# Firearms and Shooting > Firearms, Optics and Accessories >  Tikka t3 ss or Sako a7

## HFWaikato

I am looking to purchase my first rifle and have been looking at the .270 tikka t3. But noticed the sako a7 only costs abit more. It looks very similar to the tikka and was wondering if any one has used either of these rifles and what ur recommendations are. It will be used mainly deer

----------


## Munsey

> I am looking to purchase my first rifle and have been looking at the .270 tikka t3. But noticed the sako a7 only costs abit more. It looks very similar to the tikka and was wondering if any one has used either of these rifles and what ur recommendations are. It will be used mainly deer


I'm looking to get into a different caliber and have been so close to buying new as well , Im going for long action so I can't see the point on the extra$ 500 on a7 I'm gunna put that towards better glass . Someone  please put me straight on this ,but was told you can't rebarrel a a7 .?. One thing I don't like with the t3 is it looks like you can't load the mag or chamber without remove the mag .

----------


## optio

Hi HFWaikato
 Was in the same situation as you end of last year, discussed the option of t3 or a7 with a couple of gunsmiths both said t3, both said a7 wasn't worth extra $, spend $ saved on a better scope, talked to  4 gun shops about a  t3 270 three of them suggested 6.5x55 would be a better caliber also talked to one of the above gunsmiths about 6.5x55 he agreed, so thought what the hell brought a t3 6.5x55 and never looked back shoots superb very happy wouldn't hesitate buying another t3.

Munsey Yes a t3 can be loaded with a single round mag in or out, mag would be difficult to load in rifle why try when you can take it out & load it in half the time.

----------


## 7mmsaum

The t3 in 270 caliber is great on deer, loaded up with mag fit 135 Sierra matchkings you will harvest most species out to 500yrds.
Save the extra cash and buy the best scope you can

----------


## chux75

> Save the extra cash and buy the best scope you can


What he said. 

$500 more spent on a scope will generally buy you a lot more "improvement" than $500 more spent on a rifle.

----------


## Rock river arms hunter

a A7 is just a t3 with a different stock,the sako brand name on it and 3 locking lugs... and a stupid accuracy gurantee... ive got 4?5? t3's and they are all sub MOA easily... go for the t3 and use the $$$ for better glass or use it to buy some bino's!

----------


## longrange308

love my tikka so im a +1 for the extra money on scope  :Thumbsup:

----------


## Beavis

I'm lookin at selling my A7 in .270 with reloading gear and rings. PM me if you want to talk turkey

----------


## Gillie

[QUOTE=Rock river arms hunter;21736]a A7 is just a t3 with a different stock,the sako brand name on it and 3 locking lugs... and a stupid accuracy gurantee... QUOTE]
So other than the action, the magazine and the stock the A7 and the T3 are basically the same... so basically they have the same barrel?

Both rifles have their pros and cons.
I prefer the action on the A7 (mainly the ability to load through the action and the three locking lugs).
I prefer the stock shape/feel on the A7 over the T3 (synthetic stock anyway).
I prefer a wooden stock and a blued action - the A7 only comes with an synthetic stock.
I prefer the price tag on the T3!

For a first rifle i would reccommend a T3. I hope you have a bit of shooting experience behind you cause i would expect you to put a limbsaver on your T3 straight away in .270. Not a caliber i would have recommended straight away, not in a light weight rifle anyway. 

I would probably buy the T3 and spend the extra cash on a suppressor! Better quality scope won't stop you building a flinch into your shooting.

----------


## Scribe

[QUOTE=Gillie;21753]


> a A7 is just a t3 with a different stock,the sako brand name on it and 3 locking lugs... and a stupid accuracy gurantee... QUOTE]
> So other than the action, the magazine and the stock the A7 and the T3 are basically the same... so basically they have the same barrel?
> 
> Both rifles have their pros and cons.
> I prefer the action on the A7 (mainly the ability to load through the action and the three locking lugs).
> I prefer the stock shape/feel on the A7 over the T3 (synthetic stock anyway).
> I prefer a wooden stock and a blued action - the A7 only comes with an synthetic stock.
> I prefer the price tag on the T3!
> 
> ...


Top post...it is the flinch that gets so many of them.

