- Thread starter Mas
- Start date
are you set on either of the chassis? action wise the CTR is the same as the tac a1, but you would have other chassis options, and a lot of them
i looked hard at the tac a1 and was ready to pull the trigger, without even looking at the CTR to throw in something else. ended up getting a hancock...and then i got a tikka anyways and am throwing it in a krg xray this weekend
i looked hard at the tac a1 and was ready to pull the trigger, without even looking at the CTR to throw in something else. ended up getting a hancock...and then i got a tikka anyways and am throwing it in a krg xray this weekend
They are both very good rifles. The TRG is much more likely to shoot consistently 1/2 moa. The TRG has been around long enough that it is a very well known rifle. The Tikka T3X TAC A1 is fairly new and there are not a lot of them out their. So there is a bit of the cool factor on that but also a little risk that the newer model may not have all the kinks worked out.
I gotta ask how did you end up choosing between a chassis rifle and a more conventonally stocked rifle? Most shooters would make that decision (taking into account the intended use) then choose between more similar rifles.
If you were an expert on cars and someone asked you if they should get a Ford F-350 or a Corvette, you would probably have to determine how they intended to use the vehicle before you could know which was better suited for them. So what do you wish to achieve with this rifle.
I gotta ask how did you end up choosing between a chassis rifle and a more conventonally stocked rifle? Most shooters would make that decision (taking into account the intended use) then choose between more similar rifles.
If you were an expert on cars and someone asked you if they should get a Ford F-350 or a Corvette, you would probably have to determine how they intended to use the vehicle before you could know which was better suited for them. So what do you wish to achieve with this rifle.
I have both the TRG-22 and a Tikka CTR, each in a KRG Whiskey 3 chassis. Both rifles are extremely accurate and reliable, no complaints there from either. The TRG is a more robust action though and it comes with what I consider the best trigger I have ever used. While I think you would be happy with either rifle, the TRG may or may no be worth the extra money to you.
I"m in same boat. I got a 6.5 CTR that shoots great and I really like. I tried using a KRG X-Ray but couldn't get comfortable behind it, unlike when I handled the TAC A1 in a store. I have a deposit down on a nucleus barreled action in 6CM that I'll likely put in a MPA Hybrid. But that is a ways off and last week I got antsy for something new so I ordered the TAC A1 to be at my Cabela's next week.
I’m a die hard TRG supporter. I absolutely love my TRG and would not trade it for anything.
However on paper the Tac A1 does appear to be a great value. For me I just don’t like a chassis that uses and AR buffer tube.
My Tikka experience is limited to handling them in the store. I plan to get a CTR for my next rifle and put it in a KRG Bravo or W3
I think that a CTR + KRG Bravo would get you pretty close to TRG ergonomics for half the price of the TRG. How much you value the TRG action/60deg bolt and trigger is the question. In my opinion they’re worth it.
However on paper the Tac A1 does appear to be a great value. For me I just don’t like a chassis that uses and AR buffer tube.
My Tikka experience is limited to handling them in the store. I plan to get a CTR for my next rifle and put it in a KRG Bravo or W3
I think that a CTR + KRG Bravo would get you pretty close to TRG ergonomics for half the price of the TRG. How much you value the TRG action/60deg bolt and trigger is the question. In my opinion they’re worth it.
That's a very good point. I'm not sure how chassis and stock affect accuracy (it would be great if someone can educate me on that). For me I love the look of a traditional stock, especially the look of the TRG 22 stock. However, I try to avoid paying just for the look of a gun. Functionally I love the folding stock of the TAC A1, it's easier to carry around during occasional hunting.
Last edited:
I'm not sure that a TRG-22 stock could be considered more or less accurate than a Chassis. The difference is that some people are more comfortable behind one or the other. Perhaps your answer is both and a hundred rounds of ammo for each so you can see what works for you.
500-buck factory bipod is a thing... However there are inexpensive alternatives for that.
