Thank you for the comparison! I would really like to have the Tikka for my collection but they are rare and nearly non-exisent here in the US, plus they cost around US$2,100.00 when you do find them. For comparison, I recently purchased two Ruger Scout rifles, both with laminated stocks and stainless barrels, one in 308 and the other in 5.56. For the pair I paid $2,200.00 and change. With the Ruger rifles I like that you can easily install a suppressor, but with a Tikka, you have to remove the front sight to access the threads which would necessitate the use of an optic, which I generally don't use.
Great review. I just ordered a Tikka Arctic. Too bad it isn't the 'better' gun, but I'm still very pumped to get it. I love the look of the red/orange laminate!
Both look like great rifles. I’ve been jonesing for the T3X Arctic since it came out. I handled the C19 here in Yellowknife before they were issued and fell in love. My old .30-30 is my bush workhorse, and I’m debating getting a .45-70 next, but like the simplicity of a bolt gun, too. Had a Winchester model 70 in .30/06 that I foolishly traded. I got it with a mounted scope and soft case for $75 CAD. Lessons learned. I really wish Yellowknife had a patrol. I’d love to join. I’ve worked with a lot of Rangers as a field instructor, and they are great. I think I learned as much as they did! Someday... Anyways, I’d love a reliable, simple, cold weather compatible rifle with iron sights that are protected, and low maintenance. Fluid Film is keeping my blued guns alive and well, but in the wet you need to be diligent. Take care.
Hi I just saw your review on the C19 vs Ruger, the Tikka C19/Colt is a push feed action beautifully smooth, whereas the Ruger is a mauser controlled round feed and is subject to galling in wet weather and lacks the superior Tikka/Sako trigger. The Ruger trigger is not exactly what I'd call adjustable unlike the C19. I've owned both but enjoyed your comments. Dave Australia
Much appreciated! Have you found any detailed information about the actual trials for the submitted rifles? I'm wondering just how inferior the less expensive 'scout' rifles proved to be.
the Ruger Scout won the first trail but Ruger refused to let Colt Canada (which was part of the contract) make the rifle so the trials went for a 2nd time and Sako won, thus we have the C19 - a Sako gun made by Colt Canada.
@@northernwolfdude I know I'm late to the party, but I too am interested in any information from the trials or any other details you remember. The Ruger won the first but lost the second trial because they simply weren't in the running anymore?
Thanks for that honest video! Time telling, anything more to say about that tikka , the sight system? have you run any accuracy tests? ( I want a nice bolt action with iron sights in 30 cal to shoot from 100 - 600 yards ) . Ruger Scout, CZ557 and this Tikka Artic rifle seemed the obvious choices. What do you guys think?
for me the Ruger wins. 1/3 the price and 1 1/2lb lighter on weight. if your going to be hiking through any bush the weight is a nut buster! (my Ruger cost me $800)
I could not justify the price of the Arctic over the Ruger GS. Near on $3800+ Aus compared to $1500+ which I bought the 308 as a feral control hunting rifle. I like the rear drum sight on the Tikka but you can not purchase them separately from Sako/Tikka. Your right to guess if Ruger allowed them to made in Canada you would be lugging the Ruger GS instead of the C19.
I'll take theRUGER Gunsight Scout, remove the forward Pic. rail and put a Pic. rail just on the RUGR action. Then I'd add a Timney trigger and Marine Tex 'glass beding and STILL be way under the cost of theT3x Arctic. RUGER's Mauser controlled feed action and cold hammer forged barrel are a very accurate combo. (The TIKKA is "nice" but I can't see paying that money to support Finland's highly socialized economy.)
I don't quite understand why and how Ruger was in the competition with the under license manufacturing by Colt Canada being a requirement for the deal. Were they betting on Canada removing that requirement before the end?
The Sako is a good looking rifle but I have to wonder about that tiny loading/ejection port and the additional heft. Honestly not worth the extra anyway for a "second place" rifle and I wonder if the Canadian Rangers couldnt have done better?
well i don't think they could have done 'better' as the rifle is top shelf but i do feel that they could have went with a lighter less expensive rifle and gotten the same use and lifespan out of it (like the Ruger as an example). But for me personally im not a big fan of the weight of the rifle now that ive had it for 7 months of use, i still prefer my personal rifle the Ruger Scout.
