I always find the "rims and tint on a shitty car" comments unhelpful and needlessly dismissive. I think there are better ways to illustrate the differences - even using vehicle analogies... To me threaded from the factory is functional vs extra cost and wait time for threading (especially with short wait times for suppressors right now = long wait for threading)... ceracote is nice if you have had corrosion issues before - so not comparable to bling rims and tint.... more like a good hitch and truck bed liner?-- I don't like the fluting myself but aesthetics are low on my considerations...
Fair enough... How about that the cerakote and fluting are like when an automotive manufacturer updates body style, new headlights, nicer interior, but carries forward the transmission that's known to crap the bed around 100k miles, and the skinny CV axles that like to break at sharp turning angles. It's mostly aesthetic, slightly functional upgrades that don't address the real world weaknesses of the rifle.
The trigger? That is a truck vs SUV question - which type do you prefer? Personally, I like a bladed trigger - especially the extra safety it can give when working with a nervous kid having to adjust positions in the field... I like the accutrigger on my AxisII better because mine is at 2.25lbs instead of just under 3 on the Ruger... I also think an SUV works better for my family than a truck??? So?
Also fair. I've had a few bladed triggers, and a few good non-bladed (like Tikka factory) and will take the non-bladed every time. I would take a decent bladed trigger over a crappy non-bladed, but I don't know anyone who's shot a Tikka adjusted to the bottom end of its pull weight with factory spring and preferred a Savage or Ruger over that.
I have had zero mag feed or seating issues. bolt lift is maybe a bit stiff, no racking issues. But those things being a bit harder to cycle would be like a rougher ride quality or leather vs cloth seats on a vehicle - how important is a smooth ride? You get there either way. I don't notice it much myself, Tikka is smoother for sure. Still, my Ruger cycles without incident, chamber a round every time with out noticing it. trigger is consistent just half pound more than I ideally would have. goes bang into a tight group...
That's good to hear, my biggest beef with the Gen 1 was the terrible rotary mag. I've read mixed reports on the Gen2, some guys say it's way better but I've seen and heard several guys say there are still substantial issues. I see lots of guys single load on the bench and not test magazine function, then when a follow up shot is needed in the field the problems show up.
Bolt lift and binding are a bigger deal for kids, and it did show up on the Gen 1 as a noticeable difference. Lifting the bolt takes you off target, and running the bolt forward it did bind and take a second try from time to time.
The Ruger stock butt end is way off, no way around it. I am going to 3d print a straight LOP spacer to improve it, but still that silly drop on bottom side and traditional hunting rifle grip vs vertical.... I do like the grip on the forend and it is stiff enough. Tikka i would need to add an adjustable cheek piece, Ruger I just bought a higher comb riser which is marginally cheaper...
Agree, the stock geometry is probably my biggest beef with them. If Ruger did the Gen2, skipped the cerakote and fluting in order to keep it at/near Gen1 price, and copied Rokstok geometry instead of that abomination, I'd have a hard time not picking one up given their new chamberings and the reports of greatly improved magazine function.
At the end of the day, my opinion as someone who's owned both Tikkas and a Ruger American (and handled/shot several more of each that were friends' rifles), the price difference is small for the huge improvement you get with a Tikka. I don't know many (maybe any) folks with both that think the RA is close to as good.