Sako or Tikka


June 6, 2006, 12:47 AM
I was wondering if anyone new the major differences.sako has a 3 lug bolt and different size actions. tikka has 2 lugs and one action. Anything else cant decide what to buy 7MM REM hunting rifle

If you enjoyed reading about "Sako or Tikka" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
June 6, 2006, 01:11 AM
Well since you're looking for a 7mm the "only one action length" thing is a bit moot. The long action will treat you well. The Sako should be a slightly better rifle too bad it doesn't cost slightly more! I've not heard a negative regarding Tikka's other than a fairly lacking aftermarket and pricey magazines. That being said, if the Tikka fits you well you're all set and the bolt action hardly calls for a huge magazine collection to go with it. Personally if I had the money to sink into it I'd be really tempted to go for the Sako as the investment and it's retained value will be better as long as you take care of it. If you're just looking for a good shooting rifle in the proscribed caliber that I'd recommend the humble savage which has delivered submoa precision out of the box. I hope this helps.

June 6, 2006, 02:26 AM
I drool over the Sakos occasionally, but have been VERY happy with my Tikka Stainless / Synthetic T3 in .308. It replaced a Remington 700BDL and has outperformed it consistently. The T3 shoots sub-moa, has great extraction, smooth bolt movement, and handles well.

For under $1000 I was able to purchase the rifle and a Leupold VX-II scope, a very good combination. The Sakos start around $1000 without optics. The fit finishs of the Sako is superior (especially the wooden stocks), plus the trademark 3 lug action. I don't know of other differentiators. If budget is a concern I don't think you could go wrong with the Tikka.

June 6, 2006, 07:10 AM
No argue the Sako's are better guns, but the Tikkas are very close. Go pick both up and you'll see why people love both of them. Better yet shoot them if possible. For the $, the Tikka was plenty good for my tastes. No other gun with in $400 could touch how smooth and accurate the T3 was.

IMO, pick up the T3, and get a better scope with the $.

If you're unlike me and $ is no object, then by all means, pick the Sako.

June 6, 2006, 09:57 AM
It depends on how much you want to spend. The barrels for both guns are made on the machinery in the same factory. Some barrels are stamped "Sako" and the rest are stamped "Tikka". They are the same barrels. So it comes down to the action. Which do you like better? They will have the same action length in the 7mm.
Either one you choose will be a very good rifle - this is one time where you can't choose wrong one.

June 6, 2006, 10:04 AM
I think most people can relate to what I am about to say. If you want to get a SAKO, then don't be fooled thinking you can buy a TIKKA instead to save a little money and be satisfied. Eventually, you'll sell or trade up. They are NOT the same gun.

My experience with SAKO has been long and satisfying.

June 6, 2006, 11:45 AM
Tikka is cheaper, I have eyed the Tactical model of it (Basically a Varmint, with cheek rest and anodized plus picatinny rail). I have a need for off-the-shelf semi-sniper rifle, military style.
But as said, if you have resources for Tikka, then get it, if you can afford Sako then TRG is a gun you'll never regret buying.

June 6, 2006, 01:21 PM
To Hokkmike,
I and alot of hunters would disagree with you saying that Sako is a better rifle.Sure, if You want a rifle you can drag out of the cabinet and TRY to impress your friends go for the sako. they are heavy,and their reputation was built on a very accurate rifle made in the 80s.I have two sakos in my cabinet, one 75 hunter in w/blue and one Hunter , the older one easily out performs the 75.I also have a Tikka,for ease of action ,weight and sheer performance I would take the Tikka every Time.I hunt.

June 6, 2006, 06:13 PM
I have yet to see some one really justify why a Sako is THAT MUCH BETTER than a Tikka?

Not a rip at anyone, but I'd really just like to see some data (or something) to put some substance behind all the claims and better yet the price.

frank c
June 6, 2006, 08:10 PM
I also disagree with hokkmike.I own both the a sako 75 varmint stainless 223 cal.and tikka t3 stainless 308 cal.varmint.IMHO the tikka T3 has the same quality as the sako and shoots MOA just as well.My bolt action is smoother on the Tikka verses the sako,go figure?I paid about $500 more for the sako.;) Both are very nice rifles.frank c.

June 6, 2006, 11:57 PM
thanks any data on a 3 lug bolt is it worth the extra $500

June 7, 2006, 08:27 AM
they are heavy,and their reputation was built on a very accurate rifle made in the 80s.I have two sakos in my cabinet, one 75 hunter in w/blue and one Hunter , the older one easily out performs the 75.I also have a Tikka,for ease of action ,weight and sheer performance I would take the Tikka every Time.I hunt.

Depends on what you get. I have a 75 Hunter that is heavy, but I don't want to shoot a light .338. OTOH, I have a Finnlight in .308 that is only 6.5 pounds. I have been very pleased with both and the .308 is my favorite hunting gun. I don't own a Tikka, so I can't compare.

As for price, there is no way you should pay over a $1000. If you shop around, you should be able to find them for less.

June 8, 2006, 01:17 AM

June 8, 2006, 12:31 PM
You can try or Prices have gone up considerably in the last 2-3 years, but you can still find a few places that have them for under a 1000.

June 8, 2006, 01:05 PM
If one rifle costs $600 and another costs $1200, just because the second rifle costs twice as much as the first, it will usual not be twice the quality. Typically, the higher the price, the less quality each extra dollar will buy. Also, many times these extra dollars will buy improvements that we cannot see. Many, many times these dollars will buy improvements that we cannot use because we just are not good enough shots, or we just don’t put in the range time to find that “perfect load” that will help wring out that little extra that we paid for. That said, I love my TRG 22, but I know that it can shoot better than I can, but for me that’s a confidence builder… I know that as long as I do my part, the rifle will always do its part.;)

June 9, 2006, 12:20 AM
In addition to different action lengths, different number of bolts, different mags, and different bolt lifts, the Sako 75 is controlled round feed.
To me, that doesn't mean a whole lot.

I'm with many of the others on in this thread. I chose a T3 Lite in 308 and put a scope on it for less than a Sako 75 without scope.
It's a kick butt gun. It's 7 lbs with scope and is a consistent 0.5 MOA gun.

$500 is a little too much for this poor state employee to pay for prettier metal, an extra lug, and controlled round feeding.

BTW, one neat thing about the one action length of the T3 is the bolt stop.
I modified mine to allow the bolt to travel rearwards by another 1/4 inch.
I cut out the spacer in the magazine and did a little bit more work to the mag.
Now I can load long bullets and seat them out far and still be able to run the rounds through the mag.

June 9, 2006, 12:31 AM
.... the Sako 75 is controlled round feed.
No, it is not.

The recently introduced Sako 85 is a CRF action, but not the 75.

And, apropos to the original topic, The Sako 75 is by a good margin my favorite pick for the best bolt action ever. The Tikka, of which I have none, would be second. I really like the Sako 75s.

June 9, 2006, 09:11 AM
I'll try to keep this short. The Sakos that I have bought and sold were the AIII, AV, and the L61R. Calibers 7mm and 30-06. The Finnbear Deluxe model is a sporter model with standard contour barrel. No real weight difference among most guns. The AIII and AV were Sako Deluxe models and they do have a heavier barrel. They all hit where they aim, period.

The biggest difference you will notice between the Sako Deluxe AV or AIII and a Tikka is the weight, the design of the stock, and the fit. My Sako Deluxe 7mm kicked less than a 270 for sure. It fit me extremely well (I'm not large) and the stock is designed to deflect recoil. I'm sure the added barrel weight helped slow er down, but the stock is excellent. I sold it for one reason. The weight. Scoped, it was about 9.5 pounds. A bigger fella might not mind that. It's true that the recoil was smooth, but that's mostly a benefit at the range (where one can apply other recoil smoothing techniques). When I was 12, I fired my dad's lightweight 30-06 at deer and don't ever recall flinching in the field. Only at the range.

Actually, there is another major difference. The older Sakos are beautiful rifles. And life is too short to hunt with an ugly gun!

June 9, 2006, 09:47 AM
ojr and Frank C.....I hear your disagreement. I think that this is one of the things that makes the shooting sports so great. I enjoy discussing difference preferences of gun brands, calibers, etc. I will still argue as to the superior quality of SAKO over TIKKA. I have handled and shot both. I do have an advantage of 30 years or more in the field. I have NEVER had a rifle as accurate as my 6.5 X 55 SAKO Hunter. Never. I reason that it is the same, for illustrative purposes, as the difference as between a Toyota and a Lexus. are right on about weight. My Hunter with scope approaches a heavy 9 pounds. My SAKO Finnlight, on the other hand is around 7.5 pounds. Considerably lighter. A perfect weight to carry all week. To be honest I really didn't factor in weight as a quality factor.

