Why not?
They both have ugly synthetic stocks. They both have plastic trigger gaurds. They both have ho-hum metal finishing. And they both shoot exceptionally well. What makes one better than the other?
Last edited:
Which is better? Stevens 200 or t3?
- Thread starter BC Bigbore
- Start date
Why not?
They both have ugly synthetic stocks. They both have plastic trigger gaurds. They both have ho-hum metal finishing. And they both shoot exceptionally well. What makes one better than the other?
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
if better = value for your money, then the Stevens 200. whenever i am thinking about buying any used gun, the Stevens 200 is my 'baseline'. ie: should i buy this and f*ck around with it, or just get a brand new Stevens for $300? lately, every time i want to buy a rifle for a project that question goes through my mind 
if both the Stevens and Tikka cost the same, then obviously the Tikka, since its at least a $500-class rifle.
the problem i have with the Tikka is its a $500 rifle (think Savage class) with an $800-1000 price tag. i hate to say it but IMO Tikkas are too expensive for what they are. i mean they are literally in the price class of Ruger M77s, winchester model 70 classic Featherweights, Browning A-Bolts, etc.
give me a f'n break. they should be in the $500-550 price bracket, then they would be a screaming deal.
yeah yeah the Tikka is a nice accurate gun but compare this (current SIR prices):
Tikka T3 Lite Stainless: $770
Tikka Optilock Base, Stainless: $82
Tikka Optilock Rings, Stainless: $119 (hahaha)
______________________________________
Total: $971
(HAAAAHHHAAHAHA)
Ruger M77 Hawkeye: $732
Ruger stainless bases: $0
Ruger stainless rings: $0
___________________________
Total: $732, and twice the rifle the Tikka ever will be, sorry.
THAT is my problem with the Tikkas. so the short answer to your question is, hands down, the Stevens is a better rifle because you can buy two or three of them for the price of one Tikka, and the Tikka is just a slight improvement.
if both the Stevens and Tikka cost the same, then obviously the Tikka, since its at least a $500-class rifle.
the problem i have with the Tikka is its a $500 rifle (think Savage class) with an $800-1000 price tag. i hate to say it but IMO Tikkas are too expensive for what they are. i mean they are literally in the price class of Ruger M77s, winchester model 70 classic Featherweights, Browning A-Bolts, etc.
give me a f'n break. they should be in the $500-550 price bracket, then they would be a screaming deal.
yeah yeah the Tikka is a nice accurate gun but compare this (current SIR prices):
Tikka T3 Lite Stainless: $770
Tikka Optilock Base, Stainless: $82
Tikka Optilock Rings, Stainless: $119 (hahaha)
______________________________________
Total: $971
(HAAAAHHHAAHAHA)
Ruger M77 Hawkeye: $732
Ruger stainless bases: $0
Ruger stainless rings: $0
___________________________
Total: $732, and twice the rifle the Tikka ever will be, sorry.
THAT is my problem with the Tikkas. so the short answer to your question is, hands down, the Stevens is a better rifle because you can buy two or three of them for the price of one Tikka, and the Tikka is just a slight improvement.
Rugers come with free rings/bases? Ruger make's a centerfire hunting rifle?
Man, next you'll be spouting off on how great the Remington 710 is
and singing the virtues of using an SKS on moose!
manbearpig you have really got to move out of you mom's basement...
My Sig SHR is smooooooooth as my T3. Infact I find the T3 to be smmoooooooother!
Man, next you'll be spouting off on how great the Remington 710 is
and singing the virtues of using an SKS on moose!
manbearpig you have really got to move out of you mom's basement...
My Sig SHR is smooooooooth as my T3. Infact I find the T3 to be smmoooooooother!
As I think about it, for the same price neighbourhood as the tikka t3 synth/blued, you can probably look at a Browning A-Bolt composite stalker, ~$700.
It's got a better finish than the t3, a shorter bolt turn, triple locking lugs, smoother operation (slick as butter), very similar trigger, very similar weight.
I have one. And a t3. And a couple of Savages. And a bunch of other stuff, and this a-bolt that I recently acquired in the EE is just blowing me away. The t3 isn't.
