Savage 99
- Thread starter kcub
- Start date
Sure Shot Mc Gee
New member
Normally I'd ask 50 $ for the tip. But on this occasion I will say: I've commented the Tip in a few earlier 300 threads whom are now listed in this sites library.
Gunplummer
New member
KCUB, Here is a better tip. Use Remington Corlokt out of the box. I never had a problem with them. I have .300 dies and never bothered to reload the .300 Savage, even though some think the factory ammo is somewhat anemic.
math teacher
New member
Does the 300 have less recoil than 308 in a Savage 99?
Somewhat as it has less velocity. I doubt you would notice the difference all that much. While the 300 Savage has slightly less powder capacity, the main difference in the two is that the 300 is loaded to lower pressure than the 308. I killed my first four elk with the 300 Savage, but all were inside 200 yards. It is a fine deer cartridge.
Somewhat as it has less velocity. I doubt you would notice the difference all that much. While the 300 Savage has slightly less powder capacity, the main difference in the two is that the 300 is loaded to lower pressure than the 308. I killed my first four elk with the 300 Savage, but all were inside 200 yards. It is a fine deer cartridge.
Mike Irwin
Staff
From a Newtonian sense, yes. Less recoil.
From a practical sense, no.
From a practical sense, no.
Gunplummer
New member
Looking at the OAL of a 6.5 Creedmore, I would opt for the later model receiver. When you change to 6.5 and 7mm cartridges the length becomes more relevant. Anyway, it seems as if a lot of "Gunsmiths" now days are afraid to mess with a 99. You can really limit your bullet selection depending on what model you rebarrel. Fit on the rotor assembly is somewhat hit or miss. I have a .303 I may one day rebarrel to .250 Savage and it feeds .250 Savage perfectly as is. The counter numbers don't line up, but that can be fixed.
Mike Irwin
Staff
At one time a very popular conversion for the savage, based on (depending on the gunsmith) either the .250 or the .300 case, was the .270 Savage, .270 Titus, etc.
It filled a gap that a lot of people wanted filled, but which Savage never did.
It filled a gap that a lot of people wanted filled, but which Savage never did.
Gunplummer
New member
.260 works fine in my reworked .308, but you still will not be able to load 160 grain bullets in the .260 My 7-30 Waters is in an old style 99 with the shorter magazine. It is based on a 30-30 case, but unless I load flatnose bullets (Which Hornady dropped from their line), I am stuck with bullets around 120 grains. Do you see what I mean about the length difference when you get into .264 and .284 cartridges? I used a .303 Savage gun for the 7-30 extra barrel. It feeds both fine, and the .303 is a lot fatter. It is best to load up some dummies before tearing into a 99 to change over. It can be hit or miss on the feed issue among different rifles.
Jack O'Conner
New member
Savage 99 is a keeper!
Jack
Jack
I own both a 1949 Savage 99 EG in 300 Savage and a 1959 Winchester 88 in .308. The 99's velocity with 150grn bullets put's it at 60% the way towards the .308's performance over a typical 30-30's. Velocities are 300: 2,630fps, and .308: 2,810fps. As you might expect, the 99's recoil is somewhat softer than the .308's due to it's smaller powder charge but both have medium range recoil so shooting either even off the bench isn't harsh.
As both the 99 and 88 shoot the same soft point 150grn bullets, comparisons of accuracy is significant and I've found that both are 1½-2 MOA hunting class shooters which is all that one can reasonably expect from their design. My 99 has a 2" longer barrel than my 88 which helps it develop a bit higher velocities out of my handloads than book numbers which aids longer range performance, however, the .308 still retains an advantage. I should note that the 99's two piece stock design can be less accurate if the buttstock gets lose so care should be taken in that area.
Ergonomically, I like the feel of both the 99 and 88 as they shoulder well and point naturally. As both my 99 and 88 are scoped for longer range shooting, I also like the natural head placement I get on both. However, I lean towards the 88 a bit over the 99 in the overall looks department. Not saying the 99 isn't a good looker, just saying to my eyes the 88 is a bit better.
As both the 99 and 88 shoot the same soft point 150grn bullets, comparisons of accuracy is significant and I've found that both are 1½-2 MOA hunting class shooters which is all that one can reasonably expect from their design. My 99 has a 2" longer barrel than my 88 which helps it develop a bit higher velocities out of my handloads than book numbers which aids longer range performance, however, the .308 still retains an advantage. I should note that the 99's two piece stock design can be less accurate if the buttstock gets lose so care should be taken in that area.
Ergonomically, I like the feel of both the 99 and 88 as they shoulder well and point naturally. As both my 99 and 88 are scoped for longer range shooting, I also like the natural head placement I get on both. However, I lean towards the 88 a bit over the 99 in the overall looks department. Not saying the 99 isn't a good looker, just saying to my eyes the 88 is a bit better.
