Author Topic: New Ruger "Hawkeye" v. Tikka T3 (Read 3243 times)

Zachary · « **on:** March 07, 2007, 05:36:59 AM »

As many of you know, I am not a big fan of Ruger centerfire Bolt Action Rifles. It's not necessarily to say that I think that they are bad rifles, but just that they haven't "warmed-up" to me. Yes, I have shot quite a few, and hunted with them as well, but I don't own any such Ruger products.

Conversely, as many of you also know, I AM a huge fan of Tikkas. In fact, I recall praising and recommend them to our members way back when no one heard of them, something like back in 2002 or 2003 or so. Since then, interest and sales in Tikkas have grown substantially, and for good reason: they have excellent fit and finish, have outstanding accuracy, have an awesome trigger, and come at a reasonable price.

I forgot the exact year, but Tikka subsequently discontinued the original Whitetail Hunter series, and starting making the T3. Regardless of the exact year, I do recall that this occurred when Beretta took over.

In any event, the primary difference between the T3 and the original WH is that the Stock on the T3 became slimmer and thus lighter weight, as well as the one-size-fits-all receiver, which I am not a fan of. Still, everything else seems to be the same..i.e the receiver and barrel are the same size/weight.

So now, with the introduction of the Ruger Hawkeye, I can't help but notice, or at least believe, that Ruger is trying to take aim at the Tikka T3. Why? Well, Ruger boasts that the new Hawkeye ("Hawk") has a new slimmer stock (like the T3), as well as a new trigger (which is probably trying to be as good as the Tikka trigger. It further appears that the receiver and barrel of the Hawk is still the same size/weight (like the T3 concept). The Hawk also has this new recoil pad. I'm not sure of the effectiveness of the T3's pad, but it seems pretty good, although I would prefer a Simms. So after looking at these too guns, it definately seems that US manufacturers are looking at their foreign, albeit successful, competition.

For those of you who own Ruger rifles, do you also own Tikka T3s? If not, and you would consider buying a T3, does the new Hawk interest you? Any other comments or thoughts are welcome.

Zachary

k3yston3 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 07, 2007, 05:46:34 AM »

I don't think that ruger is taking aim at tikka rifles, but rather listening to consumers... Some feel that the m77mkII stocks were too big and club like, with poor recoil pads, and that the mkII trigger was terrible. By slimming down the stock, creating a now recoil pad, and the new trigger puts Ruger in a real good place for new rifles, especially with Winchester no longer in the game...

Skunk · « **Reply #2 on:** March 07, 2007, 07:40:16 PM »

"...Ruger is trying to take aim at the Tikka T3" - Zachary

LOL Zachary, like Ruger would have to do that.

I'm with K3yston3, Ruger is simply listening to their customers and providing us with an even better rifle for around the same price as the M77 MKII. You must have heard the rants over the last few years about the "12 pound," lawyer induced, trigger pulls that came stock with M77s. I think Ruger was also listening.

Does the new hawkeye interest me? You bet it does. I get warm, fuzzy, feelings whenever I think of a new Hawkeye in 7mm-08, or 308.

Would I ever buy a Tikka? Well, to each his own, but the Tikka seems cheap to me with all its plastic parts and other production cost shortcuts. Chuck Hawks calls it the "poster child for cheap rifles." Not that Chuck is the ultimate authority on T3s, however, I feel his article is accurate - especially how Tikka sells less rifle for more.

Here, read Chucks article for yourself: http://www.chuckhawks.com/critical_look_T3.htm

Following are a few quotes from the very same article:

"I suspect that most satisfied T3 customers are not experienced rifle buyers. A person who has never owned a fine rifle is much more likely to be tolerant (or ignorant) of an economy rifle's shortcomings than an experienced shooter and hunter. The relative newcomer simply has inadequate personal experience upon which to formulate an informed opinion." - Chuck Hawks

"Still, I find it hard to understand how Tikka stays in business offering less rifle for more money. The T3's success is a tribute to the ignorance of the modern American sportsman--and the connivance of the sporting press upon which they rely for information." - Chuck Hawks

I was looking a T3 over at the local gun shop just a few days ago and will say that the Tikka comes with a a very nice factory trigger.

