactly a 3 position safety, rather it's a release button right in front of the safety. I forgot to mention it because I don't care either way, and see a 3 position of no benefit really, but the OP may have a different opinion. It's a pretty neutral feature for me.
Or less, even. Closer to 1/3 the cost depending on model. A T3 lite is still around $750, an 85 Finnlight is around $2k.
I've never heard of this myself. There is the issue with EJECTION from medium (and medium only, as I understand it) length 85 actions - indeed, it's no issue, it's a fact. They flip the empty case right up into the bottom of the scope. I find it no problem during range use, as one tends to open the bolt slowly and catch the empty anyway (well, at least I do, as opposed to flinging them off into the next shooter, or the bushes) and no practical issue firing it in anger either; it's never been a problem in over a thousand rounds. It certainly can, and does, drive some nuts. I put a little piece of flat hook side industrial velcro on the bottom of my scope and called it a day. Neither bothers me nor effects the functioning in the least. YMMV!
Extraction issues though? Never heard of them. In fact, when I googled "Sako 85 extraction" google auto corrected and asked me if I meant "Sako 85 ejection." I mean, installing a Sako type extractor is a common modification to improve extraction reliability in a Rem 700...
Between the plastic mags, cheap feeling stock, plastic bolt shroud, plastic bottom metal, plastic mags (that also pointlessly limit OAL in the .223 models), one size fits all action length, deforming aluminum recoil lugs and inability to top load, people seem to find PLENTY of fault with the T3. I don't actually agree with any of those criticisms except of the lug, but people do definitely seem to find fault with the Tikka.
My impression was that wasn't quite right at all, and a look at the specs would seem to bear that out. The most extreme difference between comparable models is .55 of a pound - near enough as makes no difference in my books. I also don't believe you can characterize a 7.25 lb 85 Laminated Stainless in .30-06 as "heavy," but it's a very subjective term of course. Usually what I hear in regards to weight, if anything, is that the Tikkas can be a bit sharpish in recoil given their weight, rather than any complaints about a Sako's porkiness.
85 Hunter Synthetic, M action - 6.4 lbs
T3 Laminated Stainless, .30-06 - 6.82 lbs
85 Laminated Stainless, M action - 7.25 lbs
85 Finnlight, M action - 6.8 lbs
T3 Light, .30-06 - 6.25 lbs
85 Black Bear - 7 lbs
T3 Battue light - 6.82 lbs
and then there's the 85 Carbonlight, at 5.3 lbs, which has no comparable model with Tikka.
I suppose if the reason one buys a hunting rifle is to collect it, that could be a consideration. If one bought it to employ however, I'll confess I don't understand the relevance. I'm also not sure it's much of a point of comparison; the T3 doesn't have a religious collector following as far as I am aware, but I could be mistaken.
Couple of hundred dollars? A set of Optilock 1" rings and bases will set you back $143 at Al Flaherty's. Talley bases and 1" detach rings from Prophet River will set you back $151.
So, er, the Optilocks are actually the cheapest suitable option I am aware of.
It's again highly subjective, but I think they look a darn sight slicker than the Talley rings and bases. They also have the huge advantage of being easily dismountable with perfect return to zero. Heavy? You always hear this, but it's lost on me - a set of Optilock rings & bases is no heavier than a set of Leupold ring mounts. The Leupold RMs additionally don't have a recoil stop, so I consider them unsuitable.
I don't however, like the soft Torx screws the Optilock rings come with - that's a weak point on them. They're always listed as steel too, but so help me god, the non stainless "blued" ones are aluminum. Maybe I'm on crack, but I Cerakoted and tapped out a set to 8/32 a while back, and I am sure they were aluminum. I went so far as to test bluing solution on them, and it had no effect.
Ohhhh - and it hasn't come up yet, but you can load a Sako through the top, the Tikka you can only load by dropping the magazine. It's a minor detail, but I greatly prefer to just top load. As always, YMMV.
