Guys,
I recently received my "Callahan Letter" for my grandfathers 99. It was manufactured in 1912, and it burned up in my parents house fire in 1985. Lucky I was that I was able to send it to Savage in 1986, and they refurbished it.

After reading the Callahan Letter, it stated that the gun came with a "20" lightweight rapid taper barrel". Unfortunately, Savage fitted it with a 24" barrel when they did the re-furb in 1986, because that is all they had, and it has little taper to it. The gun that was once a sweet little lightweight gun, is now rather heavy in comparison.

This letter has given me a desire to put the gun back like it was.

My point is, does anybody have a "20" lightweight rapid taper barrel" in .303 for sale?

One more note to add difficulty here. I remember them telling me that the gun was a take-down, but the barrel that they needed to put on it to send it back to me, was not a TD barrel. The forearm is set up for solid-frame. How would they do that? Did they simply force similar threads that were not TD threads into the old receiver?

Thoughts, input and possibly somebody to sell me a barrel are much appreciated.

Bob

Interesting story and situation.
I think it is amazing that Savage would even attempt to refurbish an early TD rifle in 1986. But since they did, I'd be inclined to leave it alone. Savage likely did some tweaking of the barrel and forearm to make it fit and safe for use.
It may be possible to reverse the process, but, you'd need a barrel that fits (may not index properly), a compatible TD forearm, a skilled person to pull it together, but it will never be Gramp's original rifle anyway.
Sounds like Grampa's rifle was a 1899H TD. The letter would have stated that I think. ??
If you really want a rifle like Gramp's, go buy one. They are out there.
In the end, it is your rifle to do with as you please. Just don't screw it up.
Good luck.

Geeze, that's a hard one. Since Savage rebuilt it, I think I'd leave it as is, it is all Savage. Does the letter state that it was rebuilt? That would mean you would have to leave it as is. If you are taking count, I vote to leave it as is, Joe.

I wasn't aware Savage offered this service.

See letter below for repairs Savage offered.

Wow, fires can be tough on guns. Did it need to be reblued?

It was a nasty looking piece of burnt metal, with charred wood bits on it. Burned up completely. My Callahan Letter shows the early work only with mfg in 1912 and my grandfathers work done again in 1930. Callahan said that when I had the gun re-made in 1986, at that time they only kept records for 3 years, after which time they were destroyed.

This gun was originally an 1899 H Featherweight.

I have purchased the identical gun that this gun in question used to be, and it is beautiful. Your advice to leave it as is may be best, as it is beautiful now, just a completely different gun. They even put the last 75th Anniv butt-stock on it, as they called me and asked me if I wanted this. They felt it was a special deal and it was supposedly the last one that they had. At the time I thought it was cool, but now after learning things here, I realize it is now a bit of a Frankenstein.

This was all handled through the "Service Dept" at the time.

Looks great though, and works great, just a bit heavy compared to the nice "sporter" that it once was.

Thanks for your input.

It might be a Frankenstein, but it's not a Bubbastein, it's still all Savage.

It's a Savage customized 99.. I'd have to go with leaving it as is. By the time you got done putting it back to "original", the only original piece would be the action. I'd display the older one you have and this one side by side with a writeup on the history.

call it a survivor. keep all the documents you have and leave it as it is. that is the gun's real history.nothing worse then a fake IMO

plab

Good advice from all of you.
Thanks so much for your input.

My grandfather was an amazing man, all from the old school.
He called them like he saw them, and loved his .303 Savage.
He passed in 1980, and I miss him still.

Bob

Do they still offer this type of work?

I seriously doubt the Savage Arms of today would even touch a Savage 99.

Nope.

1899 Guy, I never heard of that, but the weird thing is, I was just bidding on an older 99 T/D and that is what the seller was saying may have happened because it will not break down. It is drilled and tapped, so I just figured somebody ran a scope base screw too deep. I doubt it is a case like yours because it still has a T/D forearm. It may be really screwed up and silver soldered or welded on to correct a loose barrel. I took a chance and it is on the way. Guess I will find out.

I bet they had a barrel for yours laying around with no threads on yet. The pitch is not the same on the square threads and "V" threads. There is not really enough material on either one to change it by threading over the top of one. Another of those mysteries we will probably never know about.

Is it possible to force a solid-frame barrel into a receiver with the slightly-different, non-interrupted, TD threads, and have it lock up tight, solid, functional? Is this likely what they did? It would explain them saying that it would no longer be a TD. Also, they returned it with a solid frame forearm, so it does not even look TD.

Yes, you can put a solid frame barrel onto a takedown receiver, and vice-versa.

Calhoun, will this make it a very tight fit and something that I should not un-do, or are the threads the same?
Thanks for your input.
Bob

Threads are the same, but it's a tight solid frame fit and isn't going to simply unscrew. It'll be like removing a solid frame barrel.

Threads exactly the same. If it doesn't come undone via hand pressure (ie: if you need to apply heavy clamping and leverage to move it), I would leave well enough alone and go forth with it and have fun. One of my 1899H's barrel is so tight in the receiver that I shrugged my shoulders and just treat it as a solid frame.

I read more into it than was there. The OP said he had this done in the 80's. I just assumed they would not have a square thread barrel laying around anymore. Then again, when you look at all the crossed over models that turn up, who knows?
I would leave it alone too. The papers with it make it a lot more valuable if you ever go to sell.

Someone posted here a few months ago that led me to understand that the thread count was different.

Nope, the only difference is the V thread or square thread barrels. Before the 1 million mark they should all interchange. I would think there were plenty of square thread barrels still available in the '80s.

The TPI between a barrel with square threads and one with "V" threads is different. The others are right. You could mill the locator notch in the threaded area, put a latch hook on the barrel, and find all the hardware (Not cheap if you are buying) for the forearm.



I was checking out a 99 on Gunbroker that someone was halfway through converting to .358 WIN. Macmillan barrel, fiberglass stock and forearm. I was checking into it as a parts gun, but it sold outright in a day. Fireball, was that you that bought it?

I don't know when they dropped square threads, but the solid frame models were "V" threads way before 1 million.

Really? I've always believed the thread change occurred with the tang safety at the 1 million mark.

Mike, I believe you are right. 1 million is the cutover.

No sir, not me. I do like the custom 358 with the McGowen barrel on GB. That one looks pretty darn sweet, but not $1900 to this guy only because the $$ come hard for this ditch digger.

What is a "Cutover"? I kind of think they moved towards standard threads when they opened up the receivers and started chambering the longer rounds. I rebarreled a few .243's and .308's with "V" threads, but don't remember ever seeing one with square threads. I sold a .300 barrel that came off a gun with R model wood that was "V" threads.

Fireball, You missed the one I was talking about. It was not finished yet and was done on a older receiver. I think the guy wanted $400. for a "Buy it now" deal. I asked a question and it was sold before I got an answer.

Now that I think about it, I don't ever remember even pulling a barrel on a 99 with a tang safety.

Then every barrel that you've ever pulled must have been from a post mil M99E. No V threads before the million mark. Take that to the bank. Sounds like you're an "internet" smith. Do some basic research.

I still own a 22-250 I barreled for my self and it is in the 767,000 range. This looked like an R model when I got it. Even though it was a .300 Savage, it had the rotor support web milled out. It was original except for a bad swivel job and the barrel was bad.
I also have one that started as a .308 and I rebarreled to .260. It is in the 842,000 range, but there is an "A" in front of the serial number. I don't know if the "A" means 1 million plus?

If you have "Reliable" research, you should share. I and others on this forum may be interested. If you are using Murrey's book, forget about it. Other than using it as a restoration guide, it is of no value to somebody that works on the 99 Savage. The most valuable research would be to find a guy that worked on the line at Savage, or one of their toolmakers. I am assuming most of them are gone by now. I don't take anything to the bank with internet research. Not a year goes by that an "Absolute fact" about something historical is proven wrong.

But you are an expert on the 99 barrel threads?

This needs to move to it's own thread. Has the makings of becoming epic.

I'm done with it. I'm reminded of my favorite Ronald Reagan quote...