It's got a better finish than the t3, a shorter bolt turn, triple locking lugs, smoother operation (slick as butter), very similar trigger, very similar weight.
I have one. And a t3. And a couple of Savages. And a bunch of other stuff, and this a-bolt that I recently acquired in the EE is just blowing me away. The t3 isn't.
I have shot many T-3's and they are accurate and reliable... same can be said about the Stevens of which I have only shot a handful.
The big difference is the superior trigger, ergonomic stock configurations and smooth/fast action which allow for better accuracy and function with most shooters.
Some of the lesser factors would be the weight and feel of the stock the detachable magazine and resale value which also favor the Tikka in my estimation.
The big difference is the superior trigger, ergonomic stock configurations and smooth/fast action which allow for better accuracy and function with most shooters.
Some of the lesser factors would be the weight and feel of the stock the detachable magazine and resale value which also favor the Tikka in my estimation.
johnnyreb65
CGN frequent flyer
"So what did you get from your new T3 that you wouldn't have from a 200? Why is it a better rifle?"
Overall fit and finish..like comparing an american car to a japanese car,, they both drive well, but the Japanese care have more attention paid to the details. Also the Tikka will have a higher resale value.
Overall fit and finish..like comparing an american car to a japanese car,, they both drive well, but the Japanese care have more attention paid to the details. Also the Tikka will have a higher resale value.
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
Rugers come with free rings/bases? Ruger make's a centerfire hunting rifle?
Man, next you'll be spouting off on how great the Remington 710 is
and singing the virtues of using an SKS on moose!
funny that you would mention the 710, since i see many similarities between it and the Tikka. they are both all about massive reductions in production cost while trading on an established name and history of quality. Remington for the 710, and Sako for the Tikka.
Tikkas have comparable accuracy to other $800-1000 guns, the problem is that nothing else about them measures up. go beyond the Tikka marketing and realise that theyre not the only company that makes an accurate gun, and that you can own a Ruger M77, Browning A-Bolt, Winchester M70 Featherweight, Remington 700, etc for the same price. then pick up those guns and compare the fit and finish, design and styling to the Tikka.
if you look closely at the Tikka, every 'feature' they tout as new and innovative also just happens to be a massive savings in production costs for the company. how convenient. ive actually seen them tout 'one standard action length' as an innovative feature, lol. plastic parts are hailed as a lightweight innovation, matte blued or bead blasted crap is touted as a 'low glare' innovation.
in terms of value i would place the Tikka around the Savages. both make compromises on fit and finish and materials yet maintain a standard of accuracy. if you examine the guns and features theyre quite similar.
The problem is that you can get a Savage for $400-550, whereas the Tikkas start at $700. the Tikka would be a great gun if it were priced in the price class where it belongs.
Republic of Alberta
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- ,location, location
I feel my $700 Tika is worth much more as a hunting rifle than my +$700 Rugers, Winchesters, Remingtons. Before I bought my T3 I thought they were ###. I bought it any way because I wanted to try it. Now that I have used it I find there is much more to it than all the theoretical plastic talk.
There are watanabe rifle prissy's out there that must talk about having this and that on thier off the assembly line rifle to give them the feeling they really own something special. That's fine.
There are watanabe rifle prissy's out there that must talk about having this and that on thier off the assembly line rifle to give them the feeling they really own something special. That's fine.
manbearpig
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Somewhere in the Third World
if expecting a certain level of quality, workmanship and materials in my rifle makes me a 'watanabe rifle prissy' then so be it.
im not saying they are bad guns, just overpriced.
im not saying they are bad guns, just overpriced.
haha i just went to wholesale sports. Wanted to hold a stevens since im interested in buying one. OMG it makes my daisy bb gun look well built haha. That stock is scary! (grey synthetic). It wasnt even straight! The gun truly feels like a crappy airsoft replica. The bolt had more play than my No.1 Mk.3. But for 1/2 the price of some of the other rifles, and the reputation it seems to carry.. id probably think about buying it.
By far the worst feeling/looking rifle i have ever held. haha.
By far the worst feeling/looking rifle i have ever held. haha.
BC Bigbore
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- BC's Peace Country
I guess you've never held a Rem 710
