Is there another "Savage" caliber?

[Newtosavage]

Just curious if there is another caliber named after the Savage brand besides the .300 Savage?

Considering the relative popularity of Savage rifles lately, I wouldn't be surprised to see one. Any guesses? Maybe a new one for their MSR series?

 

[someguy2800]

.250 savage, also known as 250-3000, and .303 savage

 

[22250Rem]

Along with the 22 Savage Hi-Power............ Which used those odd size (for a 22) bullets of .227 or .228" diameter. IIRC it was another Charles Newton design that Savage adopted.

 

[JackSprat]

22 high power

 

[JackSprat]

Sorry 22250,You beat me to it.

 

[Sunray]

"...the relative popularity of Savage rifles lately..." None of which come in any of the "Savage" named cartridges. Savage rifles are popular because they're relatively inexpensive and they shoot extremely well right out of the box. Wouldn't count on more "Savage" named cartridges though.

 

[someguy2800]

I would be perfectly happy if nobody ever released a totaly new cartridge ever again. I think we have the field covered and all the new stuff just pushes more old stuff that did the same thing into obsolescence.

 

[Olympus]

I would love to see more rifles chambered in 250 Savage personally. But not an actual Savage rifle....

 

[Newtosavage]

.250 savage, also known as 250-3000, and .303 savage

Ah, I forgot about that one!

Never heard of the .22 high power though.

I agree that the spectrum of possibilities HAS to be covered by now, but I'm sure we will continue to see new calibers so long as shooting enjoys the popularity it has these days and so long as folks have the kind of disposable income they have these days.

For me personally it would be a 7x39 Savage - necking down a 7.62x39 to 7mm. But a 6.5x39 would be okay too. Either would make a very practical, low recoiling deer round.

 

[Gtscotty]

But a 6.5x39 would be okay too. Either would make a very practical, low recoiling deer round.

I believe they call that the 6.5 Grendel, albiet with some of the taper ironed out.

 

[Newtosavage]

I believe they call that the 6.5 Grendel, albiet with some of the taper ironed out.

Yes, of course. Which is why we need a 7x39 so we can still throw 160 grainers when we want to.

 

[Jim Watson]

Not a Savage rifle caliber, but there was the .32 SAP = Savage Automatic Pistol.
Also .25 SAP and .380 SAP.
Same deal as .32 Colt New Police of course.

 

[Varminterror]

It's been about a hundred years, and just about as many owners, since Savage Arms Company has released a namesake cartridge.

Doubt it'll be in the cards for them ever again under their current or future ownership.

 

[80Goat]

I have a Remington XP-100 that is chambered in 7mm-IHMSA. It is a 300 savage necked down to 7mm with a different shoulder angle. Outstanding round for the 15-inch barrel of the XP.

Not exactly a Savage caliber, but is the basis for the round.

 

[Newtosavage]

I have a Remington XP-100 that is chambered in 7mm-IHMSA. It is a 300 savage necked down to 7mm with a different shoulder angle. Outstanding round for the 15-inch barrel of the XP.

Not exactly a Savage caliber, but is the basis for the round.

Sounds like a very efficient hunting round as well.

For deer, something between the 7.62x39 and the 7mm-08 would be perfect for most folks IMO. The reach of the 7.62x39 is not "quite" enough and the recoil of the 7mm-08 is "just" unpleasant enough that we could use something in-between IMO. Yes, yes, I know - .243 yada yada yada. But some of us want heavier bullets that don't damage as much meat.

The 6.5 Grendel looks promising. Just not sure why the 7mm seems to be getting left behind these days when it's such an efficient hunting caliber.

 

[Art Eatman]

FWIW: From 60-some years ago, Phil Sharpe listed a load for the .22 HiPower. A bunch of 2400 behind a 40-grain bullet gave 3,900 ft/sec.

There's a record of a one-shot kill on a tiger in India with a HiPower.

 

[Corn-Picker]

Sounds like a very efficient hunting round as well.

For deer, something between the 7.62x39 and the 7mm-08 would be perfect for most folks IMO. The reach of the 7.62x39 is not "quite" enough and the recoil of the 7mm-08 is "just" unpleasant enough that we could use something in-between IMO. Yes, yes, I know - .243 yada yada yada. But some of us want heavier bullets that don't damage as much meat.

The 6.5 Grendel looks promising. Just not sure why the 7mm seems to be getting left behind these days when it's such an efficient hunting caliber.

Ye old 7x57 usually checks in around 2100 ft-lbs, which is between the 7mm-08 and 7.62x39. It's a shame there are so few rifles offered in 7x57, I think the last manufacturer to offer one regularly was CZ in the full stock 550.

 

[32-20]

How about the first Savage round, the 303 Savage that started it all in 1895.

 

[bangswitch]

....... and the recoil of the 7mm-08 is "just" unpleasant enough that we could use something in-between IMO. Yes, yes, I know - .243 yada yada yada. But some of us want heavier bullets that don't damage as much meat.

The 6.5 Grendel looks promising. Just not sure why the 7mm seems to be getting left behind these days when it's such an efficient hunting caliber.

7mm-08 is not unpleasant at all; less recoil than it's parent .308, which isn't terrible. And you can't shake a stick around these parts without hitting somebody who owns a .270 Winchester, which is as close to 7mm as no matter.

Grendel....... I'm a big fan. Shoots relatively fast, shoots flat, shoots far. At 1000 yards, my 123's have about the same energy remaining as a 155 gr. .40S&W does at the muzzle. Enough that I won't volunteer to stand in front of one that far off.

 

[Newtosavage]

7mm-08 is not unpleasant at all; less recoil than it's parent .308, which isn't terrible.

Must be why my 130 lb. wife and 135 lb. daughter won't touch one then. LOL

I think whenever the issue of recoil comes up, an entire gender usually gets left out of the conversation. I own a 7.62x39 bolt action specifically because I enjoy taking ladies to the gun range to work on their marksmanship. Someone needs to.

 

[Newtosavage]

Ye old 7x57 usually checks in around 2100 ft-lbs, which is between the 7mm-08 and 7.62x39. It's a shame there are so few rifles offered in 7x57, I think the last manufacturer to offer one regularly was CZ in the full stock 550.

I just sold a 7x57 (Ruger). Very, very familiar with that round and yes, it's an excellent moderate-recoil caliber. Pity it's being all but forgotten nowdays. But I don't see much difference between it and the 7mm-08. To me they are twins in different case lengths.

If I were really into rifles, I'd have someone chamber a 7x39 for me and shoot 140 grain bullets. But it's more trouble than it's worth.

 

[Corn-Picker]

I just sold a 7x57 (Ruger). Very, very familiar with that round and yes, it's an excellent moderate-recoil caliber. Pity it's being all but forgotten nowdays. But I don't see much difference between it and the 7mm-08. To me they are twins in different case lengths.

If I were really into rifles, I'd have someone chamber a 7x39 for me and shoot 140 grain bullets. But it's more trouble than it's worth.

The 7-30 waters is a little less than the 7x57, and it's a commercial round, though the rim may limit you to Contenders and lever actions. What you're describing sounds exactly like the 280 British or 7mm BR -- if I could resurrect a dead cartridge it would probably be the 280 British.

 

[redneck2]

I have a Remington XP-100 that is chambered in 7mm-IHMSA. It is a 300 savage necked down to 7mm with a different shoulder angle. Outstanding round for the 15-inch barrel of the XP.

Or, you could just call it a 7-08 and be good to go.

I handload for my .300 Savage lever. When I couldn't find brass locally, I just used .308's. Virtually identical.

 

[Varminterror]

Must be why my 130 lb. wife and 135 lb. daughter won't touch one then. LOL

I'm a lot more prone to bet one of 3 issues if a grown woman "won't touch" a .308win: 1) rifle fitment issue, 2) lack of proper recoil management training, and/or 3) a simple mental fear of recoil.

My 125lb wife runs a fleet of rifles, including a Marlin 1895 guide gun, Ruger Hawkeyes in 7RM, 338wm, and 416Ruger, 300wsm and 338win mag Savages, and a .308win AR-10/LR308, among others at the lower end of the spectrum. She's shot all of my .375 H&H's, 416Rigby, 458wm, and 458lott rifles as well. She's telling me right now she's shot my CZ 505 Gibbs, but I don't recall when that would have been. My 140lb sister shoots a .300wm and a .338wm, my mother shoots a .30-06. My sis-in-law, who I'd peg at 125-130, shoots an 18" 308win.

Outside of my own family, I've instructed women and girls in rifle courses and hunter's safety education courses for many years, the 308win is a very common cartridge selected by their husbands, dads, boyfriends, etc to push on women, and I have yet to have a woman I couldn't coach to shoot it comfortably - pending a well fit stock.

But if the rifle doesn't fit, or the shooter doesn't know how to manage recoil properly, or if the shooter is simply scared of recoil because someone planted an idea in their head, then even a lowly 308win will be rough.

 

[CarJunkieLS1]

Sounds like a very efficient hunting round as well.

For deer, something between the 7.62x39 and the 7mm-08 would be perfect for most folks IMO. The reach of the 7.62x39 is not "quite" enough and the recoil of the 7mm-08 is "just" unpleasant enough that we could use something in-between IMO. Yes, yes, I know - .243 yada yada yada. But some of us want heavier bullets that don't damage as much meat.

The 6.5 Grendel looks promising. Just not sure why the 7mm seems to be getting left behind these days when it's such an efficient hunting caliber.

That would be the 7mm Valkyrie