Give me a reason: Tikka vs Savage vs Vanguard vs CZ

M

markalbob

New member
ugh, I'm looking at a bolt for predators, possible light-duty deer but i do already have a 30-06....coyotes main concern, with possible crows and chucks and whatnot. I'm also a lefty.

Looks like all the above have reasonable, accurate, and lefty bolts. Give me a reason to go for one of the above over the others.

Any takers?
 
Go with what one feels best and what you want to spend. If you want to be a barrel switcher get the Savage, if you want a Tikka cause they're "cool" get one. All in all if you don't like the feel of the gun you will never be happy. Just my 2 cent
 
Personally, I prefer the Vanguard action to the others. Savages have been good to me also, but I don't buy them anymore. Only CZ's I can like are their safari rifles. I don't do Tikkas of any flavor......
 
The single set trigger on the CZ is really nice. Mine is set at 6 ounces on the set sited and 3 pounds unset. Add to that great accuracy and an action built around the 223 sized case instead of just a big rifle made to fit and that's a lot of pluses for the CZ.
 
The Stevens/Savages are my vote for best deal for the initial expense, accurate and solid, and can switch calibers in 5 minutes with a few simple tools.
apex
 
I went with the CZ.

one thing to consider is what sort of rest will you use if any. I use cross sticks so if the forearm is not round it really doesn't craddle very well in the V of the sticks. for me this ruled out a tikka. but if you just shoot off hand or with a bi-pod it doesn't matter.
 
Here is my take on the matter. I have Tikka T-3 lights in 22-250 and 270 win.. Savages in 17 HMR and .204, all with the accutrigger. I have the set trigger CZ in 17 HMR. I do not own a Tikka T-3 lite in .204 because they don't make one.

I am happy with all of the firearms but they each have their own little quirks. Setting the CZ 17HMR trigger multiple times for ground squirrels is something of a pain. The Savages, both in 17HMR and .204 can have feeding issues. Not big issues but enough to notice. The Tikka presents problems top loading a bullet with a full mag in. Nearly impossible if you have large fingers. Not a big issue but noticeable if you are used to holding the shells down in the mag while you try a chamber one from the top. This is more noticeable if you are constantly getting in and out of vehicles for short hunts.

I am happy with them all, but for fit, finish, accuracy, price and slick action I would lean toward Tikka. You quickly learn to load the chamber first and then snap in the mag.

I have turned a number of my friends on to Tikkas. They are serious hunters and ranchers. I can state that they are all quite pleased with their Tikkas and would by T-3s again.
 
I just went through the exact same decision. I am even left handed. I went with the CZ in 204 Ruger. And here is why.

1. Set Trigger. This trigger was the best trigger out of all. Including Accu-trigger.

2. Hammer Forged Barrel.

3. I preferred the CZ twist rate.

4. The price is comparable in all the brands you listed. Even the Savage is every bit as expensive. And the CZ comes with rings. So that is one less thing to buy.

5. I wanted the light weight rifle, and I narrowed my decision down to the Savage and the CZ, and the CZ was lighter.

6. The CZ is a true Mauser action, with positive extraction.

7. IMO the CZ is the best looking rifle of all listed.

8. IMO CZ has the highest quality magazine. And the rifle had to have a removable magazine. The magazine on the Tikka totally turned me off. Tom.
 
Quote:
I just went through the exact same decision. I am even left handed. I went with the CZ in 204 Ruger. And here is why.

1. Set Trigger. This trigger was the best trigger out of all. Including Accu-trigger.

2. Hammer Forged Barrel.

3. I preferred the CZ twist rate.

4. The price is comparable in all the brands you listed. Even the Savage is every bit as expensive. And the CZ comes with rings. So that is one less thing to buy.

5. I wanted the light weight rifle, and I narrowed my decision down to the Savage and the CZ, and the CZ was lighter.

6. The CZ is a true Mauser action, with positive extraction.

7. IMO the CZ is the best looking rifle of all listed.

8. IMO CZ has the highest quality magazine. And the rifle had to have a removable magazine. The magazine on the Tikka totally turned me off. Tom.



I own a couple fo CZ rifles and they are perfectly fine factory rifles.

However, the statement that the CZ is a Mauser action would likely cause Peter Paul Mauser to raise up and bump his head on his coffin lid.

A rifle with a removeable bolt handle and a removeable magazine are not his ideas of a Mauser action. He worked for years perfecting and patenting the internal staggered column magazine to eliminate eternal magazines for military use and he felt the bolt and bolt handle needed to be one piece to stand up to military use and conditions.

In comparison, the fact that a Rem 700 has a staggered column internal magazine does not make it a Mauser by any stretch of the imagination. Or a Ruger 77 with a claw extractor is not a Mauser action either..

I own CZ's, Vanguard's, and Tikka's, and I would pick the Tikka hands down. My one adventure with a Savage a few years ago cured me of making that decision again...

-BCB
 
Quote:
Quote:
I just went through the exact same decision. I am even left handed. I went with the CZ in 204 Ruger. And here is why.

1. Set Trigger. This trigger was the best trigger out of all. Including Accu-trigger.

2. Hammer Forged Barrel.

3. I preferred the CZ twist rate.

4. The price is comparable in all the brands you listed. Even the Savage is every bit as expensive. And the CZ comes with rings. So that is one less thing to buy.

5. I wanted the light weight rifle, and I narrowed my decision down to the Savage and the CZ, and the CZ was lighter.

6. The CZ is a true Mauser action, with positive extraction.

7. IMO the CZ is the best looking rifle of all listed.

8. IMO CZ has the highest quality magazine. And the rifle had to have a removable magazine. The magazine on the Tikka totally turned me off. Tom.



I own a couple fo CZ rifles and they are perfectly fine factory rifles.

However, the statement that the CZ is a Mauser action would likely cause Peter Paul Mauser to raise up and bump his head on his coffin lid.

A rifle with a removeable bolt handle and a removeable magazine are not his ideas of a Mauser action. He worked for years perfecting and patenting the internal staggered column magazine to eliminate eternal magazines for military use and he felt the bolt and bolt handle needed to be one piece to stand up to military use and conditions.

In comparison, the fact that a Rem 700 has a staggered column internal magazine does not make it a Mauser by any stretch of the imagination. Or a Ruger 77 with a claw extractor is not a Mauser action either..

I own CZ's, Vanguard's, and Tikka's, and I would pick the Tikka hands down. My one adventure with a Savage a few years ago cured me of making that decision again...

-BCB




I appreciate the information that you shared. And it sounds like you know what you are talking about. So I would like to ask you a question. Are you saying that the CZ is not a Mauser Action?? They do advertise it as a Mini-Mauser action?? With positive feed, and claw extraction??

My post is not meant as a smart remark, so please do not construe it as such. I am more interested in your opinion. Thank you, Tom.
 
What sold me on the CZ was the fact that the varmint models come with a medium bull barrel. I am not fond of sporter weight barrels and i really like heavy barreled rifles. I needed a carry gun for calling duty. The CZ offered the best of both ends. The medium heavy barrel is just right. It is a great compromise. They shoot pretty well and the removable clip is a nice feature as well. I also agree with BAyou city boy about this rifle not being a mauser action. At best a modified version. Non the less a nice little rifle that shoots with the best of the factory rifles! I will buy another! Lee
 
1)Tikka 595 if can find if not T3 will be fine. Best action of the group.

Savage, I'd probably go with the predator model if i could find a 243. Best barrels of the group possibly most accurate. Sloppy bolts and stocks may need some additional fitting.

Vangaurd Sub MOA not alot experience with these but generally they are sub moa guns with decent stocks. triggers will need help.

Howa is good choice too but triggers need help, fairly simple to do yourself

CZ no experience but they do feel decent.
 
