Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 300 Savage

For those that have hunted with a 300 Savage & 308 Winchester, what true differences can you discern?

The Savage hs more panache.

the .308 can do everything the salvage can do, plus some. it can be loaded either way. and it doesnt have the ridiculously short neck of the salvage.

all that being said, a properly loaded .300 salvage is one of my favorite cartridges to shoot. my .308 loads usually approximate the salvage ballistics.

Less recoil

The .308 definitely does more with 180 grain bullets. But I do use 180's in my .300 SAV because it shoots best with them. With 150's you won't notice a difference unless you take them antelope hunting.

The 99s in 300 are just way damn cooler than those in 308. As far as cartridge performance goes It's hard to tell the difference.

Ok, and then what?

The 300 Savage might well be the most, underestimated round in todays world. It is reliably effective on game. Seems to me an odd/perverse situation when we consider some of the "darling" calibers of the AR guys.
That said, the 308 is a great one as well. Both tend to be inherently accurate, in my experience.
True differences: the ease of finding a rifle, and ammunition availability. Most rifle builders do a happy dance when they get an order for a 308 as it will likely perform beyond expectations. Inside normal hunting ranges, game won't be able to tell the difference.

Physically speaking, the 300 Savage case is shorter by 0.144" and has approximately 4.0 grains less case capacity, depending on who made the cases.

Loading data for the 300 Savage tends to be on the conservative pressure side, with maximum recommended loads for the 300 Savage producing the same approximate velocity as the recommended starting loads for the 308.

I doubt that most hunters would be able to see a meaningful difference under most common medium game hunting situations.

The 300 Savage was introduced in 1920 as a cartridge that approximated the velocity of the 30-06 in Savage's 99 lever action and 1920 bolt action, but it wasn't embraced by any other rifle manufacturer. Since 1920, Winchester chambered a few pre-'64 Model 70s, FN chambered a few commercial 98s, and Remington cataloged the Models 81, 722, 760, the 700 Classic for one year, and several small non-cataloged runs of Models 700 and 760 for Grice and other wholesalers.

I have a bunch of rifles chambered in 300 Savage, mostly Savage 1920s and 20/26s, and a couple of decades ago I hunted with a 760 when I lived in New England, but I can't remember the last time that I fired one of them.

Haven't used a .300, but commonly use a .308 loaded like one with no issues.

From my reading, loading for a .300 in a 99 is complicated a bit by the need to use shorter bullets in the heavier weights, but the common complaint about the neck being too short isn't really an issue. 150gr Partitions seem ideal to me.

I often peruse the used lists for 99s, and .300s seem to be the most common and most reasonably priced. One of these days, opportunity and resources are going to align. I want one with a brass spool and the pre-.308 modified action.

Haven't hunted with a 308, but all the deer I shoot my 300 Savage's at have died. So I'm not sure how the 308 could be better, though im not taking 300+ yard shots. I do agree heavier bullets are problematic if you want high velocity, but 150's work great.

I have some long seated Berger VLD 300 Savage loads for my Rem 700 that change the nature of the cartridge a little bit.

It's interesting that the 300sav in rifles such as the 722 and 700 achieved by accident what the 6.5 cm does by design(though not in anything Remington 😁). The 300 has an OAL of 2.6" with "normal" bullets, but the mag box on my 722 gave 2.8". In theory one could load longer high bc bullets and leave plenty of case capacity, though reaching the lands still wouldn't be likely.

For sub-MOA five shot groups I haven't found reaching the lands necessary in my 700 Classic.

.308s are easier to find off the shelf, has a sharper muzzle blast, and more recoil. My reloads for the .308 and .30'06 all mimic .300 Savage ballistics.

Several have said basically the same. That is interesting. It seems cartridge/bullet combinations have a much slower necessary velocity than we think they should. Yet, we can't seem to settle for that.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the capability of my "slow" 308's in comparison to the 300 WSM's blazing speeds.

Because we've been brainwashed by rifle/ammo companies, many (not all) gun writers, magazines, books, and old wives telling tales that the faster we drive our bullets the more dead stuff will be. High velocity may well have its place in areas where extremely long shots are taken (or where hunters are unable/too lazy to close the distance) but such is far from the norm in many places whitetails are seen. Instead of making blanket statements to the effect that the .300 is plenty good for all deer hunting, or the .300 is lacking as a deer cartridge, one should preface one's opinion with what hunting conditions are like in his bailiwick + how he hunts.

