Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Let me start by simply stating that I hate you people.

What does one in 300 Savage weigh (no scope)?

An EG is about 8 pounds. Never had an F, so no clue there.

I had no idea that the ‘50’s era F’s were only made for four years! I went to a collector show looking for something for the kid to use and saw a guy walking the show with a mint condition ‘57 99 over his shoulder and when I ran into him again three isles over, I remarked that he had a nice EG there. He said that it wasn’t an EG, but an F. I really wanted a .308, but this one was a .300. Darn. Okay, I reluctantly gave the guy the $380. that he wanted for the rifle. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and again.
Signed a blind squirrel.

Technically 5 years - 1955 to 1959. But the first year was 300 Savage and 250-3000 only, the 243/308/358 was 4 years from '56 to '59.

These are F’s except for rifle on bottom. I got one, then others have showed up




baby boy c names

So, if "EG" stands for "Economy G", what does "F" stand for? "Freakin'" good?

Eight pounds?????

Is that a question? Use your words. You normally have plenty.

Let's get back to reality. The F 'Featherweight' model is advertised at 6-1/2 pounds.

The EG is 7-1/4 pounds.

Is that a huge difference? Depends on your personal point of view. I think the advertised weight of both is light compared to actual measurements I've made.

Equally, or more, important than weight is balance IMO.

Agreed. In a stand I'm fine with the EG cause I like long barrels.

Beating the brush I want to be carrying an F.

Sorry... 7-11oz with a Marble's tang sight on it. Minutiae isn't my forte, hence the "about" 😉


Agreed. I like the EG, but the old 1899A SR feels better balanced to me. The other EG I had the rebarrel done on shoots fantastic, but feels like I have a brick hanging off the muzzle now.

That's why they made 99T's.

Thanks!

Obviously that sort of weight wasn’t a issue with guys who packed Model 70 Winchesters. Winchester sold the snot out of those rifles. I’ve never owned one, but the standard weight rifles I’ve held certainly felt heavier than what the EG could have amounted too. Maybe 99 guys just don’t like heavy rifles. Maybe that’s why the post-war R never really seems to come up on anybodies list of favorite 99s.

I love me some post war Rs! Most accurate 99s I've owned. Lot's of fun at the range. Definitely not a brush gun though.

I don't know why I always wind up agreeing with Gary, maybe it's because my parents taught me to respect my elders, but my 1899H 22HP is a very likeable carry around rifle.

HAHAHAHA just one for hunting you are in for a rude awakening the 99 flu has no vaccine no treatment no turning back
it is like the Mafia only one way out

Best of luck and enjoy when you do find the rifle you are looking for

Late to the conversation, and a newbie to boot......but loved the topic and the comments. Would add that I really like the model F in 300 Savage for hogs as well. Quick to point and shoot, and shoot again, (and maybe again), and a great caliber to load for those critters.

Amen. I'm a still hunter and a tracker, I simply don't have the patience to sit on the side of a tree all season, or worse, in a heated blind as guys do it here, nor hunt literally the same spot all season long. I'm not even sure i'd call this "hunting". You're certainly a predator, no argument there, an ambush predator, a rattlesnake versus a wolf. Which can be very effective - more effective then tracking for a lot of people. I just wanna cover some country and see what's over the next ridge, see where a big track takes me, and if i play the game skillfully enough and have the right luck i'd like a good story to go with the kill/trophy. I've taken in recent years to hunting the effectively limitless public woods of the Rocky Mountain east slopes foothills. There is lots of hunting pressure but it ends within 100 yards of a road/quad-trail, i have yet to see a single other hunter's tracks in the many miles of tracking i do. They're almost all limiting themselves to where they can get a vehicle. I doubt the 99's would enjoy the same popularity now that they did even if the guys did roam the woods, however. Out here there is no gun that's not a bolt gun in .300 winmag or 6.5 creedmore. In New England of course there's still more of a tradition of old school hunting. Many of them favor Remington pumps and i have two of those i carry in the woods, both 50's vintage and one in .300 Savage. The only edge they have on the 99 as a woods gun is they cycle more slick, so much so you don't even notice - like glass, that slide. However, i just picked up a 99 Model F in .308 for reasons of better ammo availability - $875 and a calibre i also feel comfortable with if an elk happens by. My first F, and im thinking this thing is going to be a superb tracking gun. I lucked into my preferred year of F - a '61 in very good condition with the gold trigger and dark, well above average figured walnut - i like the way the gold trigger trades accent with the brass counter window if you keep the counter polished. Really nice touch to my eye, i refinished the gun this past week and it looks fabulous, almost pristine. I can't believe how effortlessly it shoulders with it's slightly reduced proportions. Putting a Skinner ghost ring on it and looking forward to taking to the big woods with it next year. It will share duty with my Remingtons. In general i don't think hunters have the same eye for aesthetics in guns they used to. Witness all the guys out there content to carry a hunk of tacky looking plastic into the woods. So aside from the bolt-action fetish, there's a general decline in taste working against the 99. If there were not, the ones available at resale i think would be going for a lot more money. I honestly can't believe i got this old beauty for $875. Nor my Model R 15 years ago - which also has even more exceptional walnut - for $375, a real tack-driver using the lyman tang peep it came with, though heavy to lug as the miles add up.