The TRG stock is almost like mini chassis. The action is bolted into an alumin backbone that the polymer stock and forend are attached to. KRG’s chassis designs are clearly influenced by the TRG.
In terms of adjustmentablity it can adjusted to fit the shooter perfectly. The drawback to it is that it’s not as easy to adjust right out of the box as the newer chassis designs. You can add spacers for comb height and LOP.
Luckily for me it fits me great with no changes required. I have been tempted to get the latest gen KRG W3 Chassis and folding stock. That’s one feature I’d like to have.
I might hunt occasionally. Do you think the 20'' barrel trg 22 is suitable for hunting?
I have a trg22. It shoot 5 rounds 1 hole @100 yd every other time. I like the stock very much and bought a Tikka t3 sporter in 223 and shoot 1/4 moa during sight in. The sporter has almost same stock as trg except it is laminated wood. Love the ergo.
For the bipod, trg bipod cost an arm and a leg for me. But it is great. I also got a pictinny rail adaptor for both trg and t3 sporter. I can mount my gg&g and atlas bipod on either one. Cost $12 each.
For me, trg has much thicker/heavier barrel than t3. Still t3 give you best value for sub moa. To get to sub 1/2 moa, you will need to pay extra $1k. To get to 1/4 moa, you need to pay 2x the cost.
If $$$ is an issue, get tikka and a good scope. If you can save $1k and wait, get the trg22.
For the bipod, trg bipod cost an arm and a leg for me. But it is great. I also got a pictinny rail adaptor for both trg and t3 sporter. I can mount my gg&g and atlas bipod on either one. Cost $12 each.
For me, trg has much thicker/heavier barrel than t3. Still t3 give you best value for sub moa. To get to sub 1/2 moa, you will need to pay extra $1k. To get to 1/4 moa, you need to pay 2x the cost.
If $$$ is an issue, get tikka and a good scope. If you can save $1k and wait, get the trg22.
Here's my question. I can shoot 1 moa consistently with a 500 buck savage 11 at 200 yards; a much more expensive 900 buck Tikka t3 compact precision rifle is functionally the same. By the same logic, a higher 1000 buck savage ashbury can consistently shoot 1/2 moa which is functionally the same as the 3000 buck tikka trg 22. Why do people still buy the more expensive rifles? Is it about self esteem? Some chiefs like to have really high end 1000 buck kitchen knives but those knives are functionally the same as a 200 buck good kitchen knives. But for guns the only purpose is accuracy isn't it?
I love the trg 22 but the last thing I want is to have a fancy heavy rifle that has the same accuracy as a budget savage rifle (let's say both rifles are handled by a great shooter not me).
If thats your prerogative then you have your answers already.
Accuracy is cheap these days, fit and finish is not. I wouldnt normally call it self esteem in most cases, though there are plenty of gear queers out there, but confidence in your tools is of great benefit if for nothing more than peace of mind. Such as having it do what you want it to do without any fuss such as replacing a savage extractor when it inevitably fails on you because the ball bearing it rides on is too small. The tikka is nice but the TRG trigger is just that much nicer still.
No it's not just about accuracy. That's great that you can do so well with so little, it shows that you grasp the fundamentals of marksmanship but the idea that a $500 Savage will ever be able to keep pace with a TRG22 is amateur. Assuming the same skill level, a shooter running a TRG is going to have much better consistancy, he/she will be able to run the platform much faster and the reliability of TRG in adverse conditions is guaranteed, all within the stock configuration. Thats what you're paying for with all that extra money.
As a precision rifle instructor I see quite a few Savages come through my classes, in terms of accuracy they are typically ok but after 2-3 days, 90% of the guys running them are flustered, as the Savages just can't keep pace with the other platforms. They are not particually smooth actions, cheaper models are quite limited in magazine capacity and reliability. When adverse environmental conditions hit they are usally first to go down.