Here in the Eastern woodlands where I hunt, a hundred yards is right far away to expect to get a clear shot at a deer. All my hunting life I found that wimpy (by Western standards) loads were A-ok for whacking deer, that anything .30 caliber with 1500fps or better terminal velocity did the trick. I routinely load my '06 hunting ammo to .300 levels, and sometimes .30-30 levels because, well, why not- who wants to get belted every time they pull the trigger? To that end, in my neck of the woods, a factory rifle using factory ammo of .300 Savage persuasion is a well nigh perfect combo, as testified to by legions of hunters who have bought and used them.

I will always own a 300 Savage, very few other cartridges I can make that statement about.

It was cool before cool was cool and it's about as close to an Ackley case, without being an Ackley that you can find.

For a lot of the hunting spots on my lease a 150 grain flat base at 2600 would be more than plenty, visibility going downhill after about 100 yards. That said, there are a couple of spots where shots can be longer. My "trick" 300 Savage load boots a 168 VLD Berger out at approximately 2600 fps, putting it right on a trajectory I know well. (Think LC Match for 308.)

I like to call it the original short mag.

300 is cool. I'd love to have another. I think it recoils noticeably less that the .308 Win.

I have taken 5 whitetails at ranges from 30 to 200 yards and 1 antelope at a measured 285 yards with my 300 99 featherweight. I doubt they would have died any quicker with a 308.

From my limited samples, the .300 Savage generally makes the game appear at powder-burn distances, versus distances requiring sights for the .308.

I like to say that the .300 Savage seems to have a lot less bark than a .308, while sacrificing hardly any bite.

Sure, one new to hunting would be a fool not to go for the .308 just for the availability of rifles and ammo. However, if one started with a bequeathed .300 Savage, they might eventually travel the known territory of Loonyism and beyond, only to discover that they had started with perfection.

As for the coolness factor, I'd nearly go so far as to say that the .300 Savage is to .30 caliber, what the 7x57 is to 7mm bores. [I can't go all the way there to say it, as 'twould deeply offend Der Poobah, and condemn me to smoking a turd in hell.]

FC

(read: REAL hunters use the 300 Savage)

Read: Real hunters get it done, headstamps matter little, avoiding extremes.

Load them 300 Savages up with 30-30 red tip lever Rev bullets [They kill]

My dad bought a 300 Savage in a 99 in 1946, right after he mustered out of the navy. He had it for years. It was his only center fire rifle. It was the rifles I used when I was a young boy for hunting deer.

I hated it!

It was a pre-war rifle, used when he got it in 46. My guess is that it was made in the late 30s.
It had the barrel so thin it looked like it should have been on a 22, with a dog-knot where the rear sight was. the thing was VERY light and it seemed to a young boy (me) that the kick was from a mad mule. It was quite accurate however.

Some years later when I was a young teen my dad said he'd give it to me, and I told him I didn't really want it. Said it kicked me too hard. I didn't want to be a sissy, but I had to tell him, and he laughed and said "I didn't want to seem like a sissy either, but I always hated shooting that D--- rifle. It kicks!"

So he sold it and I got a M-70 in 270.
Now days I wish I had taken the 99 and bought the 270 later too.

But with all that said, I will admit it was a deer-killing machine. I never used 2 rounds on any deer with it, and it always put them right down. I used 150 grain bullets only. My dad said he tried heavy bullet (I think they were 180s) but they kicked even harder so he stopped buying them. We used mostly Remington ammo but I do recall seeing some other ammo too. I can't remember if it was Winchester of Federal.
We killed ranch horses and sometimes a few cattle with it when there was a need. When killing stock animals we shot from very close but it always worked fine.

THat is what prompted me to post this topic. I have been watching Trophy Quest where the guy is hunting all North America game with his 30-30. Intrigued, I looked up the velocity and was surprised to find the 170's running a lowly 2000 fps. I then looked at 300 Savage which put 500 fps on the 30-30. So, I figured, for its time, the 300 Savage could have been considered a magnum.

FWIW, Savage didn't catalog any Models 99 with a barrel boss for the rear sight dovetail until the 99F was introduced in 1955.

When I hunted with a 300 Savage, I loaded Remington 170 SPCL 30-30 component bullets. IIRC, I loaded them over 41.5 grains of H4895 for my Remington 760 and reduced it to 39.0 grain for my Savage 99.