Skunk

Grubbs · « **Reply #3 on:** March 08, 2007, 04:06:33 AM »

Skunk, most Tikka fans on the few forums I frequent have already ready the BS articlle from Hawks. Chuck must have been smoking crack that day, becuase his article is full of holes. Any Ruger I've had or seen pales in comparison to the Tikka's I have in every way, plastic and all. My tikka whitetail is 7 years old and never missed a beat. Best bang for the buck iin existence in my opinion.

Zachary · « **Reply #4 on:** March 08, 2007, 05:38:18 AM »

I agree, and I still see the Ruger Hawkeye having a striking resemblance to the concept of the Tikka T3, which has been around for a few years.

You could call the Ruger "Hawkeye" a Ruger "T3".

Zachary

kenjs1 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 08, 2007, 06:06:47 AM »

Tikkas are light and accurate - two things just about anyone would want. Many traditionalists may not like the way they get there but they get there. I don't think Ruger is aiming at the Tikka either - just responding to where marketplace has trended. Browning's are lightweight and accurate for example so did they target someone or were they perhaps targeted? They responded to the market by making their historically high prices more competitive. Remington's have gone lighter with their CDL's, even making them available in still lighter, smaller, and very attractive Model 7's. One of Ruger's last offerings was the Ultralight - a good looking yet seemingly fickle product. I don't own a center fire Ruger but am rooting for them to succeed with the Hawkeye as they seem to have finally listened to their customers. One player really listened to the rifle enthusiasts and that is Thompson's new "Icon". Looks like they got everything right - except the one and only knock - weight! It is not heavy for a traditional rifle - but it is heavier than most new models. Interesting to see how that will play out.

Ahab · « **Reply #6 on:** March 08, 2007, 09:30:30 AM »

Quote from: Zachary on March 08, 2007, 05:38:18 AM

I agree, and I still see the Ruger Hawkeye having a striking resemblance to the concept of the Tikka T3, which has been around for a few years.
You could call the Ruger "Hawkeye" a Ruger "T3".
Zachary

I have the Ruger "Whitetail" in 7mm08. A special limited run prior to the Hawkeye. Has a 20" pencil barrel, SS target grey, the new stock and trigger. Just over 6#'s. I chose it over the T3 because the trigger was better, it just plain felt good, and looked better. About a hundred cheaper too! At the range I was pleasantly surprised to find it more accurate than I expected. Bear in mind I started out to buy the T3.

Zachary · « **Reply #7 on:** March 08, 2007, 09:57:18 AM »

The trigger was better than the Tikka?

Wow! I've never heard anyone say that.

Zachary

Skunk · « **Reply #8 on:** March 08, 2007, 10:12:32 AM »

"...Chuck must have been smoking crack that day..." - Grubbs

LMAO Grubbs, Chuck Hawks on crack! Now that puts a vision in my head.

Like I said Zach and Grubbs, to each his own. Buy all the Tikkas you can get your paws on. I sure don't have anything against them, I just feel there are better buys out there for the money. For example - The Ruger Hawkeye or the Savage American Classic. Plus, they are made in the good old United States of America, and that means something to me. Peace brothers.

Skunk

k3yston3 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 08, 2007, 10:20:05 AM »

Personally, I think that the best bang for the buck rifles on the market these days are the CZ 550s and the Howa 1500/Weatherby Vanguard. But neither is made in the US. With the CZ getting the nod from me, as I like Mauser actions and CRF best.

victorcharlie · « **Reply #10 on:** March 08, 2007, 11:49:46 PM »

IMO, Tikka is about the ugliest rifle made......so is the Savage but they both shoot very well.....

The CZ is a very good rifle at a very good price......it's a little bigger and bulkier that the Ruger MKII but you've got to love the set trigger.

The new Hawkeye does seem to address the trigger issue to some degree, but the ones I've handled still don't seem to have as good a trigger as the Tikka.....they are a bit slimmer......

