Author Topic: Hate to brag, Tikka, but here goes (Read 1277 times)

RWH24 · « **on:** June 19, 2003, 05:50:15 PM »

Last night at the range, a Tact pardner and I were shooting his new Sako Stain/Syn 25/06. It shoots very good for me, hurt his feelings a little cause it didn't shoot as good for him. We were breaking in the barrel while sighting it in. My Tikka Blu/syn 243 has a smoother bolt that his Sako. Maybe stainless ruffness, three lug vs two lug Tikka??? Don't know but he also knows my Tikka is smoother, cause I told him so! And at half to price!!! Gotta Love Em!
Don't care for the feel of the stocks of the T-3's, wood or synthetic, just My opinion. They are also light weight, but for someone who wants a "Mountain Rifle" or a Lite toter the T-3 fits that nich.

Randy
:wink:

Zachary · « **Reply #1 on:** June 20, 2003, 06:06:43 AM »

You know, it's interesting you say that, because I have spoken with many gunsmiths and I would say that about half of them, which is a lot in my opinion, also say that the Tikka is a better gun for half the price! :grin:

Zachary

JACKNZ · « **Reply #2 on:** July 25, 2003, 05:49:38 PM »

Which is kind of funny since both rifles are made by the same folks.You guys are geting ripped off.In NZ they are both around the same price.

Zachary · « **Reply #3 on:** July 26, 2003, 04:19:47 AM »

But are the Tikkas and Sakos here in the US the exact same as they are there in NZ? In the US, granted the barrels are the same, but the Tikkas have quite a bit of plastic parts where as the Sakos are all metal. Also the Tikkas are around 500 USD whereas the Sakos are around 1000 USD.

How does this compare with NZ?

Zachary

eroyd · « **Reply #4 on:** July 26, 2003, 04:46:02 AM »

I can't imagine Tikka's and Sako's are the same price. I own both. Both have excellent barrels, actions and triggers but that's where it ends for the Tikka where they've gone to less expensive cast plastic parts.

Omaha-BeenGlockin · « **Reply #5 on:** July 26, 2003, 05:37:17 AM »

I'm guessing the cost in NZ is probably twice the retail cost in the US---for either Tikka or Sako----Who's getting ripped off?

Come on---get real.

I also don't see what the problem with plastic parts is---as long as they are functional and reliable---What's the problem? My Glock pistol is basically indestructable with a large percentage of plastic parts------its a functional--reliable---world class pistol. Again---what's the problem?

Moose-Hunter · « **Reply #6 on:** July 26, 2003, 10:54:27 AM »

Real rifles don't wear plastic. :grin:

Zachary · « **Reply #7 on:** July 26, 2003, 11:30:52 AM »

Actually, other than the mere thought of the trigger guard, bolt shroud, and DM being plastic, it really doesn't bother me. It sure as heck outshoots most of my other rifles that have metal counterparts. :grin:

My only concern is (if this is ever likely) is if the gun drops and the trigger guard, et. al., breaks. Then what would I do with an exposed trigger? Again, this is probably more hypothetical than anything else - I hope.

Zachary

Lawdog · « **Reply #8 on:** July 26, 2003, 12:48:10 PM »

Moose-Hunter,

Quote

Real rifles don't wear plastic. :grin:

Does that include stocks?

Lawdog

JACKNZ · « **Reply #9 on:** July 26, 2003, 02:10:10 PM »

Yes you are right in NZ rifles are more exspensive than in the USA but then our doller is worth less than the US doller,on an avrage I get payed almost twise as much as a US steel worker,The industry I work in,so it evens out.A SAKO will cost around $2000 while a TIKA of the same type
will cost around $1800, not a big difference.In NZ the SAKO is the most
popular rifle of its type by a long shot,#2 is Remington.The TIKA altho
it is a wonderfull rifle has never sold as well as SAKO or Remington,This
is probably because of the plastic bolt sleve.Because NZ has no hunting
seasons,Rilfes get a lot of use and most of that use is in wet,cold,snow,ect.SAKO has been the rifle that all others are measured against,TIKA has always had its fans,even before the plastic sleve but why bother when for a couple of hundred bucks you can have a SAKO.
My own SAKO is the A1 Carbine in .308.I payed $800 for it in 1978 and would not part with it for any price.In NZ most folks look at their rifles as a tool for a job and that is why SAKO is so popular.Why buy the little brother when you can have the real thing.And why buy TIKA when you have Remington.After all when did TIKA ever win anything that Remington
hasn,t already won a doz, times.HAVE FUN GUYS,,JACK.

longwinters · « **Reply #10 on:** July 26, 2003, 04:11:03 PM »

Yes Tikka has . . . my respect :lol: :lol:

Weatherby223 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 27, 2003, 02:59:01 AM »

I WISH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wish the Sako 75 was as cheap as the Tikka here in Oz! I would have one by now. I am saving my Pennies for the Sako. I do agree that the Sako is better built than the Tikka but is it enough to warrant the price!

vmaxx · « **Reply #12 on:** July 28, 2003, 07:51:11 AM »

Remington's barely have an extractor compared to Sako. I have yet to see one that has not worked loose atleast some but you can get a sako style extractor put on them. Then you may have a good rifle. Its my biggest pet peave with Reminton. I guess thats why their cheep cause they are cheep.