Replacing the stock plastic with metal is said to improve accuracy.
Do those of you who have made the replacement find this to be true?

I haven't found it necessary to replace anything on the 3 I own and they are all sub MOA w handloads.

Haven’t replaced the bottom “metal,” but I’d have a really hard time improving the existing accuracy.



P

This.

I have owned over a dozen Tikka rifles and have replaced the plastic bottom metal on every one and experienced no change in accuracy for the better or worse....In my experience its just a cosmetic change for the better 👍......Hb

I didn’t see any accuracy gain but it a starts out ridiculous accurate. I had two different ones. I had one that had to have a bunch of shims to make the magazine work right big downgrade to the plastic.

The other was a mountain tactical and that one felt really good and had no magazine issues.

I usually replace the action screws and recoil lug to the mountain tacticals. Not sure if it does anything I just like them.

I've replaced both of my factory trigger guards with Mountain Tactical trigger guards. There was no change in accuracy,but accuracy was great to start with! I just like the MT guards.

Same as others, no change in accuracy.

Let’s put it this way- I wasn’t any more accurate after I replaced the factory bottom metal! Looks better, though.

Ditto...

If it ain't broke...
But then we wouldn't be Loonies!

I'll pile on here too. I have a Tikka T3 TAC in .300 WM that shoots factory ammunition into a little over 5-shot 1/2" groups and I saw no significant change after upgrading the trigger guard, bolt shroud, recoil lug and magazines with Mountain Tactical parts. That rifle has dropped three elk and one deer and like others have said, the upgrades were more about aesthetics with parts commensurate with the overall quality of the rifle.

I have two Sako S20s and am now convinced that Sako/Tikka make the best production rifles available. If they'd only increase the .30 cal twist rates I wouldn't even look at another manufacturer. As it is, I'm barely looking at other manufacturers any more.

If Tikka made a .280 I might just sell a couple of rifles.

Ok, I gotta ask: other than, "just because," what will a .280 do that your 7-08s won't?

Throw a 160 gr AccuBond close to 3k fps.

Got it. I don't want to hijack this thread, but just a thought: why not have a 7-08 rechambered to .280? I believe the action will work, and you've probably already swapped the extractor and magazine with something from Mountain Tactical. Dunno, but it might be a good way to get what you want without waiting for Tikka to deliver. They do, I believe, offer a 7x64, but not sure about how to get one to the US.

I don't believe a 280 reamer will clean up a 7mm-08 chamber, but I think a 280AI reamer will.

Then you would be stuck with the 9.5" twist, but it would be fine with 160's at over 3K fps, even with the 22" barrel.

I like the way you roll….

Thanks Scott.

I've looked at the chamber drawings quite a few times, and I think the minimum body taper of the 280AI makes it an easy rechamber from 7-08 without setback.

And with 160's, the Tikka magazine/action length should be fine too.

Twist and magazine length may eliminate the use of longer bullets though.

I want a 24” barrel.

Well, you’ll have to bite the bullet Pharm, order up a Benchmark or Krieger and get that devil made up. Life’s to short to want for something so easy!

I’d bet he’d get away with 162 ELDs and definitely Accubonds and similar. Especially if throating and such was looked at.

I'm really not trying to convince anybody to get something they don't want, but my math would look something like this:

24" 280 = 22.4" 280AI + $500

They better make the best rifle because if anything is wrong with it you are getting zero from beretta. I sold all my Sakos had issues of some kind one wouldn’t eject the other stock went sticky. Neither dealer or beretta would stand by them.

I still have two tikkas and they are pretty much perfect.

I had a T3x hunter and wanted a metal trigger guard to go with the wood stock. I used High Desert’s bottom metal which duplicates the shape of the factory trigger guard. Made the rifle a little nicer IMO. Haven’t bothered with my superlites.

That makes good sense as well. This is how this place costs all of us money

Or you could just buy my 270 SuperLite in the Sako Classic McMillan EDGE fill and have it all ready to go

270 is gay, haven’t you heard?

There is that too I guess. It’s a sweetheart that’ll I’ll never use. Tried to talk myself into it but now it just collects dust.

Sure looks better with that nice stock Scott.

I've only owned about 3 Tikkas, and I sold them all before ever firing a shot.

Got a good deal each time, but after considering what it would cost to trick them out with a nice stock and bottom metal (bolt shroud and lug on T3) they didn't seem like such a good deal.

And factoring in some other dislikes (twist rates, action length, economical design) I just decided I probably wouldn't be happy with the end result. It failed my cost/benefit analysis.

I think the best plan for a Tikka is to just hunt it as is. It's functional with no modifications, and if you like the package it's a good rifle for the price.

I agree. The only one left is the 270. I thought I had a buyer for it as well, but I can't find the fellas number. I had a 1-8 22-250, 6.5 CM, and 7-08 Compact. Those three are all gone to good homes. I broke even with them, even after putting the same stocks on all three of those as well, but I just never really loved them like I do Model 70's. Weird, but that's the facts. Amazing shooting rifles though and excellent plastic stocks too.

Same for me. I have used various T3, T3X, but keep coming back to my M70’s. I still own one Tikka, a wood stock hunter in 222 with the High Desert bottom metal…it ain’t going anywhere.

Bottom line . . . You gotta like your rifle.