Can anyone vouch for this?

[82nd airborne]

Just wondering if any of you know anything about this Savage Favorite .22lr?
Its under 300 bucks and looks pretty slick.

[John Taylor]

I had one years ago, they are not exactly like the old ones. If I remember they had a transfer bar hammer/firing pin. Nice little rifle. I think mine was around $100 new but that was about 30 years ago.

[82nd airborne]

Think it would handle light 25-20?

[NickSS]

I have one for several years and like it a lot. I put a cheap tang sight on it and use it for plinking and some small game hunting. It does not have a transfer bar but it does have a rebounding firing pin. Some of the newer ones are takedown rifles just like the originals were but mine is not a takedown rifle. Mine is fairly accurate considering the sights I have shot groups of under 2 inches at 50 yards and have no problem hitting pop cans at that range. It has bagged a number of squirrels and rabbits too. It is a nice little rifle but no target gun and it is not fit up for a scope or tang sight and must be drilled and taped for installation of either.

[missionary5155]

Good morning
I woud be certain of one thing ... that the rifle was never to be fired with any high pressure rounds.. The favorites were chambered in .22 .25 & .32 rimfire so yes you could IF you understand NOT to hot rod it. PLus you have to change the firing to center fire.

[looseprojectile]

I have had some experience with some of the old ones. Barely strong enough for high speed .22 LR. Not reccomended.
I am sure that you would be really happy with a Martini Cadet for the donor action for a good strong light 25 20. Would be easy to reline and extractor would fit. Cost about the same.
One could assume that the new ones are stronger than the older worn ones but why start with a marginal gun?
If it is the looks that attract you get it and shoot .22s.
The 25 20 is a really neat usable cartridge. Always liked it especially in a 92.
I recently sold a Savage model 23 with a scope for three hundred.

Life is good

[82nd airborne]

Thanks for the advice gentlemen. We are hoping to start on a falling block action that will handle from .22 to 45 colt, that we can put into production and offer for a reasonable price. (Under 500 bucks) Guess I just better wait untill we have that done.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

A thought. How many markets are you hoping to tap into? All your own, or a repro?

Rich

[82nd airborne]

I cant say its all my own, it does have ideas borrowed from several other single shots. Dad made the first prototype when he was about 15 and improved on it by making a newer version every year or so. We are doing two designs, one has a one peice stock, because that was what dad wanted. I like the looks of a two piece stock with the action exposed so we will be doing a version like that to. If it goes over well, we may scale it up and do a bigger version for 45-70 and what not. It is mainly just a side project that we hope to break even or better on, just because we like that style and period of firearms. I may limit the sales to cast boolits too, just so it doesnt take too much time and tooling away from the money making projects.

[HORNET]

Take a close look at the breeching on one of the "new" Favorites and compare it to one of the old ones made before they were discontinued. Right behind the breechblock on each side there are thrust shoulders intended to support the breechblock against cartridge thrust. On the old actions, these shoulders contact the rear of the breechblock and cam it forward very slightly as the action closes, indication that they actually function. I haven't seen a "new" action yet where this happens, frequently there is a gap of 1/16" or so. This indicates that the only thing supporting the breechblock are the action pins. Not a very good situation, IMHO. It would have been so easy for them to make it correctly, especially when they converted the breechblock to powdered metal.

[82nd airborne]

My block will go into a recess in top of the action, while slightly camming, which should make for a very solid lockup. It should handel far more than I would ever chamber for. I mainly shoot light loads of unique, aa#5, or 2400, but I guess most people wont be doing that so I'll make em extra beefy so i dont get my britches sued off.
Hornet, thanks for the observations. Id like to get an old on and a new one side by side. It seems like most firearms manufacturers have taken shortcuts in craftsmanship, but never pass on the savings.

[Bret4207]

Thanks for the advice gentlemen. We are hoping to start on a falling block action that will handle from .22 to 45 colt, that we can put into production and offer for a reasonable price. (Under 500 bucks) Guess I just better wait untill we have that done.

The Favorite isn't a "falling block" per se, it's a dropping block. You need something like a Stevens 44 or Winchester.

[82nd airborne]

Thanks for clarifying Bret, when you get time sometime, would you mind letting me know what the difference(s) are between the two?

[excess650]

The Stevens 44 ISN'T a good design for CF cartridges. Its of the toggle link design, and 20K psi at best. The 44-1/2 action will handle whatever you put into it. The Lowall Winchester action was fine for smaller CF cartridges but not a great idea for larger ones. Browning's newer version of the Lowall is different and will handle higher pressures. The block MUST be supported!

[jlchucker]

I've got one of those 22's. Mine has an octagon barrel and color-hardened frame. Bought it new around 1972 or thereabouts. Good for short range shooting, and maybe for stuff around 50 yards or so. Factory sights are kind of cheap and crappy for much else. I don't know anything about the strength of this action as compared to others. I'd rather have a centerfire cartridge in something a little stronger-looking.

[tacklebury]

I love mine. 8) I'm putting a Henry style flip up ladder barrel sight on mine and smoothing off the original range marks to make my own. ;)

[Bret4207]

Thanks for clarifying Bret, when you get time sometime, would you mind letting me know what the difference(s) are between the two?