The 300 Savage comes in much cooler rifles. The Savage 1920 series is a sweet bolt action while my favorite semi-auto (Remington 81) never came in 308 Win. In 300 Savage I own Remington 700, 722, 760, and 81 as well as Savage 99 rifles and they tend to be my "go to" rifles for deer. I have a 1953 Win M-70 in 308 Win as well as a Springfield M1A but they do not hold the same allure as the Savage. Performance is close enough to be equal but the 300 Savage has more mystique.

Hornady has introduced a 150gr SST designed specifically for the 300 Savage (says so on the box). It's very accurate in my 99. Haven't poked it into a deer yet.

The vanilla 150 Interlock, flat base or boat tail, works well.

I got this one worked up to about 2,680 fps with good accuracy in a 700 classic, but wasn't able to try it on a hog when I had it out last. Perhaps this Fall.

FC

"FWIW, Savage didn't catalog any Models 99 with a barrel boss for the rear sight dovetail until the 99F was introduced in 1955."

Hummm --------that's interesting.

I only have the info my dad told me. He said he got the gun right after the war. He bought it in Colorado.
He had if for several years before I was born so I have no details to pass on other than what he told me but I do remember it had a swell in the barrel with the rear sight on it. The neighbor over on the ranch across the river had one too, but his was heavier, longer and had a pistol grip. My dad's gun was very slender at the forend, and the barrel was a bit shorter then our neighbors M99.
I was 13 when my dad sold the gun, but I am fairly sure I remember the detail correctly ---- even if it was half a century ago.

The .300 Savage is one of my favorites. I have a .30-06, a .308, a 300 Savage, .30-30 and others, but I really like taking the 99 in .300 Savage to the deer stand.

http://www.guns.com/2015/09/22/five-underrated-rifle-cartridges/

Between 1945 and 1960 Savage only cataloged three styles of the Model 99; the 99EG had a 24" barrel and a forearm with a schnabled tip, the 99F had a light 22" barrel and a slender, rounded, forearm, and the 99R had a 24" barrel and a heavy, rounded, forearm.

The only .300 Savage I ever owned that I kicked myself for even buying in the first place was a Remington 81. Heavy for a rifle that would be in my hands all day, exaggerated forward bias with said weight (atrocious balance)- which could possibly have been lived with. But it was the weird recoil impulse that I just couldn't abide. Like Loggah said years ago, it was like shooting a pogo stick!

Hmm... you sure he didn't mean Korean War? Otherwise we get a lot of folks who come asking about a 99 or 1899 and the original owner misremembered when they bought it by 10 years or so. Heck, I've had original owners who swore up and down they bought a 99 in 197x the year they graduated, but the serial number put it 5 years later. Memories play tricks on a guy.

My negative bias toward the Remington 81 and 300 Savage combination came about when Bearrr264 shot a Maine moose with one shot through the lungs and instead of shooting again to try and break it down, he allowed it to run into a beaver pond before it died. If you've ever had to retrieve a dead moose out of 4' of nearly freezing water, you might have a similar bias.

This 300 Savage topic is another excellent example of the rich information we get here on the net. I don't subscribe to any magazines however the American Rifleman and Hunter come with the memberships.



https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?campaignid=publications

Been looking for nice 99 in 308 or 300 Savage to fool with at the gun shows lately.

The biggest exit wound I have ever seen on a deer, came via a .300 Savage. I wouldn't pick it for long shots, but as a reliable killer of deer, black bear, and hogs, it is fine

The Rem 8/81 does have an odd recoil pulse but they are significant in that they were the first reliable semi-auto rifles made. It greatly reminds me of the Browning A-5 which should be no surprise as both were designed by John Browning around the same time. Both are favorites of mine.

I have a number of M-8/81s though only 3 or maybe 4 are in 300 Savage. So far this chambering has been the least accurate overall (excluding one M-8 in 30 Rem from that bunch which keyholes whatever is put down the bore) and recoils the most. Even the one that was drilled and tapped for a scope kind of throws the bullets around though I really should replace the old Weaver 2.5x with a newer model to make sure it is not the scope. If I determine the scope is not the problem, then some load work will be next. The loads I currently use were developed for my Rem 700/722/760 and are probably a bit hot for the 81. I can't get the claimed 3" for 10 shots with a 300 Savage but my latest work with the 30 Remington beat that claim by a fair margin.

They are heavy and do not carry as well as they should as the magazine extends down through the balance point. Even so, I like the gun and am always on the look out for others if priced reasonably. The first M-81 I bought was in 300 Savage as was my latest. This last one is a Kreiger modification for a detachable magazine and needs to be blooded.