It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant.
It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Pretty much what I expected. I am not a nit-picking collector, but at least I can tell the difference between a square thread and 60* thread. What the hell does not knowing about serial number designations have to do with cutting threads? One of you collectors should be able to establish just where the 1 million thread switch information came from. I totally suspect it is an accepted rumor like the "Made the receiver longer for the .308 based cartridges".
Some one on here welded a bolt to install a barrel that was already threaded. If I remember correctly, it was a 22-250. I am kind of curious if that was a factory square thread barrel and how new it was.
I did look up the prefix "A" on a serial number. Apparently it has nothing to do with quantity produced.
There you have it. I posted two serial number ranges way under a million that I am absolutely sure of. I have done others with 60* threads and am not sure on the serial numbers, but I am sure none had a tang safety.

Serial number 842,000 would be 1953'ish.
Serial number A842000 would be early 1970's.

Do you see why the serial number designation on that might have just a bit to do with the thread since the change in threading happened at 1960 with serial number 1,000,000? All Axxxxxx serial numbered rifles would be V thread.


Now, as to the serial number 767,000 that is in 22-250.. that rifle would date to 1955'ish, and would have originally had square threads unless it also has a letter prefix. And there's no reason a 22-250 can't fit into any pre-1960 receiver without any modifications to the internals. The COAL is less than the parent 250-3000 case. The pressures are significantly higher than a 250 Savage or 300 Savage cartridge, but the cartridge would fit.

If 767,000 does have V threads... then something else weird happened to it.

So you are saying at "A', they reset the count to zero?

The 767,000 serial number WAS a .300 Savage. An R model. I changed it to 22-250. I took that .300 barrel and put it in an auction box. If it had square threads I would have put the lock slot in and sold it on ebay. People bid on T/D barrels like they are gold plated, even though they probably will not fit anyway.


I am pretty sure the .308 and maybe the .243 was being chambered before 1960. I am going with the change in threads came about when they introduced the longer cartridges. One million was probably a nice round number someone just picked out. I have never seen any reference to the thread changeover period in a book.
There is just not enough information to know. Really, until more .308 based cases became available, how many people wanted a barrel replaced on a solid frame 99 Savage?

Yep, it was called the Gun Control Act of 1968. In 1969 manufacturers had to provide a unique serial number for each firearm they produced. They could no longer put serial number 1,000,000 on a 99 and also 1,000,000 on a 110 without committing a federal crime.

This is very, very old news to Savage collectors.


Yes, again in information that we've had for a long, long time the 308/243 manufacturing started in 1955. With the square threads.


You would be wrong.


People on this forum own or have owned thousands and thousands of 99's. I myself have two 1950's 99F barrels in 243 and 308 with Chicopee Falls addresses and both with the square threads.

You can keep fighting the fact that there are people here who have been gathering information on Savage 99's for 15, 20, 30, 40+ years and might know a bit more than you even if they didn't write a book... or you can trust us. Feel free to doubt, it's how we learn. But it takes more than a sample of 1 to prove a point.

Oh... and the Savage historian Mr. Callahan was a Savage employee who assembled 99's. So don't think there's nobody with any knowledge left.

And to expand on this...

The skip from serial number 969,7xx to serial number 1,000,000 happened at the switch from Savage 99 production in Chicopee Falls to production in Westfield, MA. It also represented the introduction of serious changes to Savage 99 production such as tang safeties, stamped metal parts rather than all hand made and fitted parts, as well as the end to the "old" lines of 99EG's and 99R's. So a change in barrel threading that had been in use for 60 years being made at the same time as other huge production and configuration changes makes perfect sense.

Mr. C, you are letting facts get in the way of a good story.

Maybe. But where there is one, there is usually more than one. I can't see Savage just throwing old stock out. That makes no sense either. There are plenty oddball 99's out there. It makes for a sound argument, but I still doubt there was an exact stop point. The whole thing is weird, including the OP's letter from Savage, which started all this.
I like 99's and occasionally pick up a beater to mess around with, but am hardly a collector. I will tell you a true story. Before the internet came along, you had to deal with SAAMI on the phone if there was something not in their book. Sometimes they had the information, but it was not printed in the book. I wanted a copy of a chamber drawing for a .22 HiPower to make a reamer. The guy on the other end said "I never heard of that". Then he said "Hello?", because I was speechless and he thought I had hung up. Just because he never heard of it did not make it less real.

I have a Chicopee 250 F barrel with V threads. But you all know that. there are one or two odd ducks around I'm guessing.

Anywaaay, the local sports shop called and my rifle is in. I might get over there Saturday. Now I can see if I guessed right or bought a very expensive parts gun.