The last argument in this comes from SAKO themselves. They put their name on their top of the line stuff. Lesser technical features, added decorative features, wood choices, craftsmanship, etc., goes into to their "economy" line -TIKKA. TIKKA is still a great rifle but they are not SAKO's.

I would buy and shoot a TIKKA any day of the week. They are not mere clones.

June 9, 2006, 11:59 AM
Hokkmike. 6.5x55 is my next purchase. I have one in Ruge, but am also considering the Sako. I found an L691, but it has that heavier barrel 9 3/4 pounds scoped. The price was $900 and it was beautiful. I just sold an AIII in 7mm. Great gun, fired only 6 rounds. But it was just too heavy to carry.

What is the scope weight of your 6.5x55 Sako 75?

June 9, 2006, 04:21 PM
I'd say go with the Tikka....I've got two, one in synthetic .308, and one in walnut .270 WSM.... when I picked up the .270 WSM at the dealer, I nearly passed out...the wood is immaculate....fine looking gun....go with the TIkka, you never know what you may get

June 10, 2006, 01:07 AM
nice rifle

June 10, 2006, 06:58 AM
Yes, I like the tiger stripes.

June 11, 2006, 01:22 AM
I need to look more into sakos options

June 12, 2006, 09:32 AM
It's a win-win either way you go. Both are great rifles. There remains little proof that the Tikka is that much less of a rifle. Sako's just the the better dresser.

The Real Hawkeye
June 12, 2006, 09:41 AM
They are probably equally accurate, but the Sako will retain its value better. I've also heard tell of Tikka bolt handles breaking off with normal use. I would think this would be less likely with a Sako, and I've never heard of that heppening with a Sako. I have one of each, and the quality of the Sako appears superior. Mine are equally accurate, though, for their chamberings. I have a Sako in .243 and a Tikka in .338 Win Mag.

June 12, 2006, 11:35 AM
i just wonder if the 3 lug bolt and longer action would make a difference. One other think the sako has 5 shot under an inch guaranty tikka 3 inch:uhoh:

June 12, 2006, 11:12 PM
And does anybody have trouble fitting there fingers in a tikkas small action when loading big cals

June 14, 2006, 10:55 PM
do ya

June 15, 2006, 05:21 PM
also has a under one inch guarantee. Do you mean that it is three shots, and not five?

pete f
June 15, 2006, 08:01 PM
Single most accurate out of the box rifle i have ever seen was a varmint 75 in 6 ppc. With good conditions and a top notch scope. ( I think it was a US optics, but a long while ago.) a 3/8 inch group with that rifle meant you had pulled one. the man who owned it was offered LOTS of money for it several times and he just smiled and said no.

I have seen two tickka's with split barrels was a recall on them, not sure about what else but that would shy me away till i knew whole story.

June 15, 2006, 11:07 PM
I was told they fixed that

June 16, 2006, 01:46 AM
That problem has been fixed as it was 3 years ago. Many of the rifles were still in dealers inventory and the registered owners were notified of the recall. The problem only involved the stainless steel models.

June 17, 2006, 12:02 AM
i talked to a tech rep he told me the owners were shooting to hot of a reload that the rifle never had a problem

June 24, 2006, 04:17 PM
more responses please. anybody know which sakos have a flutted barrels

June 26, 2006, 09:15 AM
The Sako Finnlight has a fluted barrel. I am not sure what others do, but you might check the Beretta ( website.

June 26, 2006, 12:43 PM
unable to see the flutes on the site

June 26, 2006, 01:20 PM
Sako and Tika share components and barrels as evidenced by the reports of the recall of Sako and Tika rifles after they began to go Kaboom.

IMO were both better firearms until Beretta bought the companies and made changes. Read the stories of how owners were treated regarding the Kaboom issues and then decide. A used 80's action Sako would be a great rifle to buy if you are set on a Sako / Tika firearm.

If you enjoyed reading about "Sako or Tikka" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!