My longest coyote kill was in the mid-80's with a 99EG in 300 Savage. I held about a foot high, shot, coyote ran a few and dropped. That was 335 yards.

Now Scott, this being the Campfire shouldn't that have been 535 yards and DRT with a head shot?

I wish there were more scope base and ring options for the Savage 99. I wish Talley made rings for the Savage 99 and or Leopold offered quick release bases and low rings to offset the drop in stocks for the older.
Savage 99 rifles to get a proper check weld.

My brother drilled and taped by grandfathers 99EG 300 for the Leopold 1 piece base and medium rings, I had to lift my head off the stock just to shoot the rifle....UGG. I removed the base and rings and had another rear hole drilled for the Weaver two piece bases and installed low Millet rings.....so much better. The oddity was I had to place two shims from Leopold under the rear base just to get the Sav 99 up 12 inches at 100 yards for proper sight in.

Not sure why that happened...scope is a VX2...3X-9X.

I will say this, the Savage cut rifled barrels sure are shooters...rifle was made in 1949. My grandfathers rifle when I do my part will cut 3 shot clover leafs with the Remington 150 gr core-lokt and IMR-4064.

Doc

My Dad owns a 300 Savage in a five diamonds 760 that was my grandfather's only big game rifle. He would shoot 150s for deer and 180s for bear in Sullivan and Clearfield counties here in PA. It is fitted with a fixed 4x unertl scope with some of the finest crosshairs I have ever seen. I have carried it a few times and shot a doe with it several seasons ago. It is a great, classic rifle and is perfectly suited to the type of hunting we do where shots are generally under 100 yards in the woods. As with many guns passed down from an older generation of long gone heroes, I wish it could talk. Oh the stories it would tell.

I'm having some difficulty seeing where the combination failed. Sounds more like a matter of bullet selection and follow up shots than one of rifle and chambering selection. A moose, lung shot with even a 375 H&H may have done the same without a follow up shot.

300 Savage is on of my favorite deer cartridges. Inside of 300 yds works as good as anything and doesn't blood shot everything from their nose to their ass. By the way in spite of all the brags 300 yds is a long way even here in the West.

my .300 savages have both been bolt rifles, a salvage weather warrior and a 700 classic. theyre tackdrivers, of course. sold the salvage, which shot great, i just didnt need 2 of them.

True, but the bad experience generally soured me on the Remington 81, the 300 Savage, and shooting moose. I sincerely wish that Bearrr264 had made a quick follow up shot, rather than admiring the shot that he did make, but I'm thankful that we had a chainsaw winch alone and with enough cable and gas/oil mix to get the moose out of the beaver pond, up onto the tripod, and onto the back of the truck. After wrestling a few elk and that moose, I've decided that for me it is less taxing, from a physical exertion perspective, just to shoot 8 to 10 whitetails than to shoot one or two larger animals.

I shot my first deer with an open sighted .300 Savage 99EG (my dad's) in 1973. My uncle had the same rifle but scoped and with a sling and recoil pad. I wanted a 99 too, but Savage had JUST discontinued the 99F, closest to the EG of my dad's and uncle's. So I bought a 20" barreled 99A in .308. It was a good deer rifle, but I sold it for a bolt action .308. Sold that one too, and my dad and I had his 99EG "modernized." Drilled and tapped, recoil pad, and sling swivel studs. I wish now I had left it stock! But that said, I hunted with that rifle for 17 years as my only deer and coyote rifle. Had a 2-7x scope, and shot 150s exlusively. It consistently put 3 shots in about 1.5 " at 100 yards. It killed deer fine to 300 yards, the longest I used it at. I couldn't see any difference between the 24" barreled .300 and the 20" barreled .308. I've mostly retired the old .300 now, but if I had to keep only one big game rifle, it is probably the one that would stay.

We look at those old rifles as a bit weak nowadays, but I grew up on on an eastern MT farm, and I would say there were more M99s in either .250, .300, or .308 than any other model rifle around among the farmers and ranchers back in the 60s and 70s. Town folks liked bolts in .270 and .30-06, but the ranchers liked the Savages. They had grown up on lever actions, and felt the Savages combined more power than a .30-30 with the handiness of a flat lever action. A neighbor used to borrow my dad's and carried it on a horse. A few scratches still on the rifle are from that use. Sight a .300 in for 250 yards, hold a little high at 300 yards, don't stretch it beyond that, and you can kill deer without much trouble!

.308 ammo is about half the cost of .300.

Yes it is. Exactly half.

