Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Savage Model 99- .284 Winchester question's ?

The attached picture is of a .284 DL that I was dumb enough to sell to the 9.3 guy. Not for $200 though...

Would you argue with 200 for the rifle he got, I darn sure wouldn't Les

Hello Violator:
I do not feel a bit bad about paying 200.00 for it. My friend set the price and I handed him the cash. It shoot's as good as it look's and I have no plan's to get rid of this tough to find caliber. It also does not bother me that it is clip fed having both they are both fine rifles this one and the rotary magazine ones. Regards, thegeneral

I wouldn't trust 'em, that wood looks made up

I would say it is aftermarket wood. The wood probably is worth the $200 and the metal is free. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Hello:
I am afraid you are "WRONG" the wood came on the gun as the original owner ordered it that way. Back in the day this was made you had a choice of ordering this wood. I also have seen it on other Savages as well. Thank's for the insult this is why I do not like to post pictures. to those of you that made nice comment's.. Thank's ...<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> thegeneral.

General,

I don't think there were any insults intended, merely comments and learned opinions. As you are fairly new to the "Fire" you may not be used to the informal banter that is commonly encountered here.

Just my opinion...but then again I could be all wrong.

In any case, I think thats nice wood for a 99.

Best regards,

Chris

As stated above, no "...insults intended, merely comments and learned opinions."

At one point Savage operated a production facility and a specialty shop. You could order it "your way". I think the specialty shop modified factory guns and there were some strange ones produced. Your rifle might have been one of those rifles. But with a recoil pad, no grip cap and no checkering there is not much there to indicate Savage production wood. It would be a good idea to try and document it. Should you deside to sell the rifle at some point in time, proof of Savage work will get you a much better price then just a story. In the gun world that is just the way it is.

No expert, just my opinion. Thanks for posting the pictures. I alway enjoy looking at nice wood.

No disrespect to you or the original owner, but I'd want to see a letter from Clark or Callahan stating that the wood on the rifle you have pictured came from Savage before I would believe it.

I didn't see that anybody slighted your rifle, it is a nice looking piece, but the general opinion remains that the wood doesn't look like it was done in Westfield, MA. If we're wrong, we're wrong, and it is just our opinion, so why get your drawers in a bind over nothing?

Jeff

I have learned alot frompeople Like Rick, Jed, Mad Dog, Lightfoot and even Lauren. They are not telling you things because they don't know, so don't get upset if it is not what you want to hear. They tell me I am wrong when I am wrong and I appreciate it when they do, I have a problem with open mouth insert foot. You need to get yourself a Murrays book, read it then read it again. The rifle looks great, noe of us has put it down for that, but there may be a chance that the wood isn't right. The only way to know is to get it lettered. So don't get offended. JMHO, Les

Hello:
To Start I have Both of Douglas P.Murray's book's and he only touches "LIGHTLY" on the clip fed model's and anyone that has really tried to look into these clip fed version's would know that. Like I also said earlier I have owned Several model 99's so this aint my first rodeo with one of there product's.He also point's out that he missed alot of information on several different model's and learn's of these differences all the time so the issue at hand may not be chissled in stone according to him. Other than a basic start date caliber line up and subtle changes it is worthless on newer model's. Now I have a 51 EG model that he does a decent job researching and providing pertinent information about important changes, barrel addresses and proof mark locations.. I am not convinced a letter would even solve the the wood issue as I have a model 220-A single shot shot gun That was bought brand new in 1937. Savage has no notes nor information that would let one think it came with anything but a plain smooth forend or a pistol grip stock.As A matter a fact they refer to this model as a utility grade shot gun but mine has many custom "FACTORY" features. The one I have has a beaver tail forend that is checkerd and a monte Carlo stock that have been on it since the Day my Grandfather bought it for 16.52 cent's back in 1937 and it was ordered and delived by mail through the Montomery Ward Catalog. He forot to check what caliber he wanted so they actually shipped two. One in 12 Gauge which he kept and one in 16 Gauge which he sent back this one I have also has a 36" Full choke barrel.I did meet a guy and I do not recall his name that claim's to be a historian for The Savage arm's corp or the one that bought all there previous record's. I told him of it at a large gun show where we met. He had a large Savage display that sparked my interest and he stated they never made nor shipped one like that when I explained all the different features mine had. At the time I lived 65 Miles from the show and could not run home to retrieve it to show him. I made arrangement's to bring it back the following year for him to see as he said he would return there to the same location. As planned I returned with it the following year and he was able to see the wood I was talking about when I handed him the gun. It also has a ivory looking front bead sight and a grouse scene on both sides of the receiver. He explained he had never seen one like it but heard of them. To me this showed that not all the factory record's may be complete nor show that a new model may have had all these bell's and whistles so to speak since this was a first year production. As far as the wood on my 99 goes I was told it is original and that is good enough for me if you look at and older EG model these are exact and it may be the original owner may have requested this style over the checkerd one instead along with the famous Savage Schnable style fore end it has.. The recoil pad is and add on and for 200.00 who really cares ? As I said earlier in the thread I have no desire to part with it just shoot it and enjoy the unique caliber that it is. I am not a collector just a hunter and one who uses every rifle or revolver that I have. Just my point of view on it. The rifle really is a tight grouping piece and that is one of the reason's I have kept it along with the fact I believe the .284 never got the credit it deserved from the start as it was dwarfed by the 7MM Magnum instead. Douglas Murray has a decent book and I am not aware if he has come out with one since I purchased the third edition dated 1985.If he has maybe he has put forth more effort on the newer model's But like I said he only touches lightly on the clip fed model's as far as deep research goes. as far as getting my drawers in a bind. I feel the original owner should know what he ordered or changed out on this rifle more than someone getting paid to look up information that may not even be available to them. Did savage have a custom shop back then ?I really do not know myself but would be interested in knowing this. I have also read that many of Savage's record's are lost so is it just and educated guess when you receive this letter ? I have seen other gun firm's that were not able to explain changes or differences in a make up of a firearm as well. Just a thought. thegeneral

