Tikka T3 & T3x lite barrel weight info - Please add!

[Trent A]

I have been trying to figure out the weight of two barrels that I'm trying to figure out how to bestgo about reducing their weights (T3 lite 308 Win & T3x lite 223 Rem). Initially I was thinking about swapping out the barrels to two Proof CF in 20" variety... but those aren't cheap, and wondering if there isn't a better option that would rival the weight savings for fewer pennies out of my pocket. Problem is, I can't find what these things weigh in the first place, now what weight I would be looking at subtracting from those initial weights for things like cutting the original down and/or fluting them after a cut down. Doing research and though I haven't found my complete answers yet, I thought I would post what I have came up with from various other sites, to have all in one place, for anyone else who might find it helpful.

• T3x 308 & 223 = 6.4 lbs factory weight, complete rifle (add 0.2 lbs for factory open sights)
• T3 = ??? factory weight of complete rifle varied 6 - 6.5 lbs from various source and couldn't find it on Tikka website any longer to verify.
• T3x 308 & 223 = 22.4" factory barrel
• T3 308 & 223 = 22.4" factory barrel
• T3 receiver, bolt, and trigger = 30 oz
  • T3 : Adding plastic mag box and bottom metal to above = 33 oz (aka 3 oz more for these to be added on)
• T3 BA = 4.4 lbs (aka 70.4 oz)
• T3 barrel (unknown caliber or length) as deducted mathematically from above info:
  • Never found anyone who weighed just a barrel, and only found one person who weighed a BA and they didn't say what caliber it was, or the length, but using the two figures above: 70.4 oz - 30 oz = 40.4 oz (aka 2.525 lbs)
    • From context clues I believe this was a 22.4" 308 but they didn't specify that and I can't verify it, but it's the best I currently have to go off of unfortunately. Do with it what you will. They did specify it was a T3.
• T3x action (I'm assuming this means bolt and receiver, no trigger) = 28 oz
• T3x Unknown Munitions recessing = -4 oz (aka shaves action down to 24 oz)
• T3x 308: cut to 16.5" (probably technically 16.9") and threaded = -6.5 oz
  • They noted they sent it off to be cut/threaded and could not verify themselves exact lengths.
• T3x 308: cut to 18" (probably technically 18.4") = -4.6 oz
• T3x 223: cut to 19" (probably technically 19.4") = -5.2 oz
  • Question: So at first I thought this made sense, 223 would have a thicker wall so more weight reduction per inch... but the barrel lengths are the same on the 308 & 223, and Tikka is claiming the 308 & 223 weigh the same amount as a complete rifle... so is this data point incorrect, or is Tikka incorrect... or is there a explanation where these could both be correct?
• Apparently there are calculators for this if you have calipers and a loose barrel to take your measurements, such as this one: https://pac-nor.com/barrel-weight-calculator/
  • Assuming by looking at the diagram on this page, I'm assuming most barrels are straight for the entire section that I plan on lopping off.
    • If that assumption is correct and using the numbers from around the internet:
      • T3x lite 30 cal = about 1.1 oz per 1" cut
        
        • Given aftermarket barrels are interchangeable I would assume this applied for the T3 as well, but can't verify that.
• Fluting... I didn't add any data points as there seem to be to many variables. How deep, strait, spiral. Let me know what you think one would typically expect from a flute job.
• 20" Proof CF 308 barrel = 2 lb 7 oz (aka 39 oz)
• 20" Proof CF 223 barrel = 2 lb 10 oz (aka 42 oz)

If you have anything to add, comment, etc., I'd appreciate any and all information. Thanks!

 

[srt-4_uk]

Weigh the barreled action.
Subtract 30oz for action, bolt, and trigger.
Now you have the weight of the barrel.

 

[noremorse92]

To what end are you trying to reduce the rifle's weight?

 

[Trent A]

To what end are you trying to reduce the rifle's weight?

Light weight pack rifle.

