Is that not what the other posts have been?
T3 why do folk like them?
- Thread starter Ranger22
- Start date
Roestalker39
Well-Known Member
I have a t3 ( which to be Honest has become the bro in laws rifle ) and a sako 591 in 7 mm the sako is by far my favourite but the tikka has been a good workhorse for the last few years only thing I’m not too keen on is the protruding mag
Ranger22
Well-Known Member
Don’t think I’ve been shot down, folk just have differing opinions from me. Of course they are wrong though!!
Ranger22
Well-Known Member
Yep, others opinions.
I had to laugh though, have I ever used a Remington 700? Obviously the poster doesn’t read all the threads just jumps in, typical SD.
Triggermortis
Well-Known Member
Ranger22
Well-Known Member
I’d struggle, didn’t have a camera phone back then
Ranger22
Well-Known Member
I’d struggle, didn’t have a camera phone back then
If someone wants to shoot a Rem 700 sps, so be it , if one does not know any better just learn to use it. I have shot with a sps before, have plenty take off sps stocks lying around. No matter what one say's on an average the sps stock is not a good stock, neither material nor design or shape. The Rem 700 is normally not a bad rifle apart from the trigger and the sometimes unreliable drop plate feeding.
T3 has a slightly better material in the plastic stock but the shape is also not great, T3 has a great trigger and generally more reliable mag with the option a mil spec/mil tested CTR magazine.
No matter which way one looks at it, injection moulded Polyprop based materials act like wood, are not good when being compressed by action screws meaning from a start you have built on "sand".....
If using a rifle professionally why buy the cheapest hobby rifle instead of something made for the job? What is the big issue with adding aftermarket bits to a rifle, or customising a rifle? This is done world wide to adapt rifles to the job ahead. You have to start with mounts and scope anyway... nothing unusual.
A Remington 700 just like a T3 or any other rifle can be a very good if the bad bits are removed and replaced with properly engineered parts.
edi
T3 has a slightly better material in the plastic stock but the shape is also not great, T3 has a great trigger and generally more reliable mag with the option a mil spec/mil tested CTR magazine.
No matter which way one looks at it, injection moulded Polyprop based materials act like wood, are not good when being compressed by action screws meaning from a start you have built on "sand".....
If using a rifle professionally why buy the cheapest hobby rifle instead of something made for the job? What is the big issue with adding aftermarket bits to a rifle, or customising a rifle? This is done world wide to adapt rifles to the job ahead. You have to start with mounts and scope anyway... nothing unusual.
A Remington 700 just like a T3 or any other rifle can be a very good if the bad bits are removed and replaced with properly engineered parts.
edi
G1963
Well-Known Member
Love my Tikkas have now changed my 243 to a T3 Hunter
Not allowed to retro fit /customise anything on rifles. Someone in office says, they know best. I find the further away from the shop floor someone is the more effect their decisions have to the detriment of the people on the shop floor. Remington 700 sps 10 years use thousands of shots fired cost new 680 could get 250 for action, trigger, bottom metal etc so cost per deer would be pennies. Tikka t3 would prob be in the same ball park but the big difference is that shooting is partially a state of mind. Your mind will be better if you shoot with something you want to use.
Ranger22
Well-Known Member
Ok, I have used far more expensive rifles than Remington. Sauer 202, Sako 75 and 85, Blaser, occasionally none of them have done the job any better than the Remington. The 202 was done after 2 years, the 85 was nothing but problems ( replaced 2 times and “repaired once”. The 75 was the best out of the bunch but still didn’t do anything better than the Remington.
I have no problem with aftermarket parts, the organisation I work for do.
I understand and yes some more expensive rifles are just more expensive because of the Gucci effect. As suppliers we were once asked to quote for "good looking... quality or strength does not matter". One must find the difference between Gucci and Pro. Rem 700 as well as T3 are also used for military/police force with some parts changed, I'd trust them more than a fancy 202.
We supply quite a few things to guys working in the forestry or those who supply rifles for professional use in deer culling in the UK. Seems not all organisations work after the same methods.
edi
Patient: "Hey Doc! It hurts every time I to this"
Doctor: "Then stop doing that."
If you don't like the Tikka get rid of it and save yourself the anguish. ~Muir
You're right, manufacturers should think about what they are making, and I strongly suspect that most of them do get extensive feedback from users and if enough people keep coming up with the same issues, then a good manufacturer will change the product to suit.
If they only get a small number of comments/complaints, then they're unlikely to do anything about it.
If you are one of those few then you have the choice to stick with that product or try something different.
Personally, I think the T3 is a product with few vices and many virtues, and the numbers sold tend to indicate that many people share my views.
My issue with Remington is that they don't listen to their customers.
If they did, the potentially deadly trigger on the 700s would have been fixed years ago.
Cheers
Bruce
Similar threads
