Tikka vs Sako?
- Thread starter pyscodog
- Start date
Coyotejunki
Well-known member
I only have one Tikka now, had one other last year. I only have the older Sako's, like the L579, AII, 75, and the L61R models. The fit and finish is much nicer on the Sako, and just an all round better built rifle. Hence the price difference. I don't think there is any plastic on my Sakos. The wood on my Sakos are much nicer than the wood on my Tikka also.
SlickerThanSnot
New member
must admit that i cheated. typed tikka vs sako in the bing search bar.
some guy somewhere in cyber land that sounded like maybe he was not drunk wrote this on a shooting forum. his forum name was rifledude. surely he knows what he is talking about.
"1. The Sako receiver requires more machine work due to more complex contours and therefore more time to finish. Time = money. The Tikka receiver is geometrically simpler and doesn't require as many machining operations.
2. Tikka has a lot of plastic, and Sako doesn't.
3. Tikka bolt is simpler and easier / less expensive to make.
4. Tikka has a relatively inexpensive molded stock. Sako wood stocks are quite a bit more expensive, and Sako synthetic stocks are a bit higher quality as well.
5. Sako has a bit better finish quality.
6. Sako has more options, and any product line with more options means smaller production runs for each set of options, which drives up cost.
7. Along with the various model options, Sako has multiple action lengths scaled to the family of cartridges they are designed for. Tikka only has one action length.
some guy somewhere in cyber land that sounded like maybe he was not drunk wrote this on a shooting forum. his forum name was rifledude. surely he knows what he is talking about.
"1. The Sako receiver requires more machine work due to more complex contours and therefore more time to finish. Time = money. The Tikka receiver is geometrically simpler and doesn't require as many machining operations.
2. Tikka has a lot of plastic, and Sako doesn't.
3. Tikka bolt is simpler and easier / less expensive to make.
4. Tikka has a relatively inexpensive molded stock. Sako wood stocks are quite a bit more expensive, and Sako synthetic stocks are a bit higher quality as well.
5. Sako has a bit better finish quality.
6. Sako has more options, and any product line with more options means smaller production runs for each set of options, which drives up cost.
7. Along with the various model options, Sako has multiple action lengths scaled to the family of cartridges they are designed for. Tikka only has one action length.
tripod3
New member
Originally Posted By: pyscodogI'm told,the barrels are made on the same machines, so what are the major differences between the two rifles?
Price!
Tikka-3 shot 1" guarantee, two lug bolt push feed, two position safety, single stack copolymer removable mag, adj trigger, weaver style ring or picatinny rail or sako optilok., exchangeable palm grip for fiberglass copolymer stock. Several wood and laminate stock configurations.
Sako-5 shot 1" guarantee, 3 lug bolt CRF, 3 function safety, double stack metal removeable magazine, magazine safety latch, adj trigger 2-4 lbs, dovetail ring mounts accepting sako optilok and a few aftermarket, Many wood, laminate, polymer and carbon fiber stocks.
Just off the top of my head, seems like I always forget something but they both work well and the T3 is not that old with new improvements for the X model just last year.
Price!
Tikka-3 shot 1" guarantee, two lug bolt push feed, two position safety, single stack copolymer removable mag, adj trigger, weaver style ring or picatinny rail or sako optilok., exchangeable palm grip for fiberglass copolymer stock. Several wood and laminate stock configurations.
Sako-5 shot 1" guarantee, 3 lug bolt CRF, 3 function safety, double stack metal removeable magazine, magazine safety latch, adj trigger 2-4 lbs, dovetail ring mounts accepting sako optilok and a few aftermarket, Many wood, laminate, polymer and carbon fiber stocks.
Just off the top of my head, seems like I always forget something but they both work well and the T3 is not that old with new improvements for the X model just last year.
SlickerThanSnot
New member
Originally Posted By: RePeteOriginally Posted By: pyscodog I have the T3 and the bolt feels like its on bearings
When a bolt is two feet long it has to be smooth.
