Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors 99B - Spiegel? - D&T for Belding & Mull?

In order to understand this post please go to GunBroker and look at completed auction #790940497, especially photos #19 & 20. I noticed this auction a few days ago, and since the sellers shop is about 25 miles from my house I decided to go look at the rifle in person this morning. Long story short, after some dickering I was able to purchase the rifle. The photos do a good job of depicting the condition of the rifle, and everything seems to be correct except the rear sight elevator. Serial nos. all match including last 3 digits on the barrel. B is stamped on the front of the receiver. Photo 19 shows holes D&T on either side of cocking indicator, and photo 20 shows one of the D&T holes in the barrel which does not have a filler screw in it.

When I got the rifle home I removed the rear sight (lots of gunk under it), and as expected there is a second D&T hole in the top of the barrel. You can't see it in the photos, but based on impressions/loss of bluing around the holes it appears that mounts of some type were mounted using both the front and rear holes at one time.

What are the earliest Spiegels we have seen? (Serial no. of this rifle puts it at 1930.) Do we know of any other 99B Spiegels? I suppose another possibility is that this rifle was shipped to Belding & Mull. I guess I'll have to spend another $45 and get this one lettered.

Anyone have a Belding & Mull scope with mounts that they aren't using?

Interesting .. good find Jack ..


plab

Its not a "B" just an inspectors mark.

If it's on the front of the receiver, it likely is a B. In the late 20's and 30's the front of the receiver did have the model stamped - or an 8 on a 99R for some reason. Not sure anybody has ever reported what was on a 99B, but apparently it's a B.

I think the earliest Spiegel we have is 359,xxx. I don't think this is likely to be a Spiegel being that it's from 6 years earlier. What it is probably remains to be discovered.. another retail outlet deal? A gun shipped to whoever made the bases for these? An after market mod?

Things like this are what help us keep digging.

Loggah, I suspect we are referring to two different locations on the rifle. I surmise you are referring to the inspectors mark on the lever boss (this rifle has a Z in that location) - the same location as the "lever boss code" on Chicopee Falls rifles. The B I was referring to is stamped on the front of the receiver. You have to remove the forearm to see it.

Looks like Rory and I were typing at the same time.

In the same vein, the 99D I bought a few months ago is stamped with an S. What is the significance of that? Standard weight barrel or ???

Nothing to do with the barrel that we know of. But your 99D might be too low to have the model stamp, in which case it's just an inspection stamp. Or maybe they used S stamps for D's. Probably too early to have a model stamp, they didn't start that until 1927? Notes at home.

That's a Savage 99B. It has a crescent BP, is a TD, has the 24" medium weight barrel with the integral front sight that appeared on all the models at that time with the exception of the 99H.

Possible that it was just D&T'd after the factory for a target scope. It appears to have had blocks mounted at one time. The rear block is located using the indicator and the front is a standard distance in front of the rear block. Seems too early to be Speigel but who can say at this time.

I think the finish might be factory as they were using a gloss varnish (?) at the time.

Update on D&T hole spacing. Recently plab measured the D&T hole spacing on his Spiegel, and I measured the same dimensions on my 99B. See table below. Given that the measurements were done by two different people using different calipers, the dimensions for the two holes in the tang could be the same, but the dimensions for the barrel holes all show that the holes on my 99B are 0.125" - 0.155" closer to the muzzle than the barrel holes on plab's Spiegel.

I know very little about early scopes, scope blocks, etc. Anyone have any idea as to what mounts might fit? I would guess the hole to hole spacing would be the critical dimension. And of course the rear block would have to be able to accomodate the cocking indicator. Thanks for any help.

Model 99 Savage D&T Hole Spacing

Rifle BBL slot to Front Hole BBL Hole Spacing Rec. front to rear bbl hole Rec. rear to front tang hole Rear hole Spacing Rear bbl hole to front tang hole
99B #331430 0.900 0.560 1.750 0.600 0.900 6.600
plab Spiegel 1.025 0.550 1.595 0.575 0.875 6.450

For some reason once I post this the spacing on the table changes. Haven't figured out how to correct that.

The closest I have is a B&L mount and scope for a Savage 45. I could send you some pictures if you think it would help. On the 40/45, the B&L mount looks like a Redfield Jr. from a distance but it is a two piece affair that consist of a base screwed to the receiver and another piece that holds the rings and slides within a dovetail on the base. I did not expect to see a 99 like yours with a crescent butt plate and the latter barrel with the raised front ramp. It looks like you scored a nice TD there.

I recently bought two sets of Lyman target blocks for my 1919 NRA and my 23D in 22Hornet. The Hornet already had holes in it. I stuck the blocks on and they lined up perfect. If you search “Steve Earles site”, standard target block spacing .560” and 860”, if that helps.

It certainly sounds as if a previous owner d/t'ed it to accommodate a Unertl/Fecker/Targetspot/Litschert target scope. Were it mine I would round up the appropriate scope blocks (Joe's recommendation of Steve Earle is spot on) and mount one of those scopes on it in order to wring out the nth degree of possible accuracy from the rifle. Those scopes are nigh worthless in the deer woods, but are just the t*ts for massacring paper bullseyes.

S99VG, PM sent.

Joe & Gary, thanks a lot for the info. The hole spacing on my barrel I measured originally as 0.560" and on the tang at 0.900". After remeasuring the tang holes, I can convince myself that they are actually spaced at 0.860". So, it looks as if the rifle has standard spacing for scope blocks. Marks left on the tang are 0.425" apart, so that is the width of the blocks - at least the part that contacts the tang. I've looked at Steve Earle's site. I don't have any sophisticated measuring tools, so I need to figure out some way to determine what the height of the front and rear blocks should be. I'm not certain I want to spend the money for one of those scopes, but it might be worthwhile to mount the blocks on the rifle.

Some of us have mounted target scopes using those holes. The Lyman blocks turn up now and then. There might be some that could be purchased from a member...? Back block is tapered and is releaved on the bottom for the indicator.

I still do not believe the holes are for the Belding & Mull mounts, the long front part of the mount is typical of all their mounts and on other guns that mount is attached with three widely spaced screws, not two close together at one end. All Spiegel catalogs only describe & show the use of 'standard scope block' on 99's.

The scope blocks that fit these holes both are contoured to sit level and the rear needs much more angle than the front. The mounting blocks sets came in different height's. Here is a picture showing a rear, the fronts have much less angle -

Thanks Gene. Looks like just what the doctor ordered. Now to find a set.