300 Savage reformed from 308Win

mehavey · June 5, 2014, 08:09 AM

I picked up a near pristine 300 Savage 99 the other day, 1952 vintage. After swapping out the old Weaver 1-3x already mounted on it for an even smaller Leupold Mark AR-1-4x** with much clearer resolution, I was getting reliable 1" groups with commercial Remington 150gr CoreLoks. I'll admit it. For a liquid-smooth 1899 lever action with an absolutely beautiful classic profile (reminds me of a Winchester Model-12) it's accuracy was remarkable.

Problem is getting cases for it. None to be had anywhere now other than mixed headstamp salvage lots whose heritage is always uncertain. (That can be a problem w/ the 99 as case stretch/separation is rampant when constantly re-sized to minumums and then repeatedly fired full-bore in a rear lock-up action.)

Reading a little more I also came to appreciate that the now ubiquitous 7.62 NATO/308Win is nothing more than that exact same 1920 vintage 300 Savage with a shallower shoulder angle and longer neck. At the same time, however, I was hearing mixed reviews of simply re-forming the shoulder angle back down on 308 brass and trimming the neck to length. Everything from "wouldn't chamber" to "neck's left too thick."

What the heck. I've got scads of M1A brass. Just do it.

Gross forming w/ an RCBS reformimg die was a no brainer. Smooth/no force, and cutting the extended neck off with hacksaw blade was all of 3 seconds.

Final forming to the exact -0.002" headspace specs for that rifle using the regular sizing die -- likewise no brainer.

Trim/chamfering case OAL to exact specs in the Giraud -- 2 seconds.

Final outcome and case volume/loading differences as shown below:

All-in-all a much simpler operation than I expected.

**That Mark AR-1 series put out by Leupold is the best deal for the money I''ve seen in a long while. Very compact and crystal clear.
http://ads.midwayusa.com/product/136...ProductFinding

Bart B. · June 5, 2014, 04:34 PM

See what happens when you do all the right stuff?

Nice, ain't it?

green_MTman · June 5, 2014, 05:07 PM

the .300 savage invented in westfield massachusetts was the parent cartridge for the 7.62-51 nato or .308 win

the only difference is that the 300 savage has a shorter neck

math teacher · June 5, 2014, 06:39 PM

If you are going to use military cases, you might want to avoid max loads, since they are usually thicker and thus have less case capacity. Congratulations on your new acquisition.

res45 · June 5, 2014, 08:19 PM

I've converted several hundred 308 Win. and 7.62 NATO cases for my Sav. 99 in 300 Sav. over the years and they have worked perfectly fine.

I use the NATO cases for my cast bullet loads and gain around 50 extra fps. over using the factory 300 Sav. cases or converted 308 win. cases using an equal weight bullet and charge weight. No telling how long these thicker cases will last just neck sizing,

It would probably be a good idea to anneal the cases before the next loading to stress relief the brass from the reforming process if you didn't do it beforehand.

I hand no issues reforming my brass just using the 300 Sav. FL resizing die and the 7.62 NATO case needed no neck turning even when using the larger dia. .310 to .311 cast lead bullet,they all chamber just fine and shoot very accurately.

chiefr · June 6, 2014, 07:23 AM

+1^^^^^^^ RES45

Annealing id the most important step.

**Mike Irwin** · June 6, 2014, 11:42 AM

"the only difference is that the 300 savage has a shorter neck"

There are other differences, as well.

The .300 has a 30 degree shoulder angle, the .308 a 20 degree shoulder angle.

The .308 has a nominal maximum neck diameter of .343, the .300 .399.

The .308 has a nominal shoulder length of .152, the .300 .093 (very short, and in conjunction with the shoulder angle, the source of reloading frustrations for many).

mehavey · June 6, 2014, 12:26 PM

Quote:

The .308 has a nominal neck length of .152", the .300 [has one of] .093"

While the other differences (mainly the shoulder angle and a shorter neck) were already noted, the actual neck length on a 300 Savage is near a quarter inch (0.221"). I've not found that particularly limiting unless having to keep heavy cast/gas checks above the powder space.

And the neck diameter specs are only 0.004" apart (308 mouth = 0.343" vs 300Sav mouth = 0.339"

Am I reading the [actual] SAAMI Charts wrong?

