Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Tell me about the Sako A2 (AII), and how it compares to a Tikka T3x

By today’s standards, AII (A2) Sakos are now old. I have a few and they shoot better with less problems than pig stink says. He’s not the only guy that shoots a lot on this forum, just the only one that thinks he matters most…

Thanks shrap. I guess a rifle made in the 80's is now 40 years old, or close to it. I was talking to gunner500 yesterday, and he said he likes the pre garcia's, but doesn't have much experience with the AII. I figured this one was calling my name and I've been interested in the older Sako's for a while. I had a Sako A7 for a couple years. It was a fine rifle, but I sold it a couple years ago. Personally, I like the looks and features of this older AII over that rifle.

You cant go wrong with any of the A-series Sakos. These actions were the last to be scaled to the caliber ‘family’. The MX91’s had different length actions, but the bolt diameter stayed the same. This carried thru with the 75, 85, and now model 90. Although Sako went with 3-lugged 60 deg bolt throw starting w the 75.

I had a 75 deluxe in 17 Remington and it was small bolt face with 3 lugs, 60 degrees…

I had no Idea that Sako made smaller diameter bolts after the AI’s. I’ll need to research that. Any pix?

That's why I started the thread. These guys know their Sako's. I've always admired the older ones. Almost bought a few, but never took the plunge. This one really caught my eye, because of it's size. It reminds me of the Tikka T3x that I love. The bolt body is comparable in size to the Tikka, it is very smooth, just like the Tikka, and I'm sure it's going to shoot as well as a Tikka. These guys here confirmed a lot of this. Even though some say they are nothing like the Tikka, I see a lot of similarities.

I just looked at both. Hard to compare fairly as one is a short action and the other is not. My Sako is about 3 inches shorter total but the weights are about the same. Also not fair is the Tikka is set up for a different style and has a much larger/heavier scope. Both are stock with nothing being done to either. Slapped a scope on them and shoot /hunt.

The action of the Tikka is significantly smoother than my Sako but is a good bit slopper

There is a lot of plastic on the Tikka compared to the Sako

This is subjective but the build quality of the Sako is a lot better

I have not played with the Tikka as much as I shot the Sako but at this point in time it has been a lot less finicky with ammo than the Sako. All brands and bullet weights that I have tried but if push comes to shove the Tikka likes heavier bullet weights

And finally just going off memory and again hugely subjective is recoil. The Tikka felt recoil is more in my opinion. Maybe stock design, maybe fit to me, maybe I’m nuts but I find the Tikka a good bit snappier. Not unbearable by any stretch but surprising to me

I’d buy either in a heartbeat if they were something I were looking for but I’d also sell one a lot quicker and that wouldn’t be the Sako

Just my opinions from the cheap seats.

Someone got a new gun and didn't post photos?

Sako rifles check all the boxes for me. Extremely well made, good stock ergos, nice wood, beautiful bluing, and accurate. The original Sako scope mounts just add to the charm. Those Finns know how to make a gun (and gunpowder, too), which isn't surprising considering Russia is permanently camped on their doorstep.

Here's my AII in 22-250 wearing Deluxe trim. She's a great little prairie dog git'r.

This is a picture I have that shows the 17 Remington, between a 6mm PPC deluxe and a 22 PPC deluxe. It is probably one of the rarest Sakos you could find. Sako never even listed it among the calibers available for a 75 deluxe. It also had a drop floor plate which was even more rare, as 75’s typically had detachable magazines and an ugly bolt with a proboscis sticking out the back of the bolt…

Nice rifles. Those late A series stocks are the best.

It’s a good day, I learned something new.

That is a sweet little rifle there. A lot to like with that one. The one I bought is not as nice as the deluxe model, but will fit me much better. Those roll over, and high cheek pieces hurt. As is, the rifle feels great in the hands and when shouldered. The action is buttery smooth. I don't have the rifle in hand yet, as I purchased it in the middle of the day on Friday, and the shop closed early Saturday. I should pick it up on Monday. Then I'll start in on it. I'll get some pics taken after I clean it up. Probably pics before it gets a scope, and then some afterwards. I'll more than likely glass bed it, and then probably shoot it Tuesday? Is that fast? Some of my buddies buy a rifle, then take 3 months to get a scope on it!!!!

I know, I wanted to show some before and after, and get a baseline, but I already know it needs to be glass bedded. I could feel it when I ran the bolt at the fun shop. That is something some guys don't get, or understand. But as some have confirmed, they shoot better when they are glass bedded. So I won't waste any time getting that done. The barrel is not freefloated, so I may just leave that alone? Then experiment later, if it's not shooting like I think it should.

The barrel on this 243 winchester is heavier than the 22-250 you pictured. It is horribly copper fouled, so I'll be soaking that and getting it cleaned. In my mind, the seller probably got rid of it because it was "not shooting like it used to". You know how some guys say they send them down the road, when they start shooting like schidt?? Well, that's my best guess. Then I come in, and make them shoot well again. Just how it goes. This one shows good sharp rifling, from what I can see of it, and the bolt face is very nice, so whoever had it, didn't shoot it much, but also did not take excellent care of it. Like I've said before, this rifle will be a lot nicer after I buy it, and tune it up a bit. If you guys want pics of that progression, and work, I'll keep you posted.

Thanks for the comments. Much appreciated!!!

Great info. Thanks! I know I'll have fun comparing them. I know there are some things that are different, like the plunger ejector on the Tikka. It never fails. If the Sako is a better build quality, then that should also be good, even though it has a fixed blade ejector. I know after a few problems with my A7, I got rid of it. That was a poor mechanical design though. I don't see that happening with the A II. I hope.. We'll see though, as when I test I am not going to be biased toward one over the other. If the Sako fails, I'll call it like it is.

Sucko 243's are EPIC Goat Fhuqks at 1-10" Hint.

Not that you CLUELESS Drooling Dumbfhuqks,could even begin to summons a FIRST fhuqking clue. Hint.

How did those 108's do in your 6x45 upper? HINT.



Yet SchitSmell is an even DUMBER Fhuqk. Hint.



Bless your hearts for fhuqking TRYING.

Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!..................

Pre AII actions are sweet. I just picked this L46 222 at a gun show in Las Vegas. This is a classic example of how well Sako rifles are made. Somehow this gun remained unfired all these years as when I cleaned it, the original packing grease was still in the bolt, action, and magazine.

I hope to be shooting it soon…

Cool find. That one does look brand new. Chambered for a cool cartridge too. Nice find!!

Nice thread. I know nothing about Sako's.

Come on Ed..

WhenI bought my AII 22-250 many years ago I wanted the deluxe but the comb was just too high for me so I got the standard........lower comb and plastic plate instead of rubber recoil pad
not quite as pretty but never been disappointed

I ran a AII in 22-250, with Millet rings, for going along about 30 years. Lots of figure in the buttstock. Fine looking and shooting rifle. Let's see some photos of yours, maybe it's my old one.