Savage MKII .22 Long rifle questions/opinions

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a Savage MKII I picked up a few months ago. Can't help you with the scope, mine came with one mounted.
Mine is very accurate with CCI standard velocity, Remington golden bullets, and a couple of other types of normal .22 ammo.
I tried CB longs, they are accurate, but will not feed from the magazine.
I picked up a single shot adapter, and that works perfectly with the CBs.
 
from what I've read the Savage MarkII that aren't sold with a included scope are drilled and tapped and should include mounts. Some people said that they didn't get mounts with their gun so they just called Savage and they were shipped out a set. I just got a Savage MarkII GXP which had the included scope, it's nice but the receiver was cut for dovetail mounts which I don't like. The model you listed will come only with the base mounts, so yes you still would have to buy weaver scope rings.

When you go to mount the scope first attach the scope rings to the rifle, then put the scope inside the rings and try to make it level (doesn't have to be perfect). Sighting it in isn't hard either, first setup your target at around 25 yards and go from there.
 
It is a fine rifle and a good value for a pretty accurate rifle IMO. I especially like the ones equipped with the AccuTrigger like the one linked. Furthermore I haven't had any trouble feeding CBs, but it will not feed Aguila Colibris reliably. I have never used one, but IIRC the single shot adapter is a factory accessory (basically a "magazine" that doesn't hold any rounds) and comes with some youth rifles.

:)
 
Probably one of the best guns on the market for the price/accuracy. There are a couple of areas I think need to to be touched up. The magazine can sometimes fail and the stocks lack support in the pillars. I have a couple and they are both very accurate and super reliable, especially after I fixed the mags and pillar bedded them.
 
The cheaper version sold at walmart does not come with a scope mount, nor does it have the accutrigger. I forget if it's the F model or G model. But that's the one I have. If I had to do it again, I'd get the accutrigger. The pull on mine is pretty inconsistent and heavy, and it's compounded by the upright trigger. The geometry of the trigger would work a heck of a lot better with a pistol grip.

Contrary to Wrench and Maverick's experience, I find that once the action was broken in and lubed, mine will now reliably feed Super Colibri's. You don't have to slam the bolt home, or anything, but it certainly helps to feed the bolt smartly and smoothly. Shorts, OTOH, seem to be a no-go.
 
Last edited:
Would it be ok if I just put a round in the chamber and closed the bolt over it?
 
Great rifle, horrible magazines. They sit in the gun so loosely it causes the the bullet to be misaligned with the chamber, creating feeding issues, in a bolt action rifle! I sold mine and got a ruger 10/22.
 
Would it be ok if I just put a round in the chamber and closed the bolt over it?
Click to expand...
Yep, no problem.

Contrary to Wrench and Maverick's experience, I find that once the action was broken in and lubed, mine will now reliably feed Super Colibri's. You don't have to slam the bolt home, or anything, but it certainly helps to feed the bolt smartly and smoothly. Shorts, OTOH, seem to be a no-go.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you got lucky on yours, wrench drew the short straw (still a fine rifle i'm sure), and I was somewhere in the middle.

Great rifle, horrible magazines. They sit in the gun so loosely it causes the the bullet to be misaligned with the chamber, creating feeding issues, in a bolt action rifle!
Click to expand...
I find them to be a pain to load, but that has not been my experience. Perhaps you drew a lemon?

:)
 
My take on the MkII, from someone who's been thinking about "stepping up" from a Savage 64F semi-auto:

- The stock feels cheaper and shorter than my 64's, and that's saying something about the cheapness. I dunno, it just doesn't feel "right." An aftermarket stock, if not too spendy, would definitely be a solid upgrade.
- The magazines and mag catch are cheap stamped metal as opposed to the cast aluminum mags and milled or cast mag release on my 64. Not that big a deal, but again, cheap-feeling.
- I've handled four different examples now, with and without the Accutrigger, and the bolt has felt really gritty, loose and jerky on all of them. I don't know whether this smooths out with use, but I hope so.
- Some have sights, some don't. I'd personally get one with irons - Savage has the best .22LR sights for detail work, IMO.
 
Ben86 said:
Great rifle, horrible magazines. They sit in the gun so loosely it causes the the bullet to be misaligned with the chamber, creating feeding issues, in a bolt action rifle! I sold mine and got a ruger 10/22.
Click to expand...
easy fix. hit it with a pair of pliers and adjust away.
 
Also, what would be a good scope thats leaning more towards the "Affordable" side of things? :)


Going to be used for small game hunting at 25-35 yards, maybe a little further sometimes.
 
I've been selling these for 3 years now and they are what you pay for etc. I've shot both the 64 and the MK and they feel about the same and fire similarly. No point in dumping money into it besides a scope etc. They come tap. for the rails and the accu-trigger is a nice add on. If you want something inexpensive, you have found your rifle. Otherwise keep on looking.
 
You need a scope for 25-35 yards?

Save the money and buy a Tasco at that range. I've had the same fixed 4x on my 64 for... 8, 9 years now? It seems to do just fine.
 
I think "Want" fits better than "Need".


I may be severely underestimating the distance, now that I think about it..
 
No need to explain...I prefer a scope for most tasks as well. Furthermore they seem to be well suited for .22s as the targets are traditionally very small (i'd say about the size of a squirrel's head ;)). I use a fixed 4x Bushnell Sportview, but mine is an older one with Korean glass, so i'd be leery of a new one (they are now using Chinese glass) unless cost was a big issue. I would probably buy something a bit nicer (perhaps with a little more magnification, like a 2-7x) if I had to replace it. That said, Bushnell scopes are the only ones that I will buy on the very low end, because they tend to be reliable and repeatable in my experience (much better than BSA or Tasco and a noticeable improvement over a low end Simmons).

:)
 
bsctov said:
I may be severely underestimating the distance, now that I think about it..
Click to expand...

Well, either way, I spend my summers cutting down daisies and plinking 12ga empties between 70 and 100 yards or so with the aforementioned Tasco 4x/64F combo - does great. Shooting at paper is boring. :)

Little Bro has a low-end ($50ish, I believe) Bushnell 3-9x on his Remington 597; it's done pretty well, but my Tasco is a little brighter and clearer. Might be an age/quality thing, since that Tasco is approaching the decade mark.

Re: Simmons; I picked up a bunch of 2-7x Simmons airgun scopes from someplace on clearance a long while back for $5 or so a pop including cheap rings. I ended up mounting one on my Marlin 60 and it seemed to work just fine up until I sold it, which admittedly was only 200 rounds or so after I mounted the scope...
 
Last edited:
I just have a suspicion that mounting/zeroing the scope is going to be a real PITA.
 
Savage Mark II is a great little .22LR, and mine wears a Leupold 4X. I do agree that for day light hunting, a Tasco 4X is perfectly fine. My Mark II will cycle with no issues even the Colibri ammo, and fires it quite accurately.

Geno
 
Rifles that use standard mounts (aka drilled and tapped) tend to have a stronger mounting system than the 22's with the dovetail.

It is not hard to mount a scope. But if you like, most any gun shop will mount a scope you purchased from them. Sportsman Warehouse in TN will mount scopes for free. It helps to have bought either the rifle or scope there however.

The Mark II is a very good rifle. I have a Classic which is a beautiful rifle.
 
I bought a Mark II a few years ago. I treated it to a Boyd's thumbhole stock which made it a very nice looking little rifle. It is very accurate and I've had no mechanical issues at all. I only shoot long rifle ammo in it.
 
Excellent rifles! I have the heavy barrel, royal jacaranda thumbhole laminate version and it is a fine shooter. I set it up for long range use with a 20MOA base from EGW and a Bushnell Elite 3200 10x. I like the Rifle Basix trigger better than the Accutrigger.
 
22-Rimfire, have you any input on your Classic with 3-5 group size off sandbags at 50 & 100 yds? Type ammo would be std velocity and HV. Thank you
 
I can fairly consistantly get 0.5" groups or a bit better (edge to edge, so your talking 0.3" groups center to center) at 50 yds pretty easily with CCI Standard Velocity (LR's). That may not be the "average group". I have not shot it with a lot of different ammo. Unfortunately, I tend to settle on a couple ammo types. It did a bit worse with Federal Lightning 510s' at 50 yds and worse yet with Remington Thunderbolts (0.75" commonly and certainly not one hole). These are 5-shot groups. Have not shot it at all at 100 yds where I tried for serious groups. My usual is breaking clay pigeons at that distance, in essence bench plinking. My usual ammo is (are) Wolf MT, Federal 510, Remington Thunderbolts or golden bullets, CCI Standard velocity, CCI HV, and PMC Moderators with my various 22 rifles. Throw in occasional higher end target stuff now and then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
  • Locked
Which new low-priced rifle in 7mm-08
Replies
22
Views
3K
meanmrmustard
M
7
  • Locked
can anyone tell me more about this savage 5r
Replies
2
Views
739
TonyAngel
T
D
  • Locked
What .22 Rifle For Me?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
furyalecto
F
C
  • Locked
which pellet rifle???
Replies
8
Views
2K
JA
J
Laphroaig
  • Locked
Savage 111 THXP
Replies
2
Views
490
Laphroaig
Laphroaig
Back
Top