Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors 270 SAVAGE

or Titus. Every time I look at this, http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=209470805
my mind wonders to all the beat up gray rats I've seen. I start thinking this might be a good project for one of those old rifles.
Has anyone every owned or re-barreled a 99 to a 270 Titus? If so I would like to hear your thoughts of this cartridge.

Lee

On "gray rats", by the time you fix it all up, regardless of the caliber, you are going to have more into it than if you bought a minty, low round count F or R/RS for a donor.
No restocking, no recolor casing, no reblue, already correctly D&T as well as selling a mint F, R/RS barrel would further offset your cost.
As for any .277 wildcat, why not just go with a 260 Remington ? Better SD, resale and factory brass. Plan B would be to find a 7mm08 99 and get it restocked.
Plan C would be to get a 243 and have it rebored.

See this thread for more info:
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/2592012/2

The kind of 99 you could buy for $7-800.

Regardless of that rifle not being "original"... I believe it's one fine-looking little rifle, but 'way over-priced. From the serial number only, it appears to be a 1951 EG... a year in which Savage was building excellent quallity Model 99s.

I also don't see any real advantage in the .270 wildcat caliber over the standard .300 Savage cartridge. While it would recoil slightly less, recoil is really not an issue with the .300 Savage, so where's the advantage?

If one were to make a .270/.300 out of the rifle, performance would be like a slightly less powerful 7mm/08... not exactly a highly desirable cartridge.

Assuming it was a .300 Savage prior to being re-barreled, using the original barrel (as long as it wasn't "shot-out" or rusted) would save investing in a new barrel. I'd just give the original barrel a high polish (in the white) and then have a fine bluing job done on it. I'd also have the lever re-case hardened as well.

If it were me, I'd use that high-grade wood and the nice bluing job... and leave it a .300 Savage.

I could be wrong, but I'd guess by buying some really nice wood and re-doing the stock one's self... and having a good gunsmith do the metal polishing and "hot" re-bluing, one could turn a "gray-rat" into an outstanding looking and excellent shooting rifle for $1,000 less than the asking price of the rifle on Gun Broker... and such a rifle would be far better looking with even nicer wood than buying an original Model 99 in excellent condition IF you could find one at $800.

Jus' my 2�...


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

An interesting wildcat for sure. The thing is with wildcats is they are for the gun crank who doesn't like marching to the beat of conformity and is willing to put up with increased hassles in making his own ammunition. Whether they offer dramatic differences in performance or not is beside the point. They offer the chance to be different. Personally I'd rather have a custom EG , R, or F in .270 Titus than in a ho-hum .300 just because I like off-the-wall stuff.

Ahhhhh... Gnoahhh, my friend...

"Different strokes for different folks"...

Over the years we've both posted in this Forum, I've agreed with the vast majority of what you've written, but on this, we're at opposite ends of the question.

To me, the whole purpose of a "wildcat" IS a "dramatic increase in performance"... and this seems to be "THE" purpose of most of those who give life to a wildcat.

If you consider those popular wildcats which have eventually become standard factory loaded rounds...the .257 Roberts (Ned Roberts necked a 7x57mm Mauser case down to ,25 caliber) the .22/250 (originally called the ".22 Varminter"... a .250/3000 case necked down to .224"), the .220 Swift (the old 6mm Lee Navy cartridge case necked down to .224"), the .25/06... and many others, in each case, the ballistics of the original cartridges were "dramatically increased".

Among the non-survivors are those cartridges which did NOT yield a dramatic increase in performance.

Thus, the success or the lack thereof seems to be connected to a "dramatic increase in performance".

Buttttttttt... like I initially wrote, "Different strokes for different folks"... and I'll be the first to defend your "right" for your reason(s) to "like" a certain wildcat or have a certain opinion as I would to defend my own reasons for doing the same thing. After all, isn't that one reason why this Forum is so successful... and what this Forum is all about?!?


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

Yep, diff'rent strokes! Funny, all of the wildcats I played with over the years, only a couple gave "increased" performance. The R2 Lovell and .219 Donaldson Wasp come to mind. Most that I played with (of my own design) were for firing .30 cast bullets at mid-range velocities out of single shots.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

That seems like a perfectly good reason to do something like that. I would guess that many of us (reloader/shooters) do similar things.

And, of course, with cast bullets... whether they were regular soft-cast or #2 alloy ("hard cast") cast bullet, you almost HAD to shoot "mid-range" loads to keep from "leading" the bore.

Did you ever try the half-jackets on those cast bullets?

Did you ever develop a "favorite" wildcat? Do you have a favorite cartridge case you used for the majority of your wildcats?

Me? I'm an "accuracy-nut". I've worked up accuracy loads in every caliber... and every rifle I've ever owned... including the .22 rimfire. I even got a little "crazy" and bought a CZ453 "Varmint" model with a heavy barrel and the factory single-set trigger to find "THE" greatest accuracy in a .22 rimfire.

I had my gunsmith pillar-bed the action screws in the CZ. I tightened the front screw to 22 lb/inches and tightened the rear screw to 25 lb/inches. I also had him glas-bed the receiver and re-float the heavy barrel. Then I bought over 30 different brands/types of .22 rimfire ammo and bench-rested them using 5-shot groups at 50 yards to find "THE" most accurate rimfire ammo.

I also bought a "gauge" that attaches to my digital calipers to measure the thickness of the .22 rimfire cartridges' rims plus I weighed out each individual cartridge and put them into "groups" of similar rim-thickness and overall weight.

I was surprised at the difference in accuracy or lack thereof of this wide array of .22 rimfire cartridges (over 30 different brands/types). Some shot fine in my Ruger 10/22 and an old Remington bolt-action rifle, but wouldn't shoot all that well in the CZ... and visa-versa! But frankly, the CZ was more accurate with a wider variety of different cartridges than was the other two .22's I have. This "accuracy test" took over 2 years to do shooting once or twice a week at my club.

Yes... the measuring and weighing took LOTTSA time-consuming labor and a lotta work at home prior to going to the rifle range... but I found that my CZ loves "Wolf Match Target" ammo and shoots smallish "one-hole-5-shot-groups" at 50 yards with it and does almost as well with some older "Aguila SE Super Extra" cartridges I found that a shooting buddy had. His target rifle didn't do all that well with the Aguila SE, so I bought all of it from him that he had (2 "bricks")... 1,000 rounds altogether.

With either cartridge, I've managed to keep myself in "free" soft drinks at the rifle range with "bets" with my shooting buddies who buy me those "freebie soft drinks" when they try to beat the CZ's accuracy using the two above cartridges. That single-set trigger helps... for SURE... and the pillar bedding doesn't hurt either!

Sometimes, with a few center-fire rifles, it has taken a couple of years of shooting just one particular rifle with different powder/bullet/primer combinations to "satisfy" my need to find "THE" powder (and "THE" amount of same), "THE" bullet, "THE" seating depth, "THE" primer and with some cartridge, even "THE" brand of cartridge case to find "THE" most accurate load.

My only real "disappointment" was with the .44 magnum using my old-style Ruger semi-auto carbine. Regardless of the load, bullet weight, etc... that ol' Ruger shoots 2 to 2�-inch+ groups (or larger) at 100 yards. I could never find any load that shot smaller 3-shot groups. I'm guessing the inaccuracy is in the rifle rather than the cartridge since the same cartridge with the same loads shoot very accurately through my Ruger Super BlackHawk with a 7�-inch barrel.

But then, I've never seen or heard anyone claim truly fine accuracy out of the old-style Ruger .44 magnum semi-auto carbine. But then, it's a "perfect match" for my ol' Ruger 10/22 semi-auto carbine, serial number 9xx" (Yep... one of the first thousand made).

Of course, with the heavy-barreled Sako in .222 Remington, I used 5-shot groups since the cartridge is a truly accurate one which, with the Sako, could and did put 3 bullets through the same .224-inch sized hole fairly often using the 24X scope.

And so, my friend... I'd say that most of us have some crazy things we do or like with our rifles and cartridges, n'est pas?


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

At the risk of taking this thread even further off the road and into the weeds, A) You don't have to stick to low velocity lead loads to avoid leading. I've gone as fast as 26-2700 fps with decent accuracy B)Lead alloys are the topic for a long article. Nay, a book even. In short, it's up to the gun. A nice smooth bore can achieve startlingly high velocity with relatively soft bullets, whereas a rough bore will lead even with hard-as-nails alloys such as Linotype or monotype (25-30 bhn). Also bullet design, diameter, and quality of the lube factor in. Again, a topic for a book-length article. C) Half-jackets swaged onto a lead core are another topic entirely. The few I fooled with (store bought) didn't offer any advantages accuracy-wise over my cast bullets so I eschewed them. D) The wildcats I cooked up were based on the .30/30 case, which is probably about the best factory case as-is for cast bullet experimentation (along with the .303 Savage- there I brought us back on topic!). I found that the very best target accuracy with the .30 designs I've fooled with (about 25 all told) generally falls in the 1600-1800 fps range for 50 -200 yard target shooting. Slower, 12-1400fps for strictly 100yd. and less. My favorite wildcat was a .30/30 case shortened by 1/2" with no change to body taper, and a neck length equal to the factory case. Case capacity was about perfect for a charge of SR-4759 to drive a 180gr. lead bullet at 16-1800 fps. One last neat thing about the .30/30 and .303 Savage is the case capacity is good for driving a 190 gr. lead bullet at 2000fps with a charge of 3031 or 4064, and even 4350 for excellent hunting accuracy, and no leading even with an alloy soft enough for excellent expansion on game tissue.

Yes it can get quite involved. I better stop here before I burn up all of the band width for this site!

Hahahahahaha... "burn up all of the band width"... a good one!!!

Your use of the .30/30 Winchester case as your basic wildcat case surprised me. I say "surprised" because I corresponded back and forth for a while with Ken Waters who wrote for Wolf Publications and lives in New Canaan, CT. I wrote to him at his home address in New Canaan, Connecticut.

He did wildcats using the .30/30 cartridge, but most of our correspondence dealt with RL-15 and reduced loads for my .338 Winchester magnum using a 200 grain bullet in my pre-'64 Model 70.

Early in 2000, he wrote a letter to me indicating he'd be willing to sell me his own "Model 99 in .300 Savage complete with an original Stith Install-It-Yourself mount and a Weave K-2.5 (60) scope."

He indicated his rifle was "of 1951-52 vintage (as was my original Model 99 which was stolen) with a brass rotor and good barrel for $475 including shipping."

But before I could say "ok"... my 2 sons, one daughter and my bestest hunting buddy found, bought and birthday gifted to me the pristine 1953 Model 99 (EG) in .300 Savage that I now treasure... and which is my primary deer rifle.

It's a "small world" when it turns out that both you and Ken Waters wildcatted using the .30/30 cartridge case.

It has been good chatting with you, my friend... guess I'd better give this thread back to Polecat, the originator, eh?


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

Nah, not a small world. The .30/30 has been recognized far and wide as being a good cast bullet platform for many decades.

I think I would have bought Ken Waters' 99 anyway! How cool would that be!

yeah, I was just thinking the same thing... I would have bought the gun anyways... one can certainly own too many 300EGs but in this case, I think an exception is easily made.

Ron and Gnoahhh, Weather its chasing accuracy with a 22 or wildcats built for cast loads, I think many of us have under taken projects that are less than cost effective. For me , I love the style and the way a 99 handles. After seeing all the 300 EGs from the 50s with cut stocks, drilled receivers and various other sins for sale cheap, I thought building a 99 in 270 Sav. would be interesting. As a reloader, this would add another unigue aspect to that hobby. I suppose I could take up golf but that would be like throwing money down a rat hole.

Lee

Ha ha, me too. None of the projects I alluded to were cost effective by any means, but some of them were sure "fun" effective! I would say, by all means make over a "rat" into a .270! I would be first in line to hear how it works out!

Yeah... I made two (2) mistakes for sure!!! I should have bought that 99 from Ken Waters.

And my 2nd mistake was failing to encourage Polecat to build that .270 Savage and keep us informed as to his progress!!!


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

I endorse taking things off road and into the weeds occasionly. Boltman and I seem to have made a habit of it. This threads no different, there is a lot knowledge here just waiting for a little encouragement to jump out.

Johno

It seems to me that something that's been overlooked here is that the .270 Titus is a great way to bring a shot out 250-3000 back to life. Bore the barrel for the larger bullet and there you have an excellent fix. No muss, no fuss, just another hard hitting Savage wildcat caliber. With bullet weights of 120-150 I'll bet it would surprise many here with its ballistics. Certainly a good cartridge for deer.