 

[Trent A]

Weigh the barreled action.
Subtract 30oz for action, bolt, and trigger.
Now you have the weight of the barrel.

Thank you for this! I know I saw weights posted somewhere for the BA. I suppose I could also weigh my own BA’s, but my kitchen scale is pretty cheap and I don’t know if I trust it.

 

[noremorse92]

The carbon barrels don't save much weight vs a standard sporter barrel if you weigh them out and they're a lot more expensive. I doubt they will shoot any better than a factory tikka barrel either.

Chop it to 20 inches or less even

Lighter scope and mounting system

Lighter weight stock like a wildcat or one of the various carbon options

Unknown Munitions also has a receiver recessing program they can do that knocks a good bit of weight off

 

[Trent A]

The carbon barrels don't save much weight vs a standard sporter barrel if you weigh them out and they're a lot more expensive. I doubt they will shoot any better than a factory tikka barrel either.

Chop it to 20 inches or less even

Lighter scope and mounting system

Lighter weight stock like a wildcat or one of the various carbon options

Unknown Munitions also has a receiver recessing program they can do that knocks a good bit of weight off

That would save me to cost of all the equipment to re barrel them as well. Great info, thank you! Any idea if adding fluting would make much of a difference? I have no idea what that costs since I’ve never had it done aftermarket before.

 

[BJames]

Fluting isn’t going to save you much, maybe 2 oz, but probably less. Chopping to 20 or less plus fluting will save the most, but your chasing oz’s. The biggest weight savings on any rifle is barrel, stock, and optic. Since you‘re addressing the barrel, the next route is an ultra light stock.

Fwiw and just my opinion, last year I went down the ultra light rabbit hole. Started with a kimber, chopped barrel, took a saw to the stock, removed or swapped for ti, any extra weight. Ran a Trijicon accupoint 3-9 (13.4 oz). Total weight was 5lb 10oz. That rifle is hard to drive, it exploits any weakness in the fundamentals. Npa a little off from a weird field position? I saw it on target. That rifle went down the road, the new rig weighs 8lb 13oz. For me it’s a perfect balance between shoot ability and packable.

 

[n2ishun]

I have a Tikka T3x with the stainless/fluted 22.4" factory barrel with a .30 hole down the middle and the factory radial brake.
Ain't got no clue on what it weighs.
But, I have one ?

 

[Trent A]

Fluting isn’t going to save you much, maybe 2 oz, but probably less. Chopping to 20 or less plus fluting will save the most, but your chasing oz’s. The biggest weight savings on any rifle is barrel, stock, and optic. Since you‘re addressing the barrel, the next route is an ultra light stock.

Fwiw and just my opinion, last year I went down the ultra light rabbit hole. Started with a kimber, chopped barrel, took a saw to the stock, removed or swapped for ti, any extra weight. Ran a Trijicon accupoint 3-9 (13.4 oz). Total weight was 5lb 10oz. That rifle is hard to drive, it exploits any weakness in the fundamentals. Npa a little off from a weird field position? I saw it on target. That rifle went down the road, the new rig weighs 8lb 13oz. For me it’s a perfect balance between shoot ability and packable.

Very good points. I sure would hate to put all that money and effort into a rig that didn't end up working out well for me. As far as potentially being off target, most of my hunting with these rifles would be done in the woods where the majority of shot opportunities would be under 100 yards. At the very most if I had to shoot from one side of a clearing to the other it might be 200-300 yards but that's a rare occasion.

One other thing I am wondering about on the 308 is how light can I make it before I start regretting my decisions due to it resulting in increased recoil. It's already light enough that it gives a little bit of a bite as is. Surprised me as I had shot 308 since getting my first rifle at 8 or so, never bothered me before, but even just that additional 1-2 lbs that my rifle had that I shot growing up apparently made a big difference. I made the mistake of getting a T3 lite in 7mm Rem Mag and sent that one packing already. Hope I'm not replicating the mistake by another means via cutting down the 308.

