Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Year savage 99 action length change?

I have read that savage lengthened the action on the 99 but do not know the year or serial number. Also are the internal parts the same including the rotary magazine. Thank you! Alan

Are you referring to the change at serial number 900,000 that allowed the 243/308/358 cartridges to fit?

They didn’t actually lengthen the receiver, they rearranged the internals to lengthen the magazine space. Most internals aren’t interchangeable.

Some internals changed again in 1960 with the tang safety.

I’ve read that the 308 was chambered in 1954. That would be below 90000 ?

No, that would be the end of 1955 when they made several thousand 99's in the 900,000 range - likely all in 308.

The 99F was first listed in the Jan 1955 pricelist in 300 Savage and 250-3000, they would have made some in late 1954 preparing for the release.

The 243/308/358 was announced for all models either late 1955 or more likely Jan, 1956.

I’m guessing the rotor would be longer? Did the alter the lever for the longer cartridge? Was there a straight stock version ? It looks like 1955 started at 756000. Thanks Alan

The carrier in the post 900,000 is longer. Its hangar, instead of being machined into the receiver, is a piece of stamped steel, rolled over the sear screw to make room for the longer carrier. The auto cutoff is likewise totally different, so its hinge does not occupy valuable space in the cavity. All these changes add up to .2", allowing the COAL to increase from 2.6" to 2.8" without a change in the receiver length. I believe that the change occurred effective with S/N 900,000 sometime during 1955. There are certainly 99s produced that year with both receivers, and I believe all 1955 models between 758,001 and 775,000 were of the older configuration, and would not have accommodated the 308, 243 or 358 cartridges. I think there were a few 99s produced in the 800,000 to 899,999 range but that topic is above my pay grade. I believe there was a minor change to the levers after 900,000 and that the bolts were unchanged, but the bolt stop was definitely shortened. This is probably not the complete list, but it gives you an idea.

SNs 900,000 and above have the change to accomodate the longer OAL for .243, .308 and .358 Wins. All the SNs. below 900k have the 2.6" OAL limitation.

The only straight stock with the 2.8" were the model 99A (1971-82), .99-358 (1976-81; I've never seen a 1980 or 81) and 99-375 (1980-81), and the 1970 Anniversary Model.

Gee guys, thanks a bunch!! Maybe there needs to be a gunsmithing book for the 99 ! I own about 7 99s and may buy a couple more. There is conflicting data on the web pertaining to years and serial numbers but it could a factory originated mystery. I’m just trying to educate myself. I started out wanting to convert a plain Jane 300 to 6.5 creedmoor but realized it is the 2.6 action. I will look for another that does not have much collector value. I want a 2.8 action, trigger guard safety , cartridge counter, and I will stock it in the carbine model. Now does the post 90000 models have square barrel threads?? I just discovered Calhoun has a book out ! Great guy! Thanks to everyone !

In addition to Calhoun's book, I keep a copy of David Royal's handy. There is a lot of crap on the web, perhaps well intentioned, but inadequately researched. Square threads did not go out at 900,000 but later with the move to Westfield. So, there are barrels of several calibers made with the 12 TPI square thread and later the 14 TPI vee thread.

Thanks a bunch Sam! Your a good man!

These are the same as all the sub-900,000 receivers. In fact they were made out of order in 1953-1954, and nobody has ever found any difference between these and rifles made in the 600,000 and 700,000 range.

Mis-stamps? It's still a mystery.

Thanks, Rory. Good to know for sure.

What about the upper tang length ? I seem to have a butt stock that though factory, is cut out too much on either the top or bottom tang . Was there a serial number when that one was made different? Thanx.

Yes, 90,000 is when the tang was shortened. The bolt was also changed and the cocked indicator was moved to the tang.

Keep the info coming! Will the lever interchange on pre 900000 to post 900000 models. I’m talking about the safety on the lever models only

The answer is far more complicated than the question. I am trying to collect data on this topic, but that will take some time. Believe it or not, there are huge safety implications of lever swaps on Savages in general. Just for openers, an E lever may fit a pre 900 F, but will not fire. A pre 900 F lever may fit an E, but will fire out of battery. A post 900 will open fully on a pre 900, but a pre 900 may not open fully on a post. And this is literally the tip of the iceberg. Insight from others is invited here.

Sam, I hadn't heard any of this. Are you sure? I mean, do you have a large enough sample size to confirm all this?

So Sam, if I buy a post 900,000 ,somewhere between 1955-1960 pistol grip, and want to convert to straight grip, what’s my best chance if any ? I do not want the later tang safety model.

