New Tikka T3x Tac A1

[Yipikaye]

Very good tip with the lighter bullets I'll research into this.

I would like to understand why the muzzle breaks are bad when shooting around other people (I don't want to be rude!). I've never used one before but I have fired 3 rounds with a silencer and it was excellent. I'm hoping its a similar effect (i know they're not the same of course).

with regards to the scope I'm actually not planning to spend more than $500 for my first scope if I can avoid it because im 99% sure I'll choose the wrong one and end up selling it in 6 months. This way I can get confident with one I think I would like and if I still do 6 months I can upgrade and get a better one, if not I will have hopefully found what I do like. So... Any suggestions you have would be awesome. Actually I would like to re-use the cheaper scope on a .22 I get in the future so I'm really not sure what to get at all.

[bladeracer]

Very good tip with the lighter bullets I'll research into this.

I would like to understand why the muzzle breaks are bad when shooting around other people (I don't want to be rude!). I've never used one before but I have fired 3 rounds with a silencer and it was excellent. I'm hoping its a similar effect (i know they're not the same of course).

with regards to the scope I'm actually not planning to spend more than $500 for my first scope if I can avoid it because im 99% sure I'll choose the wrong one and end up selling it in 6 months. This way I can get confident with one I think I would like and if I still do 6 months I can upgrade and get a better one, if not I will have hopefully found what I do like. So... Any suggestions you have would be awesome. Actually I would like to re-use the cheaper scope on a .22 I get in the future so I'm really not sure what to get at all.

Brakes and suppressors do different jobs. The suppressor grabs the gas cloud and lets it cool and slow down before releasing it to atmosphere, thus reducing the sound. A brake directs the gas cloud to the sides and upwards to reduce some of the felt recoil. It's fine for the shooter but not so much for anybody else in the vicinity.

If you want to use a scope on a .22 then you'll need one that will focus down to very close ranges. The Bushnell AR Optics 4.5-18x40's that I use allow me to read normal text at 10m which is pretty close for a centrefire scope.

[bigfellascott]

Hi All,

Thanks for the advice. I will go with what I like and not worry too much about what others think

I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.

Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.

The Tac chassis is practical too. After firing a heap of rounds I touched the top of the barrel near the scope and it was really hot (noob i know) so the extra protection is useful. Not to mention the rail etc.

... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.

Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.

Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.

There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.

[bladeracer]

Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.

There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.

If a firearm is licenced as is I can't see how they can claim it is now illegal if the rules haven't changed. If they aren't happy about the Firearms Registry allowing us to own something then they need to take it up with the Registry, it's nothing to do with the owner.
On the other hand, if they actually re-write the rules then there might be a problem. But my understanding of Australian law is anything that makes something illegal that is currently legal requires fair and just compensation be paid to lawful owners.

[Gun-nut]

Hi All,

Thanks for the advice. I will go with what I like and not worry too much about what others think

I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.

Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.

The Tac chassis is practical too. After firing a heap of rounds I touched the top of the barrel near the scope and it was really hot (noob i know) so the extra protection is useful. Not to mention the rail etc.

... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.

Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.

Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.

There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.

Holy s**t, really? What state is in?

[bigfellascott]

Hi All,

Thanks for the advice. I will go with what I like and not worry too much about what others think

I'd be weary about buying any firearm that looks military looking as I've been reading recently where people have been receiving letters to either surrender them or sell them to gunshops.

Really?? Thats just odd. It's like saying someone is not allowed due to how they look... Surely if its legal to purchase with the current laws then there should be no need to surrender it.

The Tac chassis is practical too. After firing a heap of rounds I touched the top of the barrel near the scope and it was really hot (noob i know) so the extra protection is useful. Not to mention the rail etc.

... I wouldn't bother with the FFP reticle, especially if you want to shoot longer ranges.
I also wouldn't bother with the muzzle brake unless you go with the 7mm RemMag.

Thanks for the tips. Any scope you would recommend that is good for a learner but I could push out to maybe 300m-500m as i get more experienced?
.308 is my preference so maybe I wont bother with the break but i've read its good while new to help get used to the kick slowly.

Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.

There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.

Holy s**t, really? What state is in?

For the Military Look it was W.A. and Tassie from memory - no doubt coming to a state near you sooner or later and for the patch catcher thing I think that was pretty much Aus Wide but not 100% sure as I didn't take much notice of it to be honest, I think that one came from a Firearms Lawyer warning people who have these things to be aware of what's started happening.

[bigfellascott]

Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.

There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.

If a firearm is licenced as is I can't see how they can claim it is now illegal if the rules haven't changed. If they aren't happy about the Firearms Registry allowing us to own something then they need to take it up with the Registry, it's nothing to do with the owner.
On the other hand, if they actually re-write the rules then there might be a problem. But my understanding of Australian law is anything that makes something illegal that is currently legal requires fair and just compensation be paid to lawful owners.

It's already in law, they just haven't been enforcing it and no they don't have to pay compensation, just like the Adler you can hand them in or get the mod done to make them legal, apparently people have been getting letters telling them to hand them in or sell them to Firearms Dealers or face legal action.

[bladeracer]

It's already in law, they just haven't been enforcing it and no they don't have to pay compensation, just like the Adler you can hand them in or get the mod done to make them legal, apparently people have been getting letters telling them to hand them in or sell them to Firearms Dealers or face legal action.

It would be more than simply non-enforcement since they are the people that register our firearms as being legal. Non-enforcement would be a different matter as that would come down to us being non-compliant by our own choice. If your firearm is registered by the enforcement agency as being legal I don't see how it can become your problem.

[bladeracer]

...just like the Adler you can hand them in or get the mod done to make them legal, apparently people have been getting letters telling them to hand them in or sell them to Firearms Dealers or face legal action.

I haven't seen anything requiring owners of Adlers to hand them in or sell them.
I think I saw something that prevented legal owners from selling them to anybody other than a dealer though.

[Yipikaye]

whoa! I feel for the people getting their guns taken.

I understand they would know you have this from the registry but, how would they know if you'd bought a different gun and changed it to a military looking stock?

I assume you could change the stock on this gun and it would be OK again.

[Yipikaye]

What would happen if I got the stock powder coated a bright orange colour? Then it wouldn't look military...

[bladeracer]

whoa! I feel for the people getting their guns taken.

I understand they would know you have this from the registry but, how would they know if you'd bought a different gun and changed it to a military looking stock?

I assume you could change the stock on this gun and it would be OK again.

I know in Qld an M4 collapsible stock is apparently illegal to own, whether it is attached to a firearm or not. I saw something recently about a guy that was charged for importing one without import permits in place.
In NSW firearms are specifically listed as prohibited firearms if they have any kind of folding, telescoping or swiveling stock, but I don't know if merely owning such a thing is illegal there.
In Victoria any stock is perfectly legal provided the firearms conform to our minimum length requirements - far more sensible.

[bladeracer]

What would happen if I got the stock powder coated a bright orange colour? Then it wouldn't look military...

The law says something like "If it looks to a reasonable person as if it's a toy _and_ it has none of the functions of a firearm to propel any projectile then it is a toy." If it propels anything then it's a firearm regardless of how colourful it is.

[Yipikaye]

ouch. I wonder anyone with a camo pattern would also have a problem.

[Gun-nut]

This appearance bs needs to go asap. Wasn't there a recommendation in WA to remove them and comply with other states such as Vic and QLD?

[WatchyShooter]

Yep they are applying that "Military Look" clause in the act from what I've been reading - I certainly wouldn't bother buying one, may well loose quite a few $$ if you aren't careful.

There's also been a heap of blokes get caught out with some device which you put on the end of your barrel to catch the dirty patches, turns out that is somehow illegal to do and they have been raided and lost firearms and licenses because of it (stupid I know) but you have to be careful what you do when it comes to firearms etc, they are just waiting to ping us for anything and everything, just like the blitzs they were conduction out in the central west over easter (pulling over vehicles that looked like hunting vehicles and searching them in the hope they find something amiss (they seem to run them regularly out here and always get quite a few who are doing the wrong thing.

If a firearm is licenced as is I can't see how they can claim it is now illegal if the rules haven't changed. If they aren't happy about the Firearms Registry allowing us to own something then they need to take it up with the Registry, it's nothing to do with the owner.
On the other hand, if they actually re-write the rules then there might be a problem. But my understanding of Australian law is anything that makes something illegal that is currently legal requires fair and just compensation be paid to lawful owners.

It's already in law, they just haven't been enforcing it and no they don't have to pay compensation, just like the Adler you can hand them in or get the mod done to make them legal, apparently people have been getting letters telling them to hand them in or sell them to Firearms Dealers or face legal action.

Important part there is "face legal action"

If you have the firearm, it's legal. They deemed it that is during your PTA application.

They would have to take legal action against every individual that decided to not hand in his legal registered firearms.

Just have a look at the reports from your police ombudsman and you'll see that when uninformed overzealous police officers enforcing their interpretation of the law doesn't go so well when reviewed.

its just like whenever the drift kids go out bush for one of the big events, cops set up on the main access road and check every car and person going in and out, as they couldn't come into the private property.


Go check out http://www.firearmslawyer.net.au/ and some of the cases that turn up over there, shows you the real problem with police, they can barely follow their own enforcement and laws in regards to legal firearms no wonder we are in an epidemic of kids killing kids with illegal firearms the police never even had a chance of stopping while there too focused on "oh does this look big and scary"

[Chronos]

I'm not a fan of chassis style rifles, for me a rifle should be either as heavy as the rules allow (for target shooting) or as light as possible (for hunting) and this style of rifles are neither but I understand people like them and that's fine. TBH this style of rifle is purely designed to be issued to troops of different sizes and set up to suit them where as civilians we just buy one that fits us.

