Have been nosing around the site recently and there seems to be a lot of good knowledge available. I hope you will give me your best opiniions on some questions.
I'm going to buy a Savage centerfire for Mule deer and Elk. It must also be a compromise to handle some medium range shooting for target, 300-600yds.
I keep hearing about the Savage model 10/110. But when I check around they are difficult to get ahold of. There seems to be a lot of pkg. guns in the model 111. There are also some model 16 (weather warrior) series and model 12 (varmit) series. I'm considering either the 7mm mag or 300 Win. I'm somewhat recoil sensitive so the 7mm makes more sense. But I notice there are a few reload recipes for 130-150 gr., -- 300 Win, that will hopefully keep it tame--off the bench.

Questions:
1) Are all models of Savages dual piller bedded? Sounds like this is one of the features that helps keep the model 10/110 accurate.

2) Are all different models ( 11, 12, 16 etc.) built with the same model 10 action? There seems to be a lot of package guns with scopes already on them. Sometimes the prices are better than just the gun by itself. They are found just about eveywhere. Do the package guns have the model 10/110 action?

3) Is there an accuracy problem with the stainless steel barrel vs. blued barrels? Many folks that talk about accuracy never mention stainless. Is it because the world of sniping and accuracy are so intwined therefore, bright and shiny is taboo?

4) I notice that some information on different models talk about "heavy barrels" (model 10/110 long range), and other models say "heavy contour" barrels (model 10/110 but different stock number). Do they have different levels of barrel contour other than standard and heavy?

5) Opinions on barrel length. Some folks talk about the shorter, stiff barrels are great for accuracy. Others are quick to point out a loss of retained energy and bullet speed at long distance. I may want to take the occasional turn at a long range shot. What are the pro's-cons to you.

6) Some of the tactical/police stocks are upgrades compared to standard issue stocks. Do some of the standard models come with an improved stock? For instance, one model has 2 sling swivels on the front to accomodate a bipod. Is that stock more stiff, so it won't bind on the barrel when the bipod is deployed? It appears the model 16(varmit) stock may be better but I can't tell from the pictures. I'm talking about the synthetic model, not the laminated wood. Anyone with laminated wood opinions vs. synthetic, would like to hear from you.

Thanks for the assist guys, sorry for the lack of brevity. I called Cabela's in Sydney, Neb. and they didn't have the Model 10 that I asked about. I wanted the the recessed target crown muzzle, heavy contour barrel. So I'm still looking.

Welcome!
I don't know if All rifles are pillar bedded, but I have an older 110 in 7mm mag that is very accurate. I don't think at the distances you want to shoot a lighter bullet will help your cause. Heavier bullets are usually more accurate at distance.

The Package guns are a good deal, Although the scopes leave something to be desired you can always upgrade your glass in the future.

A Matte stainless barrel will not give itself away any faster than a blued barrel.

If you are going to hunt big game, and walking allot than a bull barrel is not the ticket.
Barrel length and velocity are dictated by the cartridge. You need to decide what your priorities are. If 2 identical cartridges are fired and both bullets leave a muzzle at the same velocity, one will not loose velocity faster downrange because of barrel length only.

Beware of "Police" or "Tactical" terms. If you are going to hunt, use a rifle designed for the task. The more you add, the heavier the rifle. Even my .308 HB sports a Monte Carlo type stock. It's all about function!

There are other very good rifles out there. Don't limit yourself to only 1 option.
BTW, The Model 10 is a short action and the 110 is the long action.

Good luck, Jim

Don't know much about Savage, other than that most folks love 'em now. But for recoil, the one thing you can do is use lighter bullets. Bullet weight, other than gun weight, is the single biggest affector of recoil. So for any given gun, dropping your bullet down a notch or two will make a big difference.

What are the ranges you are comfortable taking mulies and elk? If they're not too far, you may be well able to use a standard cartridge as well....there's many fine ones that may fit the bill.

Guys,
Thanks for the reply. I found a 110 FP in 300 win mag. Will probably go with that unless something else shows up before long.

M1 I haven't hunted much the past couple of seasons so this gun may not ever get pointed at a Deer or Elk. But every fall, I feel a tug to go to the mountains. In the past, I have never shot an Elk beyond 200yds or Mulie much more than that. Would probably feel comfortable out to 300 yds. I figured it would be better to have a little too much gun and load it down than to have too little gun and wish for more.

IMO, you could do very well with a number of standards if you're setting your range at 300 yards such as the 308 Win, 270 Win, 280 Rem, 30-06, etc. Choose the right bullet and place it well and it'll do the job from any of those calibers. If you're looking at a lot of target shooting, my first thought is the 308 Win but all and many others will do a fine job. But again, thats JMO.