 

[BJames]

My ultra light was a 6.5 creed, I ended up putting a brake on it. It was just the shitty kimber radial brake, but it only weighed 1.6 oz and did just good enough to make the rifle more shootable. That would be an option for you at the cost of an oz or 2. Ultra light rifles buck though, the more weight you shave, the more you’ll feel on the other end.

I should’ve asked what shot distances you expect. 541 was my rifle’s longest shot on steel, but it was shakey past 300. I was able to print exactly 1, .5 minute group. But consistently, I could maintain right at 1 minute to 300. For whatever reason, things fell apart after that, super inconsistent. I figured I spent too much time behind a 18lb match gun. It was hard to drive, but with short distances like that, go nuts. You’ll maintain sub minute of animal at those distances.

 

[n2ishun]

A 308 doesn't kick at all.
The issue is the crapola Tikka butt pad and its funky shape (note lower pointy part?).
You can get a decelerator or a limbsaver for cheap.....don't take nuthin to install....maybe a tad with a file or sandpaper to make it just right.
I've had real good luck with using a bench grinder and manipulating it so the curvature of the grinding wheel imparts a real nice bevel to the recoil pad.

 

[BJames]

A 308 doesn't kick at all.
The issue is the crapola Tikka butt pad and its funky shape (note lower pointy part?).
You can get a decelerator or a limbsaver for cheap.....don't take nuthin to install....maybe a tad with a file or sandpaper to make it just right.
I've had real good luck with using a bench grinder and manipulating it so the curvature of the grinding wheel imparts a real nice bevel to the recoil pad.

If you’re counting oz’s they’re heavy. Ultra light pads are 1.2 oz’s, I’ve seen hardcore sheep hunters run no pad at all.

That said, I agree with you. A couple more oz’s to make the rifle more shootable is well worth it.

 

[Trent A]

A 308 doesn't kick at all.
The issue is the crapola Tikka butt pad and its funky shape (note lower pointy part?).
You can get a decelerator or a limbsaver for cheap.....don't take nuthin to install....maybe a tad with a file or sandpaper to make it just right.
I've had real good luck with using a bench grinder and manipulating it so the curvature of the grinding wheel imparts a real nice bevel to the recoil pad.

I hadn't ever thought about the butt pad being the part of the issue. I know weight makes a big difference, but I really was astonished with how much harder it seemed to kick compared to my old rifle in the same round growing up. I had the T3 in 243 before I gifted it to my father, and in the old Remington I shot growing up in 308, these two help equivalent... going 308 in the Remington and 308 in the T3, big difference. I don't recall what model the Remington was... want to say something like 783 or something odd like that... I do know whatever it was it had been a cheap line even when it was purchased for my father to shoot when he was growing up which was probably 3 decades before I ever received it in the late mid/late 90's.

Still have the Remington, of course, but it's buried at the back of a large safe. Digging it out to check the model number would be an endeavor that would undoubtedly be coupled with a surmountable number of resulting 'safe scars' to a number of rifles, lol.

 

[Trent A]

If you’re counting oz’s they’re heavy. Ultra light pads are 1.2 oz’s, I’ve seen hardcore sheep hunters run no pad at all.

That said, I agree with you. A couple more oz’s to make the rifle more shootable is well worth it.

Well, I feel like a bit of a dope for not even thinking of trying out an aftermarket butt pad before letting the 7mm Rem Mag go... Never even occurred to me that it might make much of a difference. Never used one before besides the one my dad preeminently duct taped to a single shot 20 gauge that I used growing up due to it being quite ill fitting, lol. Never tried the gun without it either so I don't think it really ever registered in my mind that it was even on there or how big of a difference it likely was making since I had no comparison to how the gun felt without it. Only reason why that even comes to mind is because I recently gifted it to my younger brother and the old aftermarket butt pad fell off as the duct tape disintegrated on him having not been used for at least the last decade sitting in my safe unused, lol. Replaced it with a better fitting Limbsaver butt pad which, unsurprisingly, he reports reduces recoil better than the 25+ year old off-brand butt pad it had been sporting previously.

