Tikki Rifles

huntnrich

Active Member
Messages
315
I was wondering what you guys thought of the Tikki Rifles? I looked at one at the Sporting Goods Store, and it felt nice, the action was really smooth. But anyway I haven't heard much about them.
 
Tikka. FYI

I own Remington, Ruger, and Tikka, and the Tikka is honestly the best factory gun I have ever handled. They have a buttery smooth action, and it is mated with a Sako barrel. Mine shoots tiny groups, that rival my custom rifles. You simply cannot beat the price for a gun that performs so well, and is so light. The only downfall is the magazines are pricey.
 
I've only been around a couple, one shot good and had feeding problems and the other didn't shoot. overall they just don't feel quality to me, but few of the new stamped out rifles do.

In my opinion I'd rather have a 700 or a 70.
 
I'll never buy another 700 again, with their booby-trap trigger design. Bought one new in 2008, and it came with a nice ding in the crown right out of the box.

The new M70 extreme weather models look appealing. Not sure how a Tikka couldn't feed...they have a single stack magazine. Perhaps the mag was defective???
 
Mine has been great. Best value for the money out there. I do not like the small ejection port and I'm not a fan of the plastic magazine. But it works and kills the ()*& out of coyotes.
 
I think it was the magazine because he bought another and said it's OK. I don't like plasic on a gun, anywhere. I'm sure it works OK maybe I'm old school but it seems cheap.

If the few hundred bucks more is possible I'd buy a Kimber, best production gun on the market in my opinion. they're real popular around here because the Nosler store pushes them, all have been good to great shooters, light weight and no plastic . just my opinion what I'd buy if I was buying.
 
Beauty in function. Many rifles are prettier, no doubt. I've got a few of them and I wouldn't abuse them like this rifle has been abused. Still works great. Plastic and all.
 
Kimbers are $1200 pieces of junk. Do some research and see how many people have had to send them back because they either wouldn't shoot worth #####, or wouldn't feed.
 
Nonsense. I own a couple and a dozen others have been at my range, no problems and the worst shooter was still good.

I don't care what it is you can have a defect and any production rifle has a chance at not shooting. they're nice guns, and $1000 for a Montana is more like it if you shop around.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-11 AT 05:40PM (MST)[p]The Kimber thing is kinda funny. I was in Cabella's looking at over-priced rifles and the guy handed me a Kimber. I mentioned that I'd heard of people having accuracy problems with them. The guy behind the counter gave me his dumbfounded look, and two other guys at the counter echoed accuracy problems with Kimbers. Just a story.
 
I checked em out with a buddy that was interested. My kid has toy guns that feel better and stronger. I think he's gonna bite the bullet and go Sako instead. mtmuley
 
I have never owned a Tikki or even a Kimber rifle and can not give a fair honest opinion on the rifles.

What I do known about Kimber concerns their marketing hype about their 1911 pistols. Kimber makes it a point to advertise that their 1911's have match grade barrels and give the impression that if you buy a Kimber 1911, you can expect match grade accuracy out of the box. All that for a very expensive pistol.

What Kimber fails to tell the customer, that a match grade barrel is almost useless if the tolerances of the frame to slide fit is loose and the gun will not shoot match grade groups or even near it.

I know many serious shooters, who bought Kimbers, have taken their Kimbers to custom smiths to have the loose slide to frame fit tighten up in order to get the groups they wanted.

I have a out of box Colt Defender, 3 inch barrel that will out shoot most out of box full size Kimbers. When it comes to a 1911, you may be better off to buy a good brand of 1911 at very good cost savings over a Kimber. Take that cost savings and use it to have a smith work the gun over and get a very accurate pistol for the ballpark price of a Kimber.

Most of the time you get what you pay for, but sometimes paying more is no guarantee that you will get what you expected in that high price gun.

RELH
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-13-11 AT 08:20PM (MST)[p]The only good thing about the Kimbers are the stocks. I think NULA helped design them, and might even make them.

Tikka for the win:

sight-1.jpg


tikkagroup2.jpg
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-16-11 AT 06:48PM (MST)[p]Really? Melvin designed the Kimber stocks.....Kimber made a balsy move when they first released the montana in the fact that they hinted that Melvin Forbes helped design the stock. I have spoken to Melvin before and his response was that he has never even spoke with anyone from kimber. There were also some rumors of a lawsuit to have Melvins name dis-associated with Kimber, who knows? Fact is, he had nothing to do with it. There stocks are manf in house. Regardless I have 3 kimber montanas now and they all shoot like this....
newpics.jpg

newpics030.jpg


I also have a couple Tikkas and they shoot just as good. BUT they still weigh more, fit and finish is'nt even close, and magazines on backpacking rifles suck...something else to loose.


The Tikka only beats the Kimber in the price point category....Notice I did'nt say "value".

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 
I'm a little behind on reading this post but if you're still looking I have to put in a good plug for Tikka. I own three Tikka's and all three shoot very tight groups. Usually all 5 holes are touching (at 100 yds of course) and with my 22-250 a dime will consistently cover all 5 holes. Great guns if you're on a budget and even if you're not! I've hunted with a Tikka since 2003 and haven't had an issue with the plastic clip or with feeding. I was somewhat worried about my 300wsm feeding since I have heard it might be an issue due to the design of the casing but it feeds just like my other two. No complaints here other than from my 700's than just sit in the safe now!
 
Do a exhaustive google search on each and I think what you will find is:

Tikka: Very few complaints about performance. Many comments of sub-moa accuracty. Complaints about the plastic and ejection port. Few complaints about actual failures of any kind.

Montana: More than a few complaints about accuracy. Praise about the feel of the gun and the apparent craftsmanship.

To me I'd rather have a gun that has too much plastic but shoots very well and isn't prone to failure. Plus is about 40% cheaper and still damn light.
 
So much for accurate reviews...every Kimber hater on this thread has never owned one.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 
I love the Tikka I own.
Light, sub MOA, great trigger, smooth action, Sako barrel, points well and left $ in the bank for great glass.(bonus)!

I see and hear a lot of people whine about the 'plastic' parts; but then I wonder how many of them own a Glock, Smith M&P or Springfield MDx?
 
I had a Tikka Lite 300WSM. It kicked like a mule. I put a Simms Vibration recoil pad on it before I fired the first round. Seven or eight shots and I was done with a black and blue shoulder. Traded it for a Remington 700 XCR same caliber and no problem with factory recoil pad, 20 rounds and shoulder still skin tone color.
 
I've decided on Browning X-Bolt instead. After looking further into the Tikki. There's to much plastic. Thanks for all your opions, and responses.
 
"You're entitled too your own opion."

Yeah, especially when he started the thread. :)

Huntnrich, Good luck with your new rifle!! Hope she turns out to be a shooter for you...keep us updated.

Joey
 
I have one in 300 Winchester. It's light and accurate. I also have one in 243 Winchester.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom