Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors To meddle or not to meddle? This is the question!

I have been fascinated over the years with chambering a Savage 99 in a 6.5X.308. I have been told that there is now a factory round in that caliber (been busy with life for 15 years and am out of touch with firearms to say the least!). If I used a 99 that did not have collector value would it make sense? Am I duplicating or coming close to any cartridges that have been factory chambered by Savage in the 99? Any of the experts here care to share your ideas on this subject.

The factory cartridge is the .260 Remington.

I have a 260 99F that has been rebored from .243 to .264. The 260 is a really nice match to the 99F and a 2-7x Leupold. The rebore cost around $200. I also have a 99C with a 6.5-284 barrel on it, but there isn't any meaningful difference within 200 yards and the 260 is factory loaded if I ever need ammo in a pinch.

Jeff

The Model 99 Savage had been factory-chambered in a good many calibers. For your convenience and information, I have listed these caliber below.



As concerns make a wildcat 6.5/.308, the famous .250/3000 aka .250 Savage would be very similar to your �wildcat� cartridge.



I�m a �traditionalist� as well as a reloader of long experience� and I�d suggest you look around for a sweet little Savage Model 99 lever-action rifle in .250 Savage � aka �.250/3000 Savage�. This mild-recoiling .25 caliber has been around since 1915 and it�s still one of the very best deer cartridges made. Since you reload, you could buy 100 or 200 cartridge cases and be set for life.



With a 100 grain Nosler Partition Bullet at 3,100 fps in a .250/3000, it�s fully capable of taking the largest deer ever born and yet, it�s recoil would be a VERY mild 8.7 lbs in an 8� pound rifle (including scope & sling) or 9.28 lbs of recoil in an 8 pound rifle according to my recoil calculator.



Sighted in 2.55-inches high at 100 yards, the bullet would be 3-inches high at 150 yards, "dead on" at 255 yards and 3-inches low at 300 yards. Thus, it would have a "point-blank range" of 300 yards. What more could you ask?



Comparatively, a .270 Winchester gives 16.6 ft/lbs of recoil using 130 grain bullets at 3100 fps in an 8� lb rifle or 17.7 ft/lbs of recoil in an 8.0 pound rifle.



One of my old reloading handbooks shows .250/3000 loads for the 100 grain and 117 grain bullets� and Nosler makes it�s excellent Partition Bullet in 100, 115 and 120 grain spitzer (pointed) bullets. You could easily �work up� loads using the following data that I�ve taken directly from an old reloading book�s -- circa 1970. You should be able to interpolate maximum loads for the 115 grain & 120 grain Nosler Partition Bullets from the loading information below. But why use any thing heavier than the 100 grain bullet since it will easily do the job?



Below are the loads I found in one of my old reloading books (circa 1970) for the .250/3000 Savage. There was no mention in the reloading manual of any problems with the 100 grain and the 117 grain bullets in their test rifle which had a 1:14 twist barrel.



These loads may NOT be safe in your rifle. Reduce these maximum loads by 10% for use as starting loads. DO NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM LISTED LOADS BELOW:



CARTRIDGE SPECIFICATION:

Bullet diameter: .257�

Maximum case length: 1.912�

Trim-to-length: 1.902�

Maximum Overall length with bullet: 2.515

Printer size: Large rifle



TEST COMPONENTS:

Remington cases

Remington 9� primers



TEST SPECIFICATION:

