Tikka Hunter vs Forest and 260 vs 6.5x55

[Olympus]

Tikka Forest and Savage are the same price. Never seen many Savages that weren't dead nuts accurate. Never seen a Tikka.

 

[rbernie]

If the actions are the same, the 260 loses that advantage over the 6.5x55.

I think that, for a long action receiver, the 6.5x55 Swede makes more sense and is probably going to be an easier chambering for which to find factory loadings for a while yet.

 

[Float Pilot]

From my handloading log book.

Model 70 featherweight 22 inch barrel 6.5x55mm
140gr Hornady SST,
46.5gr IMR-4831,
ww,ww, 2.995 col
=2,700 fps and a 0.75 inch group,

Remington Model 7, 22 inch barrel, 260 Remington
140 grain Hornady SST
44.0 grains IMR 4831
CCI-200
Rem Brass
2.78 COL
= 2685 fps and a 0.85 inch group.

Potato ------Po-tot-oh.......

 

[cdb1]

All Tikka's are long actions. I do prefer a Monte Carlo stock for the cheek weld, YMMV. Don't own a Tikka. I've had three shoulder operations and Tikka's are very light, not a good mix. If not for that there is a good chance I'd own a Tikka. They come with an accuracy guarantee, Savage doesn't though they tend to be very accurate. Quality wise I would rate a high end Savage, say their American Classic with Tikka. I much prefer the Tikka trigger over the Accu-Trigger though that is just a personal thing.

Ammunition wise 6.5x55 is more available where I live by a large margin and usually less expensive. If you reload, you can push a 6.5x55 faster because of the larger capacity case.

I have a CZ 550 American 6.5x55 and it is my favorite rifle. The felt recoil to me is closer to a .243 than a .270 in comparable weight rifles, which is important to me because of my aforementioned shoulder issues. If I needed to shoot a heavier spitzer bullet than 140 grains, I would get a 7mm-08 or 7x57. For me they don't recoil as much as similar calibers. Since I reload I'd get a 7x57, if I didn't I'd get a 07mm-08.