**Mike Irwin** · June 6, 2014, 03:15 PM

Crap, I said NECK length in my post above when I actually meant to say SHOULDER length and shoulder angle.

My bad - I've edited it.

Mike / Tx · June 6, 2014, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Crap, I said.....

Darnit, I wished I had just a nickle for every time I had that pop out of my mouth.

We'll let ya slide THIS time, .......

So just for the sake of argument here, and definitely not trying to distract from the OP,

Could you also say take the 308 case, and size the neck up just a touch using say a .303 British sizing ball, then run them into the 300 sizer so as to put a bit of a false shoulder on them for a better fire form?

Just asking as it crossed my mind when the different shoulder angle was brought up.

Sure Shot Mc Gee · June 6, 2014, 07:34 PM

I've been resizing 308 to 300 Sav for many years. I actually prefer the accuracy I get from my resized 308 Federal brass verses 300 Sav factory new Winchester which I also have a generous supply of. There are obvious differences seen in the two necks. But the 300 Sav base also shows a slight difference in its machining but not as obvious as the neck, shoulder, & body areas do. Those who think the 308 is a direct decedent of the 300 Savage. In a way I don't think it is. As there are just to many different major & minor design differences between the two cartridge cases. Am I wrong to think that way?

**Mike Irwin** · June 6, 2014, 07:51 PM

Direct descendant, evolutionary development.... take your pick.

grumbles · June 6, 2014, 09:11 PM

Savage filed and won an infringement lawsuit on the cartridge that Winchester originally produced for the military, the military had been experimenting with a cartridge based on the 300 savage to replace the 30-06. Winchester muscled in and usurped the project virtually copying the 300 savage. as a result of the suit Winchester then lengthen the neck and changed the shoulder.

mehavey · June 6, 2014, 09:40 PM

Quote:

I've been resizing 308 to 300 Sav for many years.
I actually prefer the accuracy I get from my resized
308 Federal brass...

Not bad for a 62-year old girl w/ only a 4X scope.

(She likes things ~2,550fps)

mehavey · June 6, 2014, 09:42 PM

Quote:

I've been resizing 308 to 300 Sav for many years.
I actually prefer the accuracy I get from my resized
308 Federal brass...

Not bad for a 62-year old "levergun" w/ only a 4X scope.

(She likes things ~2,550fps)

Bart B. · June 7, 2014, 08:14 AM

The following's the best written history I know of on the origin of the .308 Winchester:

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...in-of-308.html

Nowhere does it mention any Savage legal issues with Winchesters commercial version of the 7.62 NATO round nor their smaller prototype test versions. Nor have I ever heard of such a legal challenge by Savage. I'd like to see some written evidence of it happening other than what's in this thread. Or at least a link to it.

Grumbles, what's your information source for that claim about Winchester muscling in to make the .308 Winchester cartridge?

**Mike Irwin** · June 7, 2014, 10:07 AM

I'm the same. I've never heard of there being any legal issues between Savage and Winchester.

And Winchester certainly didn't muscle in and usurp the military development process, either. They were part and parcel to it pretty much from the get go.

Military interest in a shorter cartridge of approximately .30-06 power began during World War II.

The .30-06 had a bunch of dead air space between the powder and base of the bullet, and there had been severe materials shortages of copper and cartridge brass during the war. Shaving off that dead space would make the cartridge lighter, and it would conserve vital materials.

The military called in Winchester to assist in the initial development because the military research and development teams at the Frankford and Springfield Arsenals were up to their eyes in other projects.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think the first guns converted to the short cartridge were M 1 Garands and Browning M1919 machine guns, and were first converted to .300 Savage dimensions.

It was found at that time that the short neck on the Savage design did not work and play well with automatic weapons.

McShooty · June 7, 2014, 01:10 PM

Here's one for you. Resize your .308 to 300 Sav, but do not trim the necks. Get a chamber reamer that cuts the chamber neck and leade and lengthen to take the resized 308. Then you will have a 300 Sav with a long neck, thus eliminating the usual only complaint about the 300 Sav. I have contemplated this for a long time, but have never done it, as have had no problems loading and shooting the standard 300 Sav. I think it would be nice if someone else would do it and report on it, however.

