When did Savage rifles "get good"?

I had a Savage 110 "S" silhouette rifle back in the late 70's that always worked fine, had a nice trigger out of the box, and was a very accurate rifle. When were they crappy?

I never had one that was. I have a Scout now that will shoot under an inch at 100 yards with my reloads and it also had a great trigger out of the box. I know some dont like the synthetic stocks on them and a few other complaints, but mine have always been very good shooters and I never had any trouble with them. I think a lot of the bitching is just snobbery and people who spent to much on another name and it doesnt shoot as well.

I wasn't aware they ever made sub-standard rifles. Their actions are fairly robust, and some people find them to be superior to Remington's. Every manufaturer goes through times that aren't as good as others.

Where did you get the impression that they had a bad rep?

Around 1899.

Reasonably priced doesn't equal crappy.

IMO, the Savage is both crappy and standard setting. What makes the Savage is the robustness of the receiver design and the best factory barrel out there. There fire control groups and stocks are POS. I am never happy with bone stock firearm, so I have no problem throwing a new stock and trigger into the mix.

The early Model 110's (the basis for all later Savage CF bolt guns) were pretty awful. Accuracy was not bad, but the trigger pulls were terrible and the whole action was not only rough but sloppy. The stocks were not bad for feel, if you closed your eyes and didn't look at them.

I am not sure which Savage ownership (there have been several) made the decision, but at some point, they decided to drop most of the rest of the line and concentrate on improving that one action. They did a good job, and the Accutrigger (which is usually misunderstood) is another step in that direction. At the same time, they improved the barrel, stock and bedding, all of which make a previous "ugly duckling" into something that if not actually a swan, is at least a tremendous improvement. Some of the basic problems still exist, but the price advantage makes up for them.

Jim

Let's face it - Savage has always been the Chevy of rifles. That doesn't mean that they're crappy, it just means that they're not a Lexus - they're a Chevy. They don't have the smoothest and most refined bolt throw, they don't have the deepest and darkest bluing, and their stocks are never anything to write home about. But they are almost ALWAYS rugged and reasonably-to-very accurate rifles that will last a very long time and drop game with monotonous regularity if you do your part.

So - are you a Chevy kinda guy or a Lexus kinda guy? There's no harm in either - ya just have to figure out your priorities.

I'm more of a Nissan/Toyota reliability kinda guy.

Click to expand...

I guess that would make you a Rem700 or maybe even a Tikka shooter.

Me? I like old BMW sport-touring motorcycles and other such things that are designed for generalization and longevity rather than specialization and high-speed/low-drag. My primary centerfile rifles are, therefore, a sporterized 1895 Spanish Mauser, a sporterized 1944 Enfield Mk4No1, and a sporterized SKS (much like Gewehr98's recent posting).

But before I hijack the thread - my favorite Savage was (no surprise) a 99C in 308. I traded it for some HVAC work to my house in a fit of stupidity, and haven't found another one like it since. It wasn't the prettiest (for a lever action, it looked like a pregnant guppy when compared to a Win94 or a Marlin) but like the Chevy that it was, it was a heckova hot rod and strong as all get-out.

Tikka = Nissan. Savage = Chevy.

Don't say anything about old Savages. They are sleepers of the gun collecting world!

Around 1899.

Huh?
I can't speak for that. It was many many moons before I was born. But I can tell you that the 99 that my grandfather bought in when he was 16 (around 1923 or so) has never given anyone any problems. The stock has some deep gouges and even a repair (an idiot dropped it) and there is no finish on it, but it is still just as tight as any new rifle I have ever handled.
Same with the one that my dad bought in the '60's.
I have owned two Savages, a scout and a 10FP. Both were accurate and reliable.
I am even thinking about getting another Savage (probably an 11 in 308) if the plan with the AIA Enfield doesn't work out.

FWIW, I would trust a Savage over a Remington any day.

"...in the past Savage had a reputation for so-so to just plain crappy rifles..." No offense, but Savage has always made top quality rifles. Somebody BS'd you.

When Ron Coburn took over the helm.
Don

My experience with Savage rifles is limited to four Model 99s built between roughly 1930 and 1960. Crappy? (Sorry Grammaw!) Cheap? Junk? Gee! I really would love to see your data!

I Like Savage

I have no experience with Savage Centerfires but I like my .17hmr by them. It good quality and a great price.

SirPorl

Huck Finn and Jim Keenan got it exactly right.
Savage started to improve the overall quality of the bolt action rifles they produce when they realized they eliminated the finest and most popular rifle in their line, the Savage 99 lever action.
No premier product = no sales = out of business.

I never owned one but there have been a few not so poplular models out there.

Something in a bolt comes to mind that was NOT a 110 action and had a cheesey extractor ...chambere in .222 and maybe .223? \

Plus they did have some spotty QC during their reorganization period in the mid 80's I believe.

One friend of mine had a .223 varmint model that had a rough barrel that lapping barely helped. Would group good for a bit then started getting flyers so he had it rebarreled.