I can't find any reference to them being produced after '63.

I've heard about one on sale near me for a reasonable price. If it doesn't have a push-feed bolt should I jump on it, unless it looks like it's been in a barn for years?

Hell. Yes.

Pre-'64 Winchester 70s in 300 Savage are among the 5 least common. If it has any condition, you should buy it if the price is reasonable. Heck, maybe you should buy it even if the price is a little unreasonable.

Well, Hell. Guess I'm gonna go take a look at lunch...

Yes, I'd jump all over it if it's a pre-64 M70, assuming I had the money.

FWIW Remington like the 721 were fairly common in .300 Savage. There was also a run of "700 Classic" limited editions, one year.

You can start with the S/N. The pre-64 Model 70s ended with S/N 581,471.

If so, and reasonable, you should either buy it or PM me!

donsm70

Thirty mile round trip later and my dreams are shattered.

Dumb clerk wrote .300 Savage on the tag for a CRPF 70 .300WM...

Ex neighbor has a pre 64 fwt. CARBINE in 300 Sav.

Pretty sure they ain't growing on trees. I have a chitload of pre 64s and everthing about the gun looked kosher to me when I held it (droolin')

Kiss my money making a$$. It is difficult to find good help these days.

The .300 Savage was made on the Remington 722 action, not 721.......

No one was asking about the Remington versions.

Someone brought it up, not me.

I saw a Savage 99 last year tagged ".300 Win Mag."

Now that's a very rare one. The .300 Savage is the rarest M70 chambering, catalogued only in 1947 with a total of only 362 produced. Additionally, the .300 Savage was never catalogued/offered in the carbine configuration....

Hey,just logged back in and saw your post Poconojack.

I know Pigasso and the gun he's talking about and the darn thing is real. I've gone with the owner's son to several knowledgeable dealers and they just stare at it with greed in their eyes.

Unfortunately documentation is lacking so it's just a very,very neat conversation piece. It's killed a lot of deer and has "character markings" all over it.

Wish it was mine.

Compare cost and ammo selection for .308 Win vs .300 Savage. Except for Savage 1899 the .300 Savage chambering makes no sense to own at all. It is quite obvious that Savage 1899 was the best manual repeater ( a mano) ever designed and produced. The original rotary magazine w/ cartridge counter itself was a marvel of engineering.

I don't know where you live, but in the U.S. the majority of hunter aren't reloaders or high volume shooters, so they buy a box of twenty rounds every year or so. That makes the cost and/or selection/variety of factory ammo of little concern to most of them.

The Savage 1895/1899/99 was a nice rifle, but if it really was "the best", don't you think that it would still be made? As far as manual repeaters that aren't bolt actions go, the Marlin 1893/36/336, Remington 760/7600, and Winchester 1894/94 have been pretty successful and remain in production.

yep, shoulda wrote 722, not 721

The .300 is one of those rounds that are worth pursuing because it comes in some nice rifles, but otherwise is out-classed by the competition.

The 99s were simply too expensive to make, and there are literally millions of used ones out there to fill the demand that exists. Brownings chambered for various good cartridges and .308 Marlins are also available for levergun fans who want more power than the .30/30 packs.

Personally, if I were looking for a non-bolt woods gun, I'd probably pick up a decent used Remmy Model Six or 7600, with the straight-comb stock if possible. See 'em pretty often for $350-$475.

Pappy, any Remington six you find for under $500 give me a shout, Ill buy everyone of em

No Sixes locally, but a lot of 7600s. The 4-lug bolt and the supposedly quieter pump handle makes them better in my opinion.

Love that cartridge head inletted in the reciever. Classy touch.

For deer hunting, I just don't believe you could tell the difference between the 300 Sav and the 308 in the real world of hunting just like the 243 and 6mm Rem.

I currently have a couple dozen rifles chambered in 300 Savage, but shoot none of them regularly.

I currently have a quite a few Savage 1899/99 rifles, but shoot none of them regularly.

I currently have five Remington 760/7600 rifles in 6.5x55, 270x2, and 30-06x2. In terms of stock ergs, I like the monte-carlo style 760 BDL stocks with the basket-weave style "checkering" and the raised cheek-piece that were cataloged from 1966 thru 1980.

I'm reminded sitting on my desk in front of me is mainspring for a Savage 1920. It needs to be duplicated, and the rifle taken hunting this year

The Savage 1899/99's are really enjoyable rifles. Early on they were adapted to pointed bullets, and were made of forged steel and walnut. They really weren't luxury items in their day, except for the special order rifles, but were still well made with good barrels. Many of them will shoot as well as modern rifles. I've wound up with four of the 99's in .300, and the one Model 1920, also in .300. The 1920 was way ahead of its time as a handy, lightweight bolt gun.

I sometimes have wondered if Savage's redesign of the M99 in 1960 might have influenced the accounting gurus at Winchester, when they started cutting corners on the M70, four years later.

I think Remington "showed the way" when they abandoned the 30s and started applying the lessons learned during the war to sporting models. Reportedly, the 721, etc were killing the M70 on price, and WW was already losing money on them.

Evrybody likes nice guns but there's got to be enough folks willing to pay for them to keep them on the market. Possibly WW could have kept the original rifle in the line, at a premium, and made the push-feed to compete on the low end, but they went with the whole enchilada.

....and it's been downhill for them ever since... Back to the subject at hand: Too bad the clerk screwed up. That guy/girl needs to be horse whipped.. However, a 300 savage is kind of lost on a big heavy pre 64 model 70. That cartridge would be sweet in a Kimber Montana though or even a fwt model 70. I had a Remington 722 300 savage. Rifle wasn't bad if you could get past the tacky extractor that is a bi otch to find if they go bad (don't ask how I know this), and the stamped steel parts . I've picked up and examined a couple old aluminum butt plate 760's that were very cool though and regretted not buying one at a local gunshow that was reasonably priced at $350.00...

When I was in grad school during the mid-1980's, I made pocket money by cutting down and rechambering Remington 722s. There are probably 60 Remington 722s with 20" barrels floating around. The 222's were rechambered to 223 and 22-250. The 300's were rechambered to 308 and 30-284. The 257 Roberts were left alone or rechambered to 257AI and 25-284.

I can remember in the early fifties when M70s in .35 Rem. and .300 Sav. were being sold at closeout prices in the back of sporting magazines. If only my Dad would have listened to me.

My Father took a leave of absence from his job when he heard that Winchester was going to redesign the Model 70 and spent the better part of two months traveling all over the Northeast buying NIB and used Model 70s if they were in an uncommon configuration or caliber. I remember that 1963 was the year that our dining room was stacked with gun boxes and we had Thanksgiving and Christmas dinner in the kitchen, much to the annoyance of my Mother.

His buying spree worked out well for me, as shortly after my Father passed away, I traded a large stack of those rifles for a section of irrigated farm ground.

I hope it's the ergos and not the looks; those puppies had some serious oogly goin' on!

The stepped receiver was kinda cool though.

Someday I'm going to have to pick up a 6 or 7600, just because. Maybe something rubbed off on me while I was hunting in PA for all those years. I think pumps got a bad rap about reliability because so many guys put them away dirty.

I've never heard about Remington pump guns being unreliable, dirty or otherwise.

I think of the basket-weave "checkering" as being "unique" more than "oogly" and I do like the stepped receivers.