I like - no - LOVE both brands. OP, you'll be thrilled with either I think, but I would definitely finger #### a Sako long and hard before shelling out the coin for one.
Last edited:
I had the stainless synthetic 85 in 300 short mag I found the pad quite good I purchased that rifle quite a while ago though so they may have gone to a stiffer pad.
Now here we have an analogy that makes good sense, Thank-you very much Sir !
Love the feel and function of both. Very slick action. Decided on a Tikka T3 (Sako out of price range) in Stainless Synthetic, but when I picked it up the stock just felt cheap and too light, and made the rifle too front heavy. Could not get a wood stock model locally and scrapped the plan. Spoke to a few hunters in the home country and they all told me if I can get an older Tikka they are better made rifles.
Northern Amateur
CGN frequent flyer
Sako's are nice, refined rifles. Tikka's are working class rifles. If I had to choose between the two and were to go out hunting regularly with either, I'd choose the Tikka. Doesn't hurt as much if/when you drop it. However, I have owned one of the infamous A7's and I would not recommend it. Got a dud and dealing with Stoeger Canada (where all your Sako, Beretta, Benelli warranty work goes in Canada) was horrible. Worst customer service ever. Since then I have not, nor will I EVER buy another Sako product.
Stoeger was definitely the fly in the ointment with respect to buying a Tikka. I'll never buy another Benelli because of what I went through with Stoeger a decade ago (mind you, I don't remember what my specific issue was
, hey, it's been ten years!)I like my Tikkas, but if they break, I am utterly on my own... same is true of Sako owners, mind.
I've had great luck with service on my Leupold scopes (2 issues on 2 different scopes, one replaced, the other fixed in days) which suggests to me Kimber is a great option, as the Korth group is also their warranty center.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
And since SAKO is an acronym (Suojeluskuntain Ase- ja Konepaja Oy) it is properly written out in upper case.
I've always liked L series rifles, although SAKO have suffered some troubling problems with some of the newer models. One would think a $2K+ price tag would result in trouble free machinery, but apparently not. Uneven bearing on locking lugs, ejection issues, and problems related to the floating alloy recoil lug are a few of the common complaints, none of which are insurmountable, but each adds additional cost to an already costly rifle.
I like to think of Tikkas as great barrelled actions and triggers with everything else being replaceable and in most cases to a superior rifle than that of a Sako.
Example:
Tikka T3 Lite = $800 nowadays give or take
McMillan stock = $700-$900 nowadays depending on style/options
Bell&Carlson Stock = $350
Replacement bolt shroud and bottom metal = $300
Add all this up and you've got a better rifle than a standard catalogue Sako any day for just as much or less. Why anyone would pay $2K plus for a Sako 85 in a plastic stock is beyond me, same for their laminate offerings.
Sakos are still mass produced guns with little to no hand finishing. They are spit out of machines just like any other mainstream gun. Might as well start with a Tikka action and customize to your liking and end up with a superior platform.
Patrick
Example:
Tikka T3 Lite = $800 nowadays give or take
McMillan stock = $700-$900 nowadays depending on style/options
Bell&Carlson Stock = $350
Replacement bolt shroud and bottom metal = $300
Add all this up and you've got a better rifle than a standard catalogue Sako any day for just as much or less. Why anyone would pay $2K plus for a Sako 85 in a plastic stock is beyond me, same for their laminate offerings.
Sakos are still mass produced guns with little to no hand finishing. They are spit out of machines just like any other mainstream gun. Might as well start with a Tikka action and customize to your liking and end up with a superior platform.
Patrick
Last edited:
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Why not start with a Savage ? The same options are available and some models are almost half the price of a T3.
I own several 85s and love them. I have assembled several others for friends and colleagues; mounting optics, zeroing at the range and trying different loads, and loved them as well. I have yet to experience the extraction issue that seems to be repeated on various online threads. I suspect the apparent prevalence of extraction problems is due to one person having a legitimate issue, and 10 of his idiot friends talking about it.