I had a couple 99's but they were not my cup of tea, sold them but barreled up a 700 with a Douglas #5 cut to 21" for the .300 Sav.. It is one sweet rifle.. Killed mule deer, antelope and hogs with it.. May give it a whirl on elk soon..

My 1926 Model 99 is one of my most accurate rifles!

I've owned two .308's and although ok didn't stick!


Mike

I think there's no denying that a 308 is more powerful and available in way more desirable sizes and types of rifles. The 308 is more practical especially considering price and availability of ammo.
But I like hunting and using the 99 300. The rotary magazine in really neat. I got my best whitetail to date with one last season.

Nice buck and nice rifle! There's certainly a reason the .308 killed off the .300 Savage in the 99 (same as the .300 Sav did to the .303 Sav) but the .300 Sav has the nostalgia factor in spades. I don't think the .308 will ever have that. It's become too much of a mainstay with the tactical crowd.

Here's the .300 Savage sandwiched in between the .303 Savage and .308 Winchester.

Anyone have any pet loads using the 130 gr Barnes, 110 Barnes and/ or 110 v max? Any of y'all have any experience hunting with the 130 or 110 Barnes in this caliber? How did they perform? Going to use the 130 gr. For my daughter hunting this season. May practice with the 110 vmax loaded light. Keep in mind it'll be used in a Remington 700.

For me, a .300 Savage rifle is more emotionally satisfying to own and hunt than a.308 because it is different, more scarce, full of nostalgia and a good conversation starter in deer camp. II don't reload, so I stock up on .300 Savage Core-Lokt whenever I find them.

.300 Savage History

130gr Barnes TTSX 44grs of H4895, close to 3000fps from a 21" barreled M700

Start here.

And maybe here...

My own experience covers 3 hogs who all dropped at once when hit with a 130 TSX. 2 from a Rem 722, and the 3rd from a 700 classic. The 722 was loaded with 43.7 grains of H4895, while the Classic settled on 43.5 grains. Both used WLR primers.

This bullet/cartridge combo is right at the top of my favorites list. It's hard to imagine getting more killing power for the amount of recoil + muzzle blast.

FC

Great, Thank You!

I have no interest in the use of the 300 Savage, but the cartridge is certainly nostalgic to say the least. This has been an interesting thread & I have thoroughly enjoyed you guy's relating your experience with it.

The use of the 300 Savage is a very "nuts & bolts" application for big game much like the 30-30.

".308's are 1/2 as expensive as .300's."

So, people still buy factory ammo? I thought that practice went out with tail fins and "I Like Ike" buttons.

Who would do an as inexpensive rebarrel on a Mauser for a 300 Savage or a 250 Savage. Always wanted one, I got several 98 actions. Why not? Saw ER Shaw doesn't list them. Just would be wanting a "truck rifle" rebarrel. Nothing fancy. Fun gun to play weigh.

Bolt actions in 300 are out there. They aren't easy to find, and they usually aren't cheap... but the Savage 1920's in 300 Savage are a sweet rifle.




And if you like a bit of bling with some 24k gold trim, the 50th Anniversary 110's are... interesting. Some have very nice walnut tho.

Been five or so years since I did business with him, but check website of gunsmith Mark Skaggs in Oregon. He lists his prices for work and etc. Mark rebarreled or barreled at least five mauser action rifles for me, before I found a local retired machinist who'd done gunsmithing on the side for around 35 years to do my rifle work.

I've seen deer elk and blackbear shot with both...all expired in about the same fashion.

I'd rather own the 308 for brass and gun availability etc but I don't pretend there is a big advantage between either or the 06

Took my second sambar spiker on monday with a rem 700 in 300 savage, 150 gr Hornady SST about 80 yds or so a chest shot through thick tea tree scub, bang flop. I love the rifle cartridge combination. Between a mate and I we have another 25 or so down with same bullet in a sav 99F. This last one was a good heavy animal in great condition.

Johno

johno: was that the standard 150 SST, or the 150SST made for the 300 Sav? Just curious if anyone has used the new bullet, and how it performs on dee-sized game. It's very accurate in my m99 300. thanks

It was the new bullet mate, its a bit shorter and you can crimp in the correct spot. Sambar are a big tough beasty and so far all have gone down to one shot, but I don't take running shots and only shoot when I have a good clean shot to the boiler room.

Johno

Thanks! What size are your sambar? And do you generally get an exit?

Full grown stag can reach 280+ kg about around 600 lbs a doe full grown up to 230 kg. I would think the spiker I shot monday would be around the 240 lbs mark

Johno