Stevens 200


Don't Tread On Me
November 15, 2006, 09:45 PM
I've been looking at one of these in .223.

Does the whole "you get what you pay for" apply here, or is this really a great value? What kind of accuracy can I expect?

I would be handloading for this almost exclusively, so I'd be able to load a variety of bullets at any velocity with good seating depth for accuracy testing.

I want something that's cheap so I can play with, but has some sort of decent accuracy potential that I can acheive with handloading. I'm not expecting it to shoot one hole groups for that price, but don't want to buy it if it's just going to spray whatever loads I make for it.

Anyone have any input? :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Stevens 200" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
November 15, 2006, 10:14 PM
The action is the good ol' pre-Accutrigger Savage 10/110 action that you know and love. The stock is cheesy.

It should be accurate enough to be interesting and useful.

November 15, 2006, 10:31 PM
Head, shoulders, knees, and feet better than the Remington 710 competition. I only own pre-Accutrigger Savages (I like the Accutrigger models, but mine I purchased in the olden days and have no need to change now). My two are great rifles, and given the price, you can't go wrong. Best of all, they are fully upgradeable. You want to change stocks down the road? No problem.


November 15, 2006, 10:52 PM
I purchased a pre-accutrigger 10FP in 223 and liked it so much that I also bought a Stevens 200 (223) for a lighter carry around rifle. Found a used factory hardwood stock and replaced the tupperware one and it shoots almost as good as my 10FP. Just can't shoot is as fast as the 10FP due to the sporter weight barrel heating up faster.

I have loaded some Sierra 52 grain BTHP bullets using 27.0 grains of BL-C(2), Winchester cases and WSR primers and have gotten 3 shot groups that I can cover with a Nickel. Using the Sierra 52 BTHP because I was given 30 pounds of them.:D They shoot good even though they are their overruns.

The best thing about the Stevens 200 is that it is a 1-9 twist and they should shoot up 70+ grains pretty well. Mine shoots the Sierra 65 grain Gameking BT as well as the 52's.

Also check out as there is a lot about the Stevens 200 discussed there.

November 15, 2006, 11:50 PM
It is straight Savage, the stock is like over cooked mac n cheese. but if you can fill it , stiffen it up, then more power to you.

November 16, 2006, 12:32 AM
Got one last year and love far it seems to prefer 26.0 grains of varget under a 60 grain vmax. Still need to tweek though. I did have a problem with extraction/ejection but should be fixed in the line by now

November 16, 2006, 04:10 AM
Review on Gunblast. (

November 16, 2006, 08:22 AM
I have one in 308 that shoots great. I bought it to use as a hunting rifle and it fills that position very well. The rifle, scope mount, scope rings, and scope cost me about $425. I could shoot 1-1.5 inch groups (100yds) with it right of the box with Winchester 150gr ammo. I think they are a steal for the cost.

November 16, 2006, 01:18 PM
The action is the accutrigger reciever without the accutrigger... uses "accutrigger" mounts.

Can't beat them for the money, but keep in mine they're "utility" guns. I've bought over a dozen of them for the actions....trashed the stocks and sold the barrels

November 16, 2006, 02:30 PM
That's true. The Steven isn't REALLY a pre-accutrigger, as the receiver uses the same scope mount bases as the current Accutrigger Savages and not the same bases as the pre-accutrigger Savages.


January 23, 2008, 06:03 AM
does anybody have an opinion on where to find good but affordable bases for a scope on the 200?

January 23, 2008, 09:47 AM
Any base works. I've used Leopold, Weaver, etc. It doesn't have to be "tacticool", or withstand being dropped from a helicopter. EGW makes a nice one-piece base too. On my daughter's new rifle, I used the Ded Nutz one-piece base/ring combo, it's working nicely.

My Stevens 200 has been great. It's been upgraded over time with a Timney trigger, stainless 223 AI barrel, and B&C stock. I think I liked it better stock though.

January 23, 2008, 11:19 AM
I got one in 223 last Sept for coyote hunting. Only change was to adjust the trigger to 4.5lbs. Was easy to do and is actually a good trigger. Put a bipod on and made sure the stock wasn't touching the barrel. 1.5" with Wolf ammo with occasional fliers. Easily 1" with handloads and no fliers. Get one, you will like it.

January 23, 2008, 04:33 PM
I'm very new to the rifle scene... been into handguns for a while. Are there any certain measurements I need to look for for the bases? I know the rings have to match the 1" or 30mm, but I don't know jack about the bases.

January 23, 2008, 04:38 PM
Head, shoulders, knees, and feet better than the Remington 710 competition.

Damning with faint praise.:evil:

I think the Stevens is probably a good deal better than the above would imply.:D

January 23, 2008, 05:14 PM
heres mine:
i think i have 4 of these rifles. this one is either a .223 or .243 (cant check because im half the world away), but im pretty sure its a .223. they have all shot great, and i have learned alot about tuning rifles from playing with this one.

i sanded down and painted the ugly stock, and painted the barrel coyote brown for contrast. i glass bedded the recoil lug and pillars originally, and decided later to bed the tang area (made no difference in accuracy). i smoothed up the trigger some from online instructions. the biggest complaint i have of this rifle is the flimsy stock, so i cut a channel in the forarm and bedded a piece of threaded rod into it to stiffen it up. leupold split bases. topped it originally with bsa 8-32x40 contender scope, but it now sports a weaver t-24. needless to say, i put quite a bit of weight on this sporter, but it shoots great.

this is one of my better shooting rifles. w/ 69 gr sierras i can reutinely shoot great groups out of the 1/9" factory barrel. it likes the bullets practically lodged into the lands too.

for the money i dont think there are any better options out there. i enjoyed this one right out of the box, but to be honest i had just as much fun sanding, painting, bedding, and tweaking then i did shooting :).

i dont think ull be dissapointed with this rifle.

January 23, 2008, 05:28 PM
I've had a Stevens 223 for a year or so, love it.

shoots ~1.5" consistantly, way better then that with 68gr black hills blue box ammo, haven't gotten into reloading for it to much yet, but it's been promising so far.

I'm looking at getting one in 270 for a lighter hunting rifle shortly.

January 23, 2008, 05:35 PM
I've had mine since they first came out (couple years?). It shoots great. I have done nothing to it. The rifle is just plain accurate as heck. Mine is a .223.

The stock is ugly.

January 23, 2008, 05:46 PM
I have one in .308. After finding out I'll be waiting for either a factory Thumb hole from Stevens or a Richards microfit will be 8- 18 mos out, I filed the webbing in the fore grip with bondo, and the stock with sand. I camoflaged the stock and that will do for a while. Gets great groups, with out the improvements, but a stiffer stock will help. Savage please make extra stocks for your upcoming 11BTH production run. They will be center feed, and the stock will fit. Stevens = Savage 14

January 23, 2008, 07:37 PM
Any SA Savage base will fit it. I think the Stevens uses the round rear base.

January 23, 2008, 08:45 PM
My Wife recently got one in .243 with an "inferior brand" 3-9x scope and we couldn't be happier with it, but we seem to be a bit more utility-minded than many. Performance has its own beauty.

January 24, 2008, 01:56 AM
will bases for the 110 fit the 200?

January 24, 2008, 02:07 AM
I have one in .308 and mine shoots a 1 hole group with hand loads at 100yds and thats not a 3 shot group that was 5 shots I am extremly pleased with mine. Top it with good glass and you will be happy.The stock sucks as mentioned and the trigger could be better. I plan on putting a custom stock on mine and dropping in a Rifle basix trigger .
Just my two cents.

January 24, 2008, 10:01 AM
will bases for the 110 fit the 200?

They will if it's a LA Model 200.

January 24, 2008, 04:40 PM
It is.... .30-06 LA

June 11, 2008, 03:22 PM
OK, you guys seem to be the best source of info on the Stevens 200 I have found on the net so far.

What I have is a Stevens 200 .223, I hate the stock, I found a deal on a Savage T-hole unfinished stock for a Savage 10 short action. The Stevens I have is a new one, will it fit in this stock?

June 11, 2008, 05:23 PM
Measure the two screws that hold the barreled action to the stock (front screw on the trigger guard, and the the screw toward the muzzle from there)... if it measures 4.25" you should be good to go...

June 11, 2008, 05:29 PM
The best source on the net would be

June 11, 2008, 05:41 PM
I went to savage shooters but didn't register, I'll try there later.

Next question, does the Savage 12 and 10 take the same stock?

June 11, 2008, 05:43 PM
Measure the screws... 4 1/4" for the "old style" SA's...

Der Verge
June 11, 2008, 07:35 PM
I own a 200 in .223. It is a GREAT rifle. I hand load, and have a few recipes that stay sub moa all day. best group thus far is .245" @ 100 yards, and it has repeated like groups many times. I am going to buy a few more.

July 28, 2008, 09:48 PM
you get what you pay for does not apply here i have this rifle in .223 and 7mm-08 and it is as good or better than most of my more expensive rifles if you have any questions about the gun email

Der Verge
July 28, 2008, 10:44 PM
I have one in .223. Here is how it shoots...

I am pleased. .245" CTC. Yea, the finish is not a deep blue, and the stock is not the best. It is the same as the black Savage synthetic stocks, except it is grey. But then, it is pillar bedded, and it works. Great for a coyote or truck gun. The above are hand loads. It has done this constantly. This may not be a 10 shot group, but I don't like the barrel to get that warm, and I could take it out right now and know it will do that again.

BTW, I just noticed I posted here before......well I guess you now have the proof.....

If you enjoyed reading about "Stevens 200" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!