Because Tikkas use better barrels, better machining and are built to much a better spec than Savage. Tikka barrels and triggers are not that different than Sakos, same can't be said for Savage, that's why
Patrick
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
They don't generally shoot more accurately.
Isn't that the point of choosing Tikka over Sako?
Once you get into the $2000+ rifle category, you're approaching luxury goods status and have far surpassed any sound reasoning or consideration based solely on utility or function.
A Casio G Shock keeps time more accurately than a Rolex, if all you want a watch for is to tell time. The same can be said of rifles if all you want is an accurate one with decent trigger. The Sako is light years ahead in departments that relate to what others are looking for in a rifle.
If Tikka barrelled actions and triggers are made in the same factory as Sako and you can put them into a stock that is light years ahead of anything Sako is offering and upgrade all the plastic parts you don't like for the same or less than a new Sako, where is the argument to go for a Sako other than brand appeal?
You're argument for Savage goes both ways, why drop 2k on a mass produced gun when you could find some pretty nice used offerings that are hand finished/fitted from an era/company with skilled craftsmen actually putting it all together?
I like Sakos but for the money they are just not worth it compared to what you can put together using some of their own parts, ie Tikka barrels/triggers.
Last edited:
Maybe I'm out to lunch, but I don't consider a $2k rifle to be particularly expensive. On the high end of regular pricing, yes - but at the expensive end of things? It seems to be very accepted to shell out well over $2k for a Tavor, SG542 or Robinson XCR - but not on a rifle that some will spend far more time carrying in the field? AND in a role where it's accuracy, reliability, durability and usability have actual real world consequences. Funny.
Savage make great rifles for the price point, and for many uses. I quite like the one I have. It's accurate, fun to shoot, decent enough in every regard. But it's basically a disposable rifle as far as I'm concerned; stamped parts in the trigger group, the 87 piece bolt with a head held on by a preposterously tiny pin, etc etc etc. I don't expect it to survive 50 years without replacing parts. I also certainly wouldn't take it on any sort of hunting expedition except as a backup rifle. Too much to potentially fail. Whether that's a realistic concern or not, who knows - but bolt pin failures are certainly not uncommon, and it's the worry in the back of your mind that I'm trying to avoid. I guess you could always just carry a spare; that'd work, but... ultimately it is simply not made to the same level of durability and robustness.
It is funny though - of all the dozens of models and brands I've owned and hunted with, Sako is my favourite, by far, and I can't objectively tell you why. Indeed, I did for a long time have a T3s in a B&C stock, with the plasticky bits replaced. In every measure, the functional equivalent. But it just isn't anywhere near as "nice." There are a few areas in which the Sako is objectively more functional and superior, but they're really minor in the scheme of things. More finishing touches than critical.
There's no category it is objectively better in than "appeal" and "feel." It just "feels" right, from the way it carries to the way it shoots. That may or may not be worth the premium to you, which is why I'd stress anyone considering a Sako fondle it extensively first. We can debate the technical merits and differences all day long, but to me that misses the point - it's not a purely rational, logical decision. You need to balance the rational mind with the emotional mind, and that results in a wise mind as the psychologists will tell you - in other words, a purely logical decision may not be emotionally fulfilling, and a purely emotional decision has it's obvious pitfalls. Balance the two, and you wind up with a satisfying balance. It's also why I drive a Wrangler LOL... Nowhere near the most practical or economical daily driver, but it puts a smile on my face every time I'm behind the wheel. Both considerations are important.
Much like how it would be hard to make the case that an M3 is a better choice as a family car than a Subaru; both come with wheels, doors, and reliable motors. Both carry kids and groceries, and are as safe as a car can be. Any performance difference is largely lost in daily driving on public roads, at least if you want to hang on to your license. But which one is "nicer" - that question should be easy to answer.
