300 sav

99trix

99trix

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
53   0   0
Location
Vancouver Island
Most around here know that I am a bit of a savage lever action fan. I just picked up the magazine RIFLES "The Legacy of Lever Guns". There are numerous really good articles in there about Winchester, Marlin, Browning BLR and Savage 99 lever actions. One article on the 4 savage cartridges (22 hp, 250-3000, 303 sav and 300 sav) said that the 300 sav is the most efficient 30 caliber cartridge ever invented. The 300 sav came on the scene about 1920 and although there are numerous cartridges that out perform the 300 sav the one area that they don't is the 300 sav still produces more feet per second per grain of powder than any 30 caliber round. That was one interesting fact that I didn't know.
 
The .300 Savage is still a great gun though a slow mover on used gun racks for no good reason.
In 1920 it's ballistics were very close to the .30/06 as it was then loaded.
Since then the 06 has pulled away due to improved slower burning powders.
The only drawback I can see for a reloader is the short case neck which causes a heavy bullet to encroach on powder space.
But I think an autopsy would be required to see a difference in effectiveness
between it and a .308 on deer size game.
 
The .300 Savage is .308 Win light.... ;) :p

2007-10-27_091302_1aCoffee.gif

NAA.
 
I have a 300 Savage in Remington's 700 Limited edition Classic. It is a contender for being the most accurate out-of-box rifle I have ever owned, period. It shoots the 150 Partition, chased by Reloder 15 into groups under ¾" regularly, with the smallest ever grouping right at .040"!!! [witnessed, BTW] I have shot a couple of deer with it, plus one moose.....all were quick kills with not issues at all. The 300 Savage is a great chambering, and I have had no problems with that short neck either. Regards, Eagleye.
 
One of the boys in the crew pumps a 300 savage every year and always gets a nice big buck!

Hard to argue with that.
Cheers Ray!
 
I see so much foolishness written about this misunderstood cartridge. I've seen people call it "dead" even though all 3 major makers still produce it. I once saw some twit write that it was "a failure, because it never came close to its goal of equaling the .30-06....it was really little more than a .30-30...
As Mike Webb alluded to, at the time of its introduction, it pushed a 150-grain bullet 2700 fps. The .30-06 pushed the 150-grainer at....2700 fps. Hmmmm.....
I also looked up some chrono data on factory ammo. Most of it still clocks in at about 2700 fps in 24" barreled rifles.
I think it's a great cartridge, and being currently 99-less, I keep vacillating between the .250 and the .300 for chambering. I really need one. I hope Savage can help boost its flagging popularity now that they offer it in their bolt rifles again, but I think most buyers will opt for the more common .308 Winchester.
 
Hey 99 glad you were able to get a copy. Read mine cover to cover which is rare for gun mags for me. Glad you enjoyed. Waiting to hear on a 300 myself.
 
I prefer it to 308 Win.

300 Sav has more than enough killing power for deer.
And it's a little bit more pleasant to shoot than 308 Win.

I look forward to deer hunting with my Rem 760 in 2020 and
have a 100-year old cartridge with a 66-year old rifle (1954).
 
Last edited:
Before going with the .308 (or 7.62x51) The US military looked at the .300 Sav but rejected it for some reason. I tend to think of it as about the same as a .308, which isn't a bad place to be.
 
years back I had a 300 Savage in a Rem 760 from the 50's...it was a pretty good shooter, can't remember if I ever chronyed it though....nothing wrong with the cartridge that's for sure..Thompson Center decided to split the difference between the 300 Sav and the 308 with the 30TC...can't figure out the reason for that move...
 
99trix said:
The 300 sav came on the scene about 1920 and although there are numerous cartridges that out perform the 300 sav the one area that they don't is the 300 sav still produces more feet per second per grain of powder than any 30 caliber round. That was one interesting fact that I didn't know.
Click to expand...

This sounded like bull#### or at least a scrap of pretty irrelevant information, or gun writer splitting hairs....so I went and crunched a few numbers.

I consulted the Hodgdon reloading guide and found the highest velocity for a .300Sav with a 150gr bullet was given with IMR 3031, so I cross referenced a few other similar cartridges to find out how many feet per second they got from IMR 3031 with 150gr bullets.

.300Sav
38.5 gr
2575fps
66.8 fps/gr

.308 Win
43.5 gr
2881fps
66.2fps/gr

.308 Marlin
37.3gr
2545 fps
68.2 fps/gr

.30TC
42.5gr
2856 fps
67.2 fps/gr

.308 Marlin operates at similar pressures to the .300Savage, the other 2 are higher pressure cartridges, so you might get a bit more velocity from the 300 Sav than listed, although with more powder consumed, too.

But the bottom line is that comparing similar cartridges tot he Savage reveals that none of them have any real world efficiency of powder consumption, and it's probably in that magazine because the author happens to like that cartridge.:)
 
Gatehouse said:
Before going with the .308 (or 7.62x51) The US military looked at the .300 Sav but rejected it for some reason. I tend to think of it as about the same as a .308, which isn't a bad place to be.
Click to expand...

Well considering the 300 Savage is the parent case for the .308, they are pretty darn similar.
 
Gatehouse said:
The parent case for the .308 is the 30-06 Springfield, actually
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, I've read in a couple sources that it is. I know wikipedia is not a reliable source but it states:

"The test program continued for several years, including both the original .30-06 round and a modified .300 Savage (then known as the T65). In the end, the T65 demonstrated power roughly equal to the original .30-06, firing a 147-grain bullet at 2,750 feet per second (840 m/s) but was approximately .5 inches shorter."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62x51mm_NATO


And the reason they did not use the 300 Savage outright for military applications is because the neck was too short for certain bullets they wanted to use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom