800,000 serial range - 24hourcampfire

What is the reason for the low production of 99's in this range ..1952-1953 Is it because of savage moving from Chicopee Mass to Westfield Mass ?

Nope, it happened years after Savage moved manufacturing to Chicopee Falls, and 7 years before they moved to Westfield.

Personally, I think they stuck a new guy on the serial number stamping machine a few times and he just flat screwed up.

If they hadn't changed the receiver and parts for the 243/308/358 cartridges, I'm sure they'd have just rolled through the end of the 700,000's and moved onto the 800,000's. I think they skipped to 900,000 so there wouldn't be hundred of rifles out there that people would think could handle the 243/308/358 or would accept the new parts. Though it does make you wonder if they ever mis-stamped any earlier EG's or R's as 900,000..

By eliminating the 800,000 range , they sure got to the 1 millionth faster .

I have an EG in the 800k range (300 Savage) .

Wasn't just the 800k.

Skip 5000 SN's in the 1895's
Skip 10,000 SN's at 55.000
Skip 5,000+ SN's at 84.xxx
Skip 53,000 SN's at 447,xxx
Skip 17,000 SN's at end of 700k
Skip 99,500 SN's in 800k
Skip 30,000 SN's in 900k

Their 1,000,000th rifle should have been serial number 780,000.

Interesting ..........

Originally Posted by Calhoun

Wasn't just the 800k.

Skip 5000 SN's in the 1895's
Skip 10,000 SN's at 55.000
Skip 5,000+ SN's at 84.xxx
Skip 53,000 SN's at 447,xxx
Skip 17,000 SN's at end of 700k
Skip 99,500 SN's in 800k
Skip 30,000 SN's in 900k

Their 1,000,000th rifle should have been serial number 780,000.

I always wondered what the number was, that's good information. Thanks for posting that Calhoun.

Does anyone know if the post mills added enough to bring total production to one million?

Originally Posted by wyo1895

Does anyone know if the post mills added enough to bring total production to one million?

It must be in your book...............

Originally Posted by wyo1895

Does anyone know if the post mills added enough to bring total production to one million?

1960-1968 took them over 900,000 with about 180,000 sold. I'm positive they hit 1,000,000 actually produced by the end of the 70's, possibly by the mid-70's - the last few years of the 60's they were selling over 20,000 a year.

And I don't see any way in which there were 2 million produced.

I'd guess.... 1.15 million for a final count? Maybe a bit less, maybe a bit more. Depends on how the sales kept up through the 70's and first couple years of the 80's.

Thanks for the info Rory.

My math is off today.. by the end of 1968 they hit 960,000'ish (780,000 premils and 185,000'ish numbered rifles in the 60's) - so they probably hit 1,000,000 around 1971. Still guessing in the range of 1.15 million to 1.25 million total. Be nice to see the 1970's sales records.

Great information .

Murray states that the 800K range rifles are " extremely rare " .

Would that equate to those in said series to be of greater value ?

Are the manufacturing years 1952-1953 correct ?

I've seen 800K series rifles go for a premium.. but to all appearances, they are exactly the same as non-800K rifles. And 1953/1954 is the date range for most of them.

Here's the info on them from Callahan.

Originally Posted by Calhoun

From JTC long ago, as reposted by Lightfoot long ago, and now reposted by me.

Quote

Mike and anyone interested. Here is a summary of the 800,000 S/N block. It seems apparent that the company set this block aside for some unknown reason as the dates are much earlier than lower serial numbers shipped a couple of years later. Second there are way less than 100K guns in this block. The first posted s/n is 834,000 and is followed by blank records up to 834,777. A blank record is where the numbers are posted and have no entry against them and of course no product either. The first entry is at S/N 834,778 and is dated 11/6/53. The following entries are mixed up to s/n 834899 and are dated 10 & 11 of 1953 with a sprinkle of some 1955 and 56 dates. 834900 to 834909 are blank. 834910 to 834994 have entries dated 10-1953 with some in 1954. 834995 to 835025 are blank. 835026 to 835262 are mixed entries with 10 & 11 1953 dates. 835263 to 835412 are blank. 835413 to 835451
Show entries for 8/9/10/11 of 1953. 835452 to 835520 are blank. 835521 to 835539 show entries for 10/1954 and 7/1954. 835540 to 836051 are blank. If I did my subtraction right this makes for 502 Model 99’s in this S/N block. The next entry is at 900000, which of course is where the new longer and open receivers to accommodate the .243, .308 and .358 Winchester rounds started. I hope this sheds some light, but not necessarily some answers, on this controversial series of numbers. Jack

Who's Callahan ?

John T. Callahan was an ex-Savage employee who became the Savage historian for a couple of decades. So if you got a factory letter, he'd be the one researching it and typing it up. It started with Roe Clark way back in... the 70's? Then he retired and turned it over to JTC. JTC retired and Savage took over the letters, and now they've shipped the ledgers/etc to Cody.

Originally Posted by bulkie_roll

Great information .

Murray states that the 800K range rifles are " extremely rare " .

Would that equate to those in said series to be of greater value ?

Are the manufacturing years 1952-1953 correct ?

So, are they worth more? Only if you can find someone foolish enough to pay more just for a serial number.

Oh, did I mention that mine will be delivered to my FFL's on Monday?

Rick,How many do forum members have now? I think you have info on my 2,one in each caliber. Don

Seems to me... Most likely just "inventory misplaced"! Right? Just a slow 'write off' over maybe 160 years! Such, auditors, regulators, stockholders... perhaps simply burying the 'stats', never to be noticed! Now if Marlin under Remington: "Warranty Return for Repairs", excuse surely to work just fine! Not even a 'blip' on Bankruptcy Court radar!
Right...? Right!
Anonymous!

Originally Posted by Loggah

Rick,How many do forum members have now? I think you have info on my 2,one in each caliber. Don

I have 9 total in the data. Your two, the one I bought was CMHJohn's and 2 others from members.

Of the 9, 6 are EGs, 5 are 250's and 3 R's all 300's.

"Seems to me... Most likely just "inventory misplaced"! Right?"

No. Receivers were numbered early in the production process. Rifles were coded with a year stamp when completed. These 800,000 rifles were produced 2 yrs before there time.

And only about 535 rifles made in the 800,000 series range, and all in the middle.

I still go with the mis-stamped theory. New employee or something equally silly.

You mean 834xxx vs 634xxx? That would be early `52 (D). I guess they might have set for a year before someone decided that they could be used.

The one BillR has is interesting...D&T'd, not marked top or side, "99R" (light strike) stamped on brl in front of receiver.

I'm not sure it's a one number mis-stamping. I used to just think it was an 8 for a 6.. but as you say, the dates don't look right. It might be a number that was misread off a work order, or special order.. or even intentionally done by a guy in a bad mood.

It could be the numbers are correct (though the number ranges argue against that), and there's something different on them that's not visible. Heat treatment? Slightly different steel?

Originally Posted by Fireball2

Originally Posted by Calhoun

Wasn't just the 800k.

Skip 5000 SN's in the 1895's
Skip 10,000 SN's at 55.000
Skip 5,000+ SN's at 84.xxx
Skip 53,000 SN's at 447,xxx
Skip 17,000 SN's at end of 700k
Skip 99,500 SN's in 800k
Skip 30,000 SN's in 900k

Their 1,000,000th rifle should have been serial number 780,000.

I always wondered what the number was, that's good information. Thanks for posting that Calhoun.

good info Rory