The difference between a falling block and a dropping block? In laymans terms the falling block rides on surfaces that hold it in a vertical plane. A dropping block swivels to an extent on pins or bolts. The Favorites locking mechanism is just pins or bolts/screws, however you want to term it.

Read DeHass or Sharpe or Grant for a far more precise definitive than my cruddy skills allow.

[John Taylor]

The Favorite isn't a "falling block" per se, it's a dropping block. You need something like a Stevens 44 or Winchester.

Your thinking of the Stevens 44-1/2, which is a falling block. The 44 is just like the favorite only bigger. Stevens made several rifles on the same design, another was the 414. These actions are good for the low pressures. They did try the 44 with 32-40 and 38-55 , with an added feature of a hammer block to keep the breach from opening. It didn't work all that great and the ones I have seen were shot loose.

[Bret4207]

Well, I was thinking 25-20 at the time in response to 82nd Airbornes "Think it would handle light 25-20?" regarding the current Favorite. The 44 does okay with the 25-20, 32-20, etc. A 44 1/2 is always going to be a better action.

As it happens I was reading a 1940 American Rifleman last night and the author of the article makes a case for considering the 44 a rolling block. Not in the sense a Remington is, but it does rock into place. Interesting view on it..

[82nd airborne]

Thanks, so the dropping block acctually cams (maybe tilts), for lack of a better word, a few degrees? The lever, which is pinned to the block, forces it closed at a slight angle, for a more robust lockup?

[Bret4207]

I'm sure there are others here with far better communicative skills, but I'll give it a shot.

A falling block is going to have some support behind the breech from the receiver. A dropping block, like a Favorite or 44 action has no physical support from the receiver, but rather depends on pin/screws/bolts. Look at a Savage 99- thats a falling block, even though many people wouldn;t think of it that way. The rear of the bolt is supported by the recv'r when in battery. Then look at a a Ruger #1- the breech block rides in machined slots that support the block at all times IIRC, the Winchester and Browning B-78 work the same way. Those are the only 2 variations on a falling block I can think of, and most people wouldn't include the 99. The rolling or camming action of the 44 that was mentioned isn't germane to the descriptor of the dropping block. It's just a by product of the particular design. It rolls a bit going into battery, so that guy back in the 40's made the point it's sort of a rolling block. That just confuses the issue and I'm sorry I mentioned it.

When you get into the various descriptors for all the different actions you're going to run into a lot of sheer opinion mixed in with the facts. What one guy sees may differ a bit from what another guy see's.I know some people do not consider the Stevens 44 1/2 a falling block. Those are the people who only consider an action where the breech block rides in slots cut in the recvr a falling block. Most people depend on the older texts to define the particular type of action- Shapre, Grant, Whelen, etc. IOW, if Harry Pope or John Browning called something a falling block the name pretty much stuck. We get into internet dissection of the various qualities of an action and seem to spend as much time on minutiae as the major issues. Such is life.

If you read the older encyclopedic texts like Sharpes or Grants you'll get more of the fine points. De Haas books are said to contain errors, but I think they are mostly right on too. If you go to the SS enthusiasts sites you can see the fur fly over the minutiae I mentioned.


Look at these 2 schematics and you'll see some of the difference in lock up-

http://www.wisnersinc.com/exploded_views/Stevens_model_44.htm
http://www.wisnersinc.com/exploded_views/stevens_model_44.5.htm

[Dan Cash]

Just wondering if any of you know anything about this Savage Favorite .22lr?
Its under 300 bucks and looks pretty slick.

I have one and it is a very nice rifle; good trigger and very light but close to full size. Of course, it can be shortened for a child. Mine is suitably accurate.

[John Taylor]

Bret4207. On the 44 Stevens the block is supported by the frame as well as the pin. If it ain't all wore out that is. I just got done making a new block for one and if it is fitted right it will wedge against the frame and barrel at the same time.

[Bret4207]

I don't have my 44 in front of me, but isn't most of the support in the lever link when they wear a bit? I know the back of the block is supposed to fit close to the frame when done right, but the does the geometry of the swing put the block in contact?

I can't even imagine the work making a new breech block would entail. I suppose you started with a block of steel and not a forging?

[HORNET]

The geometry of the swing is supposed to put the block in contact with the shoulders in the frame. The hole for the pivot screw at the front of the block is elongated to allow the thrust shoulders in the frame to cam the block forward as it fully closes so that the shoulders take most of the case thrust and only a small amount is directed down into the linkage. If the thrust shoulders aren't contacting the block due to wear or poor fit-up, then the whole load goes onto the pivot pins and things go bad fast. Everything is still fairly soft and it's not a very strong action for use with smokeless powder loads, even when fitted correctly.

[John Taylor]

Made from a piece of heat treated 4140.http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l132/johnptaylor/44StevensbreachblockNew.jpg

[Bret4207]

Nice! Its the radius on the rear of the block surrounding the FP that would get me. Oh, what I'd give for a mill some days.

[John Taylor]

The radius was cut using a rotary table in the mill but left a little oversize. Lay out die and a file were used to get the final fit. It is a bit on the tight side, will probably loosen up with use.