Chuck Hawks rips Tikka a new one

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a friend that had a chance to buy a NIB (and I mean NIB, unwrapped, unfired) A-5 Belgian Browning for $600. I thought it would be the screaming deal of a lifetime. The local dealer (who is older and extremely knowledgable) said the price was about right.

I protested that, a few years ago they were going for 1k+. He agreed, but said that today, most young shooters want something with Parkerized finish and synthetic stocks. Something they don't have to take care of.

Go ahead and build a ton of beautiful walnut stocked rifles with deep blued finish and finely machined actions and try to sell them.

You think S&W and Colt quit making the super fine revolvers with the deep blue because they sold too well?? It's because they cost more than Joe Lunchbucket was willing to pay.

Yeah...the new Rem's and particularly Savages look like crap compared to a nice pre-64 Winchester. Trouble is, they shoot every bit as good or better.
 
I'm not sure that the A-5 has anything to do with the trend you mentioned.

I've only shot one a few times, and I'll have to say it was wierd. Felt like the whole gun was doing the jitterbug in my hands every shot! And the whole bushing thing sounds like a PITA to me, though I haven't done it.

I've seen plenty of new, shiny, walnut and polished blue guns at the shotgun range: Benellis, Berettas, Brownings, Remingtons, SKB's, Winchesters, Perazzis, etc. Many of them are in the hands of younger guys (if they can afford it).

However, even many of the old guys seem to like the well-made (and expensive) plastic and parkerized guns for waterfowl hunting. And young guys with very limited budgets are happy to get a gun that isn't pretty, but functions very well and doesn't rust easily, because it will do the job without sending them to the poorhouse.

The thing about the Auto 5 is that it's just not worth over $1K as a shotgun these days. It's a neat collector piece, and it'll still work, but for $1K or less you can get a really nice gun from many trusted vendors, brand new with warranty, and they'll shoot whatever you feed them from 2.75" to 3.5" with little or no adjustment.
 
While I enjoy Chuck Hawks writing usually, I must respectfully disagree with him on Tikkas. I wrote this a while back for a LE periodical:

here is an article I wrote a while back. It is on another tikka thread but I will cut and paste:

Here is the article with some names ommitted for OPSEC and PERSEC reasons. My partner does UC work and would not appreciate his name on the net.



The Tikka T3
By XXXXXXXX

As a firearms guy I am always eyeballing a new toy or object that I am intrigued by. I generally try to keep up to date on the latest high quality guns coming on to the market. Sometimes it is hard to form an opinion based upon what you read in the commercial gun magazines. Every gun it seems that is featured in a magazine is the latest, greatest thing since smokeless powder.

However it is not very often that a new gun really trips my trigger so to speak. I have grown rather jaundiced and cynical with all the advertisements spouting about the latest “Spec Op” “CQB” “Marine” “Ninja” blaster that only the most elite government and law enforcement agencies are using. Usually they simply have more attachments for accessories that Walter Wannabe has been convinced he must have to be truly “Tactical”. It has been my experience that simple reliable gear works best.

Highly accurate rifles are one area of interest for me. Be they called “sniper” rifles or “tactical” rifles or even “precision” rifles, I don’t care. For me it is all about performance on demand rather than the CDI ( chicks dig it) factor.

One new rifle on the American market that has not gotten a lot of press but I believe soon will is the rifle from the Finnish company Tikka. Tikka rifles are made in the same factory as Sako rifles. Sako has been a well known manufacturer of military, target and sporting rifles for a very long time. Recently I bought a Tikka T3 heavy barrel in 308 Winchester caliber. The factory accuracy guarantee of 3 shots under one inch for their sporting models peaked my interest. You will not get that from Remington or Winchester.

The rifle itself is rather sleek and unusual looking. However I was interested in its performance in the field. I mounted a top of the line Leupold MK 4 6.5x20 on the gun using Burris two piece bases. This is a truly fine piece of glass and it actually costs more than the rifle itself. On that note I have never understood why guys mount a $39 dollar Simmons or Tasco on a $500 rifle and then can’t figure out why their gun just is not up to par.

Anyways, I set out to test my new rifle. I was quite impressed right out of the box. During the barrel break in process I was getting sub .75" groups at 100 yards from the bench. Always a good sign. The more I shot it, the better it got. About this time DetectiveXXX XXX decided he wanted to play with the gun. He spent an afternoon with it and went down to the local Sportsmans Warehouse and ordered an identical one. With a little load development between the two of us, we found a hunting bullet load that would shoot 5 shot groups under a half inch. For those of you that are not into rifles, that is super impressive. We started shooting a lot of 1/4 inch 3 shot groups. Not always of course, but often enough to know it was not a fluke. Suffice to say these guns shoot way beyond their modest price.

The Tikka is rather light weight for a heavy barrel rifle. It tips the scales at only 8 pounds.The stock design, with its raised cheek piece and flat fore end make it a fine field piece. The barrel is an odd 23 and 3/8ths inches. It is fed from a single stack, detachable box magazine that holds five rounds in 308. Overall I was impressed but I still wanted to give a good test.

What better way to test the gun than the NRA Law Enforcement precision rifle (sniper) instructor school. So I took vacation and off to the school I went. Word to the wise, DO NOT go to Mississippi in late spring. Between the bugs, the heat and the horrible humidity it is not pleasant.

Anyways, I was the only guy present not shooting a Remington 308. However everyone shot Leupold scopes. By the end of the week it was apparent that the handling characteristics of the Tikka had much to offer over the Remingtons. The five round detachable box magazine made many of the drills so easy it was like cheating. The light weight of the rifle made many of the snap shooting drills and movement to contact drills a relative breeze. The only negative aspect of the rifle I found was that the ejection port was rather small and hard to get my big fingers in to compared to the Remington 700. My biggest problem was that I was afraid I was going to run out of ammo as most the cadre at the academy wanted to try the gun.

I returned to XX just in time to shoot the XX State Sniper Championships with Detective XX as my partner. The airlines had managed to disassemble my bolt and screw with my gun to the point of temporary inoperability. Fortunately XX brought two guns. One being an identical Tikka 308 with a 4x14 Leupold scope. I knew from previous experience that we shoot pretty close to the same point of impact so only minor adjustments were made for me to use the gun. XX, using the Tikka posted the best 3 shot group out of 50 some odd teams. He shot from the prone at 100 yards and shot about a 1/4 “ group. Not bad considering the caliber of the military and law enforcement teams present. He took home a new MK IV Leupold for his “best three shot group” prize. In the end a third place was earned. We were pleased considering we were shooting against guys with three to five thousand dollar rigs.

In short, the Tikka has a lot to offer for a very modest price tag. One should be able to pick one up from Sportsmans Warehouse for around $700. That is flat out inexpensive for a precision rifle of this quality. After looking at a couple of examples I brought in to one of the local city agencies, they opted for new Tikka 308s for their snipers. A good choice both in terms of performance and budget. So if you are in the market for a long range hunting, competition, or work gun, give one of these a look.

My only gripe is I have spent way too much money building custom guns that cost two to three times as much, only to equal the Tikka in performance.



POST SCRIPT: Since I wrote this, I have purchased 2 other HB Tikkas and Shot extensively a sporter contour in 6.5 Swede. ALL, including the skinny barrel 6.5 will consistently shoot .5 moa or better with careful handloading and match bullets (Sierra MK's or Lapua Scenars).
 
ArmedBear
What Chuck Hawks, old geezer that he may claim to be, seems to have forgotten is how many rifles or shotguns that granddad or even dad bought from Monkey Wards or Sears, often with store brand labels. Some of those were tolerable, some were piles of crap. Precious few of those guns ever show up in store or gun show racks, because they fell apart, rusted under the seat of a farm truck, etc.
Click to expand...
I would have to disagree with this; many of those 'Wards and Sears guns were outstanding pieces - lacking only the spit & polish of high end pieces. An example is some of the Higgins rifles that were put together with commercial FN Mauser actions. The Glenfield 30-30s were (and are) no less servicable than those also made by Marlin carrying the name.

Of course you can not make a silk purse from a sow's ear; there were of course many poor designs marketed going back to the first commercially manufactured guns in the 1800s. But this is a matter of the law of averages; one must take into account the sheer number of designs put on the market over the last one hundred years. Many of those Browning, Whitworth, BRNO, Sako, Steyr, Tikka (to name a fraction of them) sporters made from the 1960s on back lacked nothing in quality of design, materials and fabrication. And few of them will have been literally worn out with use.

I have a Steyr made in 1953 with some finish wear and signs of use - it functions perfectly and really shoots well. Steyr discontinued these rifles and carbines over nothing more than production cost issues in the 1960s. Many of the same guns manufactured going back to the first decade of the 20th century are still going strong.

One of the reasons some of these guns are not seen at shows is probably neglect (neglect a stainless gun and see what happens). However, I would say that one of the main reasons many are not seen for sale is that people are hanging onto them. Sure you can find many online, but most of the sellers are dealers. I see plenty of vintage Steyr, Husqvarna, BRNO, Tikka, Sako (etc) rifles for sale from these sources - but I do not see them on private tables at shows - or the classified ads. The dealers are probably getting many of them at estate sales (the heirs don't shoot), or the surviving spouse takes them to a dealer.

---------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
I've got an old Steyr myself, among other things.:) It's a military gun, but though it lacks a high-polish finish, it's truly perfectly designed and built. Like everything Austrian (but I'm a tad prejudiced).

I'm now even convinced that I ought to buy up some more surplus Yugo Mausers, because even if I spend the price of a good new rifle on a barrel, stock, refinishing, etc., I'll end up with a better rifle than the new one. I'll have to do some work myself, of course, but that's the beauty of a hobby. I don't have to charge myself by the hour.:)

Anyway, the Glenfields were fine, but a brand-spankin'-new Marlin 336 or 1894 can still be had for $334, retail, here in California no less. See this current ad: http://big5sportinggoods.shoplocal....gle&storeid=2504028&rapid=296164&pagenumber=2

I have a VERY high opinion of Marlin's lever guns. They do make 'em like they used to, even the "entry-level" versions. But they're still some of the least-expensive deer rifles you can buy new; only single-shots are priced lower, and not that much lower, without sights at that. So nothing has been lost, there.

I never thought that no old guns were any good. I just think people have selective memories, and I've seen a good few guns that support my assertion. :)
 
I think Chuck is right on target. Manufacturing shotcuts abound in the new rifles. I have shot two different examples of the Tikka T3. One in .270, the other in 30-06. Both were decent rifles, but neither would group less than 2.5 inches. My old FN Mauser in 7mm Ackley shoots rings around them both.
 
I wouldn't say the Tikka T3's feel cheap...compare the action on a T3 to a Remington and you wouldn't say it's cheap. I feel that the Tikka line is one of the best bargains out there in a hunting rifle.
 
Up here in Canada the T3 Lite starts at 700 Cdn or 600 USD for the blued version. They are really nice rifles, but I think they are overpriced for what you are getting. There is more to quality rifles than submoa. If they were selling for 500 -550 Cdn, they would be a better deal.
 
I agree with LAK. I have several "store brand" rifles made by Mossberg for Western Auto and Montgomery Wards. The rifles specifically are the Mossberg 800 short action with 9 locking lugs and the 810 long action with 4 lugs. These were the "cheap rifles" of their day, yet are far better finished than the average rifle today. For instance, I have a Western Field model 732 (810) in 7mm Rem Mag. It is in a walnut stock, has a deep polished blue, has a Williams style flip down rear sight and a ramped front sight, has a hinged floorplate (or detachable mag) a grip cap, jewelled one piece forged bolt, and fully adjustable trigger. It was produced in about 1968 and is far better finished than any rifle you can get at Walmart. What makes it cheap? Impressed checkering and an anodized aluminum triggerguard. That's it. That was a cheap rifle 40 years ago. Folks then would not even consider wasting their time on what we are accustomed to today.

Ash
 
Chuckhawks is also anti shortmag. He did a comparison of 7mm WSM and 7mm Rem Mag and also 300 win mag and 300 WSM. Both showing the standard as superior which is correct. Then he did a comparison of 270 WSM and 270 Weatherby, favoring the Weatherby. I sent him a email asking why he doesn't do a 270 win and 270 WSM comparison. He replied there is nothing to gain on a 270 WSM over a 270 Win ?????? But that is not what the ballastic charts show or reloading manuals.

He does the reviews and comparisons on what he likes, which shows the things he favors. He does not always show all the facts. Take what he says with a grain of salt. If it doesn't favor something he agrees with, then he just won't do it.
 
firearms enthusiast tend to be pretty conservative,

so we love our pre-64 Winchesters, our 98 Mausers and Mannlicher-Schoenauers. That warm oil finish on beautifully figured walnut and mirror polished rust blue finish brings a smile to our face and probably some great memories of long past shooting expeditions.

Fast forward to modern firearms and behold the AUG, the M-16, the Anschutz or Walther aluminum frame smallbore competition guns with short barrels and bloop tubes, the benchrest behemoths, and Barrett 50s. They work for the purpose intended, better than the old ones.

The proof is in the pudding. My T-3 shoots well. It's perfect for use in the real world. I don't care how much it cost to manufacture, so long as it's practical and does what I bought it to do. We'd all like works of art that are amazingly accurate. Very few will or can pay the cost of such gems.

Dakota Arms recently filed for chapter 11 protection. They make beautiful firearms, but most of us can't afford a $3K rifle and would hate to take it afield if we had one. Works of art belong in a gallery for all to enjoy.
 
Well, my great-grandfather bought a sears robuck shotgun around the turn of the (one before last) century. It's seen a lot of use and still works perfectly. That's what I want to leave my (grand)children. Quality. Now, if you just wan't a deer rifle and don't care about passing it on to future generations...
 
If you want to email chuck hawks, try

[email protected]

Be forewarned, he's highly opinionated, to say the least. He's also gotten greedy by putting half of his site on the "pay-to-view" circuit. I once thought highly of the man, but anymore, I couldn't care less what he has to say.
 
We've been duped into accepting lower quality finishes and stocks in the name of "it doesn't matter what it looks like as long as it shoots." There is some truth to that, but we accept blind magazines, cheap wood, cheap finishes just because it's a tool and as long as it shoots, who cares how it looks?

I don't mean wasted money on a Dakota, but it doesn't take $3,000 to get a nice rifle. Again, "cheap rifles" in the 1960's are generally better finished and with more features like good iron sights and better wood than the mid-grade today. Poorer finishes and fitting are defacto price increases. You pay the same price for a lower quality product.

The Remington 870 is not nearly as well finished today than even 10 years ago. Of course, the Mossberg 500 is generally better made now than 10 years go (cut checkering instead of pressed), but that is generally the exception to the rule. I would rather an ugly rifle that shoots than a pretty rifle that does not. However, I'd rather have one that was well finished than one that was not. And, since I can get better finished rifles made in the 1960's for less than new poorer finished rifles, I'll do that. Now, my Mossberg-made Western Field gets about 1.5 MOA, which isn't as good as that Tikka T3, but not that much worse. AND, at half the price and more features, I'll take it any day. I'm a hunter and it'll do all I need. However, I do also have a Savage 110C with a press-checkered walnut stock from the 1960's in .270 which can get below 1 MOA from the bench. It, too, is better made and finished than most rifles today, AND is just as accurate.

Ash
 
synthetic stock (plastic)

short story,
A friend and I went hunting ground squirlls near elko nv., The trip was very sucsessful. If you ever have a chance to go I highly recomend it, not only is it fun but it seasons your shooting skills. Anyway I jumped out of the truck, chevy 1977 3/4 ton, to take a leak. I leaned my ruger 77/22 on the fender behind the front tire. As I was doing my business my friend decided to start the truck, as he pushed in the clutch my rifle fell to the ground and the front passenger tire rolled on top of my gun. I yelled at him to pull forward, as he proceeded forward in 4 weel drive I could see my gun grind into the rocks and gravel. I was freaked out and thought it was destroyed. I picked up the rifle to inspect it and it had a small scratch on the barrell and 2 dents in the synthetic stock on the forearm. Needless to say I was very pleased with the damage on my gun. I sighted in my scope again and resumed our hunting trip.
As of now I really respect the progress of synthetic material it holds up wonderfully, and if I had a choice in durability well you read my story.
 
After reading Hawks column, I have just one question.....

Should I order a T3 Tactical in .308 w/brake (commonality of ammo, lesser recoil--I'm no ninja), or a Stainless Varminter in .223? :rolleyes:
 
Should I order a T3 Tactical in .308 w/brake (commonality of ammo, lesser recoil--I'm no ninja), or a Stainless Varminter in .223?
Click to expand...

I have two Tikka T3 Tacticals, one in .223 and one in .308.

I think Chuck Hawks is smoking something to suggest that these rifles aren't damn right excellent in every aspect.

But what one to choose? If you want to varmint hunt you could also get the .223 tactical in stead of the Varminter, but If I had to choose I would get the .308 due to its ridiculously high value. It has Accuracy comparable to multi-thousand-dollar rifles but cost me 1600 including a scope.
 
ITs bizness......

CH needs to take a look at the real world as it races past him.......

I have a safe full of great, well made, classic M70 Winchesters. They are fine rifles with many desirable features. But they are now OUT OF BUSINESS.....you cannot built rifles with that much machining in them at prices that the public will pay. Remington's M700, IMHO, not nearly as nice a rifle, with many of the shortcuts that CH rails against, REmington is not exactly in great finacial shape. Its about the market and staying in business.

I love my old customized Pre-64 M70's.....and when I need a rilfe that absolutely HAS to function, that is what I get out of the safe. But when I just need to snipe another whitetail across a beanfield, my uber accurate TIKKA T3 in 270WSM handles that task just fine.
 
"But when I just need to snipe another whitetail across a beanfield, my uber accurate TIKKA T3 in 270WS"M handles that task just fine."
Well said. I can outshoot guys with custom rifles at the range with my T3 in the range 100-600 yards. Their guns are prettier, but mine is better, I dare to say. BTW, when I was in the military, my gun was not prettier than T3, but I could depend on it.
Chuck can say whatever he wants, he's got no respect from me.
 
I feel the flames

coming already..........but....... When I was looking to buy my "new" (like I needed another) elk rifle, I looked hard at the T3. Something just didnt click with me. I felt the basic design was not as good as other rifles I have or were looking at. That damn plastic clip, was a real drawback as far as I was concerned. I also hated the feel of the lightweight synthetic stock. Sure the whole package was a bit lighter than some others, but I'm not going to pack any brand .338 win mag 20 miles either. Then there was price........what can I say, my dealer definately wanted all he could get for the name for sure. In the end, I wound up with a Ruger MKII wood. Yeah I know EVERYONE hates Ruger rifles...but this fit me well, has a beautiful stock, perfect deep bluing, and holds 1.5" at a hundred after a I installed a $60.00 Timney.........all for the low price NIB of $325.99... She was 3 years old in the box when I brought her home last fall, but she looks better everytime I look at the prices of the new stuff hitting the sales rack. :)
 
Give Chuck a break!!!He was just lamenting the trend towards plastic stocks, magazines, trigger guards and other cost cutting moves.Many of todays barells are better than ever but then they use castings in the receiver and shroud the whole thing in black plastic!!!
 
Actually you are probably better off doing your own evaluation.I have never bought a gun on someones elses opinion or recommendation.Out of 50+ guns I have yet to own something I regretted buying.
 
Well I don't know who this gentleman is but I would love to have a quality rifle like a Merkel or Krieghoff double rifle with all the engraving or even a drilling but I'm poor and live on a fixed income. So its the lower level firearms that I can afford unless I come across something someone is trying to just get rid of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
Tikka T3x, anyone seen one?
Replies
8
Views
1K
giggitygiggity
G
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
New 25-06 - Browning X-Bolt or Tikka T3?
Replies
5
Views
1K
quartermaster
Q
A
  • Locked
Which Tikka Model to choose?
Replies
5
Views
590
Karbon
K
H
  • Locked
Tikka T3 Varmint
Replies
4
Views
739
rbernie
rbernie
Z
  • Locked
Opinions on the Tikka T3 Deluxe in 30-06?
Replies
1
Views
1K
hoghunting
H
Back
Top