The .303 SAVAGE Cartidge

[northmn]

It is usually a bit too pernickety to comment on spelling, unless it leads to dangerous error. But the above is a picture...

In a fairly common pattern, the early 99s always strike me as far nicer rifles than the late ones. I do think they look better with a pistol grip, but I wouldn't call that a functional thing. Most rifles of this type would be used in short to medium range woods shooting, and not many people ever complained of a straight grip on a shotgun. It also beats me why they gave up the rotary magazine. Again, it isn't really a functional difference, even on my 1926 Mannlicher-Schoenauer as compared with the concurrent box-magazine version. But when they had it, why do away with it? I can't see that it was even much of a production economy, which is what most improvements are.

The pistol grip is ergonomically a better grip than the straight grip. Double shotguns with double triggers were said to be easier to permit movement to switch triggers? Still, if you look at the M16, it was designed as an ergonomic rifle from the ground up and the grip permits more finger strength on the trigger. Marlin also has a pistol grip and claimed less lever throw distance? Rotary magazines were expensive and Savage was going through some financial problems. Also some did give feeding problems. The 99 was getting close to being perfected about the time they dropped it, with a detachable magazine and tang safety, but they also cheapened things by using stained whitewood stocks. Also note they dropped the Savage line of cartridges and went to more common Winchester cartridges, the 243, 284, 308 and 358. While this type of lever action has a following the 88 Winchester and Sako Finnwolf also were discontinued. Demand did not meet the cost of manufacture such that they were too expensive. Note that the BLR is still available but Western designed like the 94 or 336. Both the Sako and Winchester 88 were nicer rifles with one piece stocks but just did not meet marketing demands.

DEP

[northmn]

Another thought. We commonly discuss comparisons to todays loadings of the 30-30. When it came out it was loaded with a 165 or 160 grain bullet at just under 2000 fps. The current loading of 170 at 2220 advertised is fairly recent. The 303 Savage and the often argued 32 Special were a slight step up from the 30-30. The 190 grain bullet at about 2000 in the 303 Savage had a little more authority.

DEP

[Oyeboten]

While it's theoretically possible (the .300 Savage might work, with a .300 rotor in the .303 action), rechambering a Savage 1899 or a pre-1955 Model 99 for a larger cartridge is not practical due to the need for altering the rotor so the new cartridge case will feed.

Of course, if you don't mind having a single-shot M-1899 (like when the .410 bbl is used on a takedown model), it's physically possible, within the cartridge OAL limits set by the action.
.

Ahhh...okay, I had not realized the Rotary Magazine would be different for various Cartridges.

This is a good learning thread for me...thanks!

[Oyeboten]

All this advice re: re-chambering is good, with one caveat. If the rifle is older than 1909, with a square backed bolt, anything more potent than the original chambering may well be too much for the action. Those early receivers have been known to crack behind the bolt mortise due to the square corners being ideal stress risers. That was fixed when they altered the design to include a radiused bolt and receiver mortise. The magazine rotor and cartridge guide is another factor to consider. They were very cartridge specific- a .303 rotor and guide won't feed a .300 for example. Those parts have increased a lot in value in recent years.

Post-1955 actions can handle .308-class/length cartridges, not so earlier ones. Don't even bother trying. I know a guy who persisted and he swore it was one of the nastiest jobs he ever undertook. In order to handle longer rotors, they had to change the internal cavity dimensions of the receivers.

Thanks for this info..!

Personally I think it would be a crime against humanity to re-chamber a dandy old .303, unless of course it is trashy and has lost any aesthetic appeal.

I agree..!

I kind got to wondering about the rechambering idea just in a general way as it applied to the .303 SAVAGE Cartridge, but, indeed, as far as a nice old m1899 which is unmessed with, decent original finish and so on, I would not do it.

A more recent one, one which had been refinished along the way, 'messed with', several generaitons of Scope Mount holes, then, sure...there'd be no loss there.

[cordite]

http://
Nothing better than hunting with an old rifle and classic cartridge. The 303 savage is very effective