Cheap bullets and not loading the way you're "supposed to"

CWLONGSHOT said:
I have pops '99. I sold off my '99/300 cause the price offered was needed else where at the time.
Pops is a 308, I bought for him when he was really down on the Winchester 88 he had ta have didnt measure up. It was simply a "Monday or Friday" gun as Bret pointed out. It was stiff to operate and never shot well. He shot the '99 with same load he had for the 88 and all three touched with zero last owner made. He sold that 88 the following weekend! Invested in a "better" scope then the 3x Weaver that the Savage wore.

Anyhow, Im a 35 cal guy to the core and since the day he gave it back to me, I have had JES rebore ta 358 in mind.

Thoughts?

CW
Click to expand...
Those rotary magazines are very particular to the original cartridge the gun was made for. Going from 308 to 358Win may work, but from 300 Savage to 358 Win may not work so well.
 
A friend of mine who's on the other site, also 24-hour campfire is the most knowlegeable gut on 99s I know and has a switch barrel one he's made up on a take down. He says that cartridge specificity of rotors isn't as bad as many make it out to be and that there is considerable leeway on what rounds they will feed if big enough. This guy has also successfully hunted deer quite a bit with a .22 Savage High Power.
 
The .22 Savage High power is actually quite common in European break-action combination guns. While most US cartridges are known by their original names, this cartridge is called 5,6x52R over here. The rim makes it very useful in break-actions, and the cartridge is well balanced for the diminutive Roe deer, which is ubiquitous in Europe.
 
RicinYakima said:
The only reason I own a Browning Model 53 in 32/20 is because Savage never made a small Model 99 in those calibers. :headscratch:
Click to expand...
IIRC Arthur Savages first working model predecessor to the 1899 was in 32/20! Take the 99, shrink the action by 1/3 or maybe closer to 50% and you'd have a doozy of a platform for the 32/20 based cartridges, 38/40, 44/40 maybe 357 and 44mag!

Too bad we couldn't challenge Ian somehow to build one of these! He'd have to acquire another $40K in tools and $75K in building to contain the tooling, but I bet it would be a beaut!
 
richhodg66 said:
Ian, did you make that stock with the Monte Carlo comb? Very different, but I like it.
Click to expand...

I did all the work to it. The comb is about 1/2" higher than it would need to be because I threaded the barrel for a suppressor and installed an appropriately high rear sight and front sight ramp.

Bret4207 said:
IIRC Arthur Savages first working model predecessor to the 1899 was in 32/20! Take the 99, shrink the action by 1/3 or maybe closer to 50% and you'd have a doozy of a platform for the 32/20 based cartridges, 38/40, 44/40 maybe 357 and 44mag!

Too bad we couldn't challenge Ian somehow to build one of these! He'd have to acquire another $40K in tools and $75K in building to contain the tooling, but I bet it would be a beaut!
Click to expand...

Believe it or not I've been mulling this over all day at work on account of the ridiculous prices. Saw a 22 Hi Power/.410 takedown combo on a gun sales site for $2500 last night, sheesh. I've always been intrigued by the takedown version of these rifles and kind of wanted one even though it would be a single-shot for a lot of cartridges.

While completely overhauling that old 1899 and learning how it was supposed to work so I could fix some issues it had, I marveled many times at just how some of the machining operations had been done. It must have taken dozens of setups in as many machines just to shape the receiver, and if I recall correctly there was more than one machined surface that totally baffled me as to how it was done. Stuff like 3/4 circular cuts that could only have been done with a single-point tool that worked like a shaper (complete with clapper box) but in a rotary fashion. The bolt locking surface had to be notched with a shaper. NO idea how the arched breech recess was cut but it wasn't from the front or back. No wonder nobody will re-produce the action, it would be damned near impossible to do half of it with a five-axis CNC and a 200-cutter library. The lever alone is a marvel, not just of machining but metallurgy: It's deeply color-case-hardened but is more than a piece of iron, it has a very precise spring temper to it to provide positive lockup and has to have a good bit of strength as it serves as one leg of the triangular breech buttress. Taking an analytical trip deep inside an 1899 is to gain a special respect and appreciation for it's rather eccentric and somewhat disturbed inventor.
 
i tried chasing down a hi-power down in pokie when i bought an old gun cabinet and found a letter from the original owner to a smith talking about him building the guy one.
it also had the return quote from the smith.
i looked all over hell for a couple of months and figure someone else got it, the family kept it, or it got sold in another city.

i was kind of excited about it since i have a swage die that makes 228 diameter bullets.
the set is kind of a pain in the butt to use, but i figured a couple hundred bullets would have kept me going for a decade or so.
 
Ian said:
I did all the work to it. The comb is about 1/2" higher than it would need to be because I threaded the barrel for a suppressor and installed an appropriately high rear sight and front sight ramp.



Believe it or not I've been mulling this over all day at work on account of the ridiculous prices. Saw a 22 Hi Power/.410 takedown combo on a gun sales site for $2500 last night, sheesh. I've always been intrigued by the takedown version of these rifles and kind of wanted one even though it would be a single-shot for a lot of cartridges.

