Retak said, "..As for the Sako being more then the Tikka. The Sako is alot better gun then the Tikka. If you are so recoil shy then i would recomend going with a 243 or 25-06 instead of a 30-06 or 270. "
I'd have to disagree with you Retak. Sako does have a few features that may make is worth somewhat more than the Tikka T3 (e.g. 3 position safety, 3 lug bolt.) However, the main reason Sakos go for at least twice the price of many T3s is because every Sako caliber is design with little made in common. So, the development and manufacturing costs are much higher.
The designers of the T3 intentionally designed this model to have as many parts made in common as they reasonably could. They didn't spend a lot of unnecessary $ redesigning parts for each caliber rifle, when it wasn't necessary. When it was necessary of course.
T3s are made in the same factory as Sakos by just as skilled Finnish craftsmen as the Sako, with the same stiff cold hammered-forged barrel as the Sako, strong action, floating barrel as the Sako, smooth adjustable trigger, crowned barrel, extremely smooth blot-action, scope mounting system that will not move on you with rings provided, etc. It's also lighter than the Sako, which will make most hunters happier going up and down mountains.
I don't think you'll find a more accurate 1 MOA accuracy rifle out the box for the $ than the T3.
I'd personally chose the Tikka T3 at your $500-600 per copy giving you enough to buy a second of another caliber for another purpose than you'd pay for 1 Sako. I think Sakos are a high quality rifle, but not worth twice the cost of the T3.
I'd buy the .30-06 for the hunting you described. You've got many more alternatives with factory ammo with it and you can go with heavier loads/bullet than the .270 W for the tougher skinned, boned game you go after. I wouldn't have any hesitation to use it on game in the .30-06out to at least 200 yds. That's just my opinion.