I plan on looking at several new Hawkeyes this weekend....

lilabner · « **Reply #11 on:** March 10, 2007, 06:38:51 AM »

I had an old tang safety Ruger in 25-06. Shot like a house afire,and a prior owner had fixed the trigger but the thing was very heavy. Does anyone know the weight of the Hawkeye? If it is in the 6 1/2 pound neighborhood with a barrel at least 22 inches long and not pencil thin, IMO it is competing with the T3. If it is over 7 pounds, IMO it is competing with other rifles. It's great they are coming around to better triggers. The so-called "lawyer triggers" were an abomination. As for Chuck Hawks, he usually makes a lot of sense. But, he is apparently old school - forged steel, fine walnut and highly polished bluing. I was the same way until a few years ago when I finally made peace with synthetic stocks, stainless steel and trigger guards and floorplates made of something other than steel. P.S. - There are some people who won't buy Rugers because their actions and other parts are investment castings rather than something carved out of a piece of steel. Ridiculous, of course. Their Safari rifle comes in some ultra large, ultra powerful calibers and it is manufactured using the same process as all the other Ruger bolt guns.

mjbgalt · « **Reply #12 on:** March 10, 2007, 09:57:06 AM »

i handled one today...the new stock is very nice and the trigger is better. the weight is less than a similar remington bdl, as far as i could tell.

-Matt

banen · « **Reply #13 on:** March 10, 2007, 10:50:54 AM »

I am waiting for Ruger to put out the wood stock ultra light Hawkeye in 338 Federal. I have a 308 ultralight MkII and I love it.

Cement Man · « **Reply #14 on:** March 10, 2007, 12:59:04 PM »

I have looked and handled the T3 at my local gun dealer. I believe they are very accurate rifles, based on comments by owners. They have a nice factory trigger pull. They certainly appear to be very good rifles for those who like that type of action, safety, design, etc. I am happy for those who own them and like them. Having said all that, there is not a single feature in the design or construction that attracts me. I prefer the way Ruger designs and builds a rifle and am glad to deal with the trigger - which is exceedingly easy to make the way I like it. That, and the way Ruger backs up their products, I am a happy man.

espalding · « **Reply #15 on:** March 10, 2007, 03:02:45 PM »

I am guessing the lock time is faster on the Tikka!

Cement Man · « **Reply #16 on:** March 10, 2007, 06:20:55 PM »

esaplading,
You bring up an excellent point, although "guessing" just doesn't get it. Lock time is a significant factor in rifle accuracy performance in a dynamic (meaningful) application. Now, lock time should be measurable. So, what are your metrics? What is your optimal range for lock time ? What range is does the Tikka perform at? the Ruger?
Lock time, in my mind, is always better when minimized. Does anybody disagree with that assumption?

Zachary,
With your extensive experience with both Tikka and Ruger, what lock time comparisons are you measuring, (or) estimating between the two brands? I am always interested in data that contributes to accurate analysis and comparison.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #17 on:** March 10, 2007, 06:28:46 PM »

I own several Ruger rifles:

M77 - .257 Roberts
M77 - 7mm Rem MAg
M77 - .30-06
M77 MKII VT - .22-250
M77 MKII - .300 Win Mag

Is there another Ruger in my future? Absolutely. A Tikka? Not at all likely.

Like Cement Man, I agree the Ruger triggers are very easily improved to the point of excellence. Accuracy has never been an issue with my Rugers, I feel the design has classic good looks and the scope mounting system is the best available. The new Hawkeye's seem to be even better. And Ruger has an excellent and well-deserved reputation for supporting their products.

If for no other reason Tikka lost me with the way they handled the stainless barrel issue. It seems to me they were more concerned about keeping the blow-ups quiet than with notifying people who might have owned one of the suspect rifles. In other words they put ther corporate profits ahead of my safety. Contrast that to how Ruger has run ads about free safety upgrades for their revolvers.

That said, there is nothing about the Tikka rifles that excites me. I'll get a Ruger and put the money I save toward a better scope. Tikka wouldn't even be my second choice...

victorcharlie · « **Reply #18 on:** March 11, 2007, 01:00:09 AM »

I had a good look at the Hawkeye yesterday.......It's slimmer in the forearm than the MKII, weighs less, and the trigger is much nicer. It's a nice rifle......