**Mike Irwin** · June 8, 2014, 08:49 AM

Why bother?

Why not just ream the chamber to .308?

McShooty · June 10, 2014, 10:26 AM

I bother to do a lot of things because I am curious as to how they would work and I have an experimental bent. The shooting world is filled with reports of results from minor differences in cartridge characteristics. As you know, the .300 Sav has a bit different case shape involving a shorter shoulder and a steeper shoulder angle than the 308. That arouses my curiosity about a long-necked 300 Sav.

Those whose major interest is shooting game and nothing else could all be told to "just get a 308." No need for any of the other mid-range thirties. In fact, you could tell the OP to just get a 308 and forget the trouble of case reforming. Not for me. I am going to continues investigating rifle performance with both major and minor cartridge differences, safely, of course.

mehavey · June 10, 2014, 10:45 AM

Quote:

...you could tell the OP to just get a 308
and forget the trouble of case reforming...

Not with the pre`57 Model 99s (which would need the action lengthened a bit, and I'm told a slightly beefier lockup cam.)

But heck, I've already got the M1A to supply my trusty 99 with plenty of case fodder -- for about a 20sec/case cost in my time.

**Mike Irwin** · June 10, 2014, 10:52 AM

Well sure I could tell them that, but where would that leave me with my 3 rifles chambered in .300 Savage?

McShooty · June 10, 2014, 11:05 AM

I guess about where I am, with my three rifles chambered for 300 Savage. With that many, we could afford to use one for experiments with a long-neck 300 Sav.

**Mike Irwin** · June 10, 2014, 01:57 PM

Crap, I forgot... FOUR rifles chambered for .300 Savage... I have two Remington 722s, and one would be a good candidate...

It's been chopped to hell and back. First, though, I'd have to see if my friend wants it back. He gave it to me when he moved to California, and I never really understood if it was a loan or a gift.

math teacher · June 10, 2014, 03:55 PM

Shortly after the 308 first came out, I approached a well known gunsmith of the time and asked him about reaming out my Savage 99 in 300 to the 308. He said that it was more involved as he would need to heat treat the receiver to handle the higher pressure of the 308. Supposedly later 99s received such treatment.

June 5, 2014, 08:09 AM	#1
mehavey Senior Member Join Date: June 17, 2010 Location: Virginia Posts: 6,894	300 Savage reformed from 308Win I picked up a near pristine 300 Savage 99 the other day, 1952 vintage. After swapping out the old Weaver 1-3x already mounted on it for an even smaller Leupold Mark AR-1-4x with much clearer resolution, I was getting reliable 1" groups with commercial Remington 150gr CoreLoks. I'll admit it. For a liquid-smooth 1899 lever action with an absolutely beautiful classic profile (reminds me of a Winchester Model-12) it's accuracy was remarkable. Problem is getting cases for it. None to be had anywhere now other than mixed headstamp salvage lots whose heritage is always uncertain. (That can be a problem w/ the 99 as case stretch/separation is rampant when constantly re-sized to minumums and then repeatedly fired full-bore in a rear lock-up action.) Reading a little more I also came to appreciate that the now ubiquitous 7.62 NATO/308Win is nothing more than that exact same 1920 vintage 300 Savage with a shallower shoulder angle and longer neck. At the same time, however, I was hearing mixed reviews of simply re-forming the shoulder angle back down on 308 brass and trimming the neck to length. Everything from "wouldn't chamber" to "neck's left too thick." What the heck. I've got scads of M1A brass. Just do it. Gross forming w/ an RCBS reformimg die was a no brainer. Smooth/no force, and cutting the extended neck off with hacksaw blade was all of 3 seconds. Final forming to the exact -0.002" headspace specs for that rifle using the regular sizing die -- likewise no brainer. Trim/chamfering case OAL to exact specs in the Giraud -- 2 seconds. Final outcome and case volume/loading differences as shown below: All-in-all a much simpler operation than I expected. That Mark AR-1 series put out by Leupold is the best deal for the money I''ve seen in a long while. Very compact and crystal clear. http://ads.midwayusa.com/product/136...ProductFinding Last edited by mehavey; June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM.