 

[n2ishun]

If you’re counting oz’s they’re heavy. Ultra light pads are 1.2 oz’s, I’ve seen hardcore sheep hunters run no pad at all.

That said, I agree with you. A couple more oz’s to make the rifle more shootable is well worth it.

Wrong direction.
I don't care what the recoil pad weighs.....it should be soft and pliable and shaped to not put all the recoil in a tiny spot like the rock hard Tikka does.

We're looking for it to reduce recoil by absorption, not weight.

 

[BJames]

Wrong direction.
I don't care what the recoil pad weighs.....it should be soft and pliable and shaped to not put all the recoil in a tiny spot like the rock hard Tikka does.

We're looking for it to reduce recoil by absorption, not weight.

Not in the hardcore ultra light game.

Fanatical backcountry sheep hunters don’t want any extra oz’s. Live off your back for 10-14 days, burning 10,000 calories a day up and down mountains, you won’t want anything extra. These guys mind set is to go as absolutely as light as possible so they’re faster, can go farther, and stay out longer. They don’t care about a recoil pad, they’re only shooting 1 shot at close range. They’ll roll up a shirt and stick that in between their shoulder and the stock.

I don’t agree with it personally, but that’s what some guys do. These dudes are cutting tooth brushes in half to cut weight, lol. I’ve tried pointing out having a negligibly heavier rifle, that they can control better, leads to better shot placement and ups their chances of a successful hunt. My perspective is, it would suck to go through all that effort, training, expense, planning, just to blow the shot over a recoil pad. Or a rifle that’s barely manageable.

 

[Trent A]

So what does everyone suggest as the best and/or their favorite recoil pads for recoil reduction over all? And seperately, what would you choose if you wanted to keep weight in mind, aka best ultralight pad? Would you go with a replacement pad that screws in, or would you go with a slide on over the stock option? Any particular reason why you would go with one over the other?

What would you choose for an ultralight stock? This is the next thing I am wanting to look at, but I don't know anything about the category to be honest, other than just googling "what i the lightest production rifle stock" which brought up a model make by Peak 44 called the Blacktooth that only weighs 20 oz and is featured on one of the new upper lines of production Weatherby rifles. Anyone know anything about the Blacktooth? Good option? Poor option? Better options out there for a little more added weight?

Appreciate everyone's opinions and advice!

 

[Trent A]

Weigh the barreled action.
Subtract 30oz for action, bolt, and trigger.
Now you have the weight of the barrel.

Just for others, after more digging around, I did see this 30 oz figure posted for the action, bolt, and trigger, posted by others on other forums in various places (regarding the T3 in 308 Win) just fyi to lend more reassurance to those reading. I'll add it to the original post.

Follow up question - was your 30 oz weighing a T3 or T3X and in what caliber?

Thanks again for providing this @srt-4_uk !

EDIT: Just realized, the caliber shouldn't matter, right? Since the variability is in the barrel alone... right?

Still wondering if this was a T3 of T3x that was weighed though.

Thanks again

 

[Trent A]

The carbon barrels don't save much weight vs a standard sporter barrel if you weigh them out and they're a lot more expensive. I doubt they will shoot any better than a factory tikka barrel either.

Chop it to 20 inches or less even

Lighter scope and mounting system

Lighter weight stock like a wildcat or one of the various carbon options

Unknown Munitions also has a receiver recessing program they can do that knocks a good bit of weight off

https://www.unknownmunitions.com/product/tikka-action-mods/

Found the page for Unknown munitions that you were talking about AND it also uncovered a reliable source for the weight of the T3x weight for the action (now my question is: I'm assuming an action is just the receiver and bolt, no trigger, correct?). The action they state is 28 oz on a T3x, and that their recessing will shave off 4 oz!