Rev Buck · « **Reply #19 on:** March 11, 2007, 01:52:35 PM »

Most of us know Chuck Hawks is the Ann Coulter of the gunwriter's world. Nobody who writes like that deserves to be taken seriously. No real journalist stoops to insults and name-calling as a cheap substitute for real writing. Having owned and shot centerfiire rifles for more than 40 years, I am neither ignorant nor inexperienced. I have owned Winchesters, Rugers, Savages, Remingtons, etc. and am now a very happy Tikka T3 owner. To each his own, but I must say this one is hard to beat in its price range for overall quality, reliability and accuracy. I like Rugers too but never had one that was accurate out-of-the-box without a bit of work. I'll be watching to see if the new Ruger can run with the Tikka. Blessings, Rev

northern hunter · « **Reply #20 on:** March 11, 2007, 02:54:44 PM »

:)Hey guys,Ruger rifles have been my favorite for alot of years,The mark 1 were the best,and I do love those #1 rifles,have owned 13 over the years.I curently have 2 T3'S,one stainless 3006 and one blue 2506,both rifles will shoot .75 groups at 100 yards,triggers are great and the light weight is great for carring.I dont think they are cheap rifles,the prices are inline with a good product at a good price.
just my 2 cents.

Zachary · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2007, 03:54:24 AM »

Zachary,
With your extensive experience with both Tikka and Ruger, what lock time comparisons are you measuring, (or) estimating between the two brands? I am always interested in data that contributes to accurate analysis and comparison.

I really can't say that I have "extensive" experience with the Ruger, at least not nearly as much as with the Tikka. In my much less experience with the Ruger, I would have to say that the lock time appears to be a bit faster than the Tikka, but not by a significant, if not truly noticeable, difference.

Zachary

SDS-GEN · « **Reply #22 on:** March 12, 2007, 05:54:44 AM »

Just picked up a Hawkeye All Weather in 338 fed. last week. I don't have any experience with tikka's but here's my opinion of the ruger. It is a VERY solid gun, trigger is OK, I really like the bead blasted, dull gray finish, bolt action is not that smooth. Floor plate release is well thought out, I like the built in scope rings. The mauser action is just plain ugly, on any rifle, it is old and could be refined, but it works. Don't know about accuracy because I haven't fired it yet. The trigger has some creep in it. I always figure if I buy a factory rifle under $1000 I will need to dump $50-$200 into it to get it the way I want it, over $1000 I'm looking at a semi-custom gun anyway so wouldn't spend that on a factory hunting rifle. The ruger will get a trigger job at the very least. I haven't weighed the rifle but according to ruger it weighs 7lbs.

Buckfever · « **Reply #23 on:** March 12, 2007, 04:52:09 PM »

I have had an early M-77 in a 7mm. It was a great rifle my nephew uses it now. I have (3) T-3 Tikkas and love them all. However the Hawkeye is available in a 25-06 with a 24" barrel and that sounds real good to me.
Buckfever

Brithunter · « **Reply #24 on:** March 13, 2007, 04:43:02 AM »

Hi All,

Hmmm I make take up this point :-

Quote

If for no other reason Tikka lost me with the way they handled the stainless barrel issue. It seems to me they were more concerned about keeping the blow-ups quiet than with notifying people who might have owned one of the suspect rifles. In other words they put ther corporate profits ahead of my safety. Contrast that to how Ruger has run ads about free safety upgrades for their revolvers.

Ahhh it was Berretta that was the problem

these problems did not occur until Berretta brought Tikka and the T3 is the result. The lack or response is typical of Berretta and the same as they did when their Berretta 92 pistols broke slides some years back

which is one reason I have never supported Berretta with any of my money

.

I have neither Tikka T3 nor Ruger rifles but I have shot both. The T3 shoots OK but does not "light my fire" and I prefer the older models unreservedly

now I very nearly brought a Ruger 77 express in .416 Rigby sevearl years ago but we could not agree the deal. i eneded up with a Ruger No1B in .300 win mag which ahd a Leupld vari X 111 2.5-8 scope on it as that was a great deal

.

I have not even see pictures of this Hawkeye let alone one in real life

So I have no axe to grind with either rifle.