input on trg22 vs.AI
- Thread starter x832
- Start date
Re: input on trg22 vs.AI
Stuff
More Stuff
TRG Stuff
Other website Stuff
The only good way to search Snipershide Stuff...Bookmark ME!!!!!!!!
Stuff
More Stuff
TRG Stuff
Other website Stuff
The only good way to search Snipershide Stuff...Bookmark ME!!!!!!!!
Re: input on trg22 vs.AI
OK lets try this another way...do you have a budget in mind? I'll assume you do as you are looking at the used market, used AW's 5K and up depending on configuration.
For the sake of simplicity lets just say Sako TRG 42 vs. AIAE.
AE's break down into two groups the MK1 and the MK2.
MK1's dont say MK1 anywhere just know its the first version and the primary difference between the two is that the MK1 used a specific magazine which was 5 rounds and the trigger had to be removed to be adjusted. The MK1 was only offered with a 24" barrel but more than a few have been chopped back shorter. These can be found recently for a very appealing price as lots of AE fans have been unloading their MK1's to get MK2's.
MK2 is offered with 20" or 24" barrels as well as threadded with or without break. The MK2 accepts the widly common and readily available 5 and 10 round AICS magazines. This is particularly handy as just about every non AI shooter is using a AICS or some sort of DBM that uses AICS magazines. If you fubar a mag chances are you can borrow one and still be able to shoot.
Both are offered in the 1.5 or 2.0 configuration meaning you can get a fully adjustable folding stock if you choose. I think the early MK1's were offered in a 1.0 non adjustable non folding configuration but really its not worth it to save a few bucks IMO get the 1.5 or 2.0. AE series barrels ar Walther match grade barrels not as fancy or exotic as some but they are a quality production barrel.
TRG-42 is a good option to the AE and has some pros and cons. Biggest two selling points to me would be cost as they are a few hundred less than an AE and second would be the stock. While I dont think the TRG stock is as durable as the AE's I do find it MUCH more comfortable and has very McM "A" series feel to it with the vertical pistol grip. Trigger is adjustable for position which makes getting a ideal trigger adress easier to attain.
While you save money on the rifle you will end up being almost equal when you factor in the cost of TRG accessories. Magazines and scope mounts to be specific are much more than the AI versions. As for Bipod and breaks there are non Sako altenatives but for the mounts the non sako alternatives seem to have issues.
Never shot them side by side and I dont have a Sako but generaly speaking the TRGs seem to shoot very well and most always better than the AI's however I feel the durability of the AI system gets the nod. In either case you are still looking at easy sub MOA rigs, remember these are military rifles not benchrest rigs so 1 MOA or better is more than acceptable.
Bottom line you cant go wrong with either. AI stock is a love or hate thing and if you hate it go for the TRG. If you want folder the TRG folding stock is BIG bucks so AI would probably be the better option.
A.S.
OK lets try this another way...do you have a budget in mind? I'll assume you do as you are looking at the used market, used AW's 5K and up depending on configuration.
For the sake of simplicity lets just say Sako TRG 42 vs. AIAE.
AE's break down into two groups the MK1 and the MK2.
MK1's dont say MK1 anywhere just know its the first version and the primary difference between the two is that the MK1 used a specific magazine which was 5 rounds and the trigger had to be removed to be adjusted. The MK1 was only offered with a 24" barrel but more than a few have been chopped back shorter. These can be found recently for a very appealing price as lots of AE fans have been unloading their MK1's to get MK2's.
MK2 is offered with 20" or 24" barrels as well as threadded with or without break. The MK2 accepts the widly common and readily available 5 and 10 round AICS magazines. This is particularly handy as just about every non AI shooter is using a AICS or some sort of DBM that uses AICS magazines. If you fubar a mag chances are you can borrow one and still be able to shoot.
Both are offered in the 1.5 or 2.0 configuration meaning you can get a fully adjustable folding stock if you choose. I think the early MK1's were offered in a 1.0 non adjustable non folding configuration but really its not worth it to save a few bucks IMO get the 1.5 or 2.0. AE series barrels ar Walther match grade barrels not as fancy or exotic as some but they are a quality production barrel.
TRG-42 is a good option to the AE and has some pros and cons. Biggest two selling points to me would be cost as they are a few hundred less than an AE and second would be the stock. While I dont think the TRG stock is as durable as the AE's I do find it MUCH more comfortable and has very McM "A" series feel to it with the vertical pistol grip. Trigger is adjustable for position which makes getting a ideal trigger adress easier to attain.
While you save money on the rifle you will end up being almost equal when you factor in the cost of TRG accessories. Magazines and scope mounts to be specific are much more than the AI versions. As for Bipod and breaks there are non Sako altenatives but for the mounts the non sako alternatives seem to have issues.
Never shot them side by side and I dont have a Sako but generaly speaking the TRGs seem to shoot very well and most always better than the AI's however I feel the durability of the AI system gets the nod. In either case you are still looking at easy sub MOA rigs, remember these are military rifles not benchrest rigs so 1 MOA or better is more than acceptable.
Bottom line you cant go wrong with either. AI stock is a love or hate thing and if you hate it go for the TRG. If you want folder the TRG folding stock is BIG bucks so AI would probably be the better option.
A.S.