 

[Trent A]

The carbon barrels don't save much weight vs a standard sporter barrel if you weigh them out and they're a lot more expensive. I doubt they will shoot any better than a factory tikka barrel either.

Chop it to 20 inches or less even

Lighter scope and mounting system

Lighter weight stock like a wildcat or one of the various carbon options

Unknown Munitions also has a receiver recessing program they can do that knocks a good bit of weight off

Was able to find a little more info that, though less than stellar info, with a couple of assumptions, I think that the 22.4" barrel (unknown caliber) weighs in around 40.4 oz. The Proof CF barrels weigh in at 39 oz for the 308 and 42 oz for the 223, and these are only 20" long, 2.4" shorter than the original Tikka barrels. I believed you when you said CF wouldn't save much weight, but I didn't think that it would actually be HEAVIER than the stock barrel (which they would be for sure if of equivalent lengths; *Edit/correction: Proof was lighter by a hair... I wrote this line before doing the math below - dang close to being even though). Using data above with numbers provided by others on the 308, cutting it down to 18" saved -4.6 oz and cutting a 308 to 16.5" plus threading saved -6.5 oz (realizing these numbers are slightly out of agreeance, likely due to the threading taking more off the 16.5", so I think it is 1.15 oz/1"cut off and then can subtract another -0.175 oz for threading).

So...

• T3 308 Win 22" (22.4" total) barrel = 40.4 oz
  • Cut to 20" non threaded = 39.25 oz
    • Threaded = 39.075 oz
  • Cut to 18" non threaded = 35.8 oz
    • Threaded = 35.625 oz
  • Cut to 16.5" non threaded = 34.075 oz
    • Threaded = 33.9 oz

So at the same 20" after cut down it looks like (and yes the math isn't perfect but its the best I have) the original Tikka barrel is only 0.25 oz heavier than the Proof CF when not threaded, and only 0.075 oz heavier if adding threading. Add some fluting and you would definitely be lighter than the Proof CF. This surprised me for sure. Very glad you brought this point up so I would look into it more, as it sure saved me from making a very expensive assumption by going with the switching out to Proof CF barrels on these rigs just to try to get a weight savings that isn't even there. Think I'm going to cut both down to either 18" or possibly even 16.5" and have them threaded (not threading just for weight savings though, lol).

 

[Trent A]

Also, if anyone has suggestions for lightweight hunting scopes under say, ballpark $500, that would be much appreciated!

 

[wind gypsy]

Carbon barrels are for suckers IMO and most all are HEAVIER than a factory tikka lite contour.

Factory 6.5 creed lite barrel chopped at 18” and muzzle threaded 9/16”: 32 oz

If you wanted to build a lightweight tikka on a budget I’d just chop a lite barrel, throw it in a stockys carbon or wildcat stock, top it with a swfa 3-9 (probably needs to be used as they are never in stock) in sportsmatch rings, and go forth killing stuff.

 

[noremorse92]

Carbon barrels are for suckers and most all are HEAVIER than a factory tikka lite contour.

Factory 6.5 creed lite barrel chopped at 18” and muzzle threaded 9/16”: 32 oz
View attachment 8427139

They're for the people who get a new iPhone every year
 

 

[wind gypsy]

I’ll get ya a weight on a 300wm super lite factory barrel tomorrow.

Edit: @Trent A 24 3/16” super lite 300 WM barrel = 34.6 ounces.

 

[tuckybill]

Also, if anyone has suggestions for lightweight hunting scopes under say, ballpark $500, that would be much appreciated!

Leupold 6x42 fixed. GREAT in low light also.

 

[BJames]

A lot of people (fudds) don’t realize that carbon barrels are only lighter than similar contours. A #1 - 2 profile is lighter.

Light weight optics, I use a trijicon accupoint 3-9x42, 13.4 oz, mildot reticle. Only a year into it, but like it so far.