Savage make great rifles for the price point, and for many uses. I quite like the one I have. It's accurate, fun to shoot, decent enough in every regard. But it's basically a disposable rifle as far as I'm concerned; stamped parts in the trigger group, the 87 piece bolt with a head held on by a preposterously tiny pin, etc etc etc. I don't expect it to survive 50 years without replacing parts. I also certainly wouldn't take it on any sort of hunting expedition except as a backup rifle. Too much to potentially fail. Whether that's a realistic concern or not, who knows - but bolt pin failures are certainly not uncommon, and it's the worry in the back of your mind that I'm trying to avoid. I guess you could always just carry a spare; that'd work, but... ultimately it is simply not made to the same level of durability and robustness.
It is funny though - of all the dozens of models and brands I've owned and hunted with, Sako is my favourite, by far, and I can't objectively tell you why. Indeed, I did for a long time have a T3s in a B&C stock, with the plasticky bits replaced. In every measure, the functional equivalent. But it just isn't anywhere near as "nice." There are a few areas in which the Sako is objectively more functional and superior, but they're really minor in the scheme of things. More finishing touches than critical.
There's no category it is objectively better in than "appeal" and "feel." It just "feels" right, from the way it carries to the way it shoots. That may or may not be worth the premium to you, which is why I'd stress anyone considering a Sako fondle it extensively first. We can debate the technical merits and differences all day long, but to me that misses the point - it's not a purely rational, logical decision. You need to balance the rational mind with the emotional mind, and that results in a wise mind as the psychologists will tell you - in other words, a purely logical decision may not be emotionally fulfilling, and a purely emotional decision has it's obvious pitfalls. Balance the two, and you wind up with a satisfying balance. It's also why I drive a Wrangler LOL... Nowhere near the most practical or economical daily driver, but it puts a smile on my face every time I'm behind the wheel. Both considerations are important.
Much like how it would be hard to make the case that an M3 is a better choice as a family car than a Subaru; both come with wheels, doors, and reliable motors. Both carry kids and groceries, and are as safe as a car can be. Any performance difference is largely lost in daily driving on public roads, at least if you want to hang on to your license. But which one is "nicer" - that question should be easy to answer.
Last edited:
Agree completely with this, and I do regard both Tikka/Sako as utilitarian mass production rifles. There is a place for "nice" as a buying criteria and that's a whole other discussion with a completely different price point and different makes/models altogether.
sir_springer
Regular
- Location
- East Kootenays
Don't think a comparison between a T3 and a Sako 85 is legit, same respect as would be comparing a Weatherby Mark V to a Vanguard.
Stuff I read, the A7 was designed to take back some market share that the T3 was siphoning away from Sako, which only had the 85 to compete against it at usually double the price or more.
Even so, there are few real similarities between the T3 and A7, not mention that the A7 is still somewhat of a walk up in price. What they both do very well is feed ammo smooth as a baby's butt and shoot damn tight groups, which is to say, both are built to high standards. Indeed, as one writer recently put it, he'd struggled with numerous custom built rifles to get them to shoot near as well as the Tikka T3 he was currently testing. And as another gun writer put it, after shooting lots of groups averaging in and around a half inch with a T3, any rifle that makes you look that good has a lot going for it.
The A7 is slightly more refined than the T3, and in that regard may well be worth a couple extra hundred bucks. But one simply cannot lose with either one of them.
Stuff I read, the A7 was designed to take back some market share that the T3 was siphoning away from Sako, which only had the 85 to compete against it at usually double the price or more.
Even so, there are few real similarities between the T3 and A7, not mention that the A7 is still somewhat of a walk up in price. What they both do very well is feed ammo smooth as a baby's butt and shoot damn tight groups, which is to say, both are built to high standards. Indeed, as one writer recently put it, he'd struggled with numerous custom built rifles to get them to shoot near as well as the Tikka T3 he was currently testing. And as another gun writer put it, after shooting lots of groups averaging in and around a half inch with a T3, any rifle that makes you look that good has a lot going for it.
The A7 is slightly more refined than the T3, and in that regard may well be worth a couple extra hundred bucks. But one simply cannot lose with either one of them.
