I don't a have a 270 SS/syn and want one as a all day carry gun. Can't afford a Kimber big sky and besides the 270's ain't out yet. Other than the 2" shorter barrel on the Ruger which to me is not a bad thing...what other pro's and con's are there to consider. I know the T3 has a better trigger out of the box and is 4 oz's lighter according to the catalog, where the trigger fix for the Ruger helps to even up the price difference, and I like the stock on the Ruger a lot better and they don't have the nylon 3 shot magazine.
Which gun would be easier to reload for with the T3's fixed length removeable magazine vs the magazine well and follower of the Ruger to find the "sweet" spot seating longer bullets just off the lands, as I can see me shooting a fair amount of of 160 gr PT's ? CRF is not a big deal either way for me. Right now I'd just as soon flip a coin.
My Tikka 270 WTHunter standard grade shoots lights out and I am spoiled with its dependability with a spread of ammo but I want a lighter gun to shave a pound or more off the WTH's 8lbs 6ozs. Comments?
Ron

I have 2 T3 Laminate Stainless 270WSM- great rifle/caliber. Shoots 140gr. Accubonds extremely good. Both factory and handloads. I suggest the LS over the SS just for the fact that the LS is a bit heavier and may handle recoil a bit better, plus the T3 stocks in the SS version I dont care for- I waited the extra year from 2003 for 2004 to get the LS version.
But if you want lightness , the T3 SS is the way to go , or go for the Sako Finnlight.

Good Luck

Not even a question it's the Tikka!

Another vote for the Tikka.

With it you get an excellent Sako trigger(the best of any factory rifle in my oppinion) and Sako barrel, the action is super smooth and it will feed superbly from that single stack mag.

I would buy a spare 5 shot mag for it (if you dont mind it protruding below the stock), then its just a matter of slipping the expended mag out and slipping the spare one in, then you reload the spare at your convienience.

I own a T3 varmint stainless and have fired 7 or 8 others, they were all extremely accurate straight out of the box, adjusting the trigger is simple, just take off the stock and adjust one screw.

The Ruger action to me is outdated, although a strong action it is clunky and nowhere near as user friendly as the Tikka, you will see what I mean if you compare/play with them side by side at your gun store.

Tikka!! Much better than Ruger (I own both).

OK
It's 4 Tikka shooters praising their experieces ...and no response from the Ruger shooters. I understand that after shooting my WTH 695 for the last 4-5 years.

But how many of you you reload? and if you do how do you get around the short "factory ammo only" magazine width to tweak the sweet spot in seating bullets off the lands? or using longer bullets that need to be seated further out because of design and keep the max capacity of powder space? ....OR does the T3 have such a long throat ala Weatherby MkV's that it can't be done easily with a lot of free bore?
Not trying to pick the fly poop out of the pepper...just interested in the details for a change. I haven't relaoded seriously in years becasue of time contraints but need to start in order to feed some of the other guns in the rack and get what I expect out of them or access to affordable premium grade ammo....like a Barnes 250 gr TSX in a CZ 9.3...so why not load for everything if I am going to set up the bench again...and the reason to pay attention to the details and sweet spots.
Ron

I have a M695, in .25-06 Rem, and a T-3, in .223
Rem., and I reload. In both of these rifles,
I have had sufficient mag. length, to get rounds
loaded just off the lands, with the bullets I
have been loading with. In the T-3, the mag
length is JUST long enough, for the 55 gr.
bullets. But it shoots some pretty groups,
with the current ammo, and COL at the max
length the mag will allow.

I had a Ruger bolt gun, that belonged to a
fellow engineer, that I work with, sitting next
to my Tikka M-695, on my range bench. The
Ruger was chambered in .270 Win. In a side by
side comparision, the Ruger looked, and felt,
pretty sad. It also shot some ugly groups. The
Tikka shot some impressive groups. The Ruger
trigger sucked, and the Tikka trigger broke like
glass. This same engineer went home to No Dak,
deer hunting with family, and the train folks
wouldn't let him take his Ruger, on the train.
So he borrowed his uncle's T-3, in .25-06 Rem.
His Ruger is going to be traded, for a Tikka.

Make that 2 move votes for Tikka.

Squeeze

I have a Ruger stainless in 30-06 and a friend of mine as a T3 stainless. Having fired both I have to agree with the Tikka trigger fans. I have no issues with the heavier pull of the Ruger though and have not had it tweaked. It is actually a very good trigger, just a heavy pull. Both rifles however are very accurate and MOA is easily achieved in either. The T3 is in 22-250 and proved to be a very flat, accurate shooter. I had no problems keeping up with the T3's accuracy with my Ruger. Going to be a tough choice for sure because even I like both.

Ken....

Here's my 2cents worth.
I've owned 3 Tikka and four Ruger bolt action rifles. All three Tikkas shot very well to did I miss the target there's only one ragged hole there!?
The Rugers; one in 243 was inconsistant, one in 257 Rob was very accurate, one in 7x57 was bloody useless and one in 6.5x55 was very accurate.
Tikka get the nod since all three were good. The two good Rugers shot aswell as the Tikka but the other two were not worth a candle.
At this time there are no bolt action Rugers in the cabinet but there is a Tikka.
The Ruger trigger.

quote:

But how many of you you reload? and if you do how do you get around the short "factory ammo only" magazine width to tweak the sweet spot in seating bullets off the lands? or using longer bullets that need to be seated further out because of design and keep the max capacity of powder space?

I reload for a T3 in 223 and an M595 in 7mm-08 and cant understand where you think the problem is, in my 7mm-08 I regularly use hornady 162 SST's and 162 A-max, which are both extremely long bullets for 7mm, I experimented and can seat both of these bullets close to the lands without any magazine restriction.

Same with the 223, havn't had any drama seating bullets out to the lands, they still fed through the magazine without a drama.

I have a SS T3 in 270 Win and I really like it. It is very accurate. I agree with the opinion mentioned above, it has the best factory trigger I have found (even better than my Kimber Montana - which I also like very much), the action is slick as butter, it feeds flawlessly, great Sako barrel, and I like the way it handles and balances quite well - even though it is light, they didn't get there by putting a pencil barrel on it. It has nice weight and enough substance to balance nicely and not heat up as fast as some other lightweights with lighter barrels.

It does shave some weight with plastic (bolt shroud, trigger guard, magazine), and the stock is nothing to write home about, but IMHO the good points far outweigh the bad.

I also have a Tikka in 223, and neither rifle is picky about ammo in the least - in fact, both rifles have shot every brand and weight of factory ammo I have tried so far (4 in the 270 and 3 in the 223) under an inch.

The factory recoil pads are not much, and a limbsaver resides on both of mine for continuity and LOP - the guns mirror each other.

I would go Tikka - they're not perfect, but they are very good.

DJ

Tumbo raises a good question that I didn't quite know how to frame initially ...the max available length difference between a SA 308 based round and a "standard" LA '06 based round in the magazine.
I'm glad to see his post about confirming being able to seat long 7mm bullets out as far as needed...but is that a function of the SA length round's magazine being the same length as a LA's magazine with no spacer involved?...hence having more length available for the SA length rounds to seat bullets out farther than would be available for the LA rounds?

As I said in my original post I anticipate using some heavy (ie longer, as Tumbo refers to?) for caliber bullets and haves some concerns here, especially in a 270 unless someone can tell me difinitively that my "fly poop out of the pepper" issue is not a problem.

While I started this Q&A thread based on using a 270, as I have shot a 270 for over 30 years and am comfortable with the round... a 308 or 7-08 would also suffice for the goal of a lite weight, as close to a 7lb as possible all up, everyday deer/hog&texas available exotics under 400 lb's, at 40-50% less than a SAKO Finnlite or Kimber Montana price for the rifle.
For bigger critters than that we go to either 300WMg or 9.3x62...or something bigger as needed.

Right now it sure looks like I need to look harder at the Tikka and get my mind around the less than pleasing to my eyes stock and all nylon magazine.

I remember when Ruger 77's first came out in the '60's when I first started shooting and all the whining about the pot metal floorplates, milled scope ring mounts "that how do ya know aren't crooked" and goofy 45* angled receiver screws from the pre 64 M70 shooters...about the time that Olin brought out their post '64 offerings that there really was nothing mechanically wrong with except that they were just not the same old thing - and ugly...funny how we accept things when the performance of the newer design product exceeds the current state of the art product design and becomes the expected standard....and from everything you guys are telling me, it seems that the T3 for all its faults and ugly'ized stock in my eyes, has raised the bar in expected accuracy standards for a mid range priced out of the box rifle.
Ron

All I can tell you is that with my T3 in 223 and 55 grain Rem PSP's seated to the lands, I still have a couple of Milimeters(perhaps a tenth of an inch)of spare room in that mag, If thats any help.

My 7mm-08 on the other hand is a short action mag and with the 162 SST's loaded(havn't got any 162 A-maxes loaded at the moment) about 20 thou from the lands, I would still have an 8th of an inch to spare.

My only suggestion to you would be, see if you can borrow a mag from a shop or take some rounds in with these long bullets loaded out and see how they fit the magazine.

I have had some experience with 8 or 9 other T3's up to 300 win mag and none of the owners have mentioned any problems loading longer bullets, I personally dont think that the T3's would be any different to any other rifle in this reguard.

verhoositz , I have the T-3 light stainless syn. , in 300 Win . Mag . The only problem I have , is the magazine box is too short to seat the bullets out to where you want them .
( short mag.box & long throat )
I have not tried any factory loads so don't know how they would work .I did get it to group well , but only with the Nos. PPT. 180 gr.(1/2 "-100 yds. )I wanted something with higher b/c , but thats it .The only other bullet that showed promise was Speer G.S. 180 gr.It took about 200 rounds to show that these were the only one's that would work in this gun . I will have to accept that .Having said that , I wish I had bought the Rem. SPS in 300 mag.
Tom

I prefer the Ruger for a tough hunting rifle as I reckon there near in-destructible especially those stainless synthetics...............I like the crf etc. I have a laminate stainless .338 and funnily enough it has a steel floor plate as well shoots 225 gr woodleigh Protected points in to just under 1"at 100 yards.

Tikkas have a bit to much plastic for my likeing and I don't like the small loading port.....................an old Tikka now thats a different kettle of fish there awesome !!

T3 +1