 

[Trent A]

Carbon barrels are for suckers IMO and most all are HEAVIER than a factory tikka lite contour.

Factory 6.5 creed lite barrel chopped at 18” and muzzle threaded 9/16”: 32 oz
View attachment 8427139

If you wanted to build a lightweight tikka on a budget I’d just chop a lite barrel, throw it in a stockys carbon or wildcat stock, top it with a swfa 3-9 (probably needs to be used as they are never in stock) in sportsmatch rings, and go forth killing stuff.

Awesome, thank you for both the info on the weight as well as the stock and scope advice! I haven’t looked at either of those stocks as options yet but I certainly would like to keep it on a budget. Never used a SWFA scope before either but have seen others mention them. Luckily it’s looking like the funds for switching out to a CF barrel just loosened up since that’s looking like no more than a very expensive way to end up right where I started weight wise. Glad I hadn’t pulled the trigger on ordering one yet. Thanks!

 

[Trent A]

They're for the people who get a new iPhone every year
 

I typically wait 3-4 years, lol.

So another question… what is the point of a CF barrel of it isn’t going to save weight? I know it will between similar contours, but if your comparing similar contours the all metal barrel will have the accuracy advantage 9 times out if 10 won’t it? I don’t know, now I just feel a little befuddled as to where the CF barrel fits in…

 

[Trent A]

I’ll get ya a weight on a 300wm super lite factory barrel tomorrow.

Edit: @Trent A 24 3/16” super lite 300 WM barrel = 34.6 ounces.
View attachment 8427238

The super lite has the same barrel as a lite version, just added fluting, right?

 

[Trent A]

A lot of people (fudds) don’t realize that carbon barrels are only lighter than similar contours. A #1 - 2 profile is lighter.

Light weight optics, I use a trijicon accupoint 3-9x42, 13.4 oz, mildot reticle. Only a year into it, but like it so far.

I do feel a bit dense. I’m not familiar with CF barrels hardly at all. I assumed they came in many various contours just the same as all metal barrels. Maybe they do(?) but at least for the Tikka’s in 223 and 308 for Proof they were only offered in one size per their website, which I hadn’t accounted for the fact that the profile was much thicker than that of the standard sporter barrel the comes in the tikka.

I’ll check out the Accupoint, I haven’t used any of their scopes aside from maybe a red dot on a pistol at one point in time, years back now. Thanks!

 

[wind gypsy]

I typically wait 3-4 years, lol.

So another question… what is the point of a CF barrel of it isn’t going to save weight? I know it will between similar contours, but if your comparing similar contours the all metal barrel will have the accuracy advantage 9 times out if 10 won’t it? I don’t know, now I just feel a little befuddled as to where the CF barrel fits in…

Carbon barrels have one benefit - larger muzzle diameter for larger muzzle threads at a given barrel weight.

Carbon fiber is generally stiffer than steel for a given weight so the idea is a carbon barrel is stiffer than a steel barrel of the same weight. The only person I know of that tested that claim said it didn’t play out and steel barrels of the same weight had roughly the same amount of deflection.

My belief is that because they are expensive, people think carbon looks cool, and carbon is somewhat more exotic or complex than plain steel, the market assumes they are better. I just see them as a $350 bedazzling up-charge that lowers your odds of getting a good barrel. Others will disagree.

 

[wind gypsy]

The super lite has the same barrel as a lite version, just added fluting, right?

Same contour, Correct

 

[BJames]

I’ll check out the Accupoint, I haven’t used any of their scopes aside from maybe a red dot on a pistol at one point in time, years back now. Thanks!

I like it so far, for just a pure lightweight hunting optic. The turrets under the caps are mushy, and mismatched with moa turrets, mil reticle. I zero’d at 100, and hold over in the reticle. Having the green dot always illuminated has been really nice, at 3x, I use it like a red dot.