June 6, 2014, 11:42 AM	#7
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	"the only difference is that the 300 savage has a shorter neck" There are other differences, as well. The .300 has a 30 degree shoulder angle, the .308 a 20 degree shoulder angle. The .308 has a nominal maximum neck diameter of .343, the .300 .399. The .308 has a nominal shoulder length of .152, the .300 .093 (very short, and in conjunction with the shoulder angle, the source of reloading frustrations for many). __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. Last edited by Mike Irwin; June 6, 2014 at 03:15 PM. Reason: Correcting shoulder dimensions.

June 6, 2014, 03:15 PM	#9
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Crap, I said NECK length in my post above when I actually meant to say SHOULDER length and shoulder angle. My bad - I've edited it. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

June 6, 2014, 09:11 PM	#13
grumbles Member Join Date: October 15, 2005 Location: michigan Posts: 19	308 descended from 300 savage. Savage filed and won an infringement lawsuit on the cartridge that Winchester originally produced for the military, the military had been experimenting with a cartridge based on the 300 savage to replace the 30-06. Winchester muscled in and usurped the project virtually copying the 300 savage. as a result of the suit Winchester then lengthen the neck and changed the shoulder.

June 7, 2014, 08:14 AM	#16
Bart B. Senior Member Join Date: February 15, 2009 Posts: 8,927	The following's the best written history I know of on the origin of the .308 Winchester: http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...in-of-308.html Nowhere does it mention any Savage legal issues with Winchesters commercial version of the 7.62 NATO round nor their smaller prototype test versions. Nor have I ever heard of such a legal challenge by Savage. I'd like to see some written evidence of it happening other than what's in this thread. Or at least a link to it. Grumbles, what's your information source for that claim about Winchester muscling in to make the .308 Winchester cartridge? Last edited by Bart B.; June 7, 2014 at 08:36 AM.

June 5, 2014, 04:34 PM	#2
Bart B. Senior Member Join Date: February 15, 2009 Posts: 8,927	See what happens when you do all the right stuff? Nice, ain't it?

June 5, 2014, 05:07 PM	#3
green_MTman Senior Member Join Date: March 27, 2014 Location: southeastern Vermont,USA Posts: 325	the .300 savage invented in westfield massachusetts was the parent cartridge for the 7.62-51 nato or .308 win the only difference is that the 300 savage has a shorter neck

June 5, 2014, 06:39 PM	#4
math teacher Senior Member Join Date: February 5, 2012 Location: Southwest WA Coast Posts: 559	If you are going to use military cases, you might want to avoid max loads, since they are usually thicker and thus have less case capacity. Congratulations on your new acquisition.

June 5, 2014, 08:19 PM	#5
res45 Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2007 Location: NC Posts: 753	I've converted several hundred 308 Win. and 7.62 NATO cases for my Sav. 99 in 300 Sav. over the years and they have worked perfectly fine. I use the NATO cases for my cast bullet loads and gain around 50 extra fps. over using the factory 300 Sav. cases or converted 308 win. cases using an equal weight bullet and charge weight. No telling how long these thicker cases will last just neck sizing, It would probably be a good idea to anneal the cases before the next loading to stress relief the brass from the reforming process if you didn't do it beforehand. I hand no issues reforming my brass just using the 300 Sav. FL resizing die and the 7.62 NATO case needed no neck turning even when using the larger dia. .310 to .311 cast lead bullet,they all chamber just fine and shoot very accurately.

June 6, 2014, 07:23 AM	#6
chiefr Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2010 Location: AR Posts: 1,401	+1^^^^^^^ RES45 Annealing id the most important step.

June 6, 2014, 07:34 PM	#11
Sure Shot Mc Gee Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2012 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,876	I've been resizing 308 to 300 Sav for many years. I actually prefer the accuracy I get from my resized 308 Federal brass verses 300 Sav factory new Winchester which I also have a generous supply of. There are obvious differences seen in the two necks. But the 300 Sav base also shows a slight difference in its machining but not as obvious as the neck, shoulder, & body areas do. Those who think the 308 is a direct decedent of the 300 Savage. In a way I don't think it is. As there are just to many different major & minor design differences between the two cartridge cases. Am I wrong to think that way?

June 6, 2014, 07:51 PM	#12
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