The difference is night and day IMO.
owned a few short action cz rifles. the bolts felt like bearing would of been a huge benefit.
the difference between long action tikkas and short action cz's is night and day imo.
When a bolt is two feet long it has to be smooth.
The difference is night and day IMO.
owned a few short action cz rifles. the bolts felt like bearing would of been a huge benefit.
the difference between long action tikkas and short action cz's is night and day imo.
Originally Posted By: SlickerThanSnotOriginally Posted By: RePeteOriginally Posted By: pyscodog I have the T3 and the bolt feels like its on bearings
When a bolt is two feet long it has to be smooth.
The difference is night and day IMO.
owned a few short action cz rifles. the bolts felt like bearing would of been a huge benefit.
the difference between long action tikkas and short action cz's is night and day imo.
Have to agree on this for sure!!
When a bolt is two feet long it has to be smooth.
The difference is night and day IMO.
owned a few short action cz rifles. the bolts felt like bearing would of been a huge benefit.
the difference between long action tikkas and short action cz's is night and day imo.
Have to agree on this for sure!!
Winny Fan
New member
Of the three, this is my order of preference based on my definition of quality:
1. Sako - hands down in all ways.
2. Tikka - a good buy even with its warts visible. And most of the more discussed warts aren't near as bad as some like to define them.
3. CZ - Would be acceptable to me only without the frigging drop down removable magazine. Some people call the CZ action a "Mauser" because it's a CRF action. The man whose name was Peter Paul Mauser who designed the CRF internal magazine rifle would puke at seeing a CZ called a mini "Mauser". His crowning achievement in rifle design in his own words was the internal staggered box magazine.
1. Sako - hands down in all ways.
2. Tikka - a good buy even with its warts visible. And most of the more discussed warts aren't near as bad as some like to define them.
3. CZ - Would be acceptable to me only without the frigging drop down removable magazine. Some people call the CZ action a "Mauser" because it's a CRF action. The man whose name was Peter Paul Mauser who designed the CRF internal magazine rifle would puke at seeing a CZ called a mini "Mauser". His crowning achievement in rifle design in his own words was the internal staggered box magazine.
SlickerThanSnot
New member
Originally Posted By: Winny FanTikka - a good buy even with its warts visible. And most of the more discussed warts aren't near as bad as some like to define them.
there it is in a nutshell.
there it is in a nutshell.
Long action or not, they work and work very well. Ya, there's some plastic parts but not where it really matters a lot. The mags are plastic but everyone that has one knows they are tough as boot leather. Bolt shroud is plastic but it can be replaced with a metal one for a few bucks if it really bothers you. Stock is plastic but its probably one of the better tupperware stocks on factory guns and Tikka has one of the best triggers on any rifle. Accuracy is usually very good to excellent. Like Winny said, most of the warts aren't near as bad as people want to make them out.
tripod3
New member
I've owned Tikka's, Sako's, and most of the rest. I still own the Tikka/Sako's.
The Tikka T3 is only about a decade old and has already gone through improvements making a great rifle even better and has gone from zero to a very popular rifle around the world.
No worries about functioning or performing here.
No sanding, filing, or bending parts required. No high mount scopes, and no backward training safeties.
Nit pickers don't gain much ground on Tikka's because they perform and are constantly being compared to rifles costing twice as much and winning.
Under one of the oldest companies in the world(over 500 years)they have come up with an entry level rifle that simply works.
The Tikka T3 is only about a decade old and has already gone through improvements making a great rifle even better and has gone from zero to a very popular rifle around the world.
No worries about functioning or performing here.
No sanding, filing, or bending parts required. No high mount scopes, and no backward training safeties.
Nit pickers don't gain much ground on Tikka's because they perform and are constantly being compared to rifles costing twice as much and winning.
Under one of the oldest companies in the world(over 500 years)they have come up with an entry level rifle that simply works.