Having said that I handled this gun for the first time last week and was surprised to find that A) it's not as heavy as I expected and 2) it's actually well balanced with the balance point behind the front hand/magwell. I expect that's because it's based on the CTR and not a Varmint like many chassis conversions.

I suspect with a scope that wasn't as heavy as some of the Tac style scopes (think S&B or NF) it might actually be ok to carry for some field shooting as long as you shoot prone.

Chronos

[Yipikaye]

Well after much deliberation I put down a deposit on one got to wait until stock comes available. Could be as late as November for a .308 with fixed stock

[scoobs]

sorry to revive an old thread, just thought id share something i find amusing.

enquired about a getting a ruger precision converted to fixed stock as i am in nsw. the ruger precision is just a no go in nsw, even with fixed stock, because of its appearance.

whats amusing is that looks basically the same as the tac a1, which i can go and buy here........

[Yipikaye]

Hi All,

I'm looking for some advice on how to clean TAC A1 with fixed stock.

If anyone has this rifle can you share how you clean it?

This is the most frustrating rifle I've had to clean as I can raise the cheek piece it's highest setting but still the rod handle hits the recoil pad. This is not good as I'm worried I'm damaging the bore or rod by (slightly) bending to get over the pad.

Options I've considered;
1. Bore snake (but I don't like these as over time you pull carbon back through the rifle)
2. Clean through muzzle (but l don't want stuff to go into action)
3. Longer rod maybe?

Any tips / advice would be great.

Thanks!

[bladeracer]

Hi All,

I'm looking for some advice on how to clean TAC A1 with fixed stock.

If anyone has this rifle can you share how you clean it?

This is the most frustrating rifle I've had to clean as I can raise the cheek piece it's highest setting but still the rod handle hits the recoil pad. This is not good as I'm worried I'm damaging the bore or rod by (slightly) bending to get over the pad.

Options I've considered;
1. Bore snake (but I don't like these as over time you pull carbon back through the rifle)
2. Clean through muzzle (but l don't want stuff to go into action)
3. Longer rod maybe?

Any tips / advice would be great.

Thanks!

What's involved in removing the butt stock?
From what I can see it looks like an M4 buffer tube attachment to the receiver?
Can you just unscrew the buffer tube?
I only clean the bore when accuracy drops off so it wouldn't be a big deal for me. But for somebody that spends more time cleaning than shooting it'd be a pain.
What attaches the adjustable butt to the buffer tube? Can that be removed with ease?

Maybe you could make up an extension that threads into the rod to make it a little longer?

[Yipikaye]

I had a look but couldn't see how to easily remove the butt stock. maybe I need to try harder to unscrew it? I didn't want to break anything.

Its an AR stock so it should be easy, I just can't figure it out

I like the idea of making extension to the rod

[bladeracer]

I had a look but couldn't see how to easily remove the butt stock. maybe I need to try harder to unscrew it? I didn't want to break anything.

Its an AR stock so it should be easy, I just can't figure it out

I like the idea of making extension to the rod

If it is an AR buffer tube then it should have a big castle nut around it locking it against the receiver.
Being NSW it might be pinned in place to be "permanent" though.

Pro Tactical make extensions - http://www.protactical.com.au/storage/product/1327-max-clean-cleaning-rod-extension-1pc-suits-gc-002-and-gc-003-cleaning-rods
Just need to check what thread size your rod and fittings are.

[Yipikaye]

I think its fixed because its sold in NSW. Doesn't seem to have any way to remove it.

I will get one of the rod extensions for sure. Thank you! \

I've also noticed there is a 44" rod. I think mine is 36" I might spend some time browsing at my LGS

[Yipikaye]

A quick update. I got a 44" carbon fibre rod and it works a treat!

For anyone who reads this if you have a fixed stock get a long rod, 36" isn't good enough!

[PoorShot300]

Did you get the glass yet, and if so, what did you end up with?

Had i been aware of this thread earlier, i might have suggested to look at Sightron as an option, or look for well cared for 'used' higher quality options. Have them inspected by a friend in 'the know' about scopes and what to look for when buying used, but bargains are to be had if your timings right.

I look forward to your continued posts and your appraisal of the new bang-stick.

Gypsy

[Yipikaye]

I got the Bushnell Elite Tactical ERS 6-24x50 with BTR-MIL reticle.
I had to choose a tactical scope for the rifle.

Love the rifle. It's my first rifle with a break I was surprised how little the recoil is. Accuracy is great. I wish it came in 270, 7mm-08 or 30-06.

I was surprised how heavy it is, I thought it would feel a lot lighter than it does but maybe it's all the accessories that add the weight

[PoorShot300]

I hear ya,..7lbs don't sound much either, till ya lug it all day for a few days....(that's bare weight as well lol). If your not used to it, or like me rarely get out in the field, you notice it....

Glad to read your having a ball....some end up with buyers remorse and glad it's not you.

Cheers