Firearm used: Custom Mauser 98

Barrel length: 24�

Twist: 1 � 14�

Groove diameter: .257�





75 GRAIN BULLET

IMR3031 � Maximum load = 36.0 grains = 3472 feet/per/second

IMR4895 � Maximum load = 37.0 grains = 3300 fps

IMR4064 � Maximum load = 38.0*grains= 3322 fps

IMR4320 � Maximum load = 39.0 grains = 3427 fps



* = compressed load

Accuracy load: IMR4320 powder, 35.0 grains = 2976 fps





87 GRAIN BULLET

IMR3031 � Maximum load = 35.0 grains = 3247 fps

IMR4895 � Maximum load = 36.5 grains = 3194 fps

IMR4064 � Maximum load = 37.0*grains= 3205 fps

IMR4320 � Maximum load = 38.0 grains = 3236 fps



* = compressed load

Accuracy load = IMR4064, 33.0 grains = 2816 fps

Factory duplication load = IMR3031, 32.5 grains = 3030 fps





100 GRAIN BULLET

IMR3031 � Maximum load = 33.0 grains = 3010 fps

IMR4895 - � � = 35.5 grains = 3000 fps

IMR4064 - � � = 35.5 grains = 3025 fps

IMR4320 - � � = 37.0 grains = 3113 fps



Accuracy load: IMR3031, 31.0 grains = 2801 fps

Factory duplication load = IMR3031, 31.2 grains = 2816 fps





117 GRAIN BULLET

IMR3031 � Maximum Load = 31.0 grains = 2672 fps

IMR4895 - � � = 33.5 grains = 2750 fps

IMR4064 - � � = 33.5 grains = 2712 fps

IMR4320 - � � = 35.0 grains = 2795 fps



Accuracy load: IMR4320, 32.0 grains = 2557 fps









Savage 99 Calibers



.22 HP

.22-250

.243

.25-35

.250-3000

.284 Win

7mm-08

.303 Sav.

.300 Sav.

.30-30

.308

.32-40

.358

.375

.38-55





I hope this information proves useful to you.





Strength & Honor...



Ron T.

While I would agree that the 250-3000 will kill the largest deer that has, or will, ever live, so will a 22 Long Rifle IF you place the bullet accurately. I have killed a number of deer and coyotes with the 250-3000, but I consider it to be, on the whole, an inferior round for deer when compared to the 260. I also believe that the 243 is a more capable cartridge than the 250-3000 because of its larger case capacity and better selection of bullets. There isn't any special magic in the 250-3000, despite what it says in COTW.

I would urge cautious when loading for the Savage 99, since they are not good at safely handling escaping gas if you have a case rupture. The loading date that Ron listed was published in a different era and looks pretty optimistic to me.

I think that you'll be pleased with the performance if you decide to build a 99 in 260. Although I might not be a traditionalist in my hunting guns, I have owned over 1,000 Savage 99s and do enjoy looking at those that remain.

Jeff

Jeff, I would agree with you on those loads being optimistic if your talking about the older 99s(experts help me here) there is a cut off in the s/n range around 200,000 where the metallergy is not quit up to say a 50's vintage rifle which handles the 308 chambering up to 52,000cup where the earlier rifles are only 46,000cup. So I'm going to stick out my ballistic neck and say a modern 250 is superior as a deer round compared to a 243. 3100 fps in 100 grn. bullets with a larger frontal area beats a 243 any day of the week. 115 grn capabilities puts a nail in the coffin. Mark. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I agree with Mark that the newer (after World War II) Model 99�s probably had better metallurgy because Savage DID, in fact, add the higher-pressure .308 Winchester cartridge in 1955 and the .243 and .358 Winchester cartridges in 1956. It�s also possible there wasn�t anything wrong with the metallurgy prior to WWII� but I really don�t know whether that�s true or not. Maybe Rick99 or RAM can shed some light on this subject?

The whole controversy seems to �spin� around the Model 99�s ability to safely handle chamber pressures of 52,000 CUP (for the .308 Winchester)� and it seems logical to me that if Savage engineers felt the Model 99�s action was safe for the 52,000 C.U.P. generated by the .308 Winchester, then it can handle the pressures generated by .250/3000�s �hot� handloads published in a recognized reloading book.

These hand-loads for the .250/3000 that I originally posted in this forum were loads that were TESTED and found SAFE by a respected reloading book publisher/reloading products manufacturer. I frankly don�t believe they can be questioned since, if anything, these specific handloads offered in reloading manuals by such facilities are THOROUGHLY tested and deemed to be �safe� in rifles of that caliber including the very first rifles made by the rifle manufacturer. Therefore, the question of the metallurgy seems moot.

Let me add this observation and then I�ll shut up. I agree with BOTH Jeff & Mark in that the .260 Remington IS superior (as a deer or antelope cartridge) to the .250/3000 Savage because it has a larger cartridge case which can hold more powder that allows it to yield a higher velocity with a larger bullet. By the same token, the .250 Savage IS superior to the .243 Winchester as a deer or antelope cartridge when HANDLOADED to its full potential because of it�s larger bullet�s cross-section at velocities at least equal to the same weight bullet in a .243 Winchester round.

Ok�.�nuff said. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


Strength & Honor�

Ron T.