Re: input on trg22 vs.AI
Question is a bit vague, however, probably the best comparison in print is the Zak Smith article listed above.
Both are fielded military weapon systems, FWIW. One cannot go wrong with either choice. Most of the homework has been done for you by big budget military forces.
Notice how many guys just get both. I have shot both side by side numerous times and I like both equally as well. Perhaps it depends on your mood/preference but the stocks on each seem to either do it for some or for others it may turn them off. I like both. I like the AI thumbhole advantage of "resting/loading" a bit of the weight on my hand as well as seemingly greater stock control.
Both essentially provide similar accuracy. If not, you/optics/ammo are wrong.
I do not agree with AnchorStation's assertion the accessories for the TRG end up being equal in cost. There are many aftermarket parts for the TRG by top shelf MFG's that are just as durable and less expensive than factory parts.
For example, NEAR makes a fine scope mount that is at least half the cost of factory. Same for Harris bipod. Also, FYI; I have been less than pleased with the durability of my factory Sako bipod. I am extremely hard on my gear and thus expect a military grade system to be bulletproof but I have broken my bipod at least twice. It's balance, of course, with the pivot point above the barrel, is the best there is, IMO.
In addition, I believe the so called argument that the AI is more rugged than the TRG system/stock etc to be somewhat spurious.
I do not know of any major failures of any TRG stock or other part. Once again, remember both are military issue and one assumes the bidding process weeded out lesser/weaker designs and that both AI and TRG are sufficiently ruggedized to withstand normal combat operations.
Having said that, one can also assume sniper systems should/ought to be handled in a manner more consistent with care rather than "abuse" than, say, the treatment standard issue rifles usually undergo in combat. If one is not attempting to preserve the capabilities of a SWS then such poor handling may border on abnormal abuse and that is certainly not wise practice.
IMO, both triggers are excellent. Bolt manipulation egde for me goes to AI but that is mere subjective "feel". Both are short angle throws and very smooth and fast.
I have never had any ejection/extraction problems with either. Never had any issues with either magazine system.
If able, shoot both and see what you like. The AI thumbhole stock might not do it for you. I would bet you end up liking both and the decision will come down to either subjective issues of $/cost.
Question is a bit vague, however, probably the best comparison in print is the Zak Smith article listed above.
Both are fielded military weapon systems, FWIW. One cannot go wrong with either choice. Most of the homework has been done for you by big budget military forces.
Notice how many guys just get both. I have shot both side by side numerous times and I like both equally as well. Perhaps it depends on your mood/preference but the stocks on each seem to either do it for some or for others it may turn them off. I like both. I like the AI thumbhole advantage of "resting/loading" a bit of the weight on my hand as well as seemingly greater stock control.
Both essentially provide similar accuracy. If not, you/optics/ammo are wrong.
I do not agree with AnchorStation's assertion the accessories for the TRG end up being equal in cost. There are many aftermarket parts for the TRG by top shelf MFG's that are just as durable and less expensive than factory parts.
For example, NEAR makes a fine scope mount that is at least half the cost of factory. Same for Harris bipod. Also, FYI; I have been less than pleased with the durability of my factory Sako bipod. I am extremely hard on my gear and thus expect a military grade system to be bulletproof but I have broken my bipod at least twice. It's balance, of course, with the pivot point above the barrel, is the best there is, IMO.
In addition, I believe the so called argument that the AI is more rugged than the TRG system/stock etc to be somewhat spurious.
I do not know of any major failures of any TRG stock or other part. Once again, remember both are military issue and one assumes the bidding process weeded out lesser/weaker designs and that both AI and TRG are sufficiently ruggedized to withstand normal combat operations.
Having said that, one can also assume sniper systems should/ought to be handled in a manner more consistent with care rather than "abuse" than, say, the treatment standard issue rifles usually undergo in combat. If one is not attempting to preserve the capabilities of a SWS then such poor handling may border on abnormal abuse and that is certainly not wise practice.
IMO, both triggers are excellent. Bolt manipulation egde for me goes to AI but that is mere subjective "feel". Both are short angle throws and very smooth and fast.
I have never had any ejection/extraction problems with either. Never had any issues with either magazine system.
If able, shoot both and see what you like. The AI thumbhole stock might not do it for you. I would bet you end up liking both and the decision will come down to either subjective issues of $/cost.
Re: input on trg22 vs.AI
Have had both, both shoot great, TRG just a bit more comfy behind the stock. Buy either and you will be happy.
Have had both, both shoot great, TRG just a bit more comfy behind the stock. Buy either and you will be happy.
Re: input on trg22 vs.AI
IF you can afford it , get the AW .
If money is a issue , get a AW clone built using a Badger M2008 action & run AW mags .
I have both the TRG & AW , and IF I could only have ONE it would be the AW hands down .
The 10rd AW mags just plain rock .
The Sako is a lighter rifle and the stock is nice , but I donot like the the mag that much .
Later Chris
IF you can afford it , get the AW .
If money is a issue , get a AW clone built using a Badger M2008 action & run AW mags .
I have both the TRG & AW , and IF I could only have ONE it would be the AW hands down .
The 10rd AW mags just plain rock .
The Sako is a lighter rifle and the stock is nice , but I donot like the the mag that much .
Later Chris
