Tikka's plastic bolt shroud

I have been shooting my T3 in .300 wsm for 4 years and havent had any problems. There are a few things that are not as nice as other guns, but I would much rather put an $800 tikka through crappy moose hunting conditions than an $1800 sako.
 
As a friend of mine once said, "Tikka T3's have a cult following". You either love them or despise them.
I have two and love them both.
I had built some handloads once that turned out to be over the maximum load. Ended up splitting a couple of cases and stretched some primer pockets, but the rifle did not give me any hint of an excess. Functioned flawlessly.
Probably a little luck on my part, but both rifles have served me very well in the last 4 years.
 
I think some people aren't quite sure what the bolt shroud is, and what its purpose is. If you read all of the thread I linked earlier, you'll find that the shroud is not merely cosmetic, but is there as a safety feature to deflect hot gasses and particles from a pierced primer from hitting the shooter directly in the face/eye. If it breaks off during the event, it hits the shooter (as it did in this case), or if it has broken previously and been removed, then there is no protection whatsoever. With the exception of this design flaw, I think the Tikka T-3 is a very good rifle, but not worth losing an eye over.
 
dragoon7214 said:
I think some people aren't quite sure what the bolt shroud is, and what its purpose is. If you read all of the thread I linked earlier, you'll find that the shroud is not merely cosmetic, but is there as a safety feature to deflect hot gasses and particles from a pierced primer from hitting the shooter directly in the face/eye. If it breaks off during the event, it hits the shooter (as it did in this case), or if it has broken previously and been removed, then there is no protection whatsoever. With the exception of this design flaw, I think the Tikka T-3 is a very good rifle, but not worth losing an eye over.
Click to expand...
Thankyou Dragoon 7214, I could not have said it better. I figured that since a pieced primer caused the shroud to break, it must be a safety design. I do not wish to think what hot gasses would have done had the bolt not been shrouded. This is a critical design flaw and should be corrected, Tikka implement recall order!!! Sadly like most manufacturing defects that can cause injury (or death), nothing is done until there is legal action brought agains the company forcing them to change. It is to bad I really like my 2 T3's, RF
 
Tikka love

My plastic bolt shroud ended up in my face from my .223!!!Am i happy about it? No!!! Would i get rid of my tikka Never!!!So what it is just for looks. And i was running rounds that were too hot!!!My Bad. :jerkit:
 
A bolt shroud is NOT just for looks! it is there specifically to catch and re-direct hot gasses and particles of brass that result from a cracked case or pierced primer pocket. That your shroud broke means that it took the hit instead of your eyes and face. Don't shoot a bolt action rifle without a functioning bolt shroud.
 
Sounds like its mostly, if not all, 223 doing it from pierced primers. At least that's the caliber that keeps coming up in this discussion. I've never had a primer pierce on my 308. I have had it happen on my m14 with some surplus ammo, and it appeared that ammo had the tendency to do it, as I've never had it happen since.
 
I use S&Bellot .223 in my AR - no problems, no stoppages. I was using winchester (sent a friend to the store, and he came back with winchester) - I might as well have loaded peanut butter and JAM into my AR.

so as far as S&B go, I've had no issues.
 
Like my mother always told me "It's all fun and games till someone loses an eye." Which is exactly what will happen if you have no bolt shroud on your rifle, and have a pierced primer.
 
with so many experts here I just gotta ask...

So with so many experts here I just gotta ask...:jerkit:

What exactly do the other rifles (in the price range of the T3) use for protection of the shooter in the situation of a pierced primer?
 
This is quoted from another thread on the exact same situation. If you go back to the link that I posted earliuer in this thread, you'll find more info and links to other incidents the same as this. But if you want to know about gas deflection read on:


Ok, if you look at almost all modern front locking bolt action rifles you will see that they have a gas port on the right hand side of the action to vent gases escaping down the locking lug race way on that side, away from the shooters face (this is assuming a right handed bolt action rifle being fired by a right handed shooter). They also have a vents drilled into the bottom of the bolt body to vent gases escaping through the firing pin hole and through the body of the bolt into the magazine. The Ruger 77 is a good example of this, it has one small and two large oval shaped vents, and it is still one of the strongest bolts out there. The locking lug raceway on the left side of the action vents gas all the way back to bolt shroud where it is deflected 90 dgrees to the shooters face by the flange on the left side of the bolt shroud. This is the way Mauser designed it in 1898 and has been copied by numerous other manufacturers ever since. If this system were inherently dangerous, believe me it would not have lasted over a hundred years. If you still refuse to believe this, pick up the latest copy of "Rifle" magazine and check out Brian Pearces article on the Ruger 77, and you will see in detail how these systems work. You can also checkout Jon Sundras article in "the Complete Rifleman 2008" on the Montana Rifle Company 1999 action,

Other rifles have additional systems to block the raceways. Check out Savage 110s and see the massive ring they put on the rear of the bolt to deflect gases at the end of the left raceway. The Savage action also utilises a second set of baffles immediately behind the locking lugs to block the raceways, making the ring redundant, and yet they still feel the need to have a backup system. Since Winchester reintroduced their controlled round feed actions they have incorporated a gas baffle on the left side, opposite the claw extractor to block the left raceway, and still have the shroud covering the left rear of the action.


The Tikka puts its vent on the left side of the the action, so they must have taken in to account the fact that the flush fitting plastic bolt shroud would not adequately deflect or stop gases in the event of a failure. If for any reason that vent hole is blocked, or the gases coming back are too much for that vent, they are definitely coming down that race way and the bolt shroud is going to be all that is in their way. Design flaws sometimes do happen, engineers make mistakes (product recalls happen all the time), and sometimes a series of events can lead to a catastrophic failure (case/primer failure+vent of gases rearward+weak bolt shroud= particles in face).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom