Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Savage 40/45 Super Sporter

Local shop has a Savage Super Sporter in pretty decent shape. Not a museum piece, the rear sight is gone and a nearly new looking Weaver base is screwed on, but it looks like it spent most of the last 80 years sitting on the really squished recoil pad.

The stock is checkered, so it looks like a 45. But there was a dovetail rear sight instead of (or maybe in addition to) a receiver sight, so it looks like a 40. So, is it a 40 or a 45?

The safety and receiver look a whole lot like the ones on a Model 23. Are these about the same to shoot, as far as trigger and accuracy?

The wood and the blue look real good. I'm thinking it might make a good .30-06 shooter.

Some people say the action is weak for a .30-06, and it does have rear-locking lugs. Any experience/reading about that issue?

The 45 had both an open sight and a receiver sight. The ones I've seen had a folding Marbles open sight.

All I've heard about the 30-06 being too stout for the Model 40 and 45 is based on hearsay, but I have heard from several folks that the action doesn't hold up well in this chambering.

The 45 is a cool gun in my opinion, and both underpriced and underappreciated.

Rod

I too am a fan. Be sure the safety holds. Trigger does double duty as the bolt stop a can get hammered with use. I too think they are an underappreciated piece of Savage history.

I have a model 45 SS in 300 Savage. It is a nice shooting cool gun. I really like it.

I've heard that it was common for the 30-06 caliber to develop headspace issues in this model.

Maybe others can with more knowledge can elaborate?

There is a period magazine article critiquing the model 45 in 30 06 ( I'm looking for it). While they complained that the action was based on the model 23 sporter rather than the Beautiful Model 20 (Oh they are beautiful), it was noted that the mass of steel within the tubular receiver and rear locking bolt lugs was greater than the Model 20 and even the Springfield receiver. The action is actually very strong and stronger than most. I don't understand the principal but somehow the length of bolt throw is less for the rear locking action as compared to a front locking action. They then began to throw proof pills through the rifle and after doing so there was no increase in head space. They aren't as graceful as the M 20 and I think the clip could be improved upon but the rifle holds a very important niche in Savage history. BTW
I have a NOS Lyman 45 rear receiver sight in the box for this rifle if anybody would like to buy it. (<:

Thank you, gentlemen. Maybe I should go back with headspace gauges and look at it again. After that, I may be in need of a receiver sight.

If it looks lightly used and the price is right go for it. It is typical Utica quality (wood, steel)It really is a good gun to shoot and hunt with. I'll be hunting with mine Oct 26 not 30 miles from the old plant where it was made. The stock should have a notch where the sight was. Also the rear sight should fold down. I still have the sight packed away from a move. I'll try and find it. Don't think you'll ever find another one of those sights in the box. Good Luck.

http://pics.reedssports.com/gb/sav192221.JPG
I think Savage got it right the first time they made this action.
I'm suprised they didn't call it a Super Sporter

I gave my .300 Savage Super Sporter to my BIL 20 years ago and it remains his favorite deer rifle. IMO an ugly gun that feels/handles surprisingly well. Of course Savage had a knack for making homely guns that worked well.

I gave my brother a 90% grade, Model 45 in .30-06 that he had lusted after for years. That was some 25 years ago and he has never had a single problem with it and shoots groups just over 1" at 100 yards. Now he isn't a high-volume shooter (maybe 40 rounds per year through this gun), but if there were really an issue with action strength it should have showed up by now.

I believe the "rumors" about the Model 40/45 being weak are mostly from those who don't have any real knowledge of rifle design.

Sure it has rear locking lugs, but so did the Remington Model 788 which set many records in benchrest competition where the volume of fire was hundreds or thousands of rounds per year.

If you look at the tubular receiver of the Model 40/45, you will find one of the heaviest receivers of this type ever made. In addition (like the 788) the openings machined into the receiver are very small (no larger than needed for ejection and magazine) which makes the action very stiff. This is the reason than many of these rifles give much better accuracy than one would expect from a "cheap" rifle.

The bolt it's self on the 40/45 is as large or larger than any other centerfire bolt action. It is the diameter of the bolt, not the length to the locking lugs that determines strength.

The Model 45 is a piece of firearms history that has been overlooked by collectors so far. That might not always be true as less than 6000 were produced.

It is often criticized when compared to rifles by Winchester and Remington, but you have to remember the Model 45 was introduced in 1928. Winchester was making the Model 54 (hardly a beauty queen) and the Model 70 was still years away. Remington had the strong, but ugly Model 30.

The real key was that both the Remington and Winchester rifles cost more than $50 while the Model 40 was available for less than $40.....quite a difference in 1928. Savage with the Model 40/45 set a marketing strategy that has continued to this day....make a good (if not as pretty) rifle for a bargain price.

Well founded points, and believe me I'm not knocking the 40/45 (although admittedly possibly damning it with faint praise). But, I defy anybody to lay a 40/45 next to a Winchester M54 and tell me the Savage is a better rifle in terms of aesthetics and functionality. Sure, the 40/45 can shoot well, and its homely stock does feel good in the hands but that's where it ends, IMO. It just doesn't cut the mustard for what me, myself, and I look for in terms of a rifle.

I daresay that that the shooting public of 75-80 years ago felt much the same way as the Savage went the way of the wind and the Winchester bolt guns continued on. In 1928 the Depression hadn't hit yet and that $10 difference wouldn't have mattered to a guy who could afford that kind of money for a new rifle. Remember too that back then Winchester had a reputation for superior quality, and Savage (with the exception of the 99) not so much. Add to that the standards by which American males of a certain age were using to judge bolt guns at the time- Springfields, Krags, Mausers- and you have another strike against the Savage, and one for the Winchester. Perhaps a shadow of that drives my subconscious today.

Even though Savage was making its mark on the world with the 99, it wouldn't have eschewed the 40/45 bolt gun if the public were beating down the dealer's doors to get them.

Not meant to ruffle feathers, but the 1920 (being the first domestic Mauser action produced) didn't seem to fare to well either. I think there are a lot of factors that play into the success or failure of a product and with the 99 being the obvious performer maybe Savage just didn't push that hard selling bolt guns.

I know this is an old thread, and fingers crossed on getting a response. Any fear in using modern ammo in this old rifle? I picked up a nice, unaltered, (but was used by the previous owner(s), has a few scars, and finish wear) 45 in 30-06. Loaded it up some hornady custom lites, and was shooting 2" groups @ 100 yards right out of the gate. Just wondering if anyone shoots "regular strength" factory ammo out of these. If so, what brand and grain, etc. Thanks in advance for any advice!

Some of those guns had some reported headspace issues in 30-06. If you aren't seeing any signs of trouble I wouldn't hesitate to run "regular strength" factory ammo in them. I guess brand and grain depends on your hunting situation and what you gun likes.

This looks like good advise to me.

Yeah, good advice. I would certainly stay away from hot rodded 06 ammo. If you compare the 40/45 action to the 23 series you will see its basically an enlarged version, a 23 on steroids if you will. If you stick to something that is in the specs of military ball ammo of the period, say around 2700-fps, you would probably be working within the design specs of the gun. Check for head space issues as with used guns you never know what previous owners might have launched out the barrel in the past, and these guns have been around for a long time. Albeit maybe not the most styling package out there, I like the Super Sporter 40/45 series and think they make a handy and respectable little rig for a center fire bolt gun. I especially like the stocks with the schnable fore arm tip but I'm a sucker for schnables.

PS - I don't know what you have for sights but both Lyman and Redfield made basic hunter peep sights for these guns that fit up to the holes on the left side of the receiver. One of these sights might help shrink up your group a bit and add a little class.

Here's an idea. There are current factory loads advertised as "Garand safe." That is, within design/safety standards developed for the M1 80+ years ago. Ie: the 2700 fps standard M2 Ball of the era which was the same era of the 40/45 Sporters. Bet it would be a safer bet for you than the regular hot factory loads in general.

Interesting suggestion. A few years ago I launched some Greek HXP out of my 45 and it seemed like a perfect match. Not too hot for an 06 and fairly pleasant to shoot in that rifle.

Thanks for the advice, I appreciate it. Just happened to find some boxes of vintage remington korelocked for sale on the interwebs that looks to be in really good shape for it's age. Very detailed pictures. The box actually lists the firearms it is specifically made for, and the Savage 40/45 is right there on the box. May just pick up a couple if for no other reason than to display it with the rifle!

You are going to have to post a picture of that!