I own or have owned all listed except the vangaurd but have owned it's brother the howa. Pretty much boils down to personal preference, and what fits you. Personally I like the tikka hands down, but my cz is pretty nice too.
 
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I just went through the exact same decision. I am even left handed. I went with the CZ in 204 Ruger. And here is why.

1. Set Trigger. This trigger was the best trigger out of all. Including Accu-trigger.

2. Hammer Forged Barrel.

3. I preferred the CZ twist rate.

4. The price is comparable in all the brands you listed. Even the Savage is every bit as expensive. And the CZ comes with rings. So that is one less thing to buy.

5. I wanted the light weight rifle, and I narrowed my decision down to the Savage and the CZ, and the CZ was lighter.

6. The CZ is a true Mauser action, with positive extraction.

7. IMO the CZ is the best looking rifle of all listed.

8. IMO CZ has the highest quality magazine. And the rifle had to have a removable magazine. The magazine on the Tikka totally turned me off. Tom.



I own a couple fo CZ rifles and they are perfectly fine factory rifles.

However, the statement that the CZ is a Mauser action would likely cause Peter Paul Mauser to raise up and bump his head on his coffin lid.

A rifle with a removeable bolt handle and a removeable magazine are not his ideas of a Mauser action. He worked for years perfecting and patenting the internal staggered column magazine to eliminate eternal magazines for military use and he felt the bolt and bolt handle needed to be one piece to stand up to military use and conditions.

In comparison, the fact that a Rem 700 has a staggered column internal magazine does not make it a Mauser by any stretch of the imagination. Or a Ruger 77 with a claw extractor is not a Mauser action either..

I own CZ's, Vanguard's, and Tikka's, and I would pick the Tikka hands down. My one adventure with a Savage a few years ago cured me of making that decision again...

-BCB




I appreciate the information that you shared. And it sounds like you know what you are talking about. So I would like to ask you a question. Are you saying that the CZ is not a Mauser Action?? They do advertise it as a Mini-Mauser action?? With positive feed, and claw extraction??

My post is not meant as a smart remark, so please do not construe it as such. I am more interested in your opinion. Thank you, Tom.



Tom:

The CZ action is designed to look like a Mauser action, but its overall design (removeable bolt handle/external box magazine) negates what they are advertising. True, it is positive feed and has the claw extractor like a Mauser, but so do a couple of other actions that do not claim to be Mausers. The claim is more marketing than fact when you look at the total picture...

As an example, I own a Kimber of Oregon rifle that has controlled round feeding and a claw extractor, but the appearance of a Mauser action ends there. The tiny Kimber action looks nothing like a Mauser in profile...

Zastava in Yugoslavia is about the only true maker of full sized Mauser actions today that closely follow the 98 Mauser design. The also are marketed as "mini-Mausers" in the small action design (Charles Daly did and now Remington imports the Zastava action - the Rem 798/799 rifles.), but the 799 "mini-mauser" from Zastava is not a true Mauser design either. It just looks like one. On the other hand, the full size design (Rem 798) follows the 98 Mauser design closely and many major part interchange.

HTH - BCB
 
My vote is Tikka T3. The reasons are weight and it shoots MOA with anything I feed it. It also handles the rough stuff . Easy to clean and won't break the bank. Some folks don't like the composite clip. If it's good enough for a stock then why not the clip? It's quieter, won't rust, and doesn't wear on the stock when inserted. I'd rather have plastic to plastic than shove a metal clip in there. There all fine rifles so choose what feels best and suits your intended use.
P1060062-1.jpg
 
I have Savage, Howa, and the Tikka.. The Tikka always shoots great, its my Go To rifle on most occasions. I think all the ones listed have good merit. Choose what feels the Best. Good luck with your purchase.
 
I am looking at a CZ as well....but I just can't get over the scope height required for bolt clearance....not natural.
Does anyone have a solution for this?
 
Back
Top