Stevens 300F first impressions

C

calalta

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
60   0   0
Location
Calgary
Even though it has no scope mounts or accutrigger, and costs more, I decided to give one of these a try. After a week in the hands of Canada Post it finally arrived today. Out of the box it is a surprise at how short it really is.
Here it is beside a Savage 93 .17hmr with a 20.5 inch barrel.
stevens300F.jpg


The length of pull is the same for each at just over 13 inches.
stevens300.jpg


Other specs:
barrel: 13"
OAL: 31.75" (this is longer than quoted)
sight radius: 9.5"
weight: 5 lb. (based on online specs, I didn't weigh it)

It is very notchy which I have found is common with many new rifles. Cartridges feed and eject fine.
It is drilled and tapped in the same locations as the Savage 93 mounts.
The only disappointment to me was the trigger pull: an astonishing 7 pounds, I have never found a 7 lb. trigger pull on a rifle before.
I have worked on a Stevens 200 trigger with good results but have not taken the 300 apart yet.
BTW thanks to Scot at Cedar Valley for a great transaction.
Likely won't get it out to shoot until the weekend.
 
hmr-hound said:
A rifle basix trigger kit will solve your trigger pull problem quite nicely, but 7 pounds is pathetic. I'd be callin savage to tear them a new one.
Click to expand...

This isn't an unuasual situation for Savage. Their non-Accutrigger rifles have always had horrid factory triggers that had pull weights that high. You either spend lots of effort or money modifying the original or you buy an aftermarket one as suggested.
 
Found a good thread on Rimfire Central - Savage Trigger Shim. Shimmed front and rear, lightly polished hammer and sear, replaced the trigger spring and now its 3.25 lbs.
 
Update: bolt action is very smooth now, I re-shimmed it and the trigger is now very nice at 2.5 lbs.
The short barrel doesn't seem to affect accuracy, about 1-1.25" at 50 yds, (bit better than my 10-22).
Win 333 ammo works well, Federal 525 doesn't.
Figured a compact scope would suit it:
compact.jpg
 
calalta said:
Update: bolt action is very smooth now, I re-shimmed it and the trigger is now very nice at 2.5 lbs.
The short barrel doesn't seem to affect accuracy, about 1-1.25" at 50 yds, (bit better than my 10-22).
Win 333 ammo works well, Federal 525 doesn't.
Figured a compact scope would suit it:
Click to expand...

calalta...that looks great!
 
so-is there ANY diferance at all other than the shorter barrel?This is one of the anonymolies of the law-A 13'' barrel is LEGAL if it comes from the factory-but ILLEGAL if you cut it yourself to the SAME length -but how they would ever figure that out,I don't know.
 
Shouldn't be any other difference.
"but how they would ever figure that out,I don't know."
I'd imagine they figure it out by taking all your guns while they pick their noses and stare at the barrel for days, occasionally scratching their heads.
 
the rationale for a barrel length only being legal if coming from the manufactuor that way ,but illegal if cut to the exact same length completely escapes me.Presumably the reason is for concealabilty,so what possible diferance could there be one way or another?-a 13'' barrel is a 13'' barrel...
 
Let's not forget this law about not cutting your barrel down will prevent a criminal from committing a crime.
Maybe they should just ban crimes.
 
Until the requirement to register long guns is gone you need your paper to show that you have a 'legal' 13 inch barrel.
As already noted, the law bans cutting down barrels to 13 inches. The certificate on the factory model states: "less than 470mm".
Can't wait for that crap to be eliminated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom