secretazure
2012 Tikka T3 Sporter -- receiver, unfired chamber, front scope base
Some interesting facts/observations when comparing Sako 85 to Tikka T3 rifles:
1. Sako receivers require more machine work due to more complex contours, and therefore, require more time to finish. Time equals money. The Tikka T3 receiver is geometrically simpler and does not require as many machining operations. For example, Sako 85's have a tapered dovetail on their receivers versus Tikka T3's being simply drilled and tapped for standard Weaver style scope mounts.
Photo of a Sako 85 receiver here: farm9.staticflickr.com/8194/8352503892_3fac9e9d8d_b.jpg
Photo of a Tikka T3 receiver here: farm8.staticflickr.com/7047/6834586702_5023d84ca5_b.jpg
2. Tikka T3's contain plastic parts, and Sako's generally do not (excluding stocks). Plastic is simply a far less expensive medium from which to create parts from. Tikka T3 polymer (fibreglass reinforced composite) parts include: bolt shrouds/knob ends, trigger guards, and magazines. Barrels, receivers, and triggers are of equal quality and made on the same Sako assembly line. Note, plastic (polymer) is not necessarily a negative thing, and in some applications/conditions, is arguably a superior material -- it is strong, flexible, and does not rust or dent. Many firearm manufacturers employ polymer parts to varying degrees, including highly respected names like Glock, Benelli, and even Remington. Regarding Remington, the highly regarded 870 'Police' pump action shotguns are now shipping with polymer trigger guards!
3. Tikka T3 bolts are simpler in design and less expensive to make. Given that Tikka T3's are found chambered in 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag, and 270/300 WSM, just to name a few, there should be no concern about the durability and safety of the T3 2-lug design! Tikka T3 bolts are particularly slick feeding, especially in combination with the T3 single-stacked polymer magazines.
Photo of a Sako 85 and Tikka T3 bolt here: farm8.staticflickr.com/7053/6834593516_d42616b629_b.jpg
4. Tikka T3's usually come with a relatively inexpensive molded stock. Sako wood stocks are usually much more expensive, and Sako synthetic stocks are also of higher quality. Note, this does not apply to the Tikka T3 Sporter stocks and Tikka T3 Tactical synthetic stocks, which are amongst the nicest factory stocks on the market -- and reflective in the retail price of these models!
5. Sako is regarded as having a bit better finish quality. Note, this has NOT been my observation when comparing my lovely Sako M85 Bavarian Carbine to my Tikka T3 Sporter.
6. Sako has multiple action lengths scaled to the family of cartridges they are designed for. Tikka (T3) have only one action length. This keeps costs lower for Tikka. Personally, I would not buy a Tikka in a calibre smaller than 308 (eg. 223), and prefer to take advantage of the larger T3 action length.
7. The Sako safety is more sophisticated as it allows you to operate the bolt while on safe.
2012 Tikka T3 Sporter -- receiver, unfired chamber, front scope base
Some interesting facts/observations when comparing Sako 85 to Tikka T3 rifles:
1. Sako receivers require more machine work due to more complex contours, and therefore, require more time to finish. Time equals money. The Tikka T3 receiver is geometrically simpler and does not require as many machining operations. For example, Sako 85's have a tapered dovetail on their receivers versus Tikka T3's being simply drilled and tapped for standard Weaver style scope mounts.
Photo of a Sako 85 receiver here: farm9.staticflickr.com/8194/8352503892_3fac9e9d8d_b.jpg
Photo of a Tikka T3 receiver here: farm8.staticflickr.com/7047/6834586702_5023d84ca5_b.jpg
2. Tikka T3's contain plastic parts, and Sako's generally do not (excluding stocks). Plastic is simply a far less expensive medium from which to create parts from. Tikka T3 polymer (fibreglass reinforced composite) parts include: bolt shrouds/knob ends, trigger guards, and magazines. Barrels, receivers, and triggers are of equal quality and made on the same Sako assembly line. Note, plastic (polymer) is not necessarily a negative thing, and in some applications/conditions, is arguably a superior material -- it is strong, flexible, and does not rust or dent. Many firearm manufacturers employ polymer parts to varying degrees, including highly respected names like Glock, Benelli, and even Remington. Regarding Remington, the highly regarded 870 'Police' pump action shotguns are now shipping with polymer trigger guards!
3. Tikka T3 bolts are simpler in design and less expensive to make. Given that Tikka T3's are found chambered in 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag, and 270/300 WSM, just to name a few, there should be no concern about the durability and safety of the T3 2-lug design! Tikka T3 bolts are particularly slick feeding, especially in combination with the T3 single-stacked polymer magazines.
Photo of a Sako 85 and Tikka T3 bolt here: farm8.staticflickr.com/7053/6834593516_d42616b629_b.jpg
4. Tikka T3's usually come with a relatively inexpensive molded stock. Sako wood stocks are usually much more expensive, and Sako synthetic stocks are also of higher quality. Note, this does not apply to the Tikka T3 Sporter stocks and Tikka T3 Tactical synthetic stocks, which are amongst the nicest factory stocks on the market -- and reflective in the retail price of these models!
5. Sako is regarded as having a bit better finish quality. Note, this has NOT been my observation when comparing my lovely Sako M85 Bavarian Carbine to my Tikka T3 Sporter.
6. Sako has multiple action lengths scaled to the family of cartridges they are designed for. Tikka (T3) have only one action length. This keeps costs lower for Tikka. Personally, I would not buy a Tikka in a calibre smaller than 308 (eg. 223), and prefer to take advantage of the larger T3 action length.
7. The Sako safety is more sophisticated as it allows you to operate the bolt while on safe.