For a something around $1350-$1400 you can have a CTR dropped into a KRG Bravo and it will smoke the pants off off just about any Savage.
or for $1500 you can have the Tac A1 and you'll have the same barrelled action in a folding chassis, with 3 magazines and TRG muzzle brake...
...and with a arguably better trigger. The TAC A1 is a great choice.
Are you concerned about velocity or about the feel of front heavy rifle. In my opion the .308 out of 20" tube is great balance of ballistic performance and weight distribution. The barrel profile of the TRG should be close on something along the lines of a Remington Sendaro / Varmint contour (anyone who has one in hand correct me if I'm wrong) which I feel is reasonable for a long range hunting rig but as a brush gun you'll be disappointed.
This^
Go low or go high, if you go in middle you might end up unhappy.
Personally, I bought a Tikka T3 Tacticool about 10 yrs ago, out of the box it was a hammer. I upgraded it bit by bit over the years, now all that’s left of the original gun is the action & bolt body. It's still a hammer, just a sexier hammer.
Couldn’t be happier with it.
Did I mention Tikkas are hammers.
I was concerned about how bulky and heavey the rifle was. The Tikka Tac A1 with folding stock could be really convenient to carry around.
Thanks for clarifying this, your comment is honest and right to the point.
Thanks for the explanation, I was happy that my question got the attention of a long range shooting instructor. Some points you mentioned were a bit abstract to me, what did you mean by "flustered" and "can't keep pace with other platforms"? As for reliability, are you saying that the savage have more malfunctions?
Thanks for the advice. By the way, is the trg 22 cheek piece ready to be adjusted or do I need to purchase some additional accessories? The official website has some really confusing information about this.
Man you seem to be all over the place in your wants if you are concerned about weight for a hunting rifle why are you even considering a TRG? There is no unicorn rifle that is perfect for both hunting and long range target shooting at the same time. Figure out which activity you will most use the rifle for and choose accordingly. If I was in your shoes I would probably get the TAC A1 over the TRG spend the extra money on the best glass I could afford.
Thanks for the advice. The reason why I even asked if trg 22 was suitable for hunting is that Mr. Silvan above suggested that I should choose trg 22 over tac a1 and he is a hunter, so I was curious about his opinion im trg 22 being an occasional hunting rifle. I did mention the word "occasional" which I thought would imply that hunting is not my primary activity. However, since I might go hunting someday in the future, it would be nice not having to buy a separate rifle for that occasional activity.
Another question about "there is no unicorn rifle that's perfect for both hunting and long range target shooting", It seems to me that the TAC A1 is very close to being a perfect rifle for both activities. What makes trg 22 superior than tac a1 in long range shooting? People say the two rifles shoot the same in terms of accuracy.
Its easy to get in to analysis paralysis. You state that you see the TAC A1 as very close to being the perfect rifle for your uses. I wouldn't stress too much about getting through that last 1% of possible doubt that I suspect you have. If the additional cost of the Sako doesn't add up for you and you like the TAC A1, get the TAC A1 and just enjoy it. If and when you find issues with it that you can't live with then I bet you can re-sell without too much of a loss and get something else. But, having recently gotten in to rifles again with a Tikka CTR, I think you'll find a lot to like in the TAC A1.
so I'm guessing you have never shot long distance nor have you hunted? sorry, that's the impression I'm getting...
short answer is no, the Tac A1 would not be remotely suitable for hunting. not any type of hunting I'm familiar with anyway.
if you want to go that route, get a CTR and buy a stock or chassis. Rudy suggested above the Bravo stock. I think that's your best bet right now as it gives you essentially one gun with two different personalities.
and by the way, if you are just starting out, I don't think you'll be able to exploit the accuracy difference between the TRG and Tac A1 or even the CTR in a Bravo stock. just my opinion...
