I’m thinking of selling the old M-99e in .308 Winchester and finding a BLR. Anyone done this lever gun transition?

41

Having owned both, I prefer the 99. While neither has a great trigger, I’ve generally had better on the 99s. Both have been accurate enough for deer at any range I’d shoot, and the 99 was easier for me to strip/clean. If you like detachable magazines, all the BLRs have them as far as I know. Is there a specific issue with the 99 that makes you want to change?

Old70

The 99's original trigger--which is the one on your 99-E--is a LOT easier to "tune" than the BLR's. And generally pre-1960 99's shoot very well, with at most a little tweaking. (Have not always found this to be true with post-1960 99's.)

On the other hand, the few BLRs I've owned have been very accurate. My first, a .30-06, grouped almost as well as my NULA Model 24 .30-06.

Whether tiny groups matter for your hunting is another question.

Both are great rifles.

Why do you want to sell the 99 and replace it with a BLR?

I've got a BLR in 308, and it's a fine rifle, but to my mind, the 99 is more gracefully styled, and just as accurate.

Regards, Guy

I own Savage 99's and also owned and tried the BLR in .308 a long time ago for one hunt. Maybe just just a love affair with the 99 my family has had since they started making them, but I could not warm up to the Browning for several reasons but mainly the trigger sucked and I did not like the feel of it compared to the Savage 99. It comes down to preference and ease of maintenance as regards take down & assembly. The Savage wins on the take down and assembly, all other aspects are preference as they both shoot very well.

I'll second MD's words on the potential of the 99E's trigger. I found a 99E in 308 for peanuts at a Tucson pawn shop, and scored a new-old-stock never installed original 99 .358 Win barrel off of eBay for equally cheap change. Frank Wells of Tucson swapped the barrels for me and did a trigger job. I ended up with a really nice rifle with a fabulous trigger. after some bedding work it's a real shooter.
I'd hold on to yours if it was my choice to make.

Best of luck,
Rex

I have a couple of 99’s and, while I’ve never had a BLR, my brother has a couple as do a couple of friends. I will say they are more accurate than such a rifle has any right to be. I have loaded for theirs and shot them quite a bit. I have also been their go-to guy when they’ve had problems. The biggest problems have been when they’ve gotten foreign matter of one kind or another inside that’s put them out of commission. They seem particularly susceptible to that and they are the sort of mechanism I don’t like to disassemble anywhere but in the shop, on a clean workbench. It just seems to me the 99 is a more robust action in that regard. All that said, my brother has had his .308 BLR since the late’70’s or early’80’s and it’s been all over with him. It’s his “last rifle to get rid of.” For me, the 99 is a nicer carrying and handling rifle as well.

Savage 99 for me any day. Have several 99f and c. Fit me better than the BLR or the Henry Long Ranger I had. Sold them and kept the 99s in 250-3000, 300sav, and 308win.

I've heard of a Savage 99. Are they any good?

I know the 99 has a well-deserved loyal following, but the one had, a.308, kicked like a mule. It was one of my first rifles and I tried to like it, but it gave me a bad flinch. Years later I shot a friend's BLR in .308 and it didn't seem so bad. I've always believed the Savage just didn't fit me well.

I have a few 99s and love them, but they do punch WAY above thier weight class for recoil.

300 Savage is my upper limit for a cartridge in them. I have absolutely zero desire to ever own one in 284/308/358. Imho they're best paired with lighter cartridges like 250, 300, 303, 30-30, etc, unless pain is one of your kinks.

For me its mostly the extraction issue, I want a rifle that's close to 100% reliable.

41

BLR's are usually quite accurate. 99's a little less so but still acceptable as a a hunting rifle. In nearly fifty years of gunsmithing, I have probably worked on as many 99's as Brownings, but the Brownings often had weird problems. Trigger issues gear timing, occasional misfires for no apparent reason.
The Browning is a little more reloader friendly as the Savage tends to stretch brass a bit if loaded hot. Load the Browning too hot and I have seen lug setback and stripped gears , if a case got stuck.
I would probably choose the 99 just because I think they are kind of classy, and they've been around for a long time. GD

i own both 99`s and BLR`S i do use a 30-06 BLR s.s. that has a better trigger now this rifle is more of a workhorse blood trailing rifle , i like to keep my 99`s in the safe and maybe shoot them a little they are kinda safe queens for me. both the 99`s and my BLR`s do shoot well .

The only way I would go down the BLR road is if I was looking for a magnum cartridge, all other calibers the 99 is better handling gun to me and no exposed hammer.

