Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Help Identifying Savage 99 250-3000

Hi all, first post. Thanks for having me. I am gun lover who is still learning a lot, and an FFL dealer for the past 3 or 4 years. I recently acquired some guns as part of my business, and one of them was a Savage 99. It was sold to me as a 99 "E" but I dont think that is correct. It doesnt have a straight stock, and it DOES have checkering. I have a blue book, and have visited several sites, but seems to be much conflicting information. I have taken off the scope to look under the mount, and there is a screw hole right where the designator would be. All I can see is what could be a 9 or maybe a lower case g. Please help identify which variant, thanks!

PS I need to sell this quick before I decide I must keep it. Yes, it is as sweet as it looks. If I do, I will need to sell something else, but...

Just took off the butt plate, the stock and the plate say "GB 20" Probably means nothing but thought I would throw it out there.

Welcome kd21.

Your rifle is an "EG". It should have a 24" barrel.

BTW, what is the serial number range on the rifle? (just the first three digits thanks, you can just X out the last three)

Thanks for the welcome olgrouser-

Looks like serial is 627XXX. Any idea on the age? I cant read the code on the "lever boss" , looks like MAYBE 2C??? Too faint to read. Maybe my wifes eyes will be better. The blue book (Fjestads gave some info on this, but I think they were off- would like to hear it from you guys with hands on experience...)

C is probably about right... 1951 if so... I would have maybe guessed a little later but I don't keep good track on these things.

I did not look at the pictures yet but 250EGs are desirable guns.

Cheers

Would have expected it to be a D and be from 1952. Beautiful gun, the drill and tap for a scope is after market and hurts the collectibility, but 250 EG's are popular any way.

Thanks all for the great info!

Naw, probably a C, the date codes were so messed up in the 600's I gave up jotting them down. You get more confused as you look at the paper it's written on.

Is true, that one's just a bit farther off than most. That's why I said "would have expected" rather than "please check it again".