Savage Shooters:
let's compare a model 111fhns with the model 700 sps by Remington. a .25-06 in the Savage is given a 22" barrel. on such an overbore cartridge you get muzzle blast, not velocity. the magnums are given a 24" barrel.
The .25-06 is ‘overbore’? The .257 Weatherby might qualify but I suspect few people would consider the .25-06 to be ‘overbore’.
Further, there is probably greater variation of ‘blast’ due to different loads than there is due to dropping from a .24” barrel to a 22” barrel. My .257 Roberts has a 22” barrel and I shoot +P loads that give up very little to a .25-06 (usually less than 100fps even with the shorter barrel). Blast is nowhere near objectionable. The fact is a 22" barrel for a 25-06 is no more objectionable than 22" barrels for a .270 Win or .30-06, which are common as dirt. If you can tell the difference in blast between my .257 Roberts, .308 Win and .30-06, all with 22” barrels, I’ll buy you dinner.
The question is about $249 rifles. A comparison that would be more apples-to-apples would be to compare the Remington M770.
remington's recent change to the 'sps' model (with the adl' being discontinued) gives us a 24" barrel as standard, with 26" barrels on the magnums.
You chose the .25-06 for your comparison but Remington only offers the .25-06 in the stainless version of the SPS. List price is $729 but I would love to get one for $249…
savage's 111fhns gives us two rounds in the magazine with their magnums; remington gives us three!
Krochus’ original post was regarding the 7mm-08, .270 Win and .308 Win so magnums are rather irrelevant.
i consider magnums in 7mm Rem' mag' and larger to be 'stoppers' when needed. two rounds in the mag' for a 'stopper' is not my idea of a properly designed rifle.
Based on the original question, magnums are irrelevant. But since you insist…
Having shot a 7mm Rem Mag as my only bolt hunting rifle for 22 years I have to say that in no case was 3 cartridges ever too few. In fact, I’m having difficulty thinking of any cases where one shot failed to put game on the ground, although I can think of some where a second round was used to hasten the inevitable. There is exactly one case I can think of where three rounds were needed – an unfortunate antelope who suffered needlessly when I was experimenting with Barnes XLC bullets - but each time I shot him the buck went down. (It is my belief the bullets failed to expand but I can hardly blame that on the 7mm Rem Mag.) The larger point is that in a $249 rifle the question of two or three rounds in the chamber (three or four with one in the chamber) is really rather unimportant in most situations.
Although the 7mm Rem Mag is very effective in normal hunting situations, I have never considered it a ‘stopper’ cartridge, meaning a good choice when Brer Bear decides you are lunch. In such situations I would suggest A) that there may not be time to fire three cartridges let alone four, making the question of the number in the magazine moot, and B) using something larger than a 7mm Rem Mag to begin with – my preference being a .338 or larger.
that fly-weight stock in the savage is probably why that accomodation had to be made. example: in .30-06 the savage weighs 6.5 lbs while the remington gives us more metal and more stock material at 7 3/8 lbs. the same situation persists with the savage weather warrior in the 16fhss model.
Again, if it shoots well and is reliable, the question of three shots or four total is rather immaterial for a $249 rifle.
And, again, the question is about the .25-06, .270 Win and .308 Win. The Savage rifles hold 4 of these in the magazine. Add one for the chamber and you have five rounds available. IT that is not sufficient for the task at hand perhaps an AK-47 with a 30-round magazine would be more appropriate.
Finally, the Remington M700 SPS in 7mm Rem Mag weighs 7-5/8 pounds, not 7-3/8 as you claim, while the Savage weighs in at 6.75 pounds. There have been many a day that shaving 7/8’s of a pound off my rifle would have made my shoulder very happy. Making more of an apples-to-apples comparison in terms of rifle cost, the Remington 770 weighs in a 8-5/8 pounds, a full 1-7/8 pound heavier than the Savage. No thanks!
with the differences in the stocks i'll definitely take the remington. the flexibility of the savage stock is its most Obvious defect to me. the accu-trigger is adjustable; but the remington triggers i've adjusted (and sometimes changed springs on) are three-way adjustable: creep; pull weight; trigger stop. if need be, we do change the pull-weight spring to accomplish a decent weight while ensuring proper sear engagement. we have consistently achieved 40 to 48 ounce pull weights with a spring change. i prefer mine a little heavier; my one buddy likes them set lighter. i have not worked on remington's latest type of trigger, however. i don't have a diagram for it yet. (my metalwork with ruger triggers on model 77 mkII's tells me that i can achieve Excellent results with a file, stone, and machinists wet-n-dry paper if need be)
Good luck getting a Remington M700 in ANY model for $249…
And I wouldn’t want a Remington M770 for $249…
most importantly: to me the advantage of a longer-lived hammer-forging -- remington's barrel -- is what most separates the two mfr's metalwork. i've seen it in print from others complaining of the problems with metal/powder fouling in the "foul-o-matic" barrels that are relatively rough on so many savages. the compact grain structure of the hammer forging is an advantage that usually provides for a smoother barrel, and one that takes the heat/pressure from smokeless powder better than does button rifling. the way the remington handles barrel erosion is important to me. my one buddy was told that his model 700 tactical in .308 Win' would probablly be accurate for 5,000 rounds. i don't see a button-rifled barrel maintaining accuracy for 5,000 rounds -- not even in the easygoing .308 caliber.
Of course the Savage can be easily and inexpensively rebarreled by the owner should that become necessary, but in my experience few big game hunting rifles are shot enough to require it.
My button-rifled Savage 110e in .22-250 went over 4,000 rounds, most of which were max loads. Some of the best custom barrel makers use button rifling.
But again we’re talking about $249 rifles. Haven’t seen a Remington M700 in that category yet. If you were being intellectually honest you would be comparing Savage 111 rifles to the Remington 770.
just opinions? yes. but most of them are mine; while some are taken from others off www.long-range.com and from the www.national-match.us websites. YES, i've shot a savage or two. but i'm just as readilly impressed with the remington accuracy, believe me.
good/best regards to all of you,
ss'
How many of the folks at long-range.com or national-match.us are shooting $249 rifles?
Why not just compare the Savage 111 to a full custom rifle costing several thousand dollars and declare the Savage to be a POS? Sheesh.
Show me a better rifle for $249 than the Savage or Stevens if you can, but I won’t hold my breath.
