Well.. a possible 1899 saddle ring carbine with barrel band showed up on facebook

I'm suspicious but will defer to more seasoned 99 guys. Was a serial number provided for the receiver?

If you have never seen one before, how would you know if you are looking at one?

Out of my league.....

A serial number is one way...

Originally Posted by 99guy

If you have never seen one before, how would you know if you are looking at one?

Out of my league.....

Meant to mean that I have never seen one so I don't know if I am looking at one...

Would be pretty awesome if it was legit.

Years back on this forum BillR mentioned he'd never seen that very rifle in his travels: a barrel band, saddle ring 1899 as cataloged in the 1901, IIRC, by Savage.

The breech bolt denotes the rifle's serial number of 10.55X is in the right range. And when compared to an 1895 SRC the stock dimensions look right...

Fun stuff Rory! Thanks for posting.

I've never met anybody that's seen a barrel band 1899 saddle ring carbine, not Fug, Rick, Ralph, BillR, nobody..

The 1900-1902? catalogs show an 1895 barrel band carbine in the catalog in place of an 1899. Then through 1905/1906 it shows an 1895 carbine without a barrel band. I don't think a correct 1899 carbine is shown until 1907.

But all of the early 1899 saddle ring carbines anybody have seen are correct non-barrel band 1899 carbines. So this, as far as I know, is a first if it's correct.

That forearm and band does look correct for an 1895 carbine.

Agree with Rory, the forend and barrel band really look off. Would Savage cover up the barrel stamps with the band? Winchester never did and something looking like that would have never left the factory.

That looks like a 1930's barrel band. The buttstock cheeks have been heavily sanded and the stock refinished, which in and of itself isn't anything, but adds to the possibility of a different forearm being fashioned at some point. That and the lettering under the band, I would, in my model specific ignorance, not bet on it being legit.

Originally Posted by Fireball2

That looks like a 1930's barrel band. The buttstock cheeks have been heavily sanded and the stock refinished, which in and of itself isn't anything, but adds to the possibility of a different forearm being fashioned at some point. That and the lettering under the band, I would, in my model specific ignorance, not bet on it being legit.

The lettering does seem odd to be under the band. But would Savage have stressed about that for a style that was only 1 or 5 or 20 rifles?

I think the forearm band is right, besides the screwhead being on the wrong side. Here's the 1899 on top, and two 1895's under it. My 1931 99H doesn't have the indentation at the top of the band like all of these do.

[Linked Image from live.staticflickr.com]

[Linked Image from live.staticflickr.com]

The condition of the bluing - would indicate very little usage

while

The condition of the butt plate and the dent the saddle ring has made in the wood - would seem to indicate more usage

Just looks too nice to me to be original for being 121 years old.

I join the majority here, no specific info re this early model. Simply joining illustration, mine perhaps last iteration of the "barrel band" in Savage producion. Photos below of 1938 production Model "H" barrel band carbine. Sidebar: .250 chambering, Weaver scope & Stith (no drill) mount.
Reference to the above Winchester situation of intentionally obscuring markings. Very unlikely but 'possible' where manufacture of only few as found in some "parts cleanup" produced rifles. I'm wondering about the circumstance leading to such purported ultra-rare production at all.
If the rifle in question is considered "ultra-rare", also to be conjuring in terms of how difficult to fake. That barrel band might be problematic unless used on later editions. Does the stock have a shoulder to which the band is abutting?
Hoping for 'happy ending here' complete with wisdom attached!
Best & DO Keep Safe!
John

Attached picture Savage 99 Carbine 1938.jpg

Attached picture Savage 99 Carbine 1938.jpg

Originally Posted by iskra

Reference to the above Winchester situation of intentionally obscuring markings. Very unlikely but 'possible' where manufacture of only few as found in some "parts cleanup" produced rifles. I'm wondering about the circumstance leading to such purported ultra-rare production at all.
If the rifle in question is considered "ultra-rare", also to be conjuring in terms of how difficult to fake. That barrel band might be problematic unless used on later editions. Does the stock have a shoulder to which the band is abutting?
Hoping for 'happy ending here' complete with wisdom attached!
Best & DO Keep Safe!
John

There's only two reasons for Savage to have produced 1899 carbines with barrel bands like the 1895, in my mind.
1) Savage had extra carbine forearms and bands left over from the 1895 production and decided to use them up. No reason not to, the catalog showed 1899 carbines with barrel bands.
2) Savage made a few very early 1899 carbines with barrel bands as new parts, and we've just never seen any before this one. They then decided to drop the barrel band for some reason and discontinued them quickly.

Rick once suggested that the reason you see so few early 1899 carbines is that they had some 1895 carbines left over that they sold in 1899 and after. We've seen a couple 1895 carbines letter as having shipped late and they had 1899 bolts, I believe.

Could this rifle have been changed decades later? Technically.. If somebody could find a barrel band that looked right and fit (or could make one)? Sure.. be pretty easy to do that while you were refinishing the stock. No specific reason to think that happened. Might even have been an attempt to restore it - if they saw a 1900 catalog or even Murray's, they'd have thought that an early 1899 carbine should have a barrel band.

As a sample of one, there's so many things you have to wonder about.

At the moment, I think it's in the original configuration. The rear sight slot is positioned right for a carbine, the muzzle is crowned like a carbine.. Removing the forearm might answer the questions by seeing if the serial number is on the forearm and bottom of the barrel, if the barrel is cut for a screw attachment on the forearm, etc.

1. My half octagon serial #10.449 has an 1895 forearm. Savage didn't throw away leftover parts. We've documented this many times.
2. My 99H 300 Sav has a 22" barrel with the barrel band partially obscuring the barrel address. A number of others have been observed with the barrel address partially obscured including some 99H's in other calibers. In the case of the 99H 300 it was only produced in 1940/41 when most models were being discontinued. Savage may have been using up leftover 99T barrels.
3. Kiwi and I each have leftover 1895 carbines that left the factory mid-1899. Both have had the barrels shortened to 20" and have an 1899 bolt. My carbine letters as having left the factory in June 1899. It was shipped to Canada. There has been some talk on the forum that these leftovers were exported.
4. The wood condition not matching the condition of the bluing makes the rifle suspect and the fact that no one has ever seen another 1899 carbine in this condition also makes it suspect. Serial numbers on the forearm, buttstock and buttplate will tell the story.

Did Savage actually place the barrel band over the lettering on the barrel? Just asking because I don't know. It just surprises me, but I guess anything is possible!

Originally Posted by tal35

Did Savage actually place the barrel band over the lettering on the barrel? Just asking because I don't know. It just surprises me, but I guess anything is possible!

My 1931 99H does not have the band over the barrel address. But it's a 303, so not an unusual configuration like David's 300, or this 1899F.

Not sure the screw head is on the wrong side what you see is to large to be the screw it looks like the head with

no slot also the lettering on the 1895 is not covered up with the band

Good catch. Thanks.

Originally Posted by wyo1895

1. My half octagon serial #10.449 has an 1895 forearm. Savage didn't throw away leftover parts. We've documented this many times.

David, do you have a picture of the barrel address stamp on 10.449 you can post?

My other two 99H's don't have the barrel band covering the barrel address. One is a 303 and the other a 30-30

The vertical dimension 0f the 1895 band and forearm appear much thinner than the H-BB

Very cool, even if it's been faked somehow. Count me as intrigued either way

My 303H has part of the address covered by the band but its much later. I think it looks legit. Like said before, serial numbers would confirm more.

"Does the stock have a shoulder to which the band is abutting?" No. Not with the 1895 SRC forearm.

"... if the barrel is cut for a screw attachment on the forearm, etc." Good question. It would have a dovetail on the bottom of the barrel for the SRC forearm screw but I don't know if it is in the same location as on an 1899 rifle. Doug, David that is a question for you with 1895 SRC's.

"looks like the head with no slot ..." There is no photo of the other side. I wonder if it is a nail?

"...also the lettering on the 1895 is not covered up with the band." I assume this means an 1895 SRC. That is a question I was going to ask...thanks.

"Did Savage actually place the barrel band over the lettering on the barrel? Yes. That was some data I collected because I thought it was strange but as it turns out it is fairly common. It's like when ever they ran a batch of H barrels the guy would sometimes forget to make the location adjustment.

10.449 barrel address is pictured on page 42 of my book