Looking for a new factory rifle: Your thoughts?

[Q_Sertorius]

A sawsall

Instructions unclear. Where to apply sawsall?

 

[KenLee]

Instructions unclear. Where to apply sawsall?

Stock length

 

[Speaks]

I should have said "like a 30-06 in a well made rifle". Y'all are delirious. I have a 6 pound 4 oz x-bolt 300wsm that kicks no more than a plain Jane t3x 270

I have not shot an x-bolt but I do know my tikka 6.5cm kicks noticeably less than my m70 270.

If factory stocks they do kick a little more than some rifles though.

 

[General RE LEE]

Tikka T3x

 

[NevadaMike]

The Tikka will do everything you described with ease without changing anything. I love Tikka's just as they come and I have several. If your budget allows the Seekins will be close to a custom rifle with stupid good accuracy and good support. I have a few seekins now and they are my go to. I have never owned a Christiansen but I do not hear good things about them.

 

[Billy Goat]

Man, I'd go .243 in just about anything for 3-350 in eastern hardwoods.

18", can, I think you will prefer it.


Not what you asked for, but if you haven't considered it, you should.

 

[Johnboy041586]

The only one of the listed rifles you mentioned I have owned are x-bolts. But I like both hells canyon ones I have (300wm & 7mm-08). I don't know if the hells canyon editions shoot better, but they sure look lol.

 

[peaceful_ruler]

Factory Sauer 100 is equivalent(or better) in every way to a factory Tikka T3X except for the action and bolt smoothness of operation…and it does that pretty well too.

$450 for a threaded 6.5 CM is a no brainer

 

[Macintosh]

It has to have something to do with their cheap stocks. I have shot a tikka next to an x-bolt in similar weights and same ammo and cartridge and the felt recoil to me seemed noticeably higher in the Tikka. I thought it was weird and am just speculating as to the why.

I dont disagree depending on exactly what you are comparing to, and I think this is probably a fairer characterization than Inwas referring to. I just think the hyperbolic characterization of it that Ive seen a few times recently is very inaccurate. Just pointing out that when comparing apples to apples the difference is demonstrably minor, and there are just as many similar or even worse stocks in other brands, and maybe a few that are noticeably better, but at a $price. If you start comparing to aftermarket stocks, significantly heavier guns, etc then sure, theres a much more noticeable difference. But making a general sweeping characterization as was done earlier in this thread is simply misleading.
Of the three guns the OP mentioned, the Tikka out of the box has the worst stock simply by virtue of being plastic, with a slightly lower comb that doesnt help with recoil. But its within 1/8” in comb height of the others, ie its not a night and day difference, and yes I have shot all three rifles in several different cartridges. The tikka is also a quarter pound lighter than both. BUT its also several hundred$ less expensive. Given the budget, it’s nothing at all to throw that Tikka in a carbon fiber stock and have something that is objectively at least the equal of either of the other two guns. If people want an out of the box solution I won’t fault anyone for that. I don’t even necessarily think any one of them is so much better than the others. I just don’t agree with the characterization of the Tikka having wildly more recoil than the other two. Ime the difference is there but minor, and easily resolved within the budget. I noted that the OP seemed concerned about aftermarket support, which made me think that an out of the box solution was not necessarily a criteria.

 

[JLH3]

Considering how well my MkV shoots, I'd take a look at one of Weatherby's 307's

 

[Chris in TN]

I dont disagree depending on exactly what you are comparing to, and I think this is probably a fairer characterization than Inwas referring to. I just think the hyperbolic characterization of it that Ive seen a few times recently is very inaccurate. Just pointing out that when comparing apples to apples the difference is demonstrably minor, and there are just as many similar or even worse stocks in other brands, and maybe a few that are noticeably better, but at a $price. If you start comparing to aftermarket stocks, significantly heavier guns, etc then sure, theres a much more noticeable difference. But making a general sweeping characterization as was done earlier in this thread is simply misleading.
Of the three guns the OP mentioned, the Tikka out of the box has the worst stock simply by virtue of being plastic, with a slightly lower comb that doesnt help with recoil. But its within 1/8” in comb height of the others, ie its not a night and day difference, and yes I have shot all three rifles in several different cartridges. The tikka is also a quarter pound lighter than both. BUT its also several hundred$ less expensive. Given the budget, it’s nothing at all to throw that Tikka in a carbon fiber stock and have something that is objectively at least the equal of either of the other two guns. If people want an out of the box solution I won’t fault anyone for that. I don’t even necessarily think any one of them is so much better than the others. I just don’t agree with the characterization of the Tikka having wildly more recoil than the other two. Ime the difference is there but minor, and easily resolved within the budget. I noted that the OP seemed concerned about aftermarket support, which made me think that an out of the box solution was not necessarily a criteria.

Stocky's has their vertical grip stocks on sale right now, for anyone considering such a thing.



(I'll freely admit the Tikka factory stock doesn't thrill me, but then again neither does most any other factory rifle stock, so that's a wash to me)

 

[bnewt3]

This take may get some odd looks but I have a different take from most. I understand this isnt really what youre are asking about so ignore if youd like.