Winny Fan
New member
Originally Posted By: pyscodogLong action or not, they work and work very well. Ya, there's some plastic parts but not where it really matters a lot. The mags are plastic but everyone that has one knows they are tough as boot leather. Bolt shroud is plastic but it can be replaced with a metal one for a few bucks if it really bothers you. Stock is plastic but its probably one of the better tupperware stocks on factory guns and Tikka has one of the best triggers on any rifle. Accuracy is usually very good to excellent. Like Winny said, most of the warts aren't near as bad as people want to make them out.
On the T-3 Lite, the once-plastic bolt shroud is actually aluminum, and even though they still have plastic magazines and trigger guards, they are both made from a very tough delrin plastic derivative which holds up very well in most hunting situations. According to Wiki, it is an engineering thermoplastic used in precision parts requiring high stiffness, low friction, and excellent dimensional stability with no possible adverse effects to its stability and stiffness until you hit consistent temperatures below -40 degrees F.
On the T-3 Lite, the once-plastic bolt shroud is actually aluminum, and even though they still have plastic magazines and trigger guards, they are both made from a very tough delrin plastic derivative which holds up very well in most hunting situations. According to Wiki, it is an engineering thermoplastic used in precision parts requiring high stiffness, low friction, and excellent dimensional stability with no possible adverse effects to its stability and stiffness until you hit consistent temperatures below -40 degrees F.
Winny Fan
New member
Originally Posted By: tripod3I've owned Tikka's, Sako's, and most of the rest. I still own the Tikka/Sako's.
The Tikka T3 is only about a decade old and has already gone through improvements making a great rifle even better and has gone from zero to a very popular rifle around the world.
No worries about functioning or performing here.
No sanding, filing, or bending parts required. No high mount scopes, and no backward training safeties.
Nit pickers don't gain much ground on Tikka's because they perform and are constantly being compared to rifles costing twice as much and winning.
Under one of the oldest companies in the world(over 500 years)they have come up with an entry level rifle that simply works.
The Tikka T-3 actually replaced the far earlier Tikka Model 595 (short action) and the Tikka Model 695 (long action) bolt action rifles. The 595 and the 695 had both been around for years before the T-3 was marketed. And they were widely used by a lot of serious hunters.
The biggest difference between them and the T-3 is the one length action on the T-3 and T-3 Lite variants.
The Tikka T3 is only about a decade old and has already gone through improvements making a great rifle even better and has gone from zero to a very popular rifle around the world.
No worries about functioning or performing here.
No sanding, filing, or bending parts required. No high mount scopes, and no backward training safeties.
Nit pickers don't gain much ground on Tikka's because they perform and are constantly being compared to rifles costing twice as much and winning.
Under one of the oldest companies in the world(over 500 years)they have come up with an entry level rifle that simply works.
The Tikka T-3 actually replaced the far earlier Tikka Model 595 (short action) and the Tikka Model 695 (long action) bolt action rifles. The 595 and the 695 had both been around for years before the T-3 was marketed. And they were widely used by a lot of serious hunters.
The biggest difference between them and the T-3 is the one length action on the T-3 and T-3 Lite variants.
savageyote94
New member
Hmm ive wondered about tikka myself. Might have to go out and get me one of those!
I bought a used T3 stainless in 243 from a local pawn shop. Took it home and cleaned it although it was in pretty good shape and looked clean, thats just standard procedure for me. Mounted a scope then went to Wally World and bought a box of Win 100 grain SP just to get the scope dialed in and just shoot the rifle. Results weren't very good. It did make me wonder???? So, cleaned it up again and this time loaded some 80 grain Noslers and a stiff load of Varget. Well, typical Tikka performance, 5 shots at a hundred you could cover with a nickle and have some change left over. I did lighten the trigger and it breaks like glass at about 1 1/2 pounds. It will get hunted this season then I plan on replacing the factory rings and either have the stock hydro dipped or replace it with a B&C stock.