While I think that 99s are strong actions, they aren't as safe in the event of a catastrophic case failure as many other actions. I have a 99CD in 25-284 that handles some pretty stiff loads without a sign of excess pressure. But I have seen the remains of a 99 that experianced a head separation and I'm glad that I wasn't anywhere near it when the cheeks of the stock blew out. That make me load accordingly. I have found some of Lyman's older loading data to be, in many cases, as suspect as P.O. Ackley's.

I don't see how a case with less capacity, the 250-3000, can push a bullet down range faster than a case with greater capacity, the 243, given the same bullet weight and loaded to the same pressure level. I also don't see any meaningful cross-section advantage in a 0.014" larger diameter bullet, as bullet construction is, for me, a more significant issue.

The game bullet that I settled on for the 243 and 6mm is the 95 grain Partition. It has a nearly perfect balance of weight, penetration, expansion, and high velocity potential. The bullet that I prefer for the 250-3000 is the 87 grain Speer for the same reason. I prefer the 115 grain Partition in the 257 cartridges with greater powder capacity, but I think that they are too heavy for the limited case capacity of the 250-3000.

Difference makes the spice of life!

Jeff

Let me see if I have this straight, we have a general consensus that the .260 Rem. is a superior round for deer and antelope than the .250-3000 and the .243, right? So with out taking to much of a leap the .260 would be a fine caliber to choose when hunting for deer. Now if I may go a step further, I carry with me a Savage 99 in .308 when hunting Deer and ELK. I have had many good kills on both species, now let me say this before we go much further. I have spent my whole life hunting, Grown up in ranching and still ranch to this day, Hunted all my life! Know how to hunt! Spent four years in the USMC where I participated in many inter-service shooting events (and didn�t loose many), for the most part know what I am doing with a firearm. All this said to avoid the �you gotta place the bullet� lecture. I like the trajectory of the 6.5 over the .308 and feel that the energy is still plenty for reasonable range shots on elk; The 6.5 has a superior co-efficiency rate which is appealing to me. Do the experts here feel that the 6.5 is too much of a sacrifice on energy for elk at distances around 225/250 yards? Could I load the .260 to a reasonably maximum load in a late model 99 (later than 1956 or so) and have full potential of the caliber? If not do the hand loaders that load the .308 for the 99 run the same risks?



My hats off to Jeff, Mark and Ron, you guys are up to snuff on your stuff.



Sonny



PS, Ron I have a 99 in .250-3000

Since an elk is a significantly bigger animal than a deer, I would say that the 260 is on the minimum side, even when loaded with my bullet of choice for the task, a 140 grain Partition. I'm not qualified to judge a man's expertise, but I think that someone who is a pretty good hunter and shot, and who is willing to pass on marginal shot angles, will have success with a properly loaded 260.

I think that maximum loads in any firearm have the potential of putting the shooter in danger, some more than the 99 and some less. Just like driving a car fast has the potential for putting the driver into a dangerous situation in the event of a catastrophic tire failure. I would suggest that these are very similar scenarios. Even when everything looks perfect, a catastrophic failure of a key component of the package can instantly rip firm control from your hands and put you into a dangerous situation.

From where I sit, the biggest safety feature of the 98 Mauser isn't the addition of an auxillary locking lug and a larger diameter front receiver ring, it is the improvement in handling escaping gas. A well made small ring Mauser, particularly the Swedish guns, are sufficiently strong to handle 52,000 PSI. However, in the rare event of a catastrophic case failure, the shooter is likely to get a face full of hot gas and brass fragments. When a case fails in a 99, the gas blows the checks of the stock outward like a claymore mine being detinated. A guy who used to post here a lot had that happen to him when he fired a factory 300 Savage round in a 99 that had been rechambered to 308, but not marked as such. I've seen the remains of the rifle and heard the stories about pieces of brass and wood working themselves out of his face for a couple of years. He was lucky that he didn't lose an eye or suffer more damage to his fair complexion. I know these things don't happen often, but it would sure suck to be there if it did and to know that you used a drop tube to squeeze an extra grain or 2 of powder into the case for the promise of a few, relatively meaningless, FPS. Why take the chance?

The 3 elk that I have shot could have been killed with a 260, but they were killed with a 30-06, a 338-06, and a 338-284.

Jeff

PS I, too, have a few 99s in 250-3000 and like them just fine. My 2 favorites are the 1950s version of the 99F and the pre-WWII 99G.

With all due respect, I've been following this thread but you're getting a little carried away. I have seen several totally separated case heads in a 99 300sav that did nothing more than blow a little hot gas back at the shooter. Whether it was headspace or too hot of a load or whatever, making it sound like a 99 is an explosive device just waiting for one little thing to go wrong is BS!

