Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Difference between Tikka T3 and Tikka 595/695?

What are the differences between the "new" T3 and its predecessor the 595/695? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the 595/695 the same gun except the 595 is for short action cartridges and the 695 for long actions? Now that I think about that, I'll bet I'm wrong...because Tikka doesn't have a "true" short action.

Anyway, I'm just curious about the differences between the T3 and 695.

Thanks!
Chris

I'm not an expert, but the 595 is a short action and 695 is a long action. The 595/695 series are heavier rifles than the T3 series. The 695 I have has steel magazines, while my 595 has plastic similar to the T3. The ejection ports are more open on the older rifles. They have the same smooth bolt throw and crisp triggers.

HTH,
Tom

Tom nailed it.

The difference? Usually a pound and sometimes more.

The 695 was too heavy. Some would argue that the T 3 is too light in the synthetic version in certain cartridges for the recoil generated.

There are several other differences, but that info is in storage for now.

The 695 didn't have the funky checkering pattern that the T3 does.

The 695 is a nicer rifle, the T3 is a lighter rifle. I own both and carry a 695 stainless and laminate 300 win mag hunting.Very nice rifle and super accurate.

I definitely like the recessed magazine design on the 595/695 rifles

Sako re-engineered the 595/695 rifles for "manufacturing economy" to develop the T3, if you recall the former rifles were quite a bit more expensive that the current rifle. (I had a 595 in .308 in carbine length, and it was good enough that a friend talked me out of it.)

I noticed when the T3 hit the market that the gunzine articles ignored why the rifle was developed, all the ink went to "new, new...".

jim

Main diff I've found is one can find a chitload of T3's for sale, and not many used 595/695's.

I'm just tickled that I found a NIB Whitetail hunter in .338 win mag..

The receiver borrows heavily from benchrest actions with a small ejection port for rigidity. The 695 was much more open. Some models in synthetic only weigh 6 and one quarter pounds but weight is kept in the barrels for accuracy.

The steel recoil lug is permanently embedded in the stock and fits into a groove on the reciever. It's a variation on pillar bedding. Much different than the 695.

It has parallel grooves for scope mounting. 70 degree bolt handle lift. Trigger is as about as good as you will find for the price.

The barrel is free floated and a Sako. It's a cosmetic and ergonomic redesign from Giugiaro, an Italian firm.

The detachable mag system is different than that of the 695, releasing in front of it rather than the side as in the 695.

It weighs a good pound less than the 695 but is just as accurate. The stocks are very different with the T3 more sleek and ergonomic.

These are notes from Boddington, Petzal, and van Zwoll. All were impresssed by the accuracy, claiming much less than the inch guarantee.

Gun writer dogzapper bought a 30-06 stainless T 3 and wrote it up here. He couldn't say enough good about it, except it perhaps was a tad too light for the recoil of a 30-06.

Does anyone know if a T3 barrel will work with a 695 action?

I’ve got a Tikka 595 in 17 Remington that is absolutely wonderful. My 595 is in the factory wood stock.