There are some tang safety post mil-99's with Chicopee barrel addresses. Wonder if they're square thread or V thread? I had one for a short time and figured it was a leftover pre-mil barrel.

David, there are probably some very early 1960 guns with Chicopee Falls barrels that are square threaded, and others that are V threaded. If the barrel was threaded at Chicopee Falls it would have been square and I bet they would have square threaded a receiver to use it up rather than toss it. If the barrel hadn't been threaded yet, it probably would have been done with V threads. If I recall, we've seen a very few samples of both - Fireball2's barrel is probably one of the latter.

But guns put together to use up leftover parts isn't what we are really talking about... We all know never to say never.

But all new production of barrels at Westfield was V threads as far as anybody has been able to tell. And no rifles made And assembled at Chicopee Falls with 1959 or earlier date codes should have V threads.

Since you asked for the opinion of a former Savage employee that worked the line how about you contact John Callahan. He is presently the Savage Historian and the source of all "Factory" letters these days. His contact info is posted in the Misc Good Info thread above. Just admit you made a mistake and move on.

And I believe he's on a VERY well deserved vacation as we speak.

skidrow, I may have been confused as to the serial number sequence, but make no mistake about this: There are 99's out there that have "V" threads on the barrel under the 1 million mark. I know it disrupts your collecting agendas, but that is the way it is. There is a BIG difference between a collector and some one that can actually work on one. I have seen a lot of unsubstantiated rumors on this forum. Instead of actually trying to get the facts together, the norm seems to be to "Move on". There does seem to be quite a following on this forum that actually likes to shoot their rifles and have an interest in the mechanical aspects.

So you talk about seeing unsubstantiated rumors on this forum while at the same time saying there are premil receivers with V threads....

Epic irony has been reached.

Ha, Ha. I was on the way off and noticed the Collectors Assessment post.

Yes. No proof what so ever and the one million rumor lives on. Two people on this forum have had the barrels from a pre-million time period and one has the receiver it came out of. There are probably more. Even Murray's book (Yes, I have one) constantly uses "(approx.)" liberally throughout the book when dating items. Curiously enough, I just noticed that the change to longer cartridges is mentioned. "a longer magazine carrier was adopted to accommodate the rimless...." Nowhere is making the receiver longer mentioned, a rumor that was on this forum many times.

Sorry, the rumor you are promoting that the 243/308/358 was discussed as having longer receivers needs to be verified. Can you provide links to a few of these "many times" that lengthened receivers were talked about?

I'm not going back looking for specific posts, but over the years it's been called a few different things, all rather loosely discussed at times. I myself have asked about the exact nature of the change due to the ambiguity of the early info.

Newer folks occasionally mention longer receivers for the 243/308/358, but the lowly and uninformed collectors here set them right as soon as it's brought up. Kind of like folks wandering in and thinking there were thread changes when the 243/308/358 was introduced. We try to set them right as soon as it's mentioned.

So you acknowledge that they have been called "longer receivers", proving gunplummers point.

The reference to the receiver being lengthened has been very infrequent and quickly put to rest by a simple explanation of the facts. Or, what Calhoun said.

No.. he did not say longer receivers had been mentioned here, he said longer receivers were "a rumor that was on this forum many times."

Having folks who pop in and mention longer receivers once or twice a year and be corrected immediately doesn't make it a rumor that's being propagated by this site.

You know, this has been kind of fun but it's getting counter productive. Since Gunplummer is brighter than anybody and everybody on here and wants to continue to go his way where A serial numbered rifles were made in the 50's and there are tens of thousands of V threaded premil 243's/308's/358's out there, then God Bless him.

Yeah, I have had enough nonsense. As usual, I have not learned a damn thing other than somewhere around a million the serial numbers were reset. I sent a section of receiver out to someone on this forum that was going to get the chemical composition checked where he worked. Never heard anything. I guess that was BS too. There is another classic rumor. "The receivers were not heat treated before the longer cartridges came along or were re-heat treated when the longer cartridges came along". What BS. People that work on guns can not afford to just fly with "It only makes sense" kind of facts.

Good Night GP. I'm sure that you work on a lot of firearms in your dreams. Take care, have a nice day and thanks for all the fish.