I don't have enough data to say what will work and what will not work. I do have enough to urge caution when doing swaps. I have definitely experienced everything I described above. In addition, I found a 358 F whose lever lock would not lock on an E lever, and therefore would not go on Safe.

I'm not saying the sky is falling. I am saying if you are going to swap parts on a 99, keep your eyes open.

Savage parts are always trial and error and must be fitted. I have gone the other way, straight lever to curved on several occasions, such as this 99/358 to old wood and curved lever.

My experience has been that all levers from 90K up to 999K can be swapped. It's just a matter of tweaking it to get that lever bite lockup working well.

I’ve read that a lot of 99s were hand fitted. There maybe someone still alive that worked at the factory. A big maybe.

It is entirely possible that there are straight levers that will fit, or that can be easily modified to fit. The inner crescent of the lever near the handle has a cam profile that is absolutely crucial. I have a couple I can play with to see if I can get closer to an answer. Fireball is so correct in his statement about trial and error and the need for fitting. It's not rocket science, but there is no room for carelessness or assumptions either. When I build from an empty receiver, I have a sequence I follow to reduce the number of times I have to go back to square 1 and start over. I'll holler when I get this past the arm waving stage.

Lightfoot, your comment makes me wonder if they changed the cam profile on the lever safety models in 1960. I will look into this further.

I just looked at 6 levers, all with lever safety. One was the E I mentioned earlier that would not let the F fire, one was a straight grip s/n 226,xxx and 4 were pistol grip, origin unknown. When it comes to the cam that controls no-fire with lever open, I saw no design differences, supporting Lightfoot's findings. I did find manufacturing variations that were visible to the eye. It would be easy to construct a fixture that could be used to at least partially quantify some of the important variations. The practical result of all this is to support the belief the the levers are interchangeable in the 90,000 to 900,000 range, differing only in manufacturing variation.

So, Alan, I believe that if you get your post 900 pre mil pistol grip, you have a good chance of finding a straight lever that will fit. You may need to remove or add a bit of material to make it work (or you may not). You do need to check for no-fire and fire out of battery (lever drooped) prior to loading it with live ammunition. Just my view.

Sam

Thanks a bunch Sam! I learned a lot. I have a 99f in 308 , but it’s too nice of a gun to modify. I will look for an ugly duckling for a project. Somewhere I have the Murray book. I have some ugly stocks coming from a member, so I will have something to do. Alan

Ralph(the owner)and I scratched our head's over this one.Out goes the 900,000 BS.

Sqweeler, this really clears everything!! What a letter!! I really enjoyed it! It is going to be interesting to other peoples responses who contributed to this post. One for the books!! Thank you so much !!! Alan

That is the one and only 243/308/358 ever seen whose serial number was under 900,000.

And, if I remember, you couldn’t load the magazine. It was a single shot.

So almost surely a factory screwup.

I think they gambled on the .243 working like a .250 in the short magazine and realized it wouldn't. I don't know that it was a single shot but it was very unreliable.

Why they ever shipped that gun is beyond me!

243 was available at one time long ago with a 100gr roundnose.Probably would have worked.I'm sure there was a correct spool in it,so the only problem was O.A.L. with today's spitzer ammo.Easily corrected with a handload.Wish I could've got my hand's on it.

They shipped it because some weirdo like me wanted it.

I think it is just a case of a model in transition where they used up the parts they had already made. When savage bought fox, it is said they used up parts that fox had made, till they made the newer model B. Just an opinion

Thanks for posting that letter. Keeps everybody on their toes.
The BS part may be somewhat harsh.
In general the Savage serial numbers that we assign start/stop dates contain a transition period however small. Let's call the transition period "slightly fuzzy".
In the case of the 900,000/.243,.308,.358 with 1 known example in the 700,000 range is best described as a piece of "lint".
Good info to know!

Took out Dad's 300Sav 1956F.Federal factory 243 100gr 2.565" oal (which is a little shorter than my 300 handload's)goes in the rotor,feed's and ejects perfect.

Hey sqweeler, what are the first 2 numbers of the serial number if you dont mind and will this action feed rounds .200 thou longer?? Thank you for your help.

782xxx. 2.600" or under. 150 Hornady handload seated to cannelure 2.595".They changed internals more so for the 308 at 2.800".

The 300 Savage specs are for 2.6" COAL, so not surprised those 243's fit. They're in the allowable length for under <900,000 SN.


A full length 243 Win at 2.7" might have problems. Almost surely a full length 308 Win at 2.8" won't go in.

I wonder if you can load .308 diameter round nose bullets short enough in a 308 case to get them to feed in a pre-900,000 magazine?

Probably - but so what??

Savage lengthened the magazine and made the distinction by jumping the SN up to 900,000.

Should be end of discussion...

308 150gr cast flatnose seated 2.600" fed and ejected fine.

Then you'd basically be shooting a 300 Savage.

So use a 300 Savage.

Or buy a post-900,000 308. Not like there aren't plenty of 1950's 99F's in 308 floating around.

Nobody should convert a gun where the owner has to handload standard cartridges 5% or 10% shorter than every manual says.

Just curious. I knew a guy who said he wanted to convert his pre-900,000 300 to 308. It was a long time ago and I didn't know enough to tell him the drawback to doing this. I sure wouldn't do it and I have a few 308's. I'm not one to tinker with firearms.

Q: Why does SAAMI exist?
A: The SAAMI Standards are published to provide safety, reliability, and interchangeability standards for commercial manufactures of firearms, ammunition, and components.

Very interesting to read the changes and improvements as the action internals evolved. My 'need to know' is for the other end of the 1899 development. I have 1900-1901 production, an A in 30-30 and a C in 303. Both very much grey dogs, but basicly serviceable. Cocking indicators don't rise (worn off internally?) and one has no friction to the safety/leverlock. Works, but will fall out of engagement. How is the safety removed? Looks to be different from later parts with a cross pin and friction spring. I have found replacement cocking indicators, looks like just a cross pin to remove after the bolt is dismounted.
On these early models, is the firing pin pinned or threaded on the hammer? What parts break out drawings I have found for this early are rather sketchy.
When did they change the configuration of the nose of the bolt? Is the configuration of the hammer bushing critical? There seems to be several different size slots for the retaining screw to ride in.
The one time that I had the 303 to the range, I had several fail-to-fire rounds. Maube old ammo, but will strip the bolt and clean/lube the hammer assy, and hopefully replace the cocking indicator. I do have a spare hammer assy if necessary. Should I plan replacing the spring? Wolf replacements are on Ebay.
If all else fails, can anyone recommend a competent Savage 'smith in NW Arkansas? I am near Fort Smith.
Thanks for any advice. I want to keep these pieces of history working properly.

Squeeler's letter confirming the (first?) 99F in 243 was significant evidence of a cutting-edge new development hitting the streets. Was there a "custom shop" back then too?

243 win was just introduced in 1955, and this was all happening at the time of the model 110 introduction too!

I should think it was at least as big a manufacturing shift needed to bore and rifle a 6mm barrel, when no other smaller-than-quarter-bore barrels existed for the 99, at least as much as it was to fit a longer rotor. New cartridges like the 243W (..and like the creedmoor family), have always generated a lot of buzz!

Out of curiosity, did the bolt travel (backwards) also change with the longer 308/243 intro? Sounds like the lever arc did not change, maybe just used a shorter bolt stop?

In addition to lengthening the carrier, several other changes were necessary to accommodate the longer cartridges. The auto cutoff was completely redesigned, moving its hinge point from the rear of the carrier spindle to a drilled hole in front of the cutoff, providing more than half the required increase in length. The carrier rear support was changed from a (very expensively) machined web integral to the receiver, to a stamped part hinged on the sear screw, and this provided most of the remainder. Yes, the bolt travel was provided by a shorter stop. I am not sure this is all, but it is all the changes I can think of at the moment. I am preparing a technical note on the safety features and mechanisms of the lever safety 99s, and will post it on this site when done. I have not found any changes to lever or trigger at the time of magazine length increase.

As to the 6mm bore, Savage had produced the .227" 22 HP earlier, albeit quite a few years earlier, and I believe only in the Utica factory.

Savage made some replacement 22H-P barrels in the early 1960's/ They are stamped "Westfield". The OD on my 243 99F is slightly smaller than the 99F 308 barrels

One obscure change was made with the 900K action that seems really unnecessary was the spindle head screw. They increased the diameter a few thousandths so it won't fit the older guns.

Availability of the old screw has really fallen off so it's a hardship if you need to replace one. Be careful if you go to Numrich for one!

David is right. I omitted service barrels from my thinking earlier.

I got a mint Westfield 22HP barrel off GB. The guy had it listed as something like, "Weird Barrel". Opening bid was $100, I was the only bidder. I guess no one wanted a Weird Barrel. The Westfield replacement barrels still have the old threads. I wanted to find a Westfield action and put the 22HP barrel and R wood on it, but it wouldn't work.

Yep, any of the Chicopee Falls and Westfield barrels made for the "obsolete" cartridges in 99's would be threaded for pre-1960 actions. They wouldn't convert 99's to those cartridges, only rebarrel them.

Are there Westfield / Chicopee barrels for other than the 22HP cartridge?

1961 service letter says they provide the following barrels:
22 Hi-Power
243
250-3000
303
30-30
300
308
358