I’ve had both, like the 99’s much better. I don’t think they have any more recoil than a bolt in the same calibers. My 358’s are pleasant to shoot.

Winchester Model 88 for the win

I have an 88 and a 99. I can never decide between them really. I have tried a BLR and wasn't all that excited about it. Never owned one though

Why not keep the 99 in 308 and look for a BLR in .358?

Unless you really don’t like the 99.

One of my brother’s BLR’s is a 7mm RM. IMHO, the magnum length BLR’s are ungainly sonsabitches.

The BLR feels ugly in the hand when carrying - the magazine sticks out of the bottom of a squared-off metal receiver, tiring the carry hand. The smooth, rounded bottom of the 99 will carry like a dream. (Knock it off! NO jokes about getting your hands on a smooth, rounded bottom!)

In my opinion, the BLR "scopes" better than the 99's....even the newer models that were drilled and tapped. I would much rather have an older 99 with a period correct tang peep, and the BLR with a 1-4x compact scope.

I think they scope ok

You’ll regret it. Just buy a Browning.

C1022 getting your hands on the smooth rounded bottom of a female is no joke. The joke is in your hand while carrying a blr. My 99 EG in 300 sav was d & t'ed for weaver bases wears weaver rings and an old weaver long tube 6x with fine x-hairs. It comes to the shoulder as nice as any and your looking thru the scope right now. The 99 ain't the problem it's all these damn short scopes with huge objectives on them that are a problem. On a 99 you just need a clear simple set and forget scope period. Mb

Since you're asking what we think about transitioning to a BLR, I'll chime in too. But, without knowing your private reasons for making the switch I (like everybody else) have to base my opinion on my own personal experience.

The ergonomics are way better with the 99. By 1960, when the 99E was intro'ed, Savage had perfected the balance and fit (with the average man in mind). So too with the action: 60 years of subtle fine tuning made them utterly reliable. Triggers suck, but only in terms of comparison with "modern" triggers that we've become spoiled with - they work ok, can be tuned a bit by someone who knows exactly what they're doing, and are simple mechanisms that will never fail you when you're crouched in the snow on a lonely mountain top a hundred miles from nowhere. "Strength" of the action is plenty for the .308 cartridge, extraction is dead-nuts reliable (unless someone has monkeyed with it).

Compare all that side by side with a BLR and get back to me.

Of course, sometimes we make such decisions based on our hearts not our heads. Mayhaps that's part-and-parcel with rifle loonyism, and explains why all of us have regrets.....

Another thought:

If like many, your 99E is fitted with a birch stock and you find it to be aesthetically displeasing (even though it's entirely functional), it can be re-stocked with walnut and made into a "semi-custom" gun. Doing that can make it a "new gun" to you and reignite the love affair you had with it when you first acquired it and all thoughts of replacement banished.

^^^^^^This^^^^^^^^

But, admittedly, you’re unlikely to find a 99 with that cool, gold-plated trigger.

Actually, there are many, many thousands of them out there. Not a fan, but they are there. One in my safe too

Gold triggers on a Savage 99? Are they rare? LOL

Weren't the gold trigger 99's tang safety only after 1960 and never on the older more desirable pre-mil lever mounted safety 99's?

Lol…I didn’t know that. All mine are 1920’s era with the lever-lock safeties.

Yes. (Unless you're rich like Fireball and commission the installation of gold triggers on all your rifles. )

I have both the M99 and the BLR. Both have features I like and features I don't like.
One the BLR, mine is the early version with the magazine that hangs down. Guess I have no choice but to live with it. My biggest gripe is the gun is too muzzle light. The Savage doesn't have that problem but I don'r like the beavertail forearm. Also I find the 99 a bit too heavy for my taste. FWIW, both rifles are more than sufficiently accurate for hunting. Both are chambered to the .358 Win.
PJ

Over the years, tried two 99's, both 250's. Triggers were ok, both walnut stocks but with gunsmithing and handloading and could not do better than 2" groups. Shot a friend's 308. It was a 2" gun also.

Have owned a 308 BLR since 1974 and steel framed 223 and 257 since their intro in the 1980's. Local smith took care of their triggers. 223 is a one inch gun while the others are better. I have many longarms to play with but these are my game guns. I do not care for the balance or roughness of the aluminum frames.

^^^Correct answer^^^

I have owned several 99's and shot several BLR's The 99's worked great but never pointed correctly for me. The BLR's also worked great and pointed better but I never could warm up to the way it carried. This was in the time long ago and far away when 100yds was a long shot for deer and most were under 50. When Ruger brought out the #1 most everything else went away. Keep them both and let the grandkids argue over them later.

My F.I.L. fed his family for years with a '94 win in 30-30. When he went into business for himself he finally got his dreams to come true; a 300 weatherby and an elk hunt out west, and BLR in 358 win and two freezers back home.

I think he thought I was some sort of tweed&cap city-feller when I showed up with a 99.., still, he let me stay and hunt.

A general comment to the several posters who say 99s kick hard:

The reason is most 99s had buttstocks designed for aiming with iron sights. Consequently when scoped your cheekbone is far under the comb of the buttstock--and the rifle rises far more than if it had a "straighter" stock.

Have seen this effect in other rifles as well. The typical Ruger No. 1 was also stocked for irons. I had one for several years, and shot and hunted with it using both iron sights and scopes. With irons it weighed around 8-1/4 pounds, and scoped a pound more. The felt recoil was noticeably harder when scoped than with irons when firing the same loads, despite weighing 10% less.

Another thing with older 99's is they had hard buttplates, whether metal or some sort of synthetic. My first was a lightweight .308 that kicked the snot out of me, both because it was scoped and rose more in recoil, and had an aluminum buttplate. Got it when I was 14 and was around 5'8" and 120 pounds, which resulted in a flinch that took a while to cure.

I have owned and hunted with both and agree with czech1022, the 99 carries easier. I never really noticed the recoil difference.

Shortly after marrying my wife in 1991, her father gave me his 1952 99EG 300 Savage with peep sight. It’s a lovely, easy to carry rifle that shoots tight groups off the hood of my truck. I never noticed the recoil, it’s certainly less than my .270 Remington 700.

I mostly hunt with a lightweight custom .257 Roberts made by Dennis Olson, but I make a point to carry that old 99 in honor of my FIL. I’ve shot 6-7 Whitetail over the years, all one shot kills.

I find ease of one hand carry a large factor in whether a rifle stays or goes down the the road. As well as I like the 77/22 Ruger and their rotary magazine, they carry like a 2 × 4, and I sent a good one down the road because of that. The 99 does carry very well.

Seems like the majority perfer the 99 for one reason or another, lots of you mention that it carrys better.

Nobody has extraction issues like I do?

Various factory ammo will stick in the chamber & need to be poked out with a cleaning rod.

41

That would explain why I don't think 99's kick hard. Mine are open sighted. Always have been

You should get the BLR for sure. You can send the 99 my way.

Yep, that make's a difference!

Have owned and hunted with a bunch of 99's. Probably half were older models which I only used with irons--thought some of the rear sights were apertures, whether receiver or tang-mounted.

The only one that kicked a little annoyingly after that first .308 (which I could well now) is the .358 Winchester Featherweight I inherited from my friend and mentor Norm Strung, which has the then-standard aluminum buttplate. With 250-grain loads its a little much off the bench, though have never noticed it while hunting. But in general I use lighter bullets in it, which helps.

Yep, that make's a difference!

Have owned and hunted with a bunch of 99's. Probably half were older models which I only used with irons--thought some of the rear sights were apertures, whether receiver or tang-mounted.

The only one that kicked a little annoyingly after that first .308 (which I could well now) is the .358 Winchester Featherweight I inherited from my friend and mentor Norm Strung, which has the then-standard aluminum buttplate. With 250-grain loads its a little much off the bench, though have never noticed it while hunting. But in general I use lighter bullets in it, which helps.[/quote]


I have two of the 358 featherweights, aren’t bad with the 180 Barnes. I only shoot pigs and the lightweight whitetail we have in Texas. They do great on them. Both were made in 56 when we were 3 yrs old. I’m having a 99 rebarreled to 338 Federal, I’m eager to try it on pigs. Pigs are good to try new rifles and bullets on.

I have had one 99, a 300 and 2 blr’s a 257 and 7mag. Still own the 257 Roberts, a great rifle for me. The savage wouldn’t extract any reloads and only half the factory ammo. The blr 7mag I hated. As a previous poster noted they are ugly. The lever throw took forever. The 257 has a short lever throw and with a 20 inch barrel it handles amazing. My only complaint is browning has the lowest comb height on blr’s of any gun they make. Terrible for a scope. I found some glue on cheek risers at Brownells that fixed the problem. When they moved the manufacturing to Japan they changed the magazine and it no longer protrudes from the bottom of the receiver.
Light, short,quick pointing and fairly hard hitting. What’s not to like.

YMMV, Fred