I'm looking to pickup a somewhat lightweight rifle for deer and occasional elk hunting. Shots will range up to 450 yards. Don't want a super light gun that is going to be brutal with recoil. Considering a 7mm mag and would like stainless with synthetic stock.

I'm leaning towards Cabela's Sako A7 Big Game as it has what appears to be a decent Bell and Carlson stock and 24" fluted barrel. The rifle costs around $1k. I'm not a huge fan of the cheap plastic synthetic stocks and would like to stay with the Bell and Carlson or other higher quality synthetic.

Is there anything better in that price range for my intended purposes?

Maybe a Tikka T3 Lite w/ an aftermarket stock (B&C, McMillan, Manners) depending on how much you want to spend. Not saying it'd be better than the A7 but you're getting the Sako barrel and the damn things tend to be shooters. Just an idea anyway.

Thanks. I thought about the Tikka but by the time I add the B&C stock, the Sako is the same price. So unless the Tikka is actually considered better than the Sako it may make sense to just go with the Tikka.

Might consider the Weatherby Vanguard S2. Nice enough stock and you would have some room for putting the extra into the optics.

Sako and Tikka's are made in the same factory. The barrels are made from the same steel and in the same hammer-forging machine. The difference is in the actions. The Tikka uses one action for all sized cartridges.
Both are hand-fired for accuracy prior to leaving the plant.

Someone with more insight may be able to talk about the Weatherby though.

Any of the three would be a great choice in my book.

Winchester EW can be had for about the same money.

i am a big fan of the vanguards, and i know they have some nice add-ons and features at that price level.

Vangaurd RC model would be around that 1K mark and carries accuracy guaranty , B&C stock too. The A-7 is probably a bit lighter.

I am not sure if they are the same rifle, but the A7 Roughtech shows an internal aluminum chassis which MAY mean a thinner wrist.

Look here:

http://www.sako.fi/sako_a7_roughtech.php

and here:

http://www.eurooptic.com/sako-a7-big-game-w-roughtech-stock-7mm-rem-mag-26-jrmbg70f.aspx

How is it even possible for someone to recoomend a Tikka over a Sako?

Sakos are Corvettes, Tikkas are Chevettes.....

The A7 is no Corvette, and not really a Sako in the traditional sense.

What makes it better than a Tikka?

Two action lengths . . . LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE?

I recognize the plastic trigger guard, floorplate, bolt shroud, and magazine. Looks a lot like a Tikka with a B&C stock to me.

A used Sako 85 goes for what a new A7 runs.

A7's are more accurate, but the 85's are built better.

Gotta agree. It is pretty weak for a Sako and I'd not buy one any more than I'd buy a Tikka.

Receiver is better/stronger than Tikka though, not just because of sizes. Magazine better design also......

75s are better than both.....

One advantage of the Tikka is there are alot more aftermarket options for them than the A7.

I like the A7, I had one, the magazine is better but also almost twice as much as a Tikka magazine.

Find a used mint Sako m75 or m85ss!!

Nothing wrong with the A7, I picked one up for my nephew in JUne in 270WSM. It was his high school graduation gift to himself.

Both Beretta. Speaks volumes..

The "plastic" Sako/Tikka uses in their magazines/trigger guards is not the Mattel type used for such things by Savage/Marlin/Ruger/Rem. on their economy rifles. It is MUCH tougher material. I know this is fact as I watched a loaded Tikka magazine cartwheel down the pavement at 60 mph last season.Aside from a bit of road rash [pock marked surface] NO DAMAGE and it still works perfectly. Try that with a sheet steel magazine.

The plastic doesn't really bother me too much.

I guess I'll keep an eye out for a used 75 or 85 but to be honest I'm a little hesitant to drop that kind of money on a used rifle.

The Weatherby S2 are nice but they are little heavier than I'm looking for.

Any other rifles I should consider.

I am sure the plastic is GOOD PLASTIC and it really is more of a traditionalist/aesthetic complaint that one supported by any functional deficiency.

That plastic "bottom metal" is a big detraction for me.

And it might be less abrasive if the plastic magazines were $25 (less than a steel Remington magazine) instead of $80.

BTW . . . I am not a Sako, Tikka, or A7 hater at all. In fact, I just bought a Tikka CTR in 260 (with bottom metal), and I have been tempted by the A7 Roughtech too.

Get a Ruger All-Weather, ditch the stock for a decent synthetic.

Also consider one of the Winchesters or a long action or 8400 Montana.

I see no need for detatchable mags on a hunting rifle unless you're hopping in and out of a truck all day. Just something else to lose, plus IMHO they look like crap.

If you really want the Sako thing, I'd get a used 75.

I'm not sure why folks think they need to change the "cheap" Tikka stocks. Hell, they virtually always shoot less than an inch right out of the box; what is a Bell and Carlson going to do for your that the Tikka isn't?

I bought my first Tikka this year and I have been more pleased with the purchase than any other rifle I have purchased in years. It has an outstanding trigger and I really like the stock and the smoothness of the bolt. There is no way I would ever consider paying an extra 450 to buy an A7 that won't shoot any better or function any smoother than the Tikka.

I tell you what, you buy a stainless Tikka In 7mag and if you don't like it I'll buy it from you for 90 percent of what you paid for it.

Tikkas dont suffer any of the ejection problems that the Sako 85 and possibly the A7 have. Cases hitting the scope. I have experienced this problem with the 85 first hand - I hear that some of the A7s do the same too.

I cannot believe that there are guys out there who still think the Sako 85 is the holy grail��..

As for the synthetic stock on the T3 - pretty well indestructible - unless you throw it in the fire!

The L46 is the Holy Grail!

Yup - no argument there!