Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Opinions on two rifles: Tikka T3 .338 Win. Mag and Ruger 77 MarK II .260 Compact

I was out trolling for "deals" last weekend and found a few: Sako blued A7's in .243 for $469, Tikka blued T3's in .308, .338 Federal, and .338 Winchester for $449, and Ruger Mark II compacts in .260 Rem. in blued and stainless for$459-$499.
The ones that really caught my eye were the .338 Win Tikka and the .260 Rugers. Can anyone comment on the recoil in the T3 in .338? Just curious how severe it is. My medium bore stable has never been "full" and I've been impressed by the 'Fire members loyalty to these guns. Secondly, how accurate are the little Rugers with the 16.5" barrels? Seems like they would be pretty loud as well.
Thanks for your input!
Lundtroller

Having bench fired 338 Wins on numerous occasions (not a T3), you can expect alot of recoil similiar to say the 300 Win or 300 Wby. T3s are somewhat lighter in rifle weight, so expect the recoil.

Got a little 16.5" barreled Ruger Frontier compact myself, and if the 260 Ruger you`re considering is anything like mine, they are very accurate using handloads the rifle prefers.

Yep! You can expect more noise from the shorter barrel. But imo, there is not really alot more noise from the 16.5" tubes vs the 18.5" and 20" barrels. But regardless of barrel length, one should always wear good ear protection designed for field use when hunting and muffs at the range.

My Ruger Frontier is chambered in the 300 WSM. My hearing is still in great shape. By comparison, a 260 chambered in the new Ruger compact is childs play.

Ruger compacts are wonderful to carry, very fast`n handy, and are highly manuverable rifles for field use under any circumstances or terrain.

A 260 Ruger compact will easily take care of any deer out to 300-400 yards, and you can probably throw in an elk into the hunting mix as well.

I'd grab that A7, AI the chamber, and shoot the chit out of things. Smokin' deal..

+1

I've shot a few of the Tikka T3 Lites and must say they are some of the most unforgiving rifles I've ever fired in terms of recoil.

My guess is stock design and rifle weight are the culprits here. All I know is I wouldn't want to shoot one in 7mm Rem Mag, let alone .338 Win Mag.

The Tikka (even with a Limbsaver) will punch you. With the way that action is designed, along with their relatively light weight, they seem just right in 25-06 and 270. The 30-06 is OK (what I have in stainless LH) but I wish they would have chambered them in 280.

As far as Rugers go, I've always preferred the Ultralight over the Compact.

I'll add another +1 to the A7 being the best deal.

I also say the A7 is the best deal. But the best deal is usless when its not what you want.

my tikka t3 has less recoil than my rem 700 and the remmy weighs a full pound more. both in 270win.

Thanks for the replies on the different rifles! I too thought the deal on the A7 was too hard to pass up and picked up two of those!!! I think I'll save them for my daughters after I get them "broken in" of course. I can hold on the T3 .338 Win. if the recoil is going to be that bad. I already have a 300 Wby that I like a lot but I acknowledge doesn't get used much any more for the same reasons... too many things that kill just as effectively that don't recoil as much. Looking for a reason to try a Tikka I guess! Ditto for the Ruger Compact... don't know much about the rifle, but would like to try the .260!!!

FYI, the Tikka's are on sale at Gart Bros./Sports Authority. The Sako A7's are on closeout at Sportsman's Warehouse... only .243. Most of the ones left are in Alaska and they will charge you shipping to get them to the lower 48 stores.
Lundtroller

I have a T3 in 338 Win Mag. The recoil is pretty stout with full-house 225 grain loads. However, the stock fits me well and I find the recoil to be quite manageable. With 180 grain Accubonds at 3150 fps, the the 338 WM recoil feels lighter than that of my 7mm Rem Mag with 160 grain bullets at 2900 fps (Rem 700 BDL). My 6'4" frame favors the T3 stock design.

I have also had a Ruger Compact, but mine was chambered in 7-08. That 16.5 inch barrel made a terrible lot of noise and the rig bucked like a wild horse. I sent that off on a trade in short order... I'd rather shoot my T3 in 338 Win Mag with full-house 225 grain loads than that little Ruger 7-08 with 139 grain loads. Go figure.

Birdhog, this must be a fit thing. I've had the opposite experience you've had. I'm 5'10" (and a half!) and my T3 270 kicks worse than the other 270s I had. (I do like the stock feel.) However, a lot of that could be the lighter weight of the Tikka.

I also have a 260 compact and it is really mild to me (but loud).

Those are some great deals. I paid $630 for my stainless compact, then some $10 background fee, then $25 shipping. I would have liked to have found your sale!

IDMilton,

I agree- stock fit. I never had my 5'9" wife fire the Ruger Compact. She may have found it quite tame.

Use the Ruger for a tomato stake and buy the Sako, second would be Tikka. Ruger isn't even in the same league with these two, especially when it comes to smoothness, accuracy, resale...and on and on. Flinch

.....................It is interesting to read how others can determine how potentially owned new Ruger rifles shoot,,,, especially ones that they will never see or own themselves! Nevermind of course, that usually in most cases when the handloads are found that the rifle prefers, rifles somehow out of the blue, become more accurate.

Well Mr. Flinch. My two "tomatoe stakes" otherwise known as Rugers, shoot moas and less using the best handloads they each prefer. No bedding work was performed on either. And as others have posted here, there are alot of very accurate Rugers floating around.

Also, neither of my "tomatoe stakes" have cost me a kill.

I don`t think you would want to volunteer to place a nice round bright yellow circle smack in the middle of your chest and stand 400 or 500 yards downrange from my two Rugers.....Ooooops, I meant "tomato stakes.".............

I'd grab a Ruger .260. All my Rugers, whether purchsed new or used, shoot great. All I do is float the barrels and polish the triggers.

Who had the Rugers on sale?

Depending on your use, and assuming that it is general big game hunting, the Ruger .260 is a dandy. I'd much prefer this cartridge to a .243 in any get up, and the Ruger MkII action is great. Trigger can be easily worked on to give a superb pull. Safety cams the striker back in a simple and positive way.

I have had no less than 10 tomato stakes and worked on a bunch of others. They don't hold a candle to other brands in the fit and finish, engineering, smoothness, nor resale. I didn't say they weren't functional. They go boom just fine, but there are FAR better rifles out there. Sako and Tikka, just to mention a couple ;o) When did you own your last Tikka or Sako? So keep your tomato stake and go paint a "BIG YELLOW CIRCLE" on someone elses chest (that was a really lame comment, by the way). If you were shooting any other brand, it would be a small orange dot ;o) Flinch

...........I guess you own some "older" Ruger tomato stakes" then? Older ones did have their issues.

Fit and finish you say? Care to engage in a durability contest under any weather condition between a Ruger and any other rifle? Oh sure, there are rifles that have somewhat smoother actions and perhaps a few more subtle refinements. That`s no big deal for most. Never has cost me a kill nor accuracy.

Engineering? Stronger bolts? Stronger actions? Did your Ruger`s break by chance? My two Rugers, are not your Rugers my friend.

I`ll settle for any sized colored circle you wish!