TC Icon Opinions

[spook1]

Has anyone on here owned or shot the Icon?  I have seen alot of advertisements for these particular rifles, but am wanting to make sure that they are not just advertisements.  I have the chance to buy a NIB 308 Icon with beautiful wood for $740 out the door.  I know this seems to be a good price, but I am wanting some opinions from people who have owned or shot one.  Your help is appreciated.

[Lawful Larry]

I held one and did a good  look/see and wasn't impressed.  I  think they are asking too much  for  the gun, but have not seen one at the range yet to fire on or hear of a good range report.  Don't think much of their reports.  They tend to be a little biased.

[mannyrock]

  I handled one and was extremely impressed.  It is the best looking out of the box factory rifle that I have seen in many many years.  I have not seen a range report though.

Mannyrock

[victorcharlie]

I haven't shot one either, but have looked at them very closely many times.

It doesn't appeal to me and competes in the same price range of some other very nice rifles.

This is a good topic, I'd love to hear a couple of range reports as well.

[Minnesota1]

I've handled a few at the gun shows and would love to own one.  The one thing that is hard for me to get passed is that when you pick up that beautiful wood stocked rifle it has a hollow feel to it.  I don't know how to describe it better than that.  It seems like the stock has been layered with a beautiful outside look of wood but there's not much under that layer.  I've read that their stocks are a hybrid mix of wood and laminate but I just recently read that.  I'd love to hear others opinions on this and on range results. 

[MGMorden]

I've handled a few at the gun shows and would love to own one.  The one thing that is hard for me to get passed is that when you pick up that beautiful wood stocked rifle it has a hollow feel to it.  I don't know how to describe it better than that.  It seems like the stock has been layered with a beautiful outside look of wood but there's not much under that layer.  I've read that their stocks are a hybrid mix of wood and laminate but I just recently read that.  I'd love to hear others opinions on this and on range results. 

The stocks are made of "durawood".  It's 3 planks of walnut laminated and used to create a shell that contains carbon fiber on the inside.   Essentially it's supposed to give the look and feel of wood with the weight of a synthetic.

The newer "classic" model coming out this year is supposed to have a real walnut stock though.  It also has a hinged floorplate (instead of the detachable mag) and a more traditional bolt handle than the butterknife.  It's only in long action calibers though.

[beemanbeme]

$750 for a rifle that is supposed to go the extra mile in fit and finish doesn't sound bad to me. 'Course you could always buy a Savage for $300. But what have you got? 
Sounds like that butterknife just didn't fly in America.

[Lawful Larry]

'Course you could always buy a Savage for $300. But what have you got? 

A pretty good rifle and one from a company that has been around a lot longer then T/C.  Who by the way doesn't really exist anymore as a gun company.  They were bought out by S&W. 

I wouldn't relate cheap and inexpensive in the same sentence when it comes to Savage.  They make a very good reliable rifle that has a lot of staying power.  Oh yeah, did I mention that I don't even one one.  Their track record speaks for itself I should think!!!               

[beemanbeme]

I've said several times, if all you're interested in is pulling old trusty rusty out of the closet once or twice a year and going out and killing something, then by all means get a Savage.  Icon has stated from the get go that they are not competing for the low end market. And if that is where your interest lies, then it is pointless to bad mouth the Icon as over priced. By that rational, if esthetics has not interest for you, so is the Kimber and others as well as the various one offs that Brit talks about regardless of their fit and finish. 
I'd like to get a range report from one of the regulars in this room rather than a paid for writer. Somebody that could tell how easy the rifle was to work with as far as any tweeking that needed to be done and such. It seems all of my Rems have needed the trigger tuned and a little bedding work. I've always been able to do it myself and it's pretty easy and straightforward so I was wondering how the Icon would be?

[Lawful Larry]

I'd like to get a range report from one of the regulars in this room rather than a paid for writer. Somebody that could tell how easy the rifle was to work with as far as any tweeking that needed to be done and such. 

Of all the websie forums, I have yet to hear of any range report.  It would seem that this is not a very popular gun.  Or every owner is being  closed mouth on its performance. 

As far fit and finish, it is not in the same category as a production Kimber.  I have a KImber and have has the chance to hold and inspect an Icon.  I'll go with the Kimber in this category for now.  I  do know how  my Kimber shoots and I am very stisfied.  I would also love to hear a good range report for one of us instead of the BS gun mag writers.  I don't think in all my years of reading them that I have read a review telling it how it really was with a bad product. 

I know I never read a "Do not buy!" review, has anyone???

[beemanbeme]

You know, LL, just to go a little afield with your "do not buy" idea. Whether it's a rifle, scope, sneakers, mountain bike, whatever. The writer aka tester is sent the item from the factory.  You KNOW that item is gone over with a fine tooth comb.  I've often wondered what would happen if the tester was merely sent a chit and he would go to the store of his choice and pick up a rifle, scope, sneakers, whatever like you and I would do.  Wonder how different the results would be?

[MGMorden]

You know, LL, just to go a little afield with your "do not buy" idea. Whether it's a rifle, scope, sneakers, mountain bike, whatever. The writer aka tester is sent the item from the factory.  You KNOW that item is gone over with a fine tooth comb.  I've often wondered what would happen if the tester was merely sent a chit and he would go to the store of his choice and pick up a rifle, scope, sneakers, whatever like you and I would do.  Wonder how different the results would be?

That's one benefit of Consumer Reports reviews.  They go out and purchase the item randomly off the shelf with their own funds for the review.  They also don't sell or permit the use of their reviews by the manufacturer as advertising information.  Unfortuneately I don't think they do guns reviews .

[Tom W.]

I handled one at the gunshop about a month ago. There were three on the rack. I wasn't too impressed, it sure didn't look near as pretty as the ones in the ads, and the LOP was kinda short for me...

That being said, if one should show up under the Christmas tree I would not send it back....

[Lawful Larry]

You know, LL, just to go a little afield with your "do not buy" idea. Whether it's a rifle, scope, sneakers, mountain bike, whatever. The writer aka tester is sent the item from the factory.  You KNOW that item is gone over with a fine tooth comb.  I've often wondered what would happen if the tester was merely sent a chit and he would go to the store of his choice and pick up a rifle, scope, sneakers, whatever like you and I would do.  Wonder how different the results would be?

Ya know you may have a point there.  I am sure they would have been highly tuned and gold plated. 

There is a magazine that reviews guns and has no advertisements in the mag at all.  I can't remember the name, but I used to get it at the sheriff's office where I worked.  As the lead firearms instructor I got had subscribed to it.  It was a very informative source of firearms info.  They were very unbiased and received no guns from the manufacturers.  If I remember right it was a little expensive, but worth it.

[kyelkhunter3006]

Isn't that magazine called Gun Tests?  I get a subscription offer from them every once in a while.  I've looked at a couple of Icon's, and I'm on the fence about them.  I love just about every feature that they offer on it, especially the integral bases.  I haven't heard anyone rave about extreme accuracy though, and at that price point, with T/C claiming MOA out of the box, you'd think that it would be a priority.  As for the price, the one's that I've checked out are finished just as well as any other $800 gun out there.

"A pretty good rifle and one from a company that has been around a lot longer then T/C.  Who by the way doesn't really exist anymore as a gun company.  They were bought out by S&W. "

I'm not sure what the point of this comment was??? 

Well, if that's the case, then Remington, Bushmaster, Winchester, Marlin, NEF/H&R, Browning, Tikka, and the list goes on and on, no longer exist as gun companies either, since they've all been bought out by other companies in recent years.

[Cowpox]

Gun Tests magazine it is.  They don't just buy and test one example, but a few of each.  Haven't bought it in 20 years, but it was not uncommon to see the "bottom line" telling you to NOT BUY, or at least NOT RECOMMENDED. 

Hear is a link where you can sign up for a $2 a month membership, and use their entire test library for as long as you remain a member.

               http://www.gun-tests.com/   

[Lawful Larry]

"A pretty good rifle and one from a company that has been around a lot longer then T/C.  Who by the way doesn't really exist anymore as a gun company.  They were bought out by S&W. "

I'm not sure what the point of this comment was??? 

Well, if that's the case, then Remington, Bushmaster, Winchester, Marlin, NEF/H&R, Browning, Tikka, and the list goes on and on, no longer exist as gun companies either, since they've all been bought out by other companies in recent years.

If you had read the posts thoroughly you would have seen that someone was making a comment that related Savage with cheap inferior products.  That was the reason for the comment!!!

[beemanbeme]

make that "cheap UTILITARIAN products" and you've got it.  One could say, if you hold it to your shoulder, pull the trigger, and it goes bang, it's a rifle.  After that everything is esthetics, workmanship. The Savages are ugly. Like the .270, .243, and Edsel, they have achieved cult status. Savage ownership is worn like a cloak of martyrdom, dast not speak against these most accurate out of the box monuments of cheapness.

