Heresy/Rechambering a Savage 99

[AJMD429]

Granted, the main reason to own a Savage 99 is to own a piece of history and fine-shooting firearm in respectable 'vintage' chambering - not much a .308 Winchester can't deal with, for instance.

HOWEVER, with all the hue and cry to get a 'levergun' in one of the big-bore modern 'revolver' cartridges from Smith & Wesson, and knowing that many of the traditional 'pistol-caliber-leverguns' are limited to pressures in the 40-50k range, yet the Savage 99 evidently is in the 60k-plus range, this makes me wonder. . .

. . .any reason you couldn't chamber a Savage 99 in 460 S&W...?

.308 = Max OAL= 2.81 @ 62,000 psi base diameter 0.470"
.460 = Max OAL= 2.30 @ 65,000 psi base diameter 0.478"

Was the .308 Win already 'pushing things' to the max...?

[rogn]

Im sure the chambering and bolt function can be readily finageled, but would the rotary mag have trouble dealing with the rim and lenght issues?. Are there any gunsmiths still working that can finess a 99?

[Canuck Bob]

There are Savage 99s that will never be collectors. I would consider the C model with the clip. It is a late production model and a great shooter. It avoids the rotary mag complication but adds the rework of a clip magazine. If the action was a little longer it would really suit a 303 Brit.

One could long throat the reamer and make a dandy 460 with some real case capacity with heavy weight bullets.

[Hobie]

Look at the working pressures of the .460 (65000 psi) vs the .308 (62000 psi) and relative head size.

[Tumbleweeds II]

I don't think the frame will handle a barrel with that much diameter and recoil. That's more important that the pressure, which is really a barrel issue.

A 99 will handle the .358 Winchester, but the .375 Winchester cracked the frame and was discontinued. All I can figure is, the .375 barrel was of larger diameter than the .358, forcing removal of so much metal from the frame that the recoil cracked it. If that hypothesis is correct, the .460 (or .454 or .45-70) will be even more unworkable.

That's my guess. I'm not an expert. You'd certainly have the only one in town if you could make it work. Be a lot easier to buy a Marlin 95 though.

[Ben_Rumson]

As much as I love the 99 I wouldn’t recommend it...Handloders of some 99s say they have had to back off of certain top loads recommended in reloading manuals do to sticky extraction or lever bite...
By a quick look of things, the BLR would be my choice to start with...The bolt face clearance for the 325 WSM (which BLRs are chambered for) would accept the .460" dia. rim of the S&W with room to spare...13 thou on a side...and 325 WSM Cart length is very close to the .308. You'd get the short action BLR...You'd have the best lock up, solid top receiver to mount... wait for it.. a Holo sight even!.... and of course what we all like... The rapidity of fire of the lever action...

[AJMD429]

Thanks for the informative responses. I am NOT planning such a project (the .444 Marlin is more power than I'll ever need), but was always curious why nobody had done that.

Of course NOW I'm curious why nobody's done it with a BLR...

That one outfit I know is making 500 S&W ones, though, so someone's always pushing the 'envelope'.

[pdentrem]

Since we are just bluesky here-

The minor barrel shank of the Sav 99 is .825". That only leaves .173 for wall thickness after chambering. The total change is only .004" on the wall thickness vs .308/.358 cartridge. Rim diameter is close to .30-30 which some early 99s came in. Therefore mechanically it appears doable. The magazine spool is easy to modify or buy .30-30/.32-40 version and try it as is. If clip version then get the .375 clip. Clip magazines are not easy to make work for cartridges that it was not setup for.

The case is a straight wall (minimal taper) that reduces thrust on the bolt head. Ackley was very interested on thrust per his articles. This will help on the pressure side of things.

I would have concerns on the recoil energy. Barrel whip maybe more than the receiver can handle if the reports of the .375 Winchester versions is correct. People are still shooting their .375s so it can not be all bad.

The recoil on you may be the issue. The 99 is not friendly on the shoulder due to the style of buttstock which is setup for open sights and not shooting from the bench.

When I had a second barrel made up for my TD version, I stayed in the same parent case (250-3000 head size) diamension. I used a Win 70 barrel and cut a new shank and had it chambered for 22BR, and brother does it shoot! I bought a spool from Nurwich for .358 and reworked it to better fit the more square shaped case of the BR. Other than that it was a simply job. I did all the work but the chambering, local gunsmith did that for me as he already had the reamer.

[Old Savage]

Don't know about the 308 but if you load the 300 Savage to top listed end it starts to distort cases which tells me that it is not containing it all that well. I don't think the action is all the tight in containing pressure and maintaining cases. Look at Ken Waters article. To me this is an action to be treated with some reservation. Same experience with the 250 and 300.

[M. M. Wright]

I think I mentioned on another thread the loads for .308 Win that I use in my BLRs wrecked a 99. Even sent a bunch of them to Hogdon for testing and they said to quit using the National Match brass or back the loads of Ball C off. The load still works fine in my BLRs though, just the 99 couldn't stand it. Had a similar experience years ago with a 99F in 250/3000. Stuck a case in the chamber. I'll admit the loads, though from a manual, were too much for the 99. I had seen excess pressure signs from primers and mostly the brass had to be trimmed almost every firing. Then the cases, after about 5 reloads started to separate just ahead of the extractor groove. The Savage is a fine rifle and I love them but they will not stand the same pressures as bolt guns. Which is what the BLR is.

[AJMD429]

Personally, if I ever get a Savage that doesn't need rebarreled (and many a 'shot-out' barrel still shoots better than I can), I'll just leave it in whatever it is chambered in and enjoy it for what it is.

If I got hold of one that needed rebarreled, I'd do it in .35 Remington.

[Old Savage]

Had a Remington bolt in 250 and I was mainly interested in accuracy but found that loads I could easily just neck size in the bolt with no pressure problems had to be full length sized for the 250 and some sticking so I stick to factory loading level for it for the most part.

[earlmck]

Savage 99s are wonderful rifles and quite available at fairly modest prices for the ones in less-than-collector condition. After admiring from afar for many years I finally started acquiring a few. Left 3 alone but couldn't resist rebarreling a 308 into 260 Remington. This makes a nifty rig and is a favorite when I head out for elk or deer. I have never fired factory ammo: my top loads are backed off a bit from when extraction became slightly sticky, which came at a little less velocity than I expect you'd get from a bolt action.

That said, I do like the one in good ole 300 Savage with a tang sight a lot, and it may get the elk-hunt nod this year.

[pdentrem]

With rear lock up vs front locking lugs, the 99 will never be as strong as a most bolt actions. Still, there are quite a few conversions out there. Just have to be aware of the limitations and load properly for that.

[dogwood2]

I've got a natural: .219 Zipper. You could barrel it with a fast twist to shoot 70 grain .224 bullets and have a .22 hi-power, but much better.

John M.

[earlmck]

I've got a natural: .219 Zipper. You could barrel it with a fast twist to shoot 70 grain .224 bullets and have a .22 hi-power, but much better.

No John, that's more of a "natural" for a Marlin 336. A "natural" for the Savage 99 would be better in .22-250, don't you think? (Savage 99s in 300 Savage being as close as you get to "dime-a-dozen"). But the fast twist sounds like a fine plan for either.