Thanks for the information again, a CTR is definitely worth considering. My shooting has been limited to 200 yards at my local range (it takes some driving to go to a place for long range shooting in New York state). I've never hunted before but I might try it someday in the future.
Is it the 2-stage trigger on the TAC A1 that has you ruling it out for hunting? or the weight? I only ask because those are the key functional differences between the CTR in a chassis and the TAC A1.
I would say get the CTR. Then shoot is in its original form and see how you like it. You may actually be done at this point, since it is good for target and hunting.
However, if you want to upgrade after that, you can do so.
For example, the 2-stage Timney Trigger for the Tikka feels awesome to me. And there are many chassis options.
In the end, you will likely have spent less money than the A1 (and certainly less than the TRG) and you will have a rifle that suits you better.
By the way, even if you change the stock and trigger, you could keep the CTR stock and the original trigger for hunting trips. Both seem very easy to change.
Good luck
However, if you want to upgrade after that, you can do so.
For example, the 2-stage Timney Trigger for the Tikka feels awesome to me. And there are many chassis options.
In the end, you will likely have spent less money than the A1 (and certainly less than the TRG) and you will have a rifle that suits you better.
By the way, even if you change the stock and trigger, you could keep the CTR stock and the original trigger for hunting trips. Both seem very easy to change.
Good luck
me personally, it's the weight. I like 2-stage triggers. I suppose if you were riding a 4-wheeler to a stand over a huge field somewhere I would be tempted to use the Tac A1 but 13+lbs of gun and scope is a whole lotta love if you got to carry it anywhere...
Agreed. I was just wondering if there was something else that I wasn't aware of. I was a bit surprised by its weight being 11.2 lbs. The CTR is 7.9lbs and the the MPR that is between 6.9 and 8.4 lbs depending on barrel length.
Getting a CTR and a MPA Hybrid would end up around $1875, so a bit more than the TAC A1. Almost certainly lighter though.
Both great rifles. For the money the Tikka is good. Maybe invest the extra you would spend on the TRG for some nice glass. I have a CTR in .308, my buddy tried mine out a few weeks ago, he’s now a Tikka tac a1 owner. Aftermarket is growing for the Tikkas as there gaining a lot more popularity over the years.
I own the TRG. I have not handled the Tikka yet, but it looks like a nice package. I hope to try one soon.
It will come down to whether you want a chassis rifle or not. Some people like chassis style with AR grips, and some like classic style. I prefer the AR style grip for quickness/snap shooting, but I shoot more accurately with a traditional style stock for long range. Others may be the opposite.
I have hunted with my TRG, but it's heavy and not something I'd really want to take into the hills. The Tikka and other chassis rifles are just as heavy. Also I have yet to find a chassis rifle that is comfortable to keep in your hand. They are covered in cold metal bits and things to catch all over the brush when you are walking so I've not even bothered to take one on a hunt. The hyper adjustable and folding rear stocks are covered in places to hook onto gear as well.
Many of these hyper adjustable stocks have knobs and things to get knocked out of place and lose if they are not captured. Even if they are captured, they still will get knocked loose and your adjusments will likely wander. They work fine on a square range, but I'm thinking in any kind of hunting situation where you are going to be knocking the rifle around a lot or taking it through the brush these folding adjustable stocks are not going to be very good.
The traditional TRG stock doesn't have these faults. It's synthetic where you hold it so it's not cold to carry, and the adjustments are all held in place by recessed allen screws that won't get knocked out or caught on things.
The TRG bipod is heavy, but I've tried all the alternatives and the TRG bipod is worth every penny. Magazines are expensive, but you buy one spare on sale from various vendors and that's a good start.
Given the above, I'd say buy it for what your primary use is. If it's for target shooting then the rapid adjustability is great as well as the weight. But if you're hunting, I'd say to not worry about it and buy a lighter rifle with simpler stock.
