Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Savage Steel

Anyone know about the evolution of savage steel and how they upgraded over the years? When did they switch to Chromoly?

Thanks

Interesting question that I doubt you will get much of an answer to.

I should take some shavings and take them to the one of the labs at work... if only I wouldn't get fired...

You should put out a donation request Drew, I'm sure everyone would chip in for the metallurgy knowledge..., and if you got caught there'd probably be enough keep you in beans and potatoes for a month or more.

we could ship you some wild boar

Has anyone ever contacted Savage to see if anybody there knows of old engineering drawings/spec sheets that may be gathering dust in an attic someplace? I guess the trick would be in getting past the "front desk" and talking to an old geezer in manufacturing engineering who's too stubborn to retire. Heck, an old guy like that might remember conversations on this subject with old geezers when he was a young geezer just starting out. That would be the obvious first step in researching the subject.

I remember my mentor when I was a young tool room supervisor starting out fresh out of college in 1974. He had started with the company in 1933, and was a font of knowledge concerning past techniques, and kept many of us youngsters from trying to re-invent the wheel.

Early catalogs refer to Savage 1895's and 1899's using military grade steel - same as used in US military rifles. So that would be what, the same as used by the Krag-Jorgensen?

My best guess would be 4140. It's very machinable, stable, yet heat treatable.

I dug around a little and I think coming up with a real answer would be difficult. I'm sure JTC would have some history. I don't think 4140 was actually around until after the turn of the century. Although metals very similar did exist. Thos flow lines are from forging.

Found this in an ASTM proceedings book from 1920:

La Metallurgie, March, 1896, quotes from experiments at the Creusot Works of Schneider et Cie in France, which showed that 0.20 to 0.30 per cent of molybdenum in 0.20-per-cent to 3.0-per-cent chromium armor-plate steels rendered them harder and less brittle. This was probably the first instance of the use of the chrome-molybdenum combination for the production of tougher steels.

Seems that by 1920 they had alloys very similar to the 41xx series.

Interesting. Krags were made of low carbon steel and carburized (case hardened). The case hardening on them is tough and deep- a file will glance off the surface. I don't think even the earliest 1899 receivers were like that, were they?

I don't think "...using military grade steel..." ties it down to a model or even a country.

Would the barrel and receivers be made of the same material? (this is something I know little about)

There was a time period when the early receivers had flow(?) marks in them. The receivers took/held the blue different. What caused that? Some of the Winchester were like this, also.

I think the receivers were forged ,and the barrels were rolled giving them a bit different characteristic !!

I don't know LBK, when did 4140 come into being? Military grade steel at the turn of the century was low carbon everywhere. Pre-WWI Mausers were low carbon steel alloys as were the early 1903 Springfields. Things changed in a hurry after WWI, I'm speaking of 1900-ish times. Barrel steel was a different story. The inception of smokeless powders necessitated a change from the low carbon steel employed previously. Ours was called "Ordnance Steel", Winchester brought out their own barrel alloy and called it Nickel Steel. I don't have a clue what Savage was up to.

I wonder if one of these would answer all the questions. If so, it would be fun at savage fest..... http://www.equipcoservices.com/rentals/xrf_rentals/xrf_analyzer_alloy_mode.html I sent a RFQ to see what one would cost for a weekend.

Gary,

I added some information to my original post. They had some pretty exotic mixtures by the turn of the century. Without some serious digging I would think 4140 might not be the answer. As I said, it was just a guess. Between 1900 and 1920???

Hey Gary that sounds like sumpthin don't it? Wowser.

Guys,
I have buddy in the scrap business who has a metal analyzer. I will be seeing him tomorrow night after work. He said he would try it out on the guns. I am taking a 1920 bolt rifle and an early teens 1899 there. I will have him check barrels and receivers separately. Below is what he emailed me.

It is a portable hand held gun that will read without damaging the item and give a breakdown of elements of whatever you have The only issue is if there is a veneer or coating on it, it may give an incorrect result due to the chemistry of the coating. When checking metals that are not clean or potentially coated, we grind the surface to get an accurate reading.

Of course, I won't let him grind on my guns....but I can let you know results later in the week.

Or would you guys prefer two different era 1899/99 rifles. Say teens and late thirties? I can go from 1899 to 1939. I have nothing in the 20's.

That would be very cool!!! I certainly would like to know. If possible, take as wide a range of samples that you can.

This topic comes up every once in a while, and we always get some good educated guesses but never anything concrete. Knowing the alloy content would also provide a clue as to what heat treating steps were taken too (although knowing the hardness too would necessary for that).

Will this do? I don't want to impose too much on my buddy.

1899, 1916, 1939 levers and a 20/26 from 1927.

About as big a range as I can cover. I slowly unloaded all the 40-50's stuff as I found my tastes ran older... in guns, NOT women.

I called my retired metallurgist friend to get his take, and he is clueless as to what was going on in the firearms industry back then. (He can quote chapter and verse on steel alloys used in building submarines though. He developed alloys for the Navy- very "hush hush" work.) He thinks 4140 was a product of the auto industry originally, and he also thought perhaps it came about in Ford's labs when they were designing the Model T.