All in all, Nice rifle, nice deal. since it is a shooter that just makes it sweeter. Les

Well, its your rifle, so if you want to believe that the wood was something special that the factory did, good for you. Without a letter from Clark or Callahan, I wouldn't believe it. There are lots of made up guns out there and lots of people who advertise special features that aren't special or original.

I can't see that there is much more "depth" of research that anyone could do on the 99Cs and come up with pearls of wisdom that aren't obvious. 1 thing is for sure, the only 99s that were cataloged without checkering in the post-1960 era were the 99E, sometimes, and the 99A/99A Brushgun, always.

If you want to feel insulted by anything that I have posted, go ahead and feel insulted. I won't lose any sleep over you or your rifle with the non-cataloged wood.

Jeff

General, I think you're right on the .284 not getting the credit it deserved. I have been shooting the .284 for appx. 20 years and have absolutely no problems with it, it has killed many deer and elk for me. Balistics are better (like for like) than 30.06 and my 99F still has great grouping, enjoy your rifle, I'm curious what the comparison would be the newer 7mm WSM balistics, Vern.

Hello Savage 284:
Right you are Sir.. Too many jump on the "MAGNUM" kick. They see Magnum after a caliber and figure it is better without even looking at the ballistics first. The .284 Is so close to the 7 MM magnum that they are almost one. I also believe Heavy advertisment sell's a caliber and Remington along with other's have done this for year's. Another fine caliber that was washed out so to speak was the .30 Rem. I have this one in and old Remington Model 14 Pump Rifle. It was run off by the famous Winchester offering 30-30 which still prevail's today. It is a known fact that one can hand load a .30 Rem to much greater speed and pressures than the 30-30 can offer.Another interesting thing is all the old Remington model 14's had a case head installed in the side of the receiver. At first I thought it may be to alert the shooter of the caliber he had but later found out it is a gas release port to keep the over pressure of a round from destroying the receiver. I backed the load down a bit after seeing a small amount of white flash out the primer hole when firing.. L.O.L. Regards, thegeneral.

It is a known fact that the 30 Remington can be load at greater pressures than the factory loaded 30-30 and 30 Remington IN SOME RIFLES/ACTIONS, but certainly not in the Remington 14/141, Standard, or Stevens 425. While you could load the 30 Remington to greater pressure in a Remington Model 30 and, maybe in a 8/81, you can load the 30-30 just a heavy in a Remington 788 or Winchester 54. The 25, 30, and 32 Remington weren't, aren't, and never will be as popular as the Winchester offerings because of the limited number of firearms for which they were chambered and the limited distrubution of ammunition. Winchester just got too big a head-start on Remington and the U.S. was a mostly a lever action market when Remington was pushing pump guns and semi-autos.

I think that the 284 got a bad, and unfair, rap from Jack O'C. Being the most influential gun writer of his day, his opinion counted and he wasn't a 284 fan, so the 284 never really got off the ground. Add to that the fact that there were few bolt action rifles available for it, Browning and ???, to go along with the Savage 99s, Winchester 88s, and Winchester 100s.

Jeff

...I recall ol'Cactus Jack had quite some affection for the 284, but he did criticise having to seat the heavier bullets into the case because of the cartridge case neck being so short. He thought it a finelighter bullet weight caliber though, capable of taking game as large as Elk with a well placed shot as cleanly as his beloved 270 Winchester.I have a clear recollection of this since it prompted me to buy a Savage 99F with rotary magazine in .284, which I still have.

Wow - just about 7 years from the last post and the one before it

The big advantage the .284 gave the shooter/hand-loader was that it literally DUPLICATED the longer-bolt-throw .280 Remington cartridge's ballistics in the "shorter, fatter" .284 cartridge which could be chambered in shorter-action rifles like the Model99 Savage rifle.

This gave the shorter action rifle owner/user the same ballistic capabilities as the longer action rifle owner/user had... the very premise which spawned the popularity of the so-called "short, fat cartridges" like the .308 Winchester, et.al. and all the short, fat magnum cartridges that came out later.

But the .284 Winchester was NOT the original "short, fat" cartridge, the .300 Savage cartridge, introduced in 1920, did the same thing by duplicating the then-.30/06 ballistics in a shorter cartridge used in a shorter action rifle like the Model 99 Savage.

While it is true that the .300 Savage never got the notoriety that the .308 Winchester and, later, all the other "short, fat" cartridges received when they were introduced, one must realize that in it's day, the .300 Savage was a highly-regarded and oft-used cartridge for all manner of big game hunting short of the big bears... and regularly took very large, non-dangerous game like elk, caribou and moose with boring regularity.

While the .300 Savage cartridge has lost most of it's "glammor", those wise, older hunters "in-the-know" still cling to the almost century old cartridge because they know it to be "THE" perfect white-tail and black bear cartridge in the eastern woods.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

You go Ron! I like the way that you think!