----------


## hunter308

The marlin Xl7 in .270 is very nice to shoot and won't give you a flinch and same goes for the ruger M77 Hawkeye all weather bit lighter than the marlin but a bit heavier than the T3 and won't kick you like the T3 will plus you get a free pentax scope with the ruger. First rifle I shot in .270 was a BRNO zkk600 and I ended up getting put off of shooting the .270 caliber after shooting the BRNO a few times till I had a go with a ruger and a marlin in that caliber this year and has actually rekindled my interest in using the .270 or .280 when I can afford a new toy.

----------


## HFWaikato

Thanks for all the feed back. Will be looking at a t3 with a better scope. Have abit of shooting experience behind me but in saying that most of it has been with heavy stocks than the t3. I have also heard the kick on the t3 270 is nasty. Any views on this, and would a limbsaver alone be enough or better to get it suppressed? Thank you

----------


## Rock river arms hunter

> Thanks for all the feed back. Will be looking at a t3 with a better scope. Have abit of shooting experience behind me but in saying that most of it has been with heavy stocks than the t3. I have also heard the kick on the t3 270 is nasty. Any views on this, and would a limbsaver alone be enough or better to get it suppressed? Thank you


Put it this way a t3 7-08 gave me recoil flinch a few years ago, if you do end up buying one buy it with a mac millan stock... or alternatively buy a hogue stocked HOWA! I find the howa's kick alot less and will shoot just as accurately, add to that a 3 position safety and the ability to make it take 10 round mags in short action... you cannot go wrong!

----------


## veitnamcam

> Thanks for all the feed back. Will be looking at a t3 with a better scope. Have abit of shooting experience behind me but in saying that most of it has been with heavy stocks than the t3. I have also heard the kick on the t3 270 is nasty. Any views on this, and would a limbsaver alone be enough or better to get it suppressed? Thank you


Lots of people recon the tikkas boot but I honestly cant tell the difference between my mates 7mm rem mag tikka and my 308 sako 85.
they both go bang and give you a push. I reckon its the noise or poor technique letting the rifle slap you(but mostly the noise) that creates a flinch.
My 2 cents

----------


## tui_man2

> Put it this way a t3 7-08 gave me recoil flinch a few years ago, if you do end up buying one buy it with a mac millan stock... or alternatively buy a hogue stocked HOWA! I find the howa's kick alot less and will shoot just as accurately, add to that a 3 position safety and the ability to make it take 10 round mags in short action... you cannot go wrong!


you you read the shit you say before you dribble it out?

----------


## Brennos

^ hahah.
Personally I would use the extra $$ and look into shortening/threading/recrowing the barrel, and a supressor, and if the t3 triggers are crap, a trigger job.  You can get some decent light suppressors that won't make the rifle too much of a pig.   Best thing I ever did was suppress my howa.  Spend any leftover $$ on the scope.

----------


## James

> Thanks for all the feed back. Will be looking at a t3 with a better scope. Have abit of shooting experience behind me but in saying that most of it has been with heavy stocks than the t3. I have also heard the kick on the t3 270 is nasty. Any views on this, and would a limbsaver alone be enough or better to get it suppressed? Thank you


Recoil is a very subjective thing- everyone has different levels of comfort/tolerance. 
It also depends how much you are going to shoot it. If you're going to do a lot of range work or high volume shooting (like goats or rabbits) then recoil will be more of an issue. If you are only going to pull the trigger 6 times a year on a deer it won't be such a problem. (Anectdotally: A lot of people will tell you that when you shoot at an animal you will hardly notice the recoil 'in the heat of the moment', as opposed to punching paper. Personally I've found this to be true).
Rifle weight as well as cartridge calibre/power is a very big factor also. I won't bore you with the maths, but if you think simply in terms of "equal and opposite" forces a heavier rifle will boot you less, quite noticeably for only a small increase in weight. This is a downside to the current trend of lightweight rifles.

In terms of your question: "would a limbsaver alone be enough or better to get it suppressed?" That really depends on your personal preference. My experience has been that a decent suppressor will reduce perceived recoil at least as much as a limbsaver, with the added benefit of being easier on everyone's ears. I don't enjoy recoil much at all, and quite like my hearing- so I start with a suppressor, and then add a better pad if it still needs it.

----------


## Gillie

As i said above i would suppress it as well. A limbsaver certainly helps but in my experience not nearly as much as a supressor. A suppressor helps reduce recoil by two ways - it adds weight to the rifle and it catches the burnt gunpowder so you can effectively take the weight of the gun powder out of the "equal and opposite" forces. I also think the T3 light rifles benefit from having a little extra weight out the front. Makes them nicer to shoot standing. 