That 110 FP is going to be a heavy sucker, are you planning on carrying it very far?

Did you consider the .300WSM. I believe the cartridge is more efficientv and throws slightly less recoil than the .300 Win Mag. Shorter action = faster operation and less weight.

I'm with M1 here. I hauled my .300 Wby for 20 years, on mostly FLAT ground with a german scope...knowing that I had the medicine for whatever showed up! And it worked just fine. A couple years ago, I started shooting my BLR in .308 more for grins than anything, switched to SST's at 165 grains, and suddenly divorced my old reliable, and carry the lever near exclusively! It's lighter, bullet technology is so far ahead now, that that bullet does MORE damage than the .300's I used to use. Get one of M1's suggestions, put a good scope on there with a detachable mount for rain or shine, and you'll never regret it.

What are the ranges you are comfortable taking mulies and elk? If they're not too far, you may be well able to use a standard cartridge as well....there's many fine ones that may fit the bill.

All of your replies make me smile. Thats why I wrote here so you could help me think about this whole thing.
I have considered a couple other calibers, most of them you have just mentioned. I might add that I also owned a Ruger #1 in the 300 WM flavor. This leaves me with lots of brass and reloading dies. A handy bit of info for you guys to know, that I left off. My original post was already very .....well------WINDY.:) So I didn't want to clutter it any further.

300 yds or a little less is my comfort zone, especially pointing at live, moving critters in a forest environment. They can run off into deep holes and make finding or bringing them home a much bigger than expected chore. Most of your suggested calibers hold up well at that range.
However, in the back of my mind, I would like to try some longer ranges on the bench and maybe with critters such as coyotes and ground-hogs in the near future. Especially if my bench shooting improves at long range.
It seems like those other calibers start pooping out past 4-500 yds when compared to the 300WM. I mainly used the Remington ballistics charts on-line to decide this. Perhaps you guys have better info sources that will change the story for me, about the other calibers.

I know this is a big gun, by both caliber and weight to carry. Definetely not ideal caliber for varmits. Savage lists the weight as 8.5 lbs. bare. Add an adjustable bipod (range and varmit only) or a better, maybe even heavier stock and it could be quite burdensome. As I indicated, this will be a multi-use tool, not quite ideal for any individual situation.

All said, I haven't brought anything home yet. Still doing some figuring in my head and hoping you guys continue to help me clarify. I don't buy very many guns. Sad but true. Maybe when the kids get done with school/college, in a few years, this situation will improve. Until then I compromise and scrimp. I also dream alot about several different walking sticks that would be fun to share the field with.

I have owned several Savage bolts over the years, in many different calibers and flavors. Every one of them was a guts accurate gun!
Hinds sight being clear as crystal, I should ahve never sold the .223 model 10 I had, or the 11 package gun in 308. Both were stellar performers, and worth the price, if not more.

Heres a pic of the model 10.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1600/682422/1127617/274932265.jpg

good luck with your new rifle!

OK, I'm an accountant, so I understand that you've got brass and dies! I agree, use 'em! But the problem is that if you only have a hammer, every job is a hammer job. Little cartridges do NOT poop out after 400-500 yards. I shoot in the Powder River Basin annually, at dem dogs. And I've dropped down to 40 grains pills in both my .223 and .22-250. Yes, in the WY wind, and at long range. They work. Get into Buffalo to The Sports Lure and grab a used one of them .22's for your varminting desires. For coyotes, most guys do use bigger bullets. Then, in your .300, load 165's instead of 180's, use a slightly faster powder rather than slower to cut the charge weight down, and get it as heavy as you're willing to carry it. All that cuts recoil. I like Stoney Creek's sticks. They've got a new one that attaches easily to the rifle. Otherwise, I carry 'em in my vest. The Harris are too heavy and clunky and slow. By a lot.

I might add that I also owned a Ruger #1 in the 300 WM flavor. This leaves me with lots of brass and reloading dies.

300 yds or a little less is my comfort zone, especially pointing at live, moving critters in a forest environment.

However, in the back of my mind, I would like to try some longer ranges on the bench and maybe with critters such as coyotes and ground-hogs in the near future. Especially if my bench shooting improves at long range.



Just gonna throw in my two cents. Since you already have the Ruger #1 why don't you pick your next rifle to be something the Ruger isn't? For example if the Ruger works well as a carry gun, set up your next rifle as a heavy long range combo.

For me recoil is a non-issue with a big game hunting rifle. Heck most of the time I'm so zoned, I'm barely aware of the thing going off. I've really gotten to appreciate a light easy to handle rifle, especially in rough terrain.

Again not to argue with what your caliber of choice should be, just want to point out my model 12 Savage in .223 routinely takes prairie dogs at 400 yards plus. Like Wyoming, the wind in SD seems to never stop. The .223 has an added bonus since it's way less money to reload for. If you get into lots of action i've run 75 consecutive rounds through mine before patching it out and allowing to cool. That would be a tall order for most magnums.

Well, if you go with the savage, you could set it up to swap barrels to a more suitible caliber for varmints. Just out of curiosity why are you looking at such a heavy barreled rifle for a walk around gun?

....It seems like those other calibers start pooping out past 4-500 yds when compared to the 300WM. .
Not true for the 300WSM...look a little harder.

I have a savage 111 package gun in 30:06 with a 22 inch barrel. It is a pretty accurate gun. Now I am not a long range target shooter, but my 17 year old son and I can hold 1 inch groups with that gun at 200 yards. It has a synthetic stock not sure about the weight but it is not that heavy. The recoil in my opinion is not that bad. I have a .270 wsm in a browning that is about the same weight and I think it kicks like a mule compared to the 30 06.

JR1-- Your right about the "hammer job." Only problem is that this gun is a multi-use (read compromise) tool, definetely not the ideal tool for each job. Wish I could buy several different guns right now but its not in the works. I like the idea about loading 165 gr. with faster powder. Will definetely give it some thought. Would like to know more about the Stone Creek sticks. I'll check the net to see if I can find them.

Monty-- I don't own the Ruger #1 any longer. Thats why I have the money to buy this new gun. I agree, the recoil isn't a factor when hunting, esp. big game. It might be more of an issue off the bench and with varmits, etc. Hopefully the additional weight will help somewhat. Also, a premium butt pad is a "must have" for me.
JB12-- Swapping barrels might be a good option in the future. It will take a while before I get all that stuff figured out and can put the cash together. Might have to add a nicer stock as a first upgrade, besides trying to have a decent scope on top of this pea shooter. I don't really want to carry a bunch of extra weight but the thicker barrel should provide more accuracy for things like long range bench and varmits. I'm getting old so maybe have to walk slower with the additional weight.
Lord Byron-- Looked at the 300 WSM since you brought it up. Your right, the ballistics look impressive. Only problem, I kinda sold myself on the Savage and they don't offer that caliber in the 110 FP. I also like the 7mm mag which seems to produce less recoil. Same problem, not offered in this gun.
Packy-- You just confirmed what I hear about Savage all the time. Good shootin-iron.

i wouldn't hang my hat on any short mag, they don't offer anything that the standard mags do and they will never have the distribution of the standard mags. in my opinion with the ranges you've listed you could get along just great with a 7/08 or a 308. 300 yards is 300 yards and i don't care what anyone says, if either of those 2 won't do it at those ranges you have no business taking the shot.

big dan the short mags offer a few things the standard magnums don't.
1. they fit in a standard length action so it is naturally stiffer.
2. they are more efficient by design
3. they allow more case neck support for heavier bullets
4. believe it or not there is a difference in recoil felt to me the standard mags are sharper on the recoil side.
I do agree that he could probably get by with a standard cartridge if he is limiting himself to 300 yards. And if you know you are recoil sensitive I would probably recommend it. If you are still wanting to shoot some long range stuff look at the 6.5-284 as well.

I am not a fan of 'Big' recoil but that doesn’t mean that I don't still need a bigger caliber for certain game. I bought a Rem. Model 700 SPS in 300 RUM this spring and before I shot it it went straight to a good gunsmith were he reworked the trigger (a must for me) and but a muzzle break on it.

...I know, I know...muzzle breaks will ruin accuracy. Mine will still shoot .5" groups at 100 yards. Besides the 300 RUM isn't my bench gun...that’s what my 204 is for.

Anyway point being the muzzle break took the recoil down to were it feels like a 243 or less when fired. This gun is only 7.5 lbs (only 1 lb heavier than Remington's mountain gun) so it's fairly light.

I feel that even if you plan on bench resting with your rifle of choice the less you flinch when firing pin hits the primer the more accurate you will be anyway. For me a 'big' recoil causes me to pull off the point of aim so much that it wouldn't matter if the gun could drive tacks, I would still be shooting sub par groups off the bench.

If you opted for the lighter firearm the cost saving you would realize in not buying the heavy barrel would probably offset the cost of a gunsmith adding the break for you.

If you decide to go that route though just make sure you are wearing your ear protection as the break exemplifies the concussion from the muzzle. :D

I’m sure whatever you decide will do what you want it to do, just so many options. :D

Best of luck to you on your decision.

i wouldn't hang my hat on any short mag, they don't offer anything that the standard mags do and they will never have the distribution of the standard mags.
What is the basis for that assertion when most of the rifle manufacturers chamber for short magnums? As far distribution, the standard mags have been around for decades, just give the WSM's some time.

Check your ballistics tables and you should spot the performance difference.