Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: Old vs New

  1. #1

    Old vs New

    Everyone seems to say that the old rifles are better than the new e.g. Tikka 595 are better than the T3.

    How many people actually believe this or do you like me think it is more to do with the fact that they aren't mainstream any more and therefore harder to get. How many people have actually had any sort of problem with say a T3?

    You are seeing more and more T3's as the base for custom rifles now and people seem to rate them, this would obviously not be the case if they were as bad as some people seem to think.

    I have a .22-250 M595 but that is more from the point of view of that was what was around when i was getting my rifle than anything else. I had no idea what i was actually getting. It has never missed a beat and is as accurate as hell but i am under no impression that a new version would be less accurate.

  2. #2
    Between the 595 / 695 generation of Tikka and the T3, the difference is that the T3 cuts manufacturing costs by only having one action size, one stock size, one magazine size, one bolt size with a few faces., and uses aluminum where the strength of steel is not needed. I think they are all equal in quality. The older ones just feel more solid, and heavier.

  3. #3
    nobody denies they are accurate (newer models t3, etc)

    thats not the bit that I find better about older rifles
    I have an older Tikka (never remember the number but think its 658 or something)

    all metal except the bolt collar
    metal mag etc
    impeccable wood
    proper fixings
    feels very well made

    not a fan of plastic as an engineering material

  4. #4
    Dan, When i first got my ticket i looked at the 595 in wood and the new tikka plastic fantastic, probably listened to a few people moaning about dinks in the wood either through dropping or misuse and i thought no thats not for me so i got the tikka t3 lite in plastic fantastic and i dare say i still enjoy using it. My friend uses the 595 and it does feel more solid but don't think there is any difference in accuracy... maybe just our eyesite. The only bit that gets on me nerve is the safety as i fecked me fingers a few year ago but thats just me.

  5. #5
    Some "improvements" on certain newer rifles would be an absolute no go for me, such as barrels that cannot be changed.
    Plastic bottom metal for example on the T3 sounds like rubbish however works really well as well as the plastic mag. The plastic shroud on the T3 is rubbish and most break soon. T3 action is a good base for a very light rifle.
    I have old and new remmy 700 actions, didn't notice that older ones were better. Older Sako actions seemed of lower quality than 80-90's era.

    No rifle is perfect, in the past or present. We will have to get used to new materials and they often have there benefits. Nobody is building large passenger Airplanes of wood anymore, even for structural parts modern fibres and composites replace metals to improve performance.
    We now have the potential to build better rifles than ever before. In many cases the goal of the rifle builder or company might be more concentrated on short term profits rather than a safe and efficient product.


  6. #6
    I started with T3s - in .243 and .222.

    They are solid, workaday rifles. Accurate and reliable.

    I recently sold them and got Sako 75s. I did not NEED to do this, but wanted to, for a few reasons:

    1. I'm not enthusiastic about the plastic bolt shroud on the T3.
    2. I don't like the magazine on the T3, and like being able to top load with the 75 (and like the extra magazine capacity).
    3. I REALLY like having a true small action for the .222.
    4. I prefer the steel bottom metal.
    5. I much prefer the stock design, aesthetics and balance of the 75.

    In terms of actual functionality, the Sako 75 in .243 is marginally more accurate than the T3 was, but only with lighter bullets (90gr and lighter) - it will not group 100gr at all (while the T3 did, but not as well as the 75 groups 90grs). The 75 in .222 is marginally more accurate than the T3 was with 55gr. However, the accuracy gains are small enough as to make no meaningful difference at normal stalking ranges.

    However, if I had never joined SD and was less of a sucker for advertising and all that nonsense, I'm sure I'd still be happily using my T3s without a care in the world!

  7. #7
    Sticking with the Tikka theme, I think the saying of the "M" series was built to a specification and the "T" series was built to a price sort of rings true, both do the same job however the M types are much smoother actions in my opinion

  8. #8
    All rifles have their stronger and weaker points. Some rifles offer a large amount of aftermarket products others don't. I would prefer a rifle, old or new that has a more options to optimise or customise.
    For example the T3 has a good range of aftermarket products that are not available for Sako or older Tikka rifles.
    A fairly new product for the T3 is the 3 position firing pin safety (left or right) from ASH. works similar to Mauser 98 or AI safeties.

    Another bonus for a T3 is, if done right one can use any T3 action to bed a stock and fit a different T3. The actions seem to be manufactured to a tight tolerance and the recoil lug arrangement suitable. Vs. say a Remington recoil lug. Of course one would only bed the action no part of the barrel and use an aftermarket hardened stainless recoil lug.
    So, overall for me the T3 wins over older Tikka and over all Sako rifles.


  9. #9
    For me I find the tikka t3 is sloppy, I hate the long action for small calibres and the plastic stocks,plastic we know is creeping into more and more rifles build up,

    I have a old tikka and a older sako action, and a cz for stalking, and to me I'd rather have a cz 550 than any t3, but that's just me,

    WARNING: LUPUS IS A KILLER, lets support them in the need to find out what it is, what causes it and how do we defeat it. Donating to LUPUS UK | LUPUS UK

    Living with Lupus - YouTube

  10. #10
    The nice thing about CZ is that they have a small action for the .222, .223, .22 Hornet and 7.62x39, with rifles as carbines, American style, German style with long barrel and nice open sights, or Stutzen.

    And they shoot very well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts