Home
I have read both Rory’s and David’s books to no avail. I am trying to find out when the change from the small integral base front sight to the larger integral base occurred.
Based on pics I have, I say between 274xxxish (has short) and 277xxx ( has long), so 1925 . These were both 99Gs. .... but 285xxx has a short, so some overlap

On 99Es I see long on 270xxx and a short on 290xxx, so overlap there, too.
Talked with Rick99 a lot on this, and we just couldn't find a "firm" switchover date/serial number. My guess is they made the change but had a lot of loose barrels on the shelves. And both type of barrels were used for a period until finally the short base were used up.

So, yes.. pretty much agree with Keith.


I found a 99G in 300 Sav at 272,2xx with long integral base.
And I found 99G's in 300 Sav around 284,xxx with short integral bases.

I'd say it's mixed from low 27x,xxx up to mid 28x,xxx.
Almost all long from mid 28x,xxx to high 29x,xxx.
Yeah, I’d say that if you were out shopping for a 99 in 1920 you wouldn’t find a raised front base as you see on post WWII rifles. However, if you put your shopping off until 1930 those bases were becoming quit common. I usually put their period of introduction to be immediately prior to 1925.
Thanks Guys. So, it looks as if the larger integral base was used only 2-3 years before the switch to the raised ramp. As with most Savage changes I'm not surprised there's no clean cut-off.
FYI...

There are two versions of the long base barrel.

The short and early long were the same diameter barrel so used the same forearm. Production wise it would not have mattered if they were mixed in the bin.

The later version, which was used for only a short time, was a medium weight barrel and soon replaced with the raised ramp version, at around 299,000. So about three years of variation and using up parts on hand.
FYI...

There are two versions of the long base barrel.

The short and early long were the same diameter barrel so used the same forearm. Production wise it would not have mattered if they were mixed in the bin.

The later version, which was used for only a short time, was a medium weight barrel which required a different forearm, soon replaced with the raised ramp version, at around 299,000. So about three years of variation and using up parts on hand.
This is the first time I’ve read anywhere that there is a medium weight barrel with the large integral base. Good to know. Thanks Rick.
I have been trying to find the right one for my case for some time, thought I had it, but the barrel ending up 24 1/4" long, wouldn't fit !!! confused confused
The integral front sight solved the problem of a lighter barrel where a dovetail could not be cut.
But it sure made barrel manufacture more challenging.
Wonder why it took a decade to come up with the raised ramp?
The integral base was used on a subset of 1899's - the rest had dovetails. The 1899H and 250-3000 were a minority of 1899's sold, so since dovetails were almost surely easier to do than a ramp it made sense to do just those.

The 1899H and 250-3000 were almost more expensive than other models, and part of that probably paid for the integral front sight.

As the 1920's went on, they started selling more 99's with integral front sights than with dovetails. So what was on premium models was becoming standard.. and they switched to ramp sights to standardize almost all barrels.

The 99E stayed $1 more than the 99A until 1927, for example.. which is when the 99E switched to a ramp front sight. Coincidence? Or was the ramp easier/quicker to produce?

Good question. Hadn't thought about barrel configuration and pricing before..
I addressed this on pages 68 and 69 of the collector's guide. Figure 5-14 shows all the sights we're discussing. #5 is the long integral base on the lightweight barrel, serial #278xxx. I didn't say when the base was produced but probably only about 1925/26. #6 is the base on the early medium weight barrel and is very similar. I have a G produced in 1923, serial #246xxx that has the short base.
© 24hourcampfire