Show us the proof.

I'm adding a little fuel to the fire, folks...I have been reloading rifles for thirty years plus. I have gone over the ballistic tables and seen optimum velocities for many cartridges. But the one main feature I have always found is, that live, on the range...the most accurate load for any given rifle is often one that has less velocity. For example, I have a 99EG in 300 Savage. Beautiful, minty gun...but the load that shoots 1.5 MOA (no scope) consistently is one that fires a generic Remington spire point 150 grain at a velocity that is only slightly higher that that of a 30-30. Makes no sense. But how can you argue with the accuracy? Same thing is true with my 25-35, 30-30, and a 1903 Springfield.

My purpose in writing this is...don't get too hung up on velocities. Get the bullet to the target accurately.

Best wishes

rooster

birdog

the dividing serial numbers are 90,000 and 266,000. In the 1940s and 1950s the factory would not rebuild guns under 90,000 to .250 and .300. It would rebuild guns between 90,000 and 266,000 for those then-hot cartridges BUT charged an extra five or ten bucks, I forget which, to retemper the frames. Over 266,000 there was no problem.'

Miki

I agree with other posts� �accuracy�, consistent with SAFETY, is of primary importance. If you don�t hit the target, it doesn�t matter how fast the bullet is going� the �wind� from the passing bullet won�t bring the game down.



In my 40+ years of reloading experience, I�ve found that �best� (consistent with safety, muzzle velocity and measured accuracy) HUNTING handloads in my rifles have occurred with a few percentage points of the maximum safe load with the most suitable powder in many cases. In every case, the powder filled the cartridge case to the base of the bullet.



As an example, when I was working up the most accurate hunting load for my heavy barreled Sako in .222 with a 6x-24x variable scope on it, I had only a 50 yard range available to me, so that�s what I used. According to VihtaVuori�s Reloading Guide, the maximum load of their N-130 rifle powder in a .222 using a 50 grain bullet was 22.1 grains. The rifle shot a 5-shot group measuring 0.094 (measuring from outside edge to outside edge of the group minus the bullet diameter of .224 inches) using 21.8 grains of N-130. All the groups fired with powder loads weighing from 21.4 grains to 21.8 grains measuring between 0.10 to 0.15 inches. Below 21.4 grains and above 21.8 grains of powder, groups increased in size. As you can see, the powder�s �sweet spot� was within a range of a half a grain of powder and the most accurate load (21.8 grains) was within 1.4% (3/10ths of a grain) of the �maximum load�.



Working up the most accurate hunting load in my 1953 �EG� Model 99, a 50 year old rifle that looks almost brand new, I had a 100 yard range available, but chose to use the 50 yard range because bullseye definition at 50 yards through the rifle�s 3x-9x Bushnell scope set on 9x assured that I was eliminating any mis-alignment of the scope. Using IMR4895, the maximum load was listed as being 41.5 grains. As I worked up to the maximum load, I got the smallest 3-shot group at 41.1 grains ( .96% below the max. load) measuring just 0.112 inches while 41.3 grains ( .48% below max.) yielded a 3-shot group of 0.221 inches and the max. load of 41.5 grains yielded a 3-shot group measuring 0.191 inches (all groups measured edge to edge of the group minus the bullet diameter of .308 inches). In this case, I chose the maximum safe powder load of 41.5 grains because it was within 7/100ths of an inch of being as accurate as the 41.1 grain load, but gave 28 fps higher muzzle velocity (2647 fps versus 2675 fps).



Admittedly, I might have achieved as good or even BETTER accuracy at much lower muzzle velocities (measured with my chronograph), but since a higher muzzle velocity with the SAME bullet weight yields higher muzzle energy, I was searching for the best HUNTING LOAD (not a bench-rest or �target� load) yielding the highest SAFE muzzle velocity possible consistent with good accuracy rather than �pure� accuracy alone.



But any way a man cuts it� �accuracy� is where you find it� together with a muzzle velocity with which you�re happy.





Strength & Honor...



Ron T.

You obviously have a lot more experience with case separations in Savage 99s than I do, but the 2 people who I personally know who have had them, were not nearly as casual about it as you seem to be. You must have a lot more tolerance for separated cases and a little gas leaking back at you than I have. I would respectfully suggest that any time that happens, there is a serious problem with either the rifle or the ammunition.

I never said that the 99 is inherently dangerous, just that it doesn't handle the escaping gas from a catastrophic case failure as well as many other actions do. That is a fact, not unsupported speculation. Do catastrophic case failures happen very often? Not that I've seen, but why take unnecessary chances with your sight?

When I build a high pressure load for a 99, I almost always do the initial load developement in a bolt action rifle first and then cut the data back 5% and build it up from there for the 99.

But that's just me. I don't like to cut corners or take unnecessary chances, so I load and shoot accordingly. Heck, I'm anal about tires, brakes, and windshield wipers on the cars that I drive. I know my limits and I know how much risk I'm willing to take. I know plently of people who routinely shoot other people's reloads and drive cars with bald tires, but not me!

Jeff

FYI I do not have a 300 sav. My friend does.

You stated that when you have a case failure with a 99 it blows the sides of the stock off. Wrong! It depends how severly overcharged the case is or the amount of excessive headspace. I can see if you fill the case with Unique or some other pistol/shot powder that things can get serious quickly. But a slightly overpressured case to where you get a case seperation in my witnessing this, has led to no more than an eye opener that somethjing needs to be checked into and remedied immediately. That and the inconvenience of having to get the front end of the case out of the chamber. My friend was loading 3031 but using data for 4064 and this is why he had overcharged his cases. This and some other factor led to this happening on 2 different occasions

I was under the assumption that a 300 sav round can be fired in a 308 without much other than lousy accuracy and a fireformed case as a result. I could be wrong, but less powder- same diameter bullet, case that is 99% the size of the 308, what's going to happen? The story you relate of a factory 300 sav round in a 308 is a hard pill to swallow. I believe if you dig deeper you'll find some other factors that caused the mishap.

No I do not have a death wish but you seem to be pushing a warning with incomplete information. When I get sticky cases or flattened primers I back off. I have never had a case seperate on me with any of my 99's or any other rifles for that matter but a 99 is quite strong in the righ places compared to other levers and even some bolt rifles. There is no moving part that can be directed rearward to the shooters face as in most bolts and levers. The resulting catastrophe HAS to be directed to the side which would minimize the lethality of the accident should one occur. JMHO

I'd still like to see the 'blown cheeks' of the stock on that rifle. Could have been an obstruction too, probably we'll never know for sure.

M99ER,

I am one (1) of the two (2) people who Jeff is citing. The rifle that "exploded" on me was a 99EG in excellent condition. There wasn't any barrel obstruction and the ammunition was factory Remington 180 grain RNCL. I had just finished detail stripping and cleaning it, as the previous owner told me that he was having hang-fire problems. He didn't tell me that the fired cases came out looking a little odd. He hadn't had a case seperation, just hang-fires. I thought that there was probably some petrified grease blocking the firing pin spring or firing pin. But it wasn't. The first cartridge that I fired from the clean rifle separated and blew the cheeks out of the stock. I still have enough scar tissue to remind me of that damned rifle every time I shave. I think that the weak firing pin spring allowed the pressure to push back through the bolt and down into the area between the upper and lower tangs. I think that a 99C would have been safer, as the gas would probably have blown the magazine out of the receiver and saved the stock.

Your friend sounds like a sloppy reloader. I think that I'd keep my distance from him at the range if I were you.

Sincerely,

Bearrr264

PS 'Saw 37 bucks today, including a 6x6 non-typical with a lovely set of matching drop tines. I think that we'll try to keep him around as breeding stock as long as possible. I sure hope that he stays on my ground and doesn't wander into danger.

I�m not sure if we have run a muck here but to brings things into perspective, I was just curious as to the abilities of a .260 in a Savage 99. Lots and lots of really good information shared here but the focus of the question was weather a 99 should be re-barrels for hunting big game (elk in particular).

I will probably reload for myself but share the same experiences that have been stated here, that the most accurate are usually the loads below the safe maximum levels. If we agree on that philosophy it sounds like the .260 in an appropriate rifle would be a fine choice and unequal to any other caliber available in factory chambered 99s available. Right?

SonnyNobody mention the .250 Ackley Improved. You could use a take down model and have it reamed to the AI. Adds 300 fps to the .250 and you can still shoot factory ammo, as I understand it, just have to reload cases to AI. Saves the integriety of the rifle. Something to think about thats cheaper than a rebarrel. George

Miki, thanks for the info. Mark.