model of savage mark II

[shores]

Hi,

So my PAL is finally in the mail, I'm ready to go shopping any day
I've been looking at CZ vs Savage, having discounted marlin XT22VR simply because of the QC issues, and I know I'll want a bipod on it at some point, and the marlin molded stock swivel points are known to be flimsy.

I'll be looking at getting a milsurp or a hunting rifle in the next while, so that's my main reasoning of going savage instead of the cz, as by the time I have the rifle, cleaning stuff, ammo, and a scope/rings, I'll already be up into a decent amount of money, and want some left over for a second purchase this fall.

I was looking at the mark II fv, the fvsr, and the bv.

I'll be mostly doing target shooting, with some critter work on a farm.

The FSS is nice that it is stainless steel and easier to maintain, but it doesn't come in a heavy barrell unless you get the limited edition BVSS with matching scope.

I like the FVSR, but since silencers are illegal in canada, and there's not really a need for a muzzle brake on a 22, is the shorter barrel just losing any accuracy or power over the normal fv?

I can buy a mount or use dovetail rings as is, so the scope rail alone doesn't make the FVSR a simple winner.

I've heard from people that the F model with synthetic stock is a bit flimsy?

Thanks!

 

[.22LRGUY]

Sounds to me like you're already considering all the angles..just a matter of choosing one. I've mentioned (in a few recent threads) that if I were buying a Savage .22 today, it would be this one;

http://www.cabelas.ca/index.cfm?pageID=71&section=1187&section2=1725&ID=4989

I like stainless too, but I've never owned one on the grounds that I believe that all guns deserve the same level of TLC if I want them to last. So, stainless or not, they'll be getting dusted-off, dried-out, and wiped-down with a lightly oiled rag whether it's a blued barrel, or a stainless one. One thing I don't know anything about is the durability of that satin metal finish on those TRR/FVSR Savages. However, they look like the finish on one of my other Savage rifles, so TLC is req. too.

As for the plastic stock-versions... I'd say 2 things about them~the quality isn't quite as horrible as they're made-out to be, BUT, the geometry isn't great. The stock is meant for a rifle with iron sights, but the heavy-barreled models requiring scopes...just doesn't work that well. Your eye will be a little low=strain a little to get your cheek high enough to peer through the scope. Is it workable? Sure it is...BUT...if you decide to wait and upgrade to a Boyd's stock later on (and the metal bits req. to do that) you will be paying more than getting it from the factory set-up that way. Ask me how I know. I bought a plastic-stock, heavy-barrel Savage 93FV (.22mag) and these list today for about $265 before tax. Bought a cheap bipod, cheap scope, shot well..killed lots of groundhogs. This is that gun;

Decided that I liked the way it shot so much that I upgraded the scope, the bipod, the scope base (not req., just liked the look of it) the bolt handle (again, just for the h*ll of it) and most importantly, the stock.

I don't remember exactly what the stock upgrade cost, but I think the total from Boyd's was about $137, plus about $50 from Savage for the trigger guard, mag plate, fasteners, shipping, etc. You don't need to be a math major to realize the merit in getting one set-up that way directly from Savage~who use Boyd's stocks anyway. The one in that link from Cabelas already has the nicer Boyd's stock metal bits, and for $329...a bit of a deal. Check with CGN sponsors in your area first of course, always better to deal local if you can.

BTW~this is more of a story of the journey I overpaid for ...not a "get a .22mag" thing.

 

[hoytcanon]

Hi,

I was looking at the mark II fv, the fvsr, and the bv.

#1; The FSS is nice that it is stainless steel and easier to maintain, but it doesn't come in a heavy barrell unless you get the limited edition BVSS with matching scope.

#2; I like the FVSR, but since silencers are illegal in canada, and there's not really a need for a muzzle brake on a 22, is the shorter barrel just losing any accuracy or power over the normal fv?
I can buy a mount or use dovetail rings as is, so the scope rail alone doesn't make the FVSR a simple winner.

#3; I've heard from people that the F model with synthetic stock is a bit flimsy?Thanks!

#1; You can buy an FVSS if you want, I have three. They have the heavy barrel and come with the synthetic stock... mine were purchased as donor rifles for builds.

#2; With LR, you effectively loose nothing in velocity or accuracy from 12" through 24"... so choose your barrel length for other factors... I personally prefer barrels on the shorter side.

#3; Yes, the synthetic stock is flimsy, but it is serviceable... the need for changing it will be personal preference... I changed all of mine... but others keep and shoot theirs.

 

[shores]

Any other votes for synthetic vs laminate?

Should I bother just spending the bit extra and going to a 455 american?

Is there that much increase in quality?

 

[AdrianM]

I'll cast my vote for Laminate.

Synthetic stocks are crap in my opinion. Too light so most rifles feel muzzle heavy, noisy when bumped. Not many are finished very well...they look and feel like a cheap kids toy.

I prefer solid wood over anything, but I'm a traditionalist. But Laminate is the next best thing to me. Solid, stay true, rugged as hell and if it gets beat up you refinish it and it's pretty again.

 

[ndb86]

This is the best picture I could find and I'm too lazy to go take another one. I got my savage for my 12th birthday. it has shot tens of thousands of rounds and never had one problem. Synthetic stock is still in good shape after all this time. I don't purposely abuse it, but it gets worked hard and I don't baby it. wood vs. plastic is a personal thing. I like the look of wood, but I don't' feel as bad scratching or getting plastic dirty.

 

[easyrider604]

I've heard from people that the F model with synthetic stock is a bit flimsy? Thanks!

I got an F model. No complaints with stock flimsiness from me. Accuracy of the tapered barrel is nearly are good as, or as good as the bull barreled versions. I think the difference in accuracy lies in the differences between individual rifles idiosyncracies, ammo type/brand and shooters' skills.

I once did MOA at 100 meters in calm air, with bulk Winchester Dynapoints, sandbagged fore and butt end, cheap 3-9X x 32AO Bushnell.

Never duplicated that feat. Now it is usually 1.5 MOA at 100 meters same ammo.

So for both range use and occasional field carry, the F/G should be GTG. IMO, the ideal affordable range gun is a Savage or CZ bull barrel with heavy wood stock, ideal affordable field gun is a 16 inch tapered barrel CZ American.

BTW, the 16 inch CZ American is capable of superior accuracy, like the CZ 16" Scout.

For me, good examples of all-purpose 22 are the F/G model or CZ American.

For long-term satisfaction, I'd go CZ. The 452 Varmint and Style, Winchester 69A and Savage MKIGY are my keepers, and have started to dispose my other brands/models.