Questions on Savage MKII Actions and barrels.

A

AJSP

Regular
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Location
Nova Scotia
I did a search and couldn't source anything.

My question relates to the Actions and Barrel(s) on the MKII Savage.

- I Assume all the actions are the same? But my big wondering is on the barrels. They have a couple different heavy barrels. Carbon and stainless. Now this question may be geared towards people who own or who have owned multiple Savages. Is any one barrel more accurate then the other? The TRR-SR has the heavy tapered barrel. The BRJ has the heavy swirled barrel. And then various other models have just the plain stainless or carbon heavy barrels.

With the "different" heavy barrels are there any difference in accuracy? or is it purely and ascetic design?

I am thinking about buying one later this year after the purchase of a MKI FVT. And would be using it for target shooting. 50-300yards. But would love some input into the matter!

Have owned 2 savage's in the past. A 93R17 BTVS and a BVSS. The BTVS was literally a tack driver at 100 yards.


Any input would be great fellas/Gals!

Thanks!
 
I have the BTVS. You're right it's awesome! Sorry don't know the answer, however I did find out that Boyds makes alot of stock for savage. I really like the Evo stock.
I'm happy your looking at Savage guns!
 
The actions are all the same, even between LR and magnum rimfire. Same e-receiver.

Barrel differences are almost purely aesthetics. That said, my FVT has the nicest bore i've ever seen on a savage and i've heard that from several FVT owners over at RFC, which leads me, and the others to believe that they either select these barrels or spend a bit of extra time on them.

It sure shows in the way they shoot. The others, F, FV, G, BTV, BTVS, TR, etc, are all very accurate button rifled barrels, More than likely rifled with the exact same button.

The advantage the heavier barrels may have is in how steady you can hold them due to the added weight.
 
mikeystew said:
The actions are all the same, even between LR and magnum rimfire. Same e-receiver.

Barrel differences are almost purely aesthetics. That said, my FVT has the nicest bore i've ever seen on a savage and i've heard that from several FVT owners over at RFC, which leads me, and the others to believe that they either select these barrels or spend a bit of extra time on them.

It sure shows in the way they shoot. The others, F, FV, G, BTV, BTVS, TR, etc, are all very accurate button rifled barrels, More than likely rifled with the exact same button.

The advantage the heavier barrels may have is in how steady you can hold them due to the added weight.
Click to expand...

not to call you out here, i dont know about all the new rifles, their actions might be the same now, however i know there was a difference in actions to older vs newer rifles.

Another advantage to the heavy barrel (which i own) is less heating up, not that youll be doing too rapidly firing of a bolt action, but also the more rigid barrel is less affected by "harmonic Vibrations" which can affect bullet stability...
 
TargetGuy said:
not to call you out here, i dont know about all the new rifles, their actions might be the same now, however i know there was a difference in actions to older vs newer rifles.

Another advantage to the heavy barrel (which i own) is less heating up, not that youll be doing too rapidly firing of a bolt action, but also the more rigid barrel is less affected by "harmonic Vibrations" which can affect bullet stability...
Click to expand...

Older savage rimfires all had different actions. 22lr were smaller than the magnums. New (post 2008) rifles all have the exact same receiver.

As for the second point, I have a marlin papoose with a super thin barrel that shoots better than any marlin i've ever owned. It also does not heat up at all worth anything to worry about, even after hunderds of rounds being fired pretty rapidly. I think "in theory" you are right about the harmonics, but in reality it does not make much of a difference if any when using .22lr. Look to anschutz and CZ rifles for the proof. If it made a big difference they would not have "sporter contour" barrels. centerfire is obviously a different story.
 
Hey Mikey stew. I have heard that about the bores on the FVT.

So speaking loosely here. Cause I know you can have IDENTICAL firearms and 1 can/could shoot better then the other. In theory apart from "maybe" the FVT versions. And the "rifles" them-self. ALL the savage MkII's with heavy barrels "should" all shoot the same? From the basic FV to the TRR-SR.

Would anybody agree or disagree??
 
All else being equal, two rifles with the same action and barrel should shoot nearly identically. However, all else is rarely equal. The barrel may be free floating in one and not quite in the other. The take down screw may be looser in one than the other. One barrel may have been bored at the factory by a tool that was slightly duller than the other one, etc, etc, etc.

Generally speaking the MKIIs are very accurate regardless of the exact configuration. But there are always going to be differences between individual rifles. For example, my BTVS always throws the cold barrel shot high and left; my BV does not.

I suspect the heavy barrels are slightly more accurate (haven't really tested this with otherwise similar models) due to being less affected by ambient temperature. I don't think the issue is overheating since bolt action .22 rifles are rarely fired fast enough to do anything other than slightly warm the barrel. The issue is more how long does it take the barrel to cool down again between rounds on a cold day. I suspect the heavier barrel, once it reaches its optimum shooting temperature, tends to stay there a little longer than the sporter barrel.
 
Good clarification JimV and I agree.

I'm at debates on what to pick/build on for a setup. I'm hearing about people shooting golf balls and 200ish yards and has got me deadly intrigued. I always enjoyed trying to shoot 22's at farther distances for ####s and giggles. But never with anything that could actually stay "accurate" at that distance.
 
Good clarification JimV and I agree.

I'm at debates on what to pick/build on for a setup. I'm hearing about people shooting golf balls and 200ish yards and has got me deadly intrigued. I always enjoyed trying to shoot 22's at farther distances for s**ts and giggles. But never with anything that could actually stay "accurate" at that distance.
 