Tikka is a solid rifle, a ton of rifle for the money, cant go wrong.

But a for typical whitetail distances and hunting(typically hunting not far from the truck) IMO Seekins, Browning, Bergara, etc is a bit silly to spend that kind of money.

Savages are known to shoot well, Rugers are known to shoot well, plenty of others. Deer have no idea what rifle the bullet comes out of.

 

[Chris in TN]

This take may get some odd looks but I have a different take from most. I understand this isnt really what youre are asking about so ignore if youd like.

Tikka is a solid rifle, a ton of rifle for the money, cant go wrong.

But a for typical whitetail distances and hunting(typically hunting not far from the truck) IMO Seekins, Browning, Bergara, etc is a bit silly to spend that kind of money.

Savages are known to shoot well, Rugers are known to shoot well, plenty of others. Deer have no idea what rifle the bullet comes out of.

I liked the looks of the Seekins PH2s. Don't care for the 3. Honestly don't care for the detachable mags on either of them.

I'd like the Bergara squared Crest if not for the detachable magazine.

Point being, I can sort of see why someone would like them, given their features. If Bergara had a better reputation for QC and a replacement BDL style floorplate wasn't so high I would have bought the Squared Crest instead of the Tikka.


I can't understand paying what Browning asks for their mid-tier rifles. I'd probably be fine with their budget stuff but there's no way I'd splurge for their upgraded stuff. I'd rather buy a budget rifle and put together my own upgrades, I guess. But I've always seen Browning that way, going back to the 1980's and the fancy walnut stocks and white gold and other stuff. They mastered the art of up-selling long ago and noticing that has always sort of colored how I see them. Also, I kinda low-key hate that they just ride on a name but haven't actually *made anything* in decades. But that's more of a personal gripe, I guess. I'm sure Miroku makes great firearms.

 

[bnewt3]

I liked the looks of the Seekins PH2s. Don't care for the 3. Honestly don't care for the detachable mags on either of them.

I'd like the Bergara squared Crest if not for the detachable magazine.

Point being, I can sort of see why someone would like them, given their features. If Bergara had a better reputation for QC and a replacement BDL style floorplate wasn't so high I would have bought the Squared Crest instead of the Tikka.


I can't understand paying what Browning asks for their mid-tier rifles. I'd probably be fine with their budget stuff but there's no way I'd splurge for their upgraded stuff. I'd rather buy a budget rifle and put together my own upgrades, I guess. But I've always seen Browning that way, going back to the 1980's and the fancy walnut stocks and white gold and other stuff. They mastered the art of up-selling long ago and noticing that has always sort of colored how I see them. Also, I kinda low-key hate that they just ride on a name but haven't actually *made anything* in decades. But that's more of a personal gripe, I guess. I'm sure Miroku makes great firearms.

Oh I definitely understand the draw of a nice rifle, i like them just as much as the next person. And just like you have your "programming" about Browning, i guess my programming is that a rifle is a tool, and in the vast majority of cases most of the available tools will get the job done and done well. And IMO just like cartridge debate, we are talking about minute differences between the options.

Now for a backwoods mountain rifle, backpacking in for a week, miles and miles of hiking, where theres a ton of time and probably money invested in the hunt, yeah I absolutely see the point of purpose built, lightweight, extremely accurate rifle. But deer out to 350 yards......I just dont see how it makes sense.

A loose metaphor? analogy? would be buying a ferrari to go to the grocery store once a week. You can, but why?

 

[Chris in TN]

Yup. I definitely track with you there.

For most of my life everything I shot was within 350. I took an interest in long range shooting and wanted to apply it to hunting. Shot 3 animals at 387, 399, and 451, and figured out that I enjoyed it more when the animals were closer.

So now I’m at the realization that pretty much any basic stock .243 carbine would have done literally everything I’ve ever actually wanted to do with a hunting rifle. That only took me 40 years to figure out. lol.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

If I could afford a Ferrari, I’d love to drive it to the grocery store once a week. Is there a better way to show off wealth? How many grocery bags fit in a frunk?

Nearly all of us could get by just fine with one basic factory rifle, but that’s like asking my ex-wife to get by with one pair of shoes or one man or whatever.

If a man wants another rifle, I won’t be the one to tell him “no.” But I’ll happily tell him how *I* would spend his money. That’s part of the fun!

 

[bnewt3]

If I could afford a Ferrari, I’d love to drive it to the grocery store once a week. Is there a better way to show off wealth? How many grocery bags fit in a frunk?

Nearly all of us could get by just fine with one basic factory rifle, but that’s like asking my ex-wife to get by with one pair of shoes or one man or whatever.

If a man wants another rifle, I won’t be the one to tell him “no.” But I’ll happily tell him how *I* would spend his money. That’s part of the fun!

I guess mine is just a different perspective, because I think about what I also get by not spending extra money on the rifle such as: ammo......a butt ton of it, a nicer scope, more range time, maybe nice binos, rangefinder.......