@@KuraMad2000 most of the Prairies seem to still use Imperial. I'm from Ontario originally, so when I moved out west and people were measuring temperature in Fahrenheit, I was a little confused. ;P
The Ruger is a scout type rifle; the scout design philosophy has been around for decades and was first put into production by Steyr, long before R. Also, the C19 is push feed (one of the original requirements, if I remember correctly, to make it easier to feed one round at a time), whereas the Ruger is controlled round feed. Each has their ups and downs. The scope placement on the C19 is above the smaller ejection port, and the Ruger places the scope forward, leaving the larger ejection port free.
you can place your scope over the ejection port by using the Ruger rings just like any of their other rifles. never really looked to see what type of feed the rifles had, now i kinda wanna looks and see!
Good point, thanks. The forward scope thing was a part of Jeff Cooper's original vision. The C19 seems to be part of the beginning of a new variation. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_rifle
The ruger’s controlled round feed doesn’t work with the gun site scout mags as the rounds don’t exit the mags feed lips until near the end of the loading stroke, I know as I had one. This make it a push feed as well so no difference there.
@@seamac7966 Not true, it is very much a n M77 Hawkeye, controlled feed action. "The original Ruger M77 design was a push feed with a claw extractor and pin ejector. You can see this if you examine the bolt face on an M77 and compare it to the bolt face on an M77 MK II or M77 Hawkeye. The M77 bolt face has a ring all the way around the front, therefore the rear of the cartridge case cannot slide up under the extractor during feeding. Once the cartridge is seated in the chamber, closing the bolt forces the cartridge flush against the bolt face and allows the extractor to slide over the rim of the cartridge and snap into place. The bottom of the bolt face on the MK II and Hawkeye is machined flat, so the cartridge can slide up flush against the bolt face, underneath the extractor. This makes these two models true controlled-feed actions. Also, the pin ejector of the M77 was replaced with a fixed blade ejector on the MK II and Hawkeye." From the Ruger website: "Non-rotating, Mauser-type controlled round feed extractor is among the most positive case extraction systems ever invented, and features a fixed blade-type ejector that positively ejects the empty cases as the bolt is moved fully rearward." www.ruger.com/products/scoutRifle/models.html
@@EdAb It is true because the AICS mags negate the controlled round feed of the Ruger. I saw the same comment and checked it out on my gunsite scout and the mag lips hold the chambering round for about 2/3 of the bolt stroke. I don’t know if you actually checked it out for yourself before you decided to play Captain Obvious about how push feed vs controlled round feed works. I owned both a Ruger Scout and a T3 Arctic and I still have the Arctic as it suited my needs better and the irons are far superior to the Ruger’s sights.
I’m an expat Canadian living in the U.S. The Tikka Arctic is unobtainable here. So I purchased a Ruger Scout in .308 with stainless 18” barrel and laminate stock. The rear sight leaves a lot to be desired compared to the C19. Any thoughts on how to obtain a C19 / Arctic rear sight and fit it to the Ruger?
I think the laminate is supposed to be red but looks more pink. Maybe lighting? I like the sights on the Tikka better. I don't think Tikka copied the Ruger. The reason they are so similar is they were competing for the same contract with the Canadian rangers. The rangers set the guidelines and Tikka won the contract after several evaluations. Thanks
@@northernwolfdude Hmmmm that's interesting? So Colt accually builds it? I thought it was just sold under them? I still prefer the heavier barrel and sights on the Tikka. Have you tested the sights at all the ranges? The Ruger is click adjustable right? I'm thinking it would be much more difficult to change range. Thanks
@@brianlee6849 yes, Colt Canada makes the C19 as they also make all Canadian Forces rifles (C7/C8). that was part of the contract when it went out for bid.
first off lets take a moment to enjoy the irony of your name and then your comment. as to your comment i suppose your right, but Sako and Tikka are in essence the same, both owned by Beretta and really Tikka is a sub branch of Sako isnt it? www.tikka.fi/en-us/about-tikka
I agree that SAKO copied the RUGER Scout for their contract Canadian Ranger rifle. And I would take the Ruger Scout every time. Like theSAKO, The RUGER it has a cold hammer forged barrel and as with my 6.5 CM Ruger Precision Rifle and Ruger American Predator rifle those cold hammer forged barrels are VERY accurate. So WHY would I want the pricey SAKO with its far pricier magazines? Absolutely no reason at all!
The Canadian Army has all of their firearms built in Canada, plus all of their bullets made in Canada. In WW1, the British refused to sell or license the Lee Enfield rifle to Canada, so Canada went to war with a less suitable rifle. After that experience, the army swore that they would never be held ransom by a foreign government again, so all small firearms are built in Canada.
