There's been plenty talk about upper end 99s, but not much about those that often get the pass by from 99 collectors. I ask this question because I figure that all 99s will drop any game deader than a door nail and, for the guy with a modest spending account, some of these rifles may provide a reasonable way to get into the game. For me, the least desirable 99 would be a 60s vintage E in.300. Not much to get excited about but still an effective tool.

In general, .303's, .300's, hardwood stocked models like the 60's E's, post-million 99C's (post- million for many). Anything with an added recoil pad/shortened stock, none factory D&T'ed, shorted brl., badly cracked wood, gray rats...

But not all sellers know the answer to your question so pricing might not match the value. It is not only good to know which are good values but which should have lower prices.

Thanks. It looks like this thread can serve an extra purpose in identifying the least valuable 99s to buyers and sellers a like. Thanks again.

I am not much interested in post-mil guns of any type, with the exception of the 99A Saddle Guns.

From a collector standpoint, the 99EG in .300 is probably the least desirable because Savage made so many of them. The reason they made so many of them, of course, is that they were one of the finest hunting rifles of their day, so from a hunter / shooter point of view a .300EG is a gun well worth owning.

Rick mentioned that the .303 is a less desirable chambering, but I don't feel that way at all.

Rod

I don't want to step on anyone's toes but probably the most accurate 99 I own is a 99E 300 Savage manufactured in December 1975. It's not the greatest looking rifle and yes it does have a recoil pad on it, but it is one fine shooting rifle. And the deer don't know if they were shot with a "Collector Grade 99" or a "Least Desirable 99."
Just my 2 cents worth.

A 243 made after 1964 can pound dirt all day long.

Least desirable is one with a tang safety and gold trigger.

hey that would include the DL
to each his own .
Savage doesn't make the 99 anymore I remember when there were lots of 99's around here in the local shops. now you hardly ever see one in a shop. if you ask oh we had one but it didn't stick around very long. even the lowly E will become"collectable" in time

plab

Any with the pressed checkering, I dont care for it at all!

I don't mean to imply that any of these 99s are bad rifles but the ones I am referring to are, so to speak, the ugly ducklings of the hatch. I may not like the 99 in .300 and would walk on to something more tantalizing, but I certainly wouldn't tell a guy (of modest means) that it wasn't a capable hunting weapon. Especially if it was priced right. And any new guy knowing that the 99E is not the type of rifle that Savage aficionados would be beating a path to get to just might empower him to talk a deal. This is just an example.

The post mil 99E and the 1970's C are running neck and neck in the ugly department. I own both and have hunted elk with a pressed checkered E in 308. I didn't get any elk with probably because I didn't see one on that hunt. There isn't any 99 that isn't capable of killing what the cartridge was intended for an a proper range for the cartridge/game combination. In other words I wouldn't try to shoot an elk with a 22 H-P at 300 yards but I intend to try to take an antelope with the 22 at 100 yards or so.
Everything depends on what you want the rifle for and how much you can afford.

Least desirable is the ones I can't afford.

The 303 Savage is an old blooper that's obsolete.

I like the tang safety.

One with a side scope mount is not what I want.

Lyman's #44 manual says the bores run oversize in the .303 and .308" bullets are not suggested.

Lost my post... Anyway, there are exceptions




I think a 99 should have the Savage "cheeks" on the buttstock. H's and E's w/o them are plain.

Right, it's all about what you want it to do and what you can afford. Regarding the latter I was hoping the price of fugly 99s might reflect their desirabilty, you know kind of like the 1964 Winchester 70 vs the vaunted pre-64s we were talking about in another thread. A buddy of mine has a pristine 1964 Model 70 and the barrel channel is so wide you could throw a cat in it. It is so fugly that a local gunsmith wasn't even interested in it on a trade for a nice early Remington 760, but it still shoots and can kill a deer.

PS - that early 99E is actually pretty cool.

22hp is least desirable on old ones. Any from Westfield are less desirable than pre 1 millions.

The least desirable one is the one I don't have, but that WILL change when I see it.

I just can not like any 99 that bubba has added a recoil pad to

Least desirable from a collector's standpoint? Any model made post-war, especially if it has been messed with in any way. Least desirable from a hunter/shooter's standpoint? None- they will all provide years of enjoyment. Just one pilgrim's opinion.

Ones that are priced more than they are worth are the least desirable to me.

The least, is the one you have that I want.

Based on the above, here's how I see it:

Least desirable caliber:
.300 depending on model - maybe/maybe not
.303 maybe/maybe not
.243 depending on year
.22 HP

Least desirable model:
99E post million
99C post million
Anything post war - maybe/maybe not

Least desirable characteristics:
Added recoil pad
Cut down stock
Cracked stock
Cut down barrel
No "cheeks" on butt stock
Pressed checkering
Non factory D&T
Side mount scope
Tang safety - maybe/maybe not
Grey rats
Anything over priced
The one that Calhoun can't afford
The one that Longbeardking doesn't have, but will want when he sees it
The one I have that Joe Martin wants

I can't imagine why SVG .300 is not desirable in a hunter rifle...it will kill any North American game at a reasonable distance with less recoil than the vaunted .308 which is frankly, for most purposes, no more effective. JMO.

I like the .300, but I put it on the list because it was identified as a least desirable caliber. I'll add a "maybe/maybe not"

300 is lesser than 308.

Remember, the question was "... those that often get the pass by from 99 collectors." Not what makes a good hunting rifle.

Don't forget pressed checkering, which goes back to my 1964 date cut off

I will add it to the list. Thanks!

Added!

The thing of it is, even the least desirable 99 beats the most desirable of a whole slew of other rifles.

Hell yeah it does. But I was trying to come up with some criteria we share on things we don't particularly like. Something that a person new to our affinity for 99s might find helpful. Having said that. I have to add to the list "anything Winchester." Just kidding to all you fans of Oliver's rifles.

We don't need no stinking R's.

Eh?

Only if you hate accuracy

I had one of the "least desirables" for many years: a detachable clip, tang safety, stamped checkering on plain walnut (NOT Birch), .243 which had a factory "Monte Carlo" buttstock. Can't remember if it had a gold plated trigger; think it was called a "CDL."

It was reliable and dead nuts accurate; the only .243 I have ever had that shot better with 100 gr. deer bullets than varmint 55s. It would shoot 1 1/8-1 1/2" 3-shot hundred yard groups with 100 grain Powerpoints all day long.

Probably a gun that Savage collectors would walk 'way around, but a great tool, sheet metal clip and all. Went into a house payment like so many of my "great tools"....

BTW, the one "improvement" that most '99ers hate that I love is the tang safety. For anybody that hunts birds as much or more than big game, it's perfect.

I will add the details of tang safety, clip magazine, gold trigger, Monte Carlo and non-checkered stocks to the list. Rs will be maybe/maybe not. Funny that nobody complains about the tang safety on the 1920 series.

99H's in 300 are desirable.

I love tang safeties! Does anyone really hate them? Or is it just that they are only "factory" on post million 99's? I wish all my 1895/1899's/99's had them! From the factory, that is.

Doug

I would make the additions to my list but there must be a time limit for editing as t can't seem to do this with that posting any more. I will make a new list.

No time limit that I know of. "F5" the window and see if that clears it.

Rick, those of us who aren't moderators can't edit posts over 24 hours old.

It's a heavy burden we bear.

I don't think people necessarily dislike the tang safety feature, they dislike what it represents which is the 1960 downgrade in quality manufacturing.

Yeah the tang should have been original equipment on all 99's. Better for the lefty, super convenient for anyone used to bird guns. Not quite as nice when you've got the scope on top though.

I didn't know that. Learned something new today.

This has been an interesting post. There are many criteria for the term "desirability". It is first and foremost what appeals to a particular individual. This is whether it's the most collectible or the most pleasing to look at or has the best workmanship or is the most efficient hunting tool or is the best value for the money or whatever appeals to that individual. Differences of opinion are what make this forum and life in general interesting. Keep up the good work, guys! Just my opinion, David

Revised - Based on the above, here's how I see it:

Least desirable calibers:
.300 depending on model - maybe/maybe not
.303 maybe/maybe not
.243 depending on year
.22 HP

Least desirable models:
99E post-million
99C post-million
Anything post war - maybe/maybe not
99R - 1950s version, maybe/maybe not

Least desirable characteristics:

Factory -
Monte Carlo stocks
Non-checkered stocks
Pressed checkering
No "cheeks" on butt-stock
Gold trigger
Clip magazine
Tang safety - maybe/maybe not

Non-Factory -
Gunsmith D&T
Side mount scope
Added recoil pad
Cut down stock
Cut-down barrel
Cracked stock
Grey rats
Anything over priced
The one that Calhoun can't afford
The one that Longbeardking doesn't have, but will want when he sees it
The one I have that Joe Martin wants

Thanks wyo1895!

how bout when you get a cut barrel, changed sights cracked stock or chips out of it , common model with as unresonable price ,, seams to be more of these around as we gather up the better condition guns .

I find myself buying more older ones just because they are available at a resonable price .

norm

Change that 99R to "1950's 99R".

Nothing undesirable at all about the 1930's 99R.

I guess you get to look the seller square in the eye and tell him in no uncertain words that he's full of crap!

Done

Yeah what's all the fascination with that big nose sister.

I think the 50s 99R must have been Savages response to the Model 70. I (stupidly) passed on a nice 50s R in .250 that weighed in at something short of a Sherman tank. I couldn't figure out where the extra beef came from. On the other hand one of my prized possessions is a very nice circa-1933 R. And it doesn't seem any heavier than a 50s vintage EG.

I don't understand it but I hated the 300 R and really like the feel of the 250. Extra weight on the barrel I guess. Sure is a shooter.

Love the pre war R's. But I would cave in for a 50's R in 358 win. GW

I'm that way with post war 99Fs IN .358. But to me that caliber is forged from unobtainium!

Got tired of ripping my leather straps on the scabbard with tem stinking R s. Just kidding.

Wow, the Rs are getting a lot of comment. Even if it is just kidding. I'm beginning to think that they deserve their own special category. Ya know, something like you either love them or hate them, or you love to hate them, or maybe you hate to love them; I dunno?

OK,you guys just had to keep pushing my buttons. Here's my big ole clunky 1950 vintage 99R that I dragged all over Newfoundland until this poor innocent little caribou made a fatal mistake.

Granted I like tomato stakes better than R's but I sure like R's too.

Best lookin R I've ever seen!

How many extra dogs did they have to add 2 the sled team to drag that R 4 u ?

The R stands in a class of its own. I wouldn't pass on one (or I should say another one) if the condition and price were right.

none, it's light compared to the Weatherby Accumark I used to hunt with. It's also almost as accurate as the Weatherby.

R's are the most accurate 99 of them all, hands down.

Least desirable? I'll have to go back in the posts as I'm sure my name and the stake has been mentioned considerably.

Nope, but if you have some dislikes please chime in.

David, you said that poor Bou made a mistake? It looks like he got so close you whacked him on the nose, it's all bloody, with that club. I'm one of the ones that love my R's. 40% of my collection are R's. That's a 1950 R in 250 and a 1951 R in 300. That leaves a 1912 H, 1926 F, and a DL, Joe.

The bullet hit him so hard in the heart it blasted blood out of his nose.

Figured everyone would want to see the autopsy photos.

Looks like we have finally exhausted this topic. I'll Post a final list and then put this thread to bed. Thanks to all for your input.

No one mentioned the run of 99s made overseas.

To me, the least desirable have detachable magazines, pressed checkering, and chambered in 22 HP, in that order.

Oh yeah, weren't there a run made in Portugal or Spain? Nobody ever mentions them and I can't say that I've ever ran into one. I will add them to the list.

Yeah.. as a hunter they are probably lowest on the list. But there is a collectible issue to them. The Spain 99C's were only the 2nd batch of the 99 family to be made outside of Savage factories (1895's obviously being the other), and there were less than 1500 made.

So I guess as users they are low on the list, but with only 1500 made they do have a collector appeal.

What if I added the 1895 Commemorative 99 to the list? Holy smokes those things are gaudy.

I'm so glad you didn't like your .300 R. The one you sold me is a shooter. First group at 100 yards with an old El Paso Weaver 4x and factory 150 grain corelokts was .68" for 5 shots. Unbelievable accuracy! All I did was shim the front base to fix alignment.

The .300 R has become desirable to me!

They go good with gold teeth.

I don't collect 99s , I shoot 'em , so for me the least desirable 99s are the collectible 99s.


Mike

Very interesting counter point. Which was kind of my goal in the first place. Avoid the collectables and go for the relative bargains.

SHOOT what you collect and be done with it.

The 99F 22HP in my antelope hunt post is one of the rifles I display at gun shows. I've hunted with several of the others from the display including the 1895 round barrel. I killed a whitetail with in 1967. I consider all my 99's except the Bubba job in my thumbnail as collectible.

I was thinking "affordable" makes an individual gun the most desirable, essentially the same thing you state. First affordable one I found was an EG and after I found it not as accurate as I'd hoped the next one turned out to be an "R". Being a later gun without the sexy groove around the forearm might have kept it from being bid higher by aficionados, thus more desirable

Don't for 1 minute think it was the EG's fault. BTW ya didn't say if that R made you a better shot.

