Obambulate
New member
For home defense, the lever action was perfect. We already had .38/.357 revolvers. My wife is a lefty and shoots a rifle well. I found an older Interarms Rossi 16" carbine in .357.
American made 1892
- Thread starter oldbear1950
- Start date
Savage never made the model 99 in .348.
This is one of the downsides to lever guns. GENERALLY they don't shoot groups like bolt guns do. So to many potential buyers, they aren't "as good".
and this is the other side of the coin, in an ironic way. "Hunting accurate"?? ALL the classic lever guns of the past were "hunting accurate". As were their cartridges. It has to do with perception more than reality.
Show a buyer a 2MOA lever gun, even in "modern rounds (like .308 or .243 or something else) and they will almost always choose a 1-1.5MOA bolt gun, because its "more accurate" (and often cheaper). Doesn't matter that a 2moa lever gun will put deer in the freezer at any range ethical, what matters to the majority of today's buying public is they believe the more accurate bolt gun will do the job better. And, especially if its a bit cheaper.
stagpanther
New member
I have a BLR in 7mm-08--it actually can shoot very accurately when I'm lucky enough to get a good hold on it; Problem with it is Browning advertises it coming with a 4.5 lb trigger pull--the reality is mine came with a pull almost twice that (mine hasn't lightened with use). My Henry 45-70 in contrast has a perfect as-delivered pull IMO. The BLR is a true work of art--but Browning shoots themselves in the foot with that heavy trigger pull.
There were several reasons I parted with my Savage 99A Brush Gun.
1- Accuracy, the rifle ate scopes on a regular basis. I don't know what it was actually capable of because it kept killing the optics. So I didn't really trust the rifle to have a working scope if I were to hunt with it.
2- Cleaning it was a PITA compared to a bolt action rifle. I had to use a bore snake or clean from the muzzle. I was afraid to disassemble the rifle and put it back together.
3- Accuracy again. I was only capable of about 3 MOA at 100 yards with the sights. Good enough to kill deer within a reasonable distance, but it didn't bring confidence that I had in other rifles.
4- It was at least 90% condition, and the .358 Win chamber made it desirable. I think the only Savage 99 chamber there were fewer of is the .284 Winchester. So while I enjoyed shooting it, I wasn't going to hunt the mountains for mule deer or elk with it. Nor was I going to take it to the costal rain forest of AK in pursuit of black bear and risk rusting and the wood moving because of the wet environment.
The last reason was probably the biggest reason. I was wanting to build a custom rifle, and there was a guy in PA looking for a .358 Win Savage 99. So I sold the rifle and built a custom .338-06 on a stainless M70 action.
All four of your reason are plausible and valid reasons, for you, but they are all personal matters which are no fault or flaw in the rifle itself.
If the rifle is "eating scopes" the owner is using the wrong scopes, or possibly mounting them incorrectly.
Cleaning from the muzzle? Done right, its fine, and the list of firearms that require being cleaned from the muzzle is much larger than the ones that don't.
I would not disassemble a Savage 99, by choice, and would never touch the rotary magazine. If the magazine needed it, I would PAY a professional, and let them earn their money.
And, not wanting to risk the finish and appearance of a rare rifle in the wilds, is also a completely personal choice. Value vs utility, there is no "wrong" choice there, only choices others might disagree with.
A friend of mine has a concept he calls "honest wear", and I don't disagree. It shows the previous owner, used it, and cared for it. As he puts it, honest wear (on a sporting arm) means "somebody loved this gun" caried it, used it, and didn't abuse or neglect it. It's "character" and gives the gun more meaning to him than something that sat NIB for 30 years before being sold. Entirely a point of view thing.
Based on what you told us, you're happy, the new owner is happy, and, if you could get it to talk, probably so is the rifle, and that's the whole point.
If the rifle is "eating scopes" the owner is using the wrong scopes, or possibly mounting them incorrectly.
Cleaning from the muzzle? Done right, its fine, and the list of firearms that require being cleaned from the muzzle is much larger than the ones that don't.
I would not disassemble a Savage 99, by choice, and would never touch the rotary magazine. If the magazine needed it, I would PAY a professional, and let them earn their money.
And, not wanting to risk the finish and appearance of a rare rifle in the wilds, is also a completely personal choice. Value vs utility, there is no "wrong" choice there, only choices others might disagree with.
A friend of mine has a concept he calls "honest wear", and I don't disagree. It shows the previous owner, used it, and cared for it. As he puts it, honest wear (on a sporting arm) means "somebody loved this gun" caried it, used it, and didn't abuse or neglect it. It's "character" and gives the gun more meaning to him than something that sat NIB for 30 years before being sold. Entirely a point of view thing.
Based on what you told us, you're happy, the new owner is happy, and, if you could get it to talk, probably so is the rifle, and that's the whole point.