A golf ball is about .5 moa at 200 yds, and I don't know of too many rimfires that can do that consistently. But if I was going to build a super accurate long range savage, I would use a TR because it is already wearing the appropriate stock for long range work. I would then glass and pillar bed the action and modify the accutrigger to lighten the pull to 13oz-1 lb.
Even better I would just invest in a good scope for the FVT and take the target sights off when I want to shoot long range. Put it in a glass an pillar bedded boyds rimfire target hunter with thick bottom metal and it would be close to the perfect long range .22 I think.
 
That thought has cross my mind Mikey! I can't remember where I read the golf ball thing at. I just like to have the excuse of another gun :)

I have never tried to shoot "accurately" past 50yrds with a 22. Cause I've only ever plinked or practiced got hunting. I've never had a dedicated 22 for target shooting. If I can find a good shooter and do my part. What can I honestly aspect for 200yards??? My 93r17 with heavy barrel and thumbhole laminate .17hmr at 200 with a cheapo tasco scope could do about 3ish inches. Without really practicing was just dicking around. Used it for gopher killing when I was in Alberta.
 
Last edited:
I am from NS originally. And I'm probably the guy Dave was talking about as we have had several communications related to the FVT. I believe it was a thread I did on the review of mine that inspired Dave to buy one. Has he had a chance to shoot that thing yet?

As for what to reasonably expect... Anywhere between 1.5-3 inches is very very good shooting at 200 yds. Not to say that you cant shoot under 1.5" at that distance, but it would require a very expensive rifle, very expensive scope, very expensive ammo, and absolutely perfect conditions combined with outstanding shooter ability... And a bit of pure luck.
 
I am not sure if he has had a chance to get a round off yet with the new stock.
You are from New Glasgow correct?
1.5-3'' is more then fine by me to have fun shooting. If I can get to that..

He has inspired me too look at getting one as well. The only thing I am having issues with is the heavier stock.. I've never did target shooting before and find it hard to grasp the heavy stocks.. Does make sense in my simple mind lol.
 
so-let me sum this up with one question-if you only shot 5 shots ,from any of the models[ no heating issue] there would be little or no diferance in accuracy from any of the models,from the basic plain barrel, plain stock , no extras cheapest to the most expensive-am I right?
 
That is what I am trying to figure out. I don't know about the light barrel. In "theory" all the MkII's with the different heavy barrels should all shoot the same(ish) with in reason.
 
Marlin used to offer their model #7000-heavy barrel''squirrel rifle''-but it was dropped-it really didn't offer any significant accuracy advantage over the model 60 or 795 with the regular barrel and it weighed more-not an advantage to a walking gun
 
Yea. Walking guns and heavy is not fun. My walking hunting 22 is a bare bones Rem 597. I call is my "mud stick" Drop it in mud, snow dirt, prybar, shovel, truck gun. Would love to have one in a magnum but they are over priced on the EE.
 
ratherbefishin said:
so-let me sum this up with one question-if you only shot 5 shots ,from any of the models[ no heating issue] there would be little or no diferance in accuracy from any of the models,from the basic plain barrel, plain stock , no extras cheapest to the most expensive-am I right?
Click to expand...

In a nutshell yes. But only if all the guns were tuned to perform their personal best and say, shot from a mechanical rest to eliminate the variables such as barrel weight, steadiness, cheek weld, trigger pull etc.

And yup, I'm from NG originally.and ratherbefishin that is a good example. Like I said before, my papoose has the thinnest barrel I've seen and shoots almost as good as a quality bolt action. By far better than any other marlin I've owned.

I'd even go further to say barrel heating is really a non issue with the .22lr. Again, my papoose... Teeny weenie barrel... Never heats up to the point of poi shift or groups opening up. Just does not happen. Again, look at an anschutz biathlon rifle or a CZ 452. They don't have heavy barrels because the thickness of a .22lr barrel has little to do with it's inherent accuracy. If the bore is good and the shooter is comfortable with the gun, that is all that really matters.

The FVT's problem is the drop in the comb. You can't get a good cheek weld, an that will harm accuracy more than a smaller barrel. And by saying heavier stock, that is somewhat a relative term. The FVT even with a boyds is in the 7 lb range which is minimum for accuracy work IMHO. Heck you want to see heavy? I had a BSA martini international the was over 12 lb. Sure was accurate, but too heavy for me.
 
I have an old remington mohawk that I got from an old retired rancher-he said that was the gun he reached for whenever he left the house.I have a marlin 795 in a plastic stock that I filled with non expanding foam,and thats about as utilitarian as you can get.Goes bang everytime and hits what I aim at though.I 'd kind of like one of those savage mk 2 's though and if the basic model is as accurate as the top of the line one, it would be good choice for what I want.
 
According to Savage (I called and asked), there is ZERO difference in the way they manufacture the barrels with regard to the BORE. There are differences in length, diameter and fluting/threading... but the bore is essentially the same for all barrels, including the FVT. I am personally a fan of heavy barrels, mostly because I like the balance, feel and look more so than sporter contours. I don't mind the extra weight, and I feel that it helps with offhand shooting, a little weight aids in steadiness, and the weight certainly doesn't hurt on the bench. Also, for reasons that I won't go into (some are listed in above posts), it is my belief that the heavy barrels are (potentially, but not necessarily) more accurate... at any rate, I have more confidence when shooting a heavy barreled gun... confidence does tighten groups.

019RFC.jpg


057RFC.jpg


024RFC.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom