I have just been gifted my Great Grandfathers 1907 vintage Savage 1899 in .303 Savage. Why did they call it .303 when its a .308 cal???

Les ??? Where are ya, Les?!?

'Splain the .303 to this man, Les...

(Les is the Forum's ".303 Dude", don't cha know?)

Following is a quote from Wikipedia:
Savage Arms created the .303 Savage as part of an unsuccessful attempt at creating a cartridge for the military. Although the cartridge was never popular with the military, it did become a popular round for civilian hunters. Being a pointed-tip rimmed cartridge, it worked well in the Model 99 rifles that Savage produced, but not as successfully in other rifles. However, the pointed-tip bullets gave it a ballistic advantage over other cartridges such as the .30-30. [1]

Cannot tell you why it is .303 but I can attest to how well it works!

That's a beautiful old rifle.

Ken Waters in his Pet Loads article in November 1967 reported that "our No. 22 Ideal Handbook contains a statement that the original size of the .303 Savage barrel was .303 taking .311 bullets". I don't have any idea if the No 22 Ideal Handbook is correct or not, apparently neither did Waters. It seems more likely to me that Mr. Savage, always the marketer, wanted to give the impression his .30 cal was better, bigger, stronger. Just a guess.

Thanks Hawkeye!

Not bad for a 106 year old rifle.

303 Savage was the 1st production Cartridge for the Savage rifles, damn fine cartridge, ballistically the equivalent of the 30-30, but predates it by about 4 months. Shoots a .308 bullets, if the bore is .311, it is due to being shot that much, early 303 Rounds had a .311 bullet, but the bore was .308. I assume that they frigured the increased pressure would give better ballistics, but later cartridges, from the later 30's on were pretty much .308 bullets. It does handle heavier 180 and 190 grain bullets better than the 30-30, has a lot to do with case design. The main body on the 303 is larger than the 30-30, therefore the bullet doesn't sit so far into the powder. There is a sticky on here about how to make your brass form 307 Winchester if you don't mind work, or you can just get some Norma or Bertram's brass and call it good. 100 Pieces should last a lifetime. I honestly don't have a clue why they called it the 303, 308 Savage would have made more sense at the time to me. Les

Still don't understand the folks here that look down their nose at an Original Savage cartridge and prefer the Winchester stuff. Heresy I tell ya!

For some reason I was under the impression that the .303 was only available loaded with blunt nose bullets, making it no better than .30-30. Not true?

It was originally sold with round nosed bullets, but the hunting bullets were typically 190gr versus 170gr for the 30-30. There were target rounds and varmint rounds also sold, not sure if they were all round nosed or not.

I think the original factory rounds were hotter than the 30-30's were, but in the end it's totally subjective as to whether one cartridge is better than another. The 303 Savage had a huge following at the turn of the century due to their belief it was better.

I happen to think .30-30 is an excellent Eastern deer round, so being just a little better can't be bad.

Here is the visual comparison. Left to right 30-30 Win, 303 Sav, 308 Win, 303 British

Blunt nosed or round nosed i am sure i will get more velocity than any of my .30-.30's as i will be pushing a 170 grain pill out of a 26" octagon barrel.

Actually the case capacity between the two is about.05 grains or smaller, depending on the brand of cartridge.

Les

can you give a reference for the 303 Savage pre dating the 30 Winchester? I'd like it for my files. Thanks.

Got some cast lead bullets with copper gas checks sent up from Glenhills, WI. Looking forward to loading them up for the oldest Savages.

I found the listing on some obscure page, also, if you read the development of the 1895, it was released before Winchester brought out the 1894 in 3030. Les

Remember Savage started working on this cartridge in 1893

I don't have a Savage in 30-30 to compare velocities but, I get 1950 fps out of a Hornady 170 grain flat point over 31.5 grains of IMR 4320 in the 303 B that I hunt with. It has a 26" barrel. Looking at the load data for a 30-30, I don't think I can, nor do I want to, match the velocity of those modern loads in modern guns. I try to keep in mind that for me, shooting and hunting with a 303 Savage is not an exercise in achieving maximum velocity but instead is a chance to participate in a little bit of the nostalgia and history of the past. That's about as sentimental as I get.

If you look at the older reloading manuals you will find that the high end of a .30-30 load is around the starting point of the .303 Savage. The .303 delivers a little more oompf than the .30-30 in factory loaded cartridges.

The appeal of the .303 to me has always been accuracy. I have never seen a .30-30 that would shoot moa - have seen a lot of .303s that would. A little more accuracy will put meat in the pot too.

Maybe I have been lucky, but every .30/30 I've owned was a MOA gun, usually with cast bullets, too. Had a 54 Winchester w/Unertl 12x that would plop my standard .30/30 hunting load (190gr. cast lead flat nose at 2000fps- sounds like a .303 load to me)into 5/8inch all day long. In my 99A that load groups into a solid inch (Stith/Weaver sighting). My old man's .303's (2 beautiful 1899A's and a minty B) could be counted on for 1 1/2-2" @100M, tang sights. Just couldn't make them shoot any better. My head was in a different place back then (18yrs. ago)- some would say up my **s- so I sold them off. **s-kicking line starts at the rear!

The 303 is steeped in Savage lore ..... you have to like it .

I prefer the 30-30 WCF purely on the availability of components / ammo ...... It's just not as romantic as the 303 .


Both the 303 Savage and 30-30 WCF were one of the first sporting cartridges to be offered with the " new " smokeless powder ... it was a advertisement battle from the drop of the hat .

Savage started offering the 30-30 chambering as an option in 1900 ......

Winchester never offered the 303 as an option ......


Opinion :

How did this help / not help Savage ? ( offering the 30-30 alternative )

Was this Savage's humble admittance to Winchester that the 30-30 was winning the popularity contest ? ... I mean , " imitation is the ultimate form of flattery " .... right ?


Or do you think this actually helped Savage gain popularity by offering the 30-30 option in the new 1899 / 99's .... you can like a cartridge but not the original platform it was unveiled in ( Win. 1894 / 94 ) ....right ?

I have alway thought that the .303 was named thus in competition with the 30-30. However, .30WCF was the designation for years, so I am most likely (again) wrong. Probably the 30-30 became popular because of the inexpensive and handy model 94's. Who knows the prices of each in their day? Seems Winchester went to 3 or 4 million when Savage was still under 1, so availability is part of it. Winchester couldn't use a pointed bullet loading, so couldn't offer the .303. I still want one.

Calhoun: many thanks for your article above, the big print makes it easy to read! I finally got the marble sight off my octogon 99 .303 after i soaked it in kroil. i took the sight off after i lined up the lyman tang sight. I replaced the marbles with a lyman folding sight. I got the bolt catch (safety spring) ordered from gpc and will order lee dies soon. Hopefully graft and sons will have .303 sav brass available soon. The article gets me all inspired to reload and shoot it. Kind of afraid to take the gun hunting, however but since it is a grey rat with not much original finish - i might! Thanks again, sir!

Yes, thanks for the .303 article, Calhoun. I was almost ready to bite on a .303 yesterday at the Mason MI Gun Show, but passed on it. It was a well-worn 1921 takedown with no blue left on the receiver and a small tang crack, but the bore was great and it hadn't been messed with. It was priced at $375 including a box and a half of ammo. I'm saving my cash for another project or I might have brought it home.

Rory, just wondering, where did you get that article, tis a good one. Les

From the 1923 edition of Townsend Whelen's "The American Rifle". Google Books is wonderful for books over 75 years old..

http://books.google.com/books?id=7vBCAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22The+American+Rifle%22