Recoils is certainly a funny thing. I can't say i agree with the saying "you won't notice it hunting" how many people have you seen with a cut around theur eye hunting? I would bet they noticed the recoil! Do you think they might remember that next time they fire that rifle? 
What about when you sight the rifle in? You might fire quite a few shots to work out what ammunition the rifle likes as well. You have to have confidence in your rifle, your ability to use it and that is sighted in for you. If the recoil is affecting how you sight it in then how confident can you be it is sighted in at all?

----------


## James

> I can't say i agree with the saying "you won't notice it hunting" how many people have you seen with a cut around theur eye hunting? I would bet they noticed the recoil! Do you think they might remember that next time they fire that rifle? 
>  Hahaha- I think it's the scope bell hitting them in the face that they notice more than the recoil that put it there  Let's be honest, that's a pretty extreme example (I've seen it 6 times, and none of those were repeat offences- if you catch my drift). You'll also notice I said "Anectdotally", an anecdote being: "a short and amusing or interesting story about a real incident or person." I also said I had experienced this, and that I had heard many people say it.What about when you sight the rifle in? You might fire quite a few shots to work out what ammunition the rifle likes as well. You have to have confidence in your rifle, your ability to use it and that is sighted in for you. If the recoil is affecting how you sight it in then how confident can you be it is sighted in at all?
> I Couldn't agree with you more Gillie. That's why I said "If you're going to do a lot of range work" in which I would include any extended amount of sighting in. (As opposed to your bog-standard hunter with little accuracy concerns, who's happy firing 5 shots for sighting, and getting within an inch of their point of aim).


.

----------


## James

Sorry Gillie, but I have to call you on this one. (No disrespect intended. I for one have thoroughly enjoyed and benefitted from your posts on the other forum for several years. But your experience and standing within the NZ shooting community places a greater onus on what you say, lest new/inexperienced shooters take it for granted).




> catches the burnt gunpowder so you can effectively take the weight of the gun powder out of the "equal and opposite" forces.


This isn't entirely accurate.
On ignition the powder mass is rapidly converted into gas. It is this rapid expansion/increase in volume that drives the bullet down the barrel. This gas ultimately exits the muzzle through the small opening of the bore at very high speed, creating noise, heat and a rearward force.
A suppressor works by effectively providing an expansion chamber (often including baffles) that allows the gas to expand/reduces the volume of gas in the bore. As a result the rate of gas exiting the muzzle is reduced. (And therefore so too is the noise and rearward force/recoil). The initial "mass" of the powder doesn't come into it directly, apart from the fact that a bigger mass of powder obviously generates a larger volume of gas.

----------


## James

Edit: To be more Accurate I should say:

The "mass" of the gas/unburnt powder/carbon is significant if we consider:
      FORCE = MASS x ACCELERATION.
However, as almost all the gas/unburnt powder/carbon is still exiting the muzzle (with only a small portion remaining as deposits in suppressor/bore) it can be seen that the suppressor doesn't reduce the "MASS" part of the equation, it just slows the "ACCELERATION".

(Yes, I am bored....sitting at home having a quiet/early night before duck shooting). :36 17 4:

----------


## Gillie

heh heh heh nothing wrong with some open debate James  :Thumbsup:  I'll have to agree to disagree with you on the felt recoil thing. I have seen more than a few guys not keen to get on the trigger after a smack in the face. Their fingers just sit real softly on the trigger and they tend to jerk it, even on animals... I have seen guys close their eyes when they pull the trigger! Looks funny as when they realise you put a dummy round in and not a live one! I have more than a few guys who rely on their gunsmith to sight their rifle in. I shouldn't laugh though, i am going through this flinch thing at the moment with a 375H&H i am learning to shoot at the moment. Doesn't help that it has brushed my eye brow a couple of times on the range!

Yep, totally agree with you with regards to the physics behind a suppressor "catching" / slowing the acceleration of the gas. "Catching" was a very simplistic (and technically wrong!) term for me to use. I should have said "catches and slows down". Hope you have fun duck shooting!  :Thumbsup:

----------


## James

> heh heh heh nothing wrong with some open debate James  I'll have to agree to disagree with you on the felt recoil thing. I have seen more than a few guys not keen to get on the trigger after a smack in the face. Their fingers just sit real softly on the trigger and they tend to jerk it, even on animals... I have seen guys close their eyes when they pull the trigger! Looks funny as when they realise you put a dummy round in and not a live one! I have more than a few guys who rely on their gunsmith to sight their rifle in. I shouldn't laugh though, i am going through this flinch thing at the moment with a 375H&H i am learning to shoot at the moment. Doesn't help that it has brushed my eye brow a couple of times on the range!
> 
> Yep, totally agree with you with regards to the physics behind a suppressor "catching" / slowing the acceleration of the gas. "Catching" was a very simplistic (and technically wrong!) term for me to use. I should have said "catches and slows down". Hope you have fun duck shooting!


 :Thumbsup:  Cheers Gillie, it was all good- small numbers of birds, but some more challenging shots. Got to stretch it out a bit more than when they're coming in thick and fast.

-A question for you now Gillie, re. the accidental "wearing" of a scope eyepiece (Apologies to HFWaikato for us slightly highjacking his post, but it's related):
The few times I've witnessed people "scoping" themselves it has seemed to be due to them taking steep uphill/downhill shots on animals, and ending up crowding the scope due to rushing/the awkward angle. (in these cases I'd seen the guys fire quite a lot on the flat without any issues, so I'm presuming the steep angle is the changed factor). Luckily I've never managed to do it myself. But I was bloody scared about a month ago firing a 416 Rigby for the first time- man did it boot, I was waiting for the smack in the eyebrow the whole time, but luckily it had a scope with long eye relief. That brings me to my questions for you:
1) Is it common for people to "wear" their scopes on steep uphill/downhill shots?
2) Do you think inadequate eye-relief on scopes is sometimes a problem?
3) How often is it just a case of bog-standard poor shooting form? 

Cheers  :36 17 4:

----------


## Gillie

Many things can cause the scope to hit someone. Shooting uphill is a common cause but mostly it comes down to poor rifle fit and poor technique. 
I don't think it would happen ever with a downhill shot only uphill. When you bring the rifle up past horizontal you automatically bring the scope closer to your face. Shooting downhill the scope movely slightly away from your face. 
Most scopes have eye relief that is fine for most calibers. The biggest factors in determining if you get a kiss from the scope is rifle fit, scope setup and shooting technique. 
Rifle fit - basically the rifle has to fit your well. This is not that important with light recoil but with heavy recoil it matters. Stock too long and you won't get comfortable, the rifle won't sit in your shoulder "pocket" properly and probably you'll end up hurting your shoulder after a few shots. Stock too short and when you have to take that snap shot and don't remember to hold your face back... say hello to your scope!  :Wink: 
Scope setup - i have just gone through this with my .375H&H. When my father and i setup the scope on the rifle it was placed so when you brought the rifle up *standing* the view was great. Problem is that when shooting a rifle prone you naturally put your head closer to the scope. Result was that when i was first shooting my .375H&H the scope just brushed my eye brow (three times in 8 shots! You can imagaine how hard it was to shoot well knowing that the scope was out to get me!). After that we shifted the scope forward about 3/4 of an inch. The rifle is now setup so the scope comes up great when shooting prone and it is still fine shooting standing. 
Shooting technique - this is pretty simple really. Put the rifle in your shoulder and hold on to it tightly! Not a death grip but just a firm grip. Pull the rifle back into your shoulder. And you may need to bunch up your shoulder muscles a bit as well. Traditional technique calls for the shooter to be relaxed... being too relaxed with a heavy recoiling rifle is not enjoyable. Seems to be a lot to remember but a bit of dry firing focusing these and soon you will do it without thinking. 

Sorry for the novel, but you did ask!  :Thumbsup:

----------


## Gillie

Sorry but i should add, a good way to bunch up your shoulder muscles without straining them is to keep your right elbow closer to your body when shooting (for a right hander).

----------


## Gemini

I have owned both. A super varmit tikka and currently own a couple of A7's. 
I fit the A7's slightly better than the 
Tikkas. 
Both good shooters. 
A mate lost a mag on T3, this was part if the rational in deciding on A7.

----------


## Rock river arms hunter

Yep Tui I do, funny thing is having just completed my first duck season using a 12ga with 3" 36g loads i actually enjoy recoil now, i think its more a case of man up and hold it bloody tight and you will be right (to a certain degree).

----------


## Beavis

Just takes discipline

----------


## HFWaikato

Hi guys. Thanks for all the information you have given. I have purchased a tikka t3 lite but decided to go for a 7mm 08. Hopefully get it out and sighted in this weekend.

----------


## veitnamcam

Cant go to far wrong with either choice really.

----------