It will come down to whether you want a chassis rifle or not. Some people like chassis style with AR grips, and some like classic style. I prefer the AR style grip for quickness/snap shooting, but I shoot more accurately with a traditional style stock for long range. Others may be the opposite.
I have hunted with my TRG, but it's heavy and not something I'd really want to take into the hills. The Tikka and other chassis rifles are just as heavy. Also I have yet to find a chassis rifle that is comfortable to keep in your hand. They are covered in cold metal bits and things to catch all over the brush when you are walking so I've not even bothered to take one on a hunt. The hyper adjustable and folding rear stocks are covered in places to hook onto gear as well.
Many of these hyper adjustable stocks have knobs and things to get knocked out of place and lose if they are not captured. Even if they are captured, they still will get knocked loose and your adjusments will likely wander. They work fine on a square range, but I'm thinking in any kind of hunting situation where you are going to be knocking the rifle around a lot or taking it through the brush these folding adjustable stocks are not going to be very good.
The traditional TRG stock doesn't have these faults. It's synthetic where you hold it so it's not cold to carry, and the adjustments are all held in place by recessed allen screws that won't get knocked out or caught on things.
The TRG bipod is heavy, but I've tried all the alternatives and the TRG bipod is worth every penny. Magazines are expensive, but you buy one spare on sale from various vendors and that's a good start.
Given the above, I'd say buy it for what your primary use is. If it's for target shooting then the rapid adjustability is great as well as the weight. But if you're hunting, I'd say to not worry about it and buy a lighter rifle with simpler stock.
Thanks for the advice, I've never considered how the metal bits can catch the brush. And I think you are right about buying the rifle for the primary use, seems that TAC A1 is not the do-all rifle I thought it would be. By the way, do you have to buy the bipod for the trg 22? Would it be possible to just use a caldwell front bag? Actually almost everyone installs a bipod on their sniper rifle and I'm wondering why.
I wouldn't rule out getting a CTR and learning what you do and do not like about it. You have the right recognition that there isn't really a do-it-all rifle. The goals for best hunting and best target shooter are just conflicting and not reconcilable.
Starting with a CTR you can determine what you like and don't like. Whittaker still has good pricing on them for a bit before their pricing goes up (the dealer incentives are apparently reducing soon).
My reason for a bipod is just ease of transport. My range has steep downhill steps and a walk to the rifle range so I'd rather not carry heavy caldwell bags in addition to other gear.
Starting with a CTR you can determine what you like and don't like. Whittaker still has good pricing on them for a bit before their pricing goes up (the dealer incentives are apparently reducing soon).
My reason for a bipod is just ease of transport. My range has steep downhill steps and a walk to the rifle range so I'd rather not carry heavy caldwell bags in addition to other gear.
I own a TRG and an older Tikka M595 Master Sporter (Not T3) They are both beautiful rifles.
I *love* my TRG. It has the finest factory trigger I have ever felt. The balance is great, the stock is extremely comfortable and it is a laser.
If I had to choose between the two it would be the TRG. hands down.
Having said that there are some things to think about.
First the Sako accessories are very pricey. The bipod is fantastic but it is around $450.00.
The TRG is heavier to lug around.
If you want a 2 stage trigger go with the TRG.
If you are good with single stage go with the Tikka.
There are way more aftermarket accessories/chassis etc for the Tikka than the TRG.
Hope this helps.
I *love* my TRG. It has the finest factory trigger I have ever felt. The balance is great, the stock is extremely comfortable and it is a laser.
If I had to choose between the two it would be the TRG. hands down.
Having said that there are some things to think about.
First the Sako accessories are very pricey. The bipod is fantastic but it is around $450.00.
The TRG is heavier to lug around.
If you want a 2 stage trigger go with the TRG.
If you are good with single stage go with the Tikka.
There are way more aftermarket accessories/chassis etc for the Tikka than the TRG.
Hope this helps.
Tikka T3x Tac A1 has 2-stage trigger. CTR has single stage...
I stand corrected.
