Advantage Howa, simply for price
This is true, but just because it costs more doesn't automatically make it better quality...............There are differences between Howa and Tikka. Just like there are differences between Vortex and Leupold, or Toyota and Fiat. I would use Howa and Weatherby but...Well..........
Personally I have had very good experiences with Howa's I have owned. Would I own a Tikka? Maybe if it was at the right price. I have nothing against them, but if I had $1300 for a rifle I would spend $1000 on a Howa and throw the extra $300 towards the scope budget and get better optics. Both will out perform most shooters. Both will be more accurate than 99% of the nuts behind the butt. And if you are asking which is better, I would suspect very strongly that you are unlikely to be part of the 1% who can shoot better than either, in which case you probably would not be looking at either of them.
The advice to try holding both and see what you feel more comfortable with is probably the best advice here. And there are others in that bracket that can perform at similar levels, but these two would arguably be the better of the group.
Only downside to the two is one appears to be named after a curry......
"Name brands" always cost more...
"European labour" always costs more...
In saying that the most accurate hunting rifle I've seen was a Tikka, and as some have already said they tend to shoot better with a wider variety of box ammunition.
But my barrelled action Howa was $800 new. It came threaded too. I built the carbon fibre stock for roughly $100, slapped some talleys and a muzzle brake on and still haven't reached the cost of a new Tikka. And unlike the Tikka I can properly seat out my projectiles in the mag-box.
It shoots sub-moa too. The trigger was also really easy to tune down to 2 pounds. I think value for money is what your getting a bit more of with the Howa.
![]()
Id still love to see a bit more on how you did that stock? Still not exactly sure how you joined the halves.
Bookmarks