Action Design For Hunting

[nm.otter]

I just want to go on record as proof that you can like (love) Tikka rifles and still acknowledge that a 3-position safety on a bolt action rifle is objectively better.

I'll again point to the Sako 85/90 safety system. It's not 3-position per se, but delivers the same functionality in what I believe to be a more intuitive (and possibly safer) manner.

 

[Kjc103]

I don’t think anyone is forcing anyone else to only buy Tikkas. If you feel they are unsafe then absolutely buy whatever platform you think gives you the best safety.
That being said there are more accidental discharges from weapons believed to be unloaded than from the design of Tikka’s safety system and in those instances the best safety is following the rules for safe firearms handling.

Tikkas are not unsafe, they’re awesome.

They’re not ideal for carrying it with a round chambered, very few rifles are. Very few can do this safely,

 

[Marbles]

I'll again point to the Sako 85/90 safety system. It's not 3-position per se, but delivers the same functionality in what I believe to be a more intuitive (and possibly safer) manner.

Like this?


People who think safeties make a rifle safe are a little scary. Once the design hits a certain level of reliability, the difference is the user.

The Tikka design is prone to two user errors, failure to adequately reinstall the trigger, and users making the trigger less safe with aftermarket springs.

The question then becomes, how do you use the rifle and what is good enough. A lighter spring in a range queen is not as concerning as a lighter spring in a hunting rifle, and a lighter spring in a combat rifle is flat unacceptable.

 

[Formidilosus]

Tikkas are not unsafe, they’re awesome.

They’re not ideal for carrying it with a round chambered, very few rifles are. Very few can do this safely,

What are you talking about?

 

[amassi]

You really that worried about opening the bolt with the safety off?

It’s time some of these posters take up pickleball


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[amassi]

I have heard this said many times. I cant wrap my head around it. Why would it matter if you had to take the safety off before unloading a chambered round?

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk

Well you see- Guns are hard to grip without placing your finger in the trigger guard and pulling the trigger for maximum control especially when your booger picker is extra slick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wapitibob]

Safety is off and rifle can be fired, who'd of thought..

 

[amassi]

Yes sir. IMO the only time the safety should be in the fire position is when the weapon is about to be fired, or dry fired on the range. I would especially be concerned about putting a weapon like this in the hands of a youth. Just another way to have an accident IMO.

To each its own though. My reason for responding was due to how much I like the X-Bolt’s locking bolt system, the safety location, and being able to unload it while the safety is in the safe position.

You’d be shocked how many “safe” x bolts get negligently discharged every year when trying to unload
You either are capable of handling a firearm in all conditions or you are not capable. There is no work around and in BACOS case certainly no magic button


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BLJ]

People who think safeties make a rifle safe are a little scary

 

[ddd-shooter]

The PRINCIPLES are what’s foolproof, not the mechanical device in your possession.

Yes, hunters who look for a mechanical way to make up for their negligence are the issue.
OP used the negligent examples in this thread to justify the need for a company to “fool proof” his rifle.
If you’re at the ready, be at the ready! Carry a round chambered with confidence.
If you’re on a horse, or at camp, or in a vehicle, or otherwise not in control of the rifle- don’t have a round chambered!

I walked two miles yesterday looking for squirrels with a group of 6 people-3 children. My lever action .22 mag didn’t have a safety. (Shocker) No one was injured, because we practice proper firearms handling.
I can also carry a revolver that’s loaded, shotguns with no safeties, etc.

The PRINCIPLES are what’s foolproof, not the mechanical device in your possession.

 

[goalie]

Having the ability to both lock the bolt on safe as well as cycle the bolt on safe is a good thing.

Three position safety is objectively > 2 position

It doesn't mean a rifle with a 2 position safety is unsafe or bad.

 

[grfox92]

Well you see- Guns are hard to grip without placing your finger in the trigger guard and pulling the trigger for maximum control especially when your booger picker is extra slick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For real. I guess when it's time to unload, a lot of guys are pointing their rifles at their friends and family and maniacally running the bolt until the gun is empty. Think of Jack Nicholson in the shining, they have that look on their face when they are doing it.

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk

 

[rookieforever33]

Agree with many above that the ultimate safety of the rifle is the user. If there are mechanical designs that you prefer to "help" you remain safe, buy one of those. Chances are you will find a rifle with features you like that still outshoots you even if it isn't a mythical tikka. I have different guns, with different safety designs, I treat every one the same if its a 3 position, 2 position, hammer fired, striker fired, or slingshot. By following all fundamental rules of firearm safety.

 

[REWIND]

For anyone worried about the Tikka style safety, I think the safety design on the CZ 600s are great alternative. The vertical tang safety plus the button forward of the bolt to allow unloading on safe make it unlikely to be accidentally moved to fire position. The 600s aren’t as well received as the 550s but still a good “modern day” rifle. I have both and they perform equally well.