[MGMorden]

make that "cheap UTILITARIAN products" and you've got it.  One could say, if you hold it to your shoulder, pull the trigger, and it goes bang, it's a rifle.  After that everything is esthetics, workmanship. The Savages are ugly. Like the .270, .243, and Edsel, they have achieved cult status. Savage ownership is worn like a cloak of martyrdom, dast not speak against these most accurate out of the box monuments of cheapness.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  While my Savage 110 certainly could have nicer looking wood on it, I don't find it any uglier than other factory produced bolt action rifles of today - at least the budget models of such. If you want something nicer, Savage does offer higher end pieces such as the classic series (http://www.savagearms.com/14EuroClassic.htm), or their 50th Anniversary model (in .300 Savage) they're offering this year (http://www.savagearms.com/110model.htm).  And I own quite a few different makes of rifle to compare it to.

I've just never understood the whole "Savage is ugly" angle.  But, as said, everything is a matter of opinion there.  I find the entire line of Blaser rifles to look pretty goofy and they cost a small fortune.

Besides - given what I've seen coming from many custom gunsmiths these days, I'd say that a large portion of the gun buying populace is after accuracy more than beauty anyways.  Half of the custom guns I see these days look like a Frankengun to me.  Stainless barrels mated up to blued receivers with butt ugly synthetic stocks (or worse, weird colored laminates like pink or purple).  Most of these are bench guns in a different league of accuracy than a Savage, but it's clear there that what the shooter is after is performance, and when compared to other factory rifles, the Savages do pretty well in that category.

[Tom W.]

Beeman, my Savage Model 12 ain't ugly.....just heavy. I've seen some of those "fish belly" looking things that were highlighted in Guns & Ammo that really looked bad, at least to me.  My personal preference is a Ruger #1B.....with a good Leupold on top.

[beemanbeme]

I have a .300 Savage in the Rem Classic. With a Weaver K3 on it. When I take it deer hunting, I load my ammo with a Lee Loader. How bad is that?? 
I totally agree about the influence of Star Wars on the weapons of today.  I guess the tactic-cool school of thought will have it's day.  Hopefully a short one. 

MY personal opinion of the Blaser (and the Hummer): Classic examples of "I can spend more money for my toys than you can". 

[Tom W.]

I'd just like to be able  to pay cash for a few Hummers and some Blasers

[jcn59]

I got a .30 T/C at a good price; one of the earlier versions with better wood.  Factory 150 gr. 3 shot group at 100 yards - the 4th hole was a 100 yard poke from my .45 blackhawk, (not shot with Icon.)  The other 2 shot group at 100 yards was from cases made from .308 Win. cases.  One of my home-made cases didn't chamber - hence the 2 shot group.  I think that it might like those 168 gr. match Sierra bullets.  I'll know more after I shoot it some.

[neald]

Hello folks,
 As a member I bought an Icon through the TCA  in the 30TC cal.. It has a good looking piece of wood ( laminated with a slice of carbon fiber in the center). Not as fancy of wood as the ones shown in the ads early on.
 
 I have shot it about 190 rounds. then my OLD Herters scope that I had laying in a drawer when the Icon came and I used it, gave up the ghost.
 Before the scope went south on me I was getting 3/4  inch five shot groups consistently with the factory ammo. for a light barrel on a factory gun I don't think that it was bad at all.
 My only complaint is the fact I can not duplicate the factory loading yet, but I have hope, as I read somewhere that someone brought out some high energy powder.
 I will buy anouther in 243 cal when the wife isnt looking.
Neal

[NAM70]

I certainly respect the accuracy of Savages but I think its their action that's ugly. That's what kept me from buying one all these years. I'm still a Remington shooter. Dave

[longwinters]

I have a good hunting buddy that just got one in 308.  The wood is beautiful, trigger easily adjustable and it's 1st outing at the range was 3 shots to site in and the next 3 were under 1/2"( with some loads that I had for my 308 Sako).  I don't know as it suits my taste, but the bugger just plain shoots.  I don't know why the tread got hi-jacked to a Savage discussion, but I guess boys will be boys.

Long

[ricehombre]

I have one of the early 243 Icons. Has a beautiful stock, great trigger, smooth action, and must weight over 8.5 lbs. Like one of the previous posts said, it just shoots anything I feed it and makes pretty little groups. Wish it had 4-5 shot clip instead of the 3 shot with one in the chamber. Replaced the flat bolt handle with a traditional round one. The Icon would be my first choice if I was looking for another rifle.

[ricehombre]

Just started reloading for the Icon this weekend and found that you can load most any bullet to the lands and still use the magazine.

[Swampman]

I've played with them.  They seem very overpriced to me.  The thing that puts me off with T/C is that's all you see on TV hunting shows.  I get a little tired of the high pressure advertising.

[kyelkhunter3006]

Yep, just like 10-12 years, ago, everyone that hunted on Realtree was shooting a Remington 700 of some kind.  The shows are a business, if someone says, hey, I'll pay XX of $$ for you to use my products, you aren't going to say no, if it means that you're making money on your business.