While completely overhauling that old 1899 and learning how it was supposed to work so I could fix some issues it had, I marveled many times at just how some of the machining operations had been done. It must have taken dozens of setups in as many machines just to shape the receiver, and if I recall correctly there was more than one machined surface that totally baffled me as to how it was done. Stuff like 3/4 circular cuts that could only have been done with a single-point tool that worked like a shaper (complete with clapper box) but in a rotary fashion. The bolt locking surface had to be notched with a shaper. NO idea how the arched breech recess was cut but it wasn't from the front or back. No wonder nobody will re-produce the action, it would be damned near impossible to do half of it with a five-axis CNC and a 200-cutter library. The lever alone is a marvel, not just of machining but metallurgy: It's deeply color-case-hardened but is more than a piece of iron, it has a very precise spring temper to it to provide positive lockup and has to have a good bit of strength as it serves as one leg of the triangular breech buttress. Taking an analytical trip deep inside an 1899 is to gain a special respect and appreciation for it's rather eccentric and somewhat disturbed inventor.
Click to expand...
I have faith in you man! You'd figure it out. And you'd have the ONLY ONE!!! You would think with todays casting methods there would be a way to produce it. There are likely still people alive in Utica or Mass that know how all that was done..
 
CWLONGSHOT said:
I have pops '99. I sold off my '99/300 cause the price offered was needed else where at the time.
Pops is a 308, I bought for him when he was really down on the Winchester 88 he had ta have didnt measure up. It was simply a "Monday or Friday" gun as Bret pointed out. It was stiff to operate and never shot well. He shot the '99 with same load he had for the 88 and all three touched with zero last owner made. He sold that 88 the following weekend! Invested in a "better" scope then the 3x Weaver that the Savage wore.

Anyhow, Im a 35 cal guy to the core and since the day he gave it back to me, I have had JES rebore ta 358 in mind.

Thoughts?

CW
Click to expand...

Glaciers said:
Well there’s got to be something to that as Savage offered the Hi Power and 410 takedown as a factory offering. Even as a boxed set.
Click to expand...
If memory serves me right, the .410 barrels were intended to be used as a single shot. I know I just said there's more lee way on the rotors than many think, but going from a bottle neck to a .410 hull is likely too much.
 
richhodg66 said:
I'm something of a Savage 99 snob, not as bad as some, I have a few in a few configurations. Not a big fan of the post one million serial numbered ones in general, though I like the E models which kept the trigger safety as opposed to the tang. My .358, likewise is a post one million and is a good shooter. I have an H carbine in .303 which will hld its own on the handiness scale with any '94 or 336.

Probably the best deer rifle among them is a beat up pawn shop rescue 99EG in .300 Savage, the most common variant in the most common caliber but that thing points and carries like a dream to me and cycles like greased glass. Accurat with cast as well. Most of the 99 purists when you get amongst them kinda turn their noses up at the EGs, but a finer deer rifle doesn't exist.
Click to expand...
I had a 99 in 250/3000,,,think it was a G,,cant member.but it was a takedown,,and they made a 410 barrell with it.had buetiful fine pearl sight on it,and was a joy to shoot.except,,,holding the gun easy on the forearm,or really grabbing it solid,,was worth 7 inches of vertical at 100 yards.i traded it off.years later,i learned that there was a spacer ring that you was suppose to use with the riflebarrell,,,,bummer,wish i didnt trade it!!!!!
 
I have enjoyed this thread.!
I have an affection for marlins.ive always noticed how rough they are,but i just love them.the win carries better,and is built better,but it aint a marlin,i hate them.
I bought a bore scope a while ago,,and when looking down marlin bores,it is pretty sad looking,but them suckers will shoot!!even with all that roughness,all my marlins will shoot cast,clean.
 
Ian said:
Believe it or not I've been mulling this over all day at work on account of the ridiculous prices. Saw a 22 Hi Power/.410 takedown combo on a gun sales site for $2500 last night, sheesh. I've always been intrigued by the takedown version of these rifles and kind of wanted one even though it would be a single-shot for a lot of cartridges.
Click to expand...
I often ponder converting a takedown (or my recalcitrant 30-30) to single-shot. From my admittedly-ignorant perspective, it looks like it could be done with a block substituting for the rotor. Not saying this should be done with minty takedowns, but there are a lot of well-worn takedowns that could have a second life as a single-shot, rebarreled for any cartridge with the same case head.
 
MJ kind of just wandered off.
he was on some other forums for a while then just sort of disappeared.
 
fiver said:
MJ kind of just wandered off.
he was on some other forums for a while then just sort of disappeared.
Click to expand...
Bummer,,,i picked up a 1st year 336a,,1948 vintage,,had alot of trouble shooting cast in it.
Come to find out,it has a undersize throat.

Ended up using neck turned cases,, and that rifle shoots splendid.He turned me on to that,,as a way to help the gun.
 
MJ went off on his own bullet lube tangent that was tangent to the other experiments that were going on at the time, he'd pop in occasionally with questions and over time faded away. That was near ten years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.