Tikka T3x Lite SS Shortened vs Tikka T3x Superlite

[brymoore]

I never understand why you’d want to cut a barrel. There are advantages to a longer barrel and shortcomings to cutting it.

 

[mr_steve]

I never understand why you’d want to cut a barrel. There are advantages to a longer barrel and shortcomings to cutting it.

If you’ve ever tried hiking through a mile of alders with a rifle on your pack you’d understand a shorter barrel. I’ve heard lots of good reports from a shorter barrel. You lose some velocity at further distances but beyond yardages I would shoot at. I may be missing something so please feel free to make me aware.

 

[mr_steve]

I have heard rumors that the 6.5 Creedmoor might be a better killer than the 300 RUM

To the OP - I have a 6.5 CM Superlite. Mine is the left hand version with the shorter 22.4” barrel. Since the barrel is already skinny, I find it hard to believe that the flutes make the Superlite 4/10 of a pound lighter than the Lite. BTW - I saw a post on another thread that indicated that a 4” section cut from the end of a Tikka weighed 4 oz.

Yeah I’ve heard an ounce per inch is average. After spending all day researching rifles and comparisons I’m leaning towards the 7mm-08 and cutting it down to 20” as well as threading it. Not necessarily for weight savings but I want a shorter length so it’s easy to pack through brush. The 7-08 vs 6.5 comparison seems to be that the 6.5 can be better for long range shooting but 7-08 has better versatility for game and knockdown with still minimal recoil like the 6.5. Either should work well for what I need so I choose hunting versatility over long range plinking.

I’m not even close to being an expert but these are my observations from what I’ve been told and what I’ve read on several different forums. If it’s on the internet it’s got to be true, right?

 

[Brian in Montana]

I doubt you'll be in any way disappointed with a 7mm-08, especially if you handload. (I missed it if you said.).

And it might just be me, but I really don't find a 22.4" barrel awkward in the brush. My 7-08 is a Rem 700 with a 24" barrel, and although it's generally not my first choice on a mountain pack-in, I really don't find it too bad either. I have a strap on my pack that holds a rifle in place under my right arm, so it's not really sticking way up to get caught in branches anyway.

 

[Big Ed]

or do like i did. i bought a brace of tikka t3x sl's in 7mm-08 rem and 7mm rem mag. i like the 7mm bullet and is prolly my fav diameter bullet with 6.5's,260 rem,coming in on a very close 2nd. i'm strictly a whitetail deer hunter but bought the 7mm rem mag just in case i ever got the chance to elk hunt. the 7mm-08 rem will do all i need round here in MS but ya never know when i might hunt a big green field and need the extra umph of the mag.
good luck,
Big Ed

 

[EastTNHunter]

Due to the Tikkas all being long actions, there is no advantage to a short action cartridge in one unless you are just going for lower recoil. In that case you can always load a long action caliber down for lower recoil.

I vote for the .270. You’d come out cheaper (no gunsmithing) and get more horsepower if needed.

Not much practical difference in .3mm (.13”) of bullet diameter, but some people go gaga over BC. I can’t shoot well enough over that long of a distance to gain an ounce of advantage from the small difference in BC between the two.

 

[mtmuley]

Due to the Tikkas all being long actions, there is no advantage to a short action cartridge in one unless you are just going for lower recoil. In that case you can always load a long action caliber down for lower recoil.

I vote for the .270. You’d come out cheaper (no gunsmithing) and get more horsepower if needed.

Not much practical difference in .3mm (.13”) of bullet diameter, but some people go gaga over BC. I can’t shoot well enough over that long of a distance to gain an ounce of advantage from the small difference in BC between the two.

Quit making sense. mtmuley

 

[mr_steve]

Due to the Tikkas all being long actions, there is no advantage to a short action cartridge in one unless you are just going for lower recoil. In that case you can always load a long action caliber down for lower recoil.

I vote for the .270. You’d come out cheaper (no gunsmithing) and get more horsepower if needed.

Not much practical difference in .3mm (.13”) of bullet diameter, but some people go gaga over BC. I can’t shoot well enough over that long of a distance to gain an ounce of advantage from the small difference in BC between the two.

You sound way too practical and rational. Solid input

 

[Deleted member 16014]

I’m not the first or even the 100th but I’ve said it many times...pick a bullet you want to deliver, pick a speed you want to deliver it at to be effective, buy or build the rifle in a chambering to do that.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

In the end, all of the thought that went into this will be largely meaningless in terms of killing animals. Anyone that thinks there is any significant difference between shooting animals with a 6.5 and a .270 is delusional.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

As far as the original question, I’d say get the lite and chop it. Something a little different, and it seems like you’d appreciate a shorter set up.

 

[Brian in Montana]

In the end, all of the thought that went into this will be largely meaningless in terms of killing animals. Anyone that thinks there is any significant difference between shooting animals with a 6.5 and a .270 is delusional.

Only about 300-400fps and a bigger bullet. LOL

But I get what you're saying. A guy that is practiced and familiar, and knows what he's doing with a his rifle is deadly regardless. At least I guess that's what you're saying. Or maybe a .308 and a .338 RUM are the same and a zebra is a horse and a noun is an adverb.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I’m not the first or even the 100th but I’ve said it many times...pick a bullet you want to deliver, pick a speed you want to deliver it at to be effective, buy or build the rifle in a chambering to do that.

And before you buy/build, make sure you are comfortable with the amount of recoil those choices entail.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Only about 300-400fps and a bigger bullet. LOL

But I get what you're saying. A guy that is practiced and familiar, and knows what he's doing with a his rifle is deadly regardless. At least I guess that's what you're saying. Or maybe a .308 and a .338 RUM are the same and a zebra is a horse and a noun is an adverb.

Right. 0.013” is a whopping difference. I’ll say it again. Anyone that thinks 0.013” and 300 FPS difference will make a significant difference in killing animals is delusional.

 

[Brian in Montana]

My only questions is: how significant of a difference is needed before we're not delusional?

 

[Deleted member 16014]

Right. 0.013” is a whopping difference. I’ll say it again. Anyone that thinks 0.013” and 300 FPS difference will make a significant difference in killing animals is delusional.

And yet somehow less recoil and more COAL to work with are this crazy new idea...

 

[mr_steve]

Well I bought the Tikka T3x Superlite in 7mm-08. Almost went .270 but deciding factor was recoil. I'm going to explore cutting it down and then threading it but I did just get a report that one gentleman has had issues since cutting down the same rifle so we will see. I enjoyed everyone's input!

On a side note Tikka has the Superlite on sale because they are discontinuing this model for a new one although I am not sure what it will be.

 

[Brian in Montana]

Tikka's discontinuing the Superlite? WTH? Maybe coming out with a T4X or some such thing? The Superlite line is awesome. For all you can get for the $ I really don't think there is a better deal out there.

Good choice, btw. I doubt you'll be disappointed in either the cartridge you chose or the rifle. Good luck afield.

 

[AggieOutlaw]

You'll be happy with the 7-08. It's a better choice for hunting than 6.5cm. I love 6.5cm for long range plinking. I'd use it on deer. But in short action, 7-08 is the best option for general hunting applications. I'm a 270 man myself. Love my T3x SS lite in 270. Wish it was the Superlite but I got it for a steal @ $499. Saving a couple oz wasn't worth the extra couple hundo.

PS.
Don't cut it.

 

[Roughwater]

I have narrowed down my search for a lightweight backcountry rifle and have chosen a Tikka but I am looking at two different routes both in 6.5 CM. The Superlite is 5.9 lbs vs the Lite which is 6.3 lbs due to the fluting on the SL. Both are 24.3" barrels. I'm either going to get the Superlite or buy the Lite and cut down the barrel to 20" as I like a shorter barrel for packing and not snagging on brush. In thick brush a long rifle can be very frustrating. I understand you lose some velocity at far distances but I don't ever plan to shoot over 500, and rarely over 300. You will also cut weight to be similar to the SL.

Does anyone have experience with shortening a Tikka down? Which route would you chose, Tikka T3x Lite SS shortened to 20" barrel or Tikka T3x Superlite? Thanks for your input!

I know this is an old post and the OP has probably long since made his choice. This info is for someone that is also looking for a shorter barrel Tikka in 6.5 Creedmoor. Just a couple days ago my buddy had bought a Tikka 6.5 in the 20" model (Tactical?) and invited me to come down to the local range. I'm assuming his rifle was the tactical model since it has a threaded barrel and the barrel is 20".

I'm not that easily impressed but that sucker using 140 gn Hornedy ELD Match ammo shot awesome! This was a brand new rifle and the rounds he shot with me that afternoon were the first rounds he had put through it. After breaking the barrel in with some cheaper ammo (cleaning frequently), he fired for accuracy using the Hornady match ammo. The first 3 shots were in one slightly enlarged hole which impressed me but he then shot 2 more rounds with no cleaning in between the 5 rounds. His 5 shot group was one slightly enlarged hole at 100 yards! If I hadn't seen it myself I wouldn't have believed it. He shot the first round basically cold bore too as he had cleaned the gun well prior to shooting the last 5 rounds. It was in the afternoon and warm and sunny here in NC. Aside from the rifle being a real shooter the 20" barrel ought to go through the bush just fine and be relatively light as well. I know from experience that everything has to be just right to shoot a group like that, the scope, the rings, the mount, the stock, the ammo and of course the shooter as well. I've personally never seen accuracy like that before from a new factory rifle.