In this thread affordable is desirable, I just think that (outside the occasional fluke) there are certain models of the 99 you don't find people paying a premium for. Say like a prewar 99G vs a 60s vintage 99E. They both work just as well for hunting but you damn well know that the E will never command the same asking price. The Edsel was a car that was as good as any other car but it didn't sell. I guess I'm looking for specific rifles and characteristics qualify as the Ford Edsels of the 99 world.

Yes, but it was the atrocious styling of the Edsel that killed it. Quality and drive-ability was never an issue.

That is my point and the reason for the analogy. One could say that it's the atrocious styling of the 99E that keeps it down in price. Other than that it is just as "drivable" as any other 99, including the highly vaunted engraved models from the rifle's early years. This is an exercise to identify such 99s so as to allow a new guy something to look for to get into the game with a reasonable price. Or something for any of us to look for who have to get by on a working man's wages.

Now that you mention it, maybe the R did just that! I got smaller groups with it anyhow, so maybe I learned something. Well under an inch with 125gr Sierra Pro Hunters is best so far, I plan on trying a varmint bullet in it and getting more of the same. I actually sold the rifle to a friend who already had 2 of them, and he sold it back without ever shooting it himself. We all could stand some friends like this.

So following some of the things mentioned in this thread I noticed last night that one of the online auctions has a 99E in .300 languishing at 300-bucks with a BIN of only 375. It is an E, has hardwood pressed checkered stocks and looks really clean. A good starter 99? My apologies for posting a live auction but at least I didn't identify the web sight.

If you have ever taken the butt stock off newer 99's or better yet shake one you can see and hear the difference to pre mil 99's. You can keep the gold triggers and tang safety 99's. Tom

Tom I was out with the 250 R this last couple days and noticed with 5 in the magazine and one in the chamber the darn thing rattled. I've had that happen in the past and the solution was to remove one from the magazine. Didn't try it on the 250 R.


As a side note, my buddies 300 R had the lever stick halfway open after he got his buck on Thursday. So the pre-mils have their issues once in a while too I guess.

I agree, any individual rifle may have issues but in general the workmanship just isn't what it used to be. Just my personal preference. There are exceptions, Tom.

TomA - the original point of this thread was to discuss 99s with least desirable characteristics so as to identify potential bargains for new guys. This 99 seemed to fit that bill. I have an even crapier looking 99E in .308 that will still kill game as good as anything else. While we all know the fault of these rifles I do think a meaningful discussion on them as entry level firearms is something well worth doing. And, as in everything else, "caveat emptor." Or at least check the damn thing out before you put your money down.

One of the better features removed from most post mil 99's was the ability to have a round in the barrel with the firing pin uncocked. I have always liked that feature while carrying a 99 and from a safety stand point made sense. I believe many folks do not even know this feature exists. If we are talking about hunting rifles I just prefer the old style. I own several post mil 99's but after taking a few apart I have sent some down the road. The top tang safety on some seemed to move as much sideways as it did forward and back.

I shot my first elk with a 99E in 300 Savage and for carrying in Colorado it worked great. They all can be tools but they all ain't safe queens. Tom

Yes, they can't all be safe queens. So I guess there's no harm in using post mils for their intended purpose. I knew you could slip the trigger out of battery on the old lever safety 99s and heard it couldn't be done with the newer thumb safeties. I don't have a thumb safety 99, not that I wouldn't pass the right one up. Thanks much for your perspective.

Sorry if I'm repeating myself on this thread, but I have two tang safety 99's that slip close. A .375 and a early post mil cut checkered 243 99F. Work exactly as the pre-mils did.

As for the right tang safety to get you fired up, how about a 1964 cut checkered 284? (Minus the see-thru's of course!)

That makes me happy. It was in super shape so I would expect it to be a shooter.

I'm not a big fan of see-thru's, unless they happen to be on a female frame. Nice .284!

Roy, I have four 99 CE's and one will slip close. Why 1 out of 4, poor manufacturing I would guess? Tom

The obstruction to slip closing the tang safety guns is the lever itself. I have seen guns where the lever was ground away enough to allow slip closing. I suppose it's possible that there is enough variation in tolerances that some levers are shy in the area that catches and they squeak by.

And that's the key to making a tang safety rifle a "slip close" rifle. You've got to break it down and remove some metal on the outside of the curve of the lever. Works like a charm if you're willing to experiment and perhaps devalue your rifle.