Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors 99 triggers

Has anybody ever figured out how to improve the trigger pull on a 99? They all creep like crazy. I have polished them till they are quite smooth but that just makes a very smooth creep. I've always been afraid to shorten up the engagement surfaces because the bolt just does not lock up consistantly. It's the only thing I don't like about the 99.

I'm at a quandry as to how trigger adjustment is effecting your bolt lock up. Could you explain?

Shortening creep on a pre million 99 can only be accomplished one way. If done too much, the FP will not C.O.C. and you'll be closing the bolt with a downed FP on a live round in battery. NOT GOOD. But your bolt will still lock into battery, provided it locked into battery before you started. In fact, if you "theoreticly" could remove the trigger entirely, the bolt would still lock into battery.

The bolt closes differently on a once fired case as opposed to a new factory case. If you full length size each time this is less of a problem, but you'll get a head seperation once in a while if you full length resize every time. Head seperations are bad news in a 99. There is nothing but wood between you and all that pressure. Best to keep sizing to a minimum. How high in the reciever the bolt closes affects firing pin to sear engagement. If you cut back sear engagment for a nice sharp break on a tight case, and then chamber a new one, you'll be on the feathery edges of sear engagement, because the bolt will rise just a little farther up into the reciever on the new case. It's locked up safe enough eather way, but the trigger pull will be different. I guess what it amounts to, is you have to set it up for the new, or full length sized cartridge case and then learn to live with a little creep with neck sized ones. It's not a case of trigger adjustment affecting bolt lock up. Just the opposite, bolt lock up affects trigger adjustment. See what I mean?

I understand where you are coming from.....I just don't understand how you got there <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Trigger creep can be minimized with an empty chamber, so what type of case (new, FS'd, NS'd) your locking up on should be moot. These are not shotguns that can handle varing sized cases. Have you checked headspace on the weapon in question?

I'm not talking about a particular rifle. This problem exists with any 99. And, they will handle different size cases. I'm talking about a few thousandths, but it's enough to change trigger pull. Headspace in any rifle can be from 0 to maby .008 and still be safe. It's usually arround .003 to .005. Everybody has tolerences. The guys who cut chambers have to make them long enough to accept the longest cases from the guys who make cases. If you fire a case with a max load several times and neck size, it will still chamber, but it will be tight. The 99 bolt, any 99 bolt, does not close the same on a tight case as it does on a loose one. It is inharent with the design. I was just wondering if anyone had ever come up with a solution, other than adjusting engagment for the loose case and tolerating some creep with the tight one. Maby I'm being overly critical, but, compared to bolt actions, or even Win. 94s the 99 has a lousey trigger. I still like the rifle. I just wish it had a better trigger.

Maby this will clear things up a little. I just did an experiment. I happen to have 2 99s in the shop righ now one is a 300 the other a 243. I mounted a dial indicater on the reciever so as to measure how high in the reciever the rear end of the bolt closed. Then I crushed the shoulder of a case for each rifle just enough to cause a tight fit in the chamber. Not enough so I had to hammer the lever closed, just enough to cause a little resistance. The difference between an empty chamber and a tight case for the 243 was .006. For the 300 it was .003. Now, because of the way the 99 bolt closes this will have very little effect on headspace, but it will on trigger/sear engagement. That 243 has .006 more creep with a tight case than it does with a loose one. Now that may not sound like much, but you can sure feel it on the trigger. At least I can. There are proubably 99s out there with less than .003, but there are likely some with more than .006. It proubably has to do with how tight the cam followler on the lever fits the cam on the bolt.

Dude, these aren't benchresters, they're whitetail harvesters. With designs back 110 years. I'm really not too concerned with 6 THOUSANDTHS OF AN INCH creep in the heat of the moment so to speak. I doubt my sometimes gloved trigger finger would ever feel the difference.
I'm sorry for thinking there might be a bigger issue here. Triggers and rear sights where never Savage's strong suits. But it seems the trigger problem is finally being addressed after all these years.

Dang. Ram, you nearly shocked me out of my seat by saying rear sights and triggers were never the 99's strong suit. Could you elaborate? My very limited experience with 99's has been just the opposite.

I've been fooling with boltgun triggers for decades, and messed with more than a handful of Winchester and Marlin leverguns. None of the latter compare with my two 99's trigger-wise. I'm a wee bit sensitive about triggers at the moment, having spent nearly nearly three hours earlier today trying to get the creep out of the trigger of an 1898 Govt. Krag, a boltgun. Stoning the 99 triggers was a joy compared to that beast. One of the 99s, a 1916 250-3000, has a crisp 1.8lb trigger pull. The other, a 1909 303 Savage, is equally crisp at 2.4lbs. It's hard for me, with this experience, to understand what all the p.... and m.... is about. Are we talkin about post-1960 99's or sumpthin??? Now, yappin about lock time, that may well be another matter.

When it comes to sights, you must be talkin about the later rifles??? That d&t long rear tang is a wonder to behold, alowing precise receiver sights to be mounted back close to the eye just like the fine, if somewhat fragile tang sights, that often came with the rifles. What's not to like???

Cordially, jethrow

Jethro, your post proves my statement, what is it you don't understand? What's THE most missing/replaced item on vintage 1899/99's? Rear sights. Why? The factory semi bucks are useless. Aside from the RS's (see even Savage new there other sights sucked <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) which of course didn't have them.

As to triggers, I didn't say the 99 trigger couldn't be improved, quite the contrary. Done it to many. But as you stated, it takes time, patience, and a stone or two. But from the 1899's through the Sporters, the 340's and even the shotguns, straight up through the 2001 mod 110's et all, triggers from the factory have been utilitarian at best.

Going back to what I said earlier, the 99 bolt does not close up consistantly. I have proven it, at least to myself, with the dial indicater. And, this inconsistancy affects the quality of its trigger pull. At least now we can agree, the trigger is not the 99s strong point. Benchrester or whitetail harvester, .006 is a lot of creep. If you think it wouldn't bother you, good for you. But, creep affects accuracy, and as Col. Wellen said "The only interesting rifles, are accurate rifles". There never was, at least in my mind, a "bigger issue". So, thanks for your imput, but I'll continue my quest for improvement in all things, big or small.

I am with RAM on the model 99 rear sights. That semi-buckhorn is a abomination. My 99's either wear a tang sight or a stith mount. My vision is bad enough that the problem may be me, but I am in denial.

I've got several M99s, including a M99G Deluxe which is a take down, that will shoot 3 shots into an inch all day long if I do my part. Since these are hunting rifles with sporter barrels and low power scopes (none higher than 4X fixed), not benchresters or varmint rifles, how much more accuracy do you need to make it "interesting"?

Way back at the beginning of this thread I was asking if anyone knew of a way to improve the 99 trigger. This developed into a discussion of how the bolt locked into the reciever, and how that affected trigger creep. RAM said that the 99s are not benchrest rifles but whitetail harvesters and that .006 more creep in the trigger is of no concern. I disagree. If there is a way to eliminate that little bit of trigger creep and thereby make a rifle more accurate, then I am interested. Actually my "interesting rifles" was a quote from Colonel Townsen Wellen, an old time hunter, experimenter, and rifleman, on the order of Phil Sharp, Julian Hatcher, Parker Ackley, Harry Pope, and others. Their search for improvement a long time ago has brought our sport to the level it is at today. Sure, one inch groups all day long is very interesting. You're proud of those groups, and rightly so. That's why you mentioned them. But if I told you I knew of a way to cut those groups down to 3/4 or even 1/2 inch would you be interested? Of course you would. Let's face it 90% of our whitetail harvesting could be done with rifles that shoot 6 inch groups. Anybody out there interested in 6 inch groups?

Now your starting to sound like a ghost from christmas past. Don't put words in my mouth. I said to me and my sometimes gloved trigger finger I doubt I'ld notice 6/1000ths" in the heat of the moment. A friggin post card is 9/1000ths of an inch thick, its not like we're talking "great distances" here. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I doubt you'll find a better trigger on a 36, 336, a 92 or 94, or on a 88 which were the 99's chief competitors.

I really feel your trying to pick fly [bleep] out of pepper to be any more anal on this topic. A good shooter can over come creep, it takes disipline, but it can/has happened. Look at some of the documented shots from military snipers with old '03's and '98's and thats w/ military two stage triggers, hell there's about 1/4" of creep in them. But if you wish to try to make a benchrester out of a 99, by all means have at it.

toublesom1
You are NOT alone!
I have asked this question (triggers) before, on this, and other forums. Everyone comes forth with how thier trigger is wonderful, just a little stonning, but I have yet to see where anyone has said what they stoned, what they filed, how long it took them, and if they screwed up and had to replace the sear or hammer face.
My '99, after some stoning on my part of both the sear, and the hammer face, (they were rough as he11) is much better than it was, but far from where I feel it could be.
I have not measured creep, but the trigger feels like it moves close to 1/8 of an inch before it releases the sear engagement.

If you can find a copy of a book published in 1974 entitled GUN OWNER'S BOOK OF CARE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, by Roy Dunlap, there's a section on fixing 99 triggers--with photographs and everything! A good bookstore can usually find one, but there are quite a few around, as it was a pick of the Outdoor Life Book Club, where I got mine in 1974.

The techniques very simple and works on any older 99. The newer ones with all the stamped parts are trickier but can be improved some too.

It's Colonel Townsend Whelen, by the way.

Much obliged, Mule Deer! Since getting Dunlap's magnum opus, Gunsmithing, some months ago, I'd more or less ignored that earlier more gun specific work. His coverage there(pp.76-78)is brief but to the point, with three detailed photographs. No big deal! To quote Dunlap:

"Usually quite a lot of the top of [the] sear can be ground off to reduce engagement and so give a shorter and cleaner pull without making the arm unsafe. The function and fit of parts is very obvious. Nothing complicated, no hidden meanings!"

IMHO, hardly seems worthy of 'cabin fever'. ---jethrow---

Actually, I wouldn't be interested in shooting 3/4 inch groups or 1/2 in groups with any of my M99s. I find the fact that they will shoot 1 inch groups interesting but not essential for what I use them for. As you stated, a 6 inch group is good enough for most whitetail hunting. Since that's about as good as I can hold on a very good day without a rest I'm very interested in 6 inch groups. If you know anyone who can shoot 3/4 or 1/2 inch groups without a rest under hunting conditions I'll kiss his a.. on Broadway at high noon. Me, I'll settle for placing one shot within 3 inches of my point of aim at 100 yards (the radius of a 6 inch group) any day under hunting conditions. If I can do that chances are I won't need to shoot a group. Grouping is highly over rated as a measure of how well a hunting rifle shoots. I'm not a benchrester and am far more interested in how close I can place one shot from a cold barrel to my point of aim. Most of the time if the first one isn't where you want it it's all down hill after that. Ever try to shoot a group into a running deer? In addition to the book already mentioned there are numerous other references describing how to improve the trigger on a M99. If worst comes to worst and you can't find one or don't feel qualified to do the work yourself you can always send it to Wayne E. Schwartz, 970 E. Britton St, Morrice, MI 517-625-4079. He's probably the best M99 mechanic left in the country.

JonnyCannuck: Thanks. You're like a breath of fresh air.
Mule Deer: Thank you. This is exactly the sort of information I've been looking for. I'll look for a copy.
fintofeather: You're right. Thanks.
Jethrow: Thanks. This is what I wanted to know from the start of all of this.
Skidrow: How can you have any confidence in your rifle if you don't fire a group? You are confident in your rifle because you HAVE fired groups. Shooting groups from a bench with a good rest is the only way I know of to minimize the human factor and see what the rifle and cartridge alone are capable of. Would you sight in your scope with a new rifle with one shot and then go hunting? In truth, most of us mortals are doing pretty well to hold a 6 inch group offhand at a hundred yards consistantly. You say you can do it on a good day. But, just for the sake of discussion let's say you can always do it. What if the best your rifle will do is 6 inches from a bench (which you won't know till you fire a few groups)? If you're capable of 6 and the rifle will only do 6, that's 12, and at 200 yards that's 24. As for me, I'll take any advantage I can get. If someone can show me how to turn a 1 inch rifle into a !/2 incher, I'll jump at the chance. I'd be thankful for those "other refrences" if you can pass them along.
RAM: The 03, 98, 36, 336, 92, 94, and just about any other firearm I can think of, factory new, has a better trigger than a factory new 99. Hands down. Military snipers shoot military sniper rifles, which are carefully worked over by military armorers, beleave me none ever left the shop with a 1/4" creep. If such creep ever developed it would be returned in a hurry. When I was in the Army I won two rifle matches, one with an M14, the other with an M16. Both were of course two stage triggers. Both had a little creep. We were not allowed to touch those triggers. I am no longer under such restrictions. I'll remove the creep from my own triggers if I can. Two stage triggers are no hinderance to rifle acuracy, in my openion. The national matches at Camp Perry are shot with two stage triggers. That .006 would not be noticeable if it were at the tip of the trigger. But that's not where the .006 is. It's at the sear/fireing pin. Because of the mechanical advantage of the trigger, it translates to a good deal more at the tip of the trigger. This is why you can feel it, or at least I can. But this is missing the point. The real significance of that .006 is this: Let's say you cut down the top of the sear, as Dunlap says, (thanks again Jethrow) till you have a nice crisp pull. Maybe you've got .010 engagement. Not too bad. Everything works fine with your neck sized cases. Then one day you chamber a factory round, and the bolt goes .006 higher in the reciever. Now you only have .004 engagement. If it wears a little you might only have .002 or .003. That's getting pretty close to BANG. So the only alternative is to leave more engagement and put up with a little creep. Look, I never ment to make a benchrester out of the 99, I just wanted to know if anybody knew of a way to improve the trigger. And I wasn't trying to "put words in your mouth". It's called paraphrasing. I've been getting the impression all along that you thought .006 was insignificant. Did I misunderstand? There is no reason to get upset. This should be a discussion about stuff we all love, not an argument. It's okay if we disagree. Switch to decaff. Look everybody, as soon as I said there was somthing I didn't like about the 99 you'd think I pissed on the flag. Like anything else this rifle has it's faults and it's strong points. Faults: lousey trigger, does not handle escaping gass well, two piece stock (not condusive to accuracy), poor rear sights. Strong points: can use a pointed bullet, can mount a scope centered over bore, more accurate than it's competitors (except maybe the Win 88), stronger than any of it's competitors (except mabe the 88). Yeah I know the 88 was only arround for a few years and the 99 well over a hundred. Well this has gotten pretty long, and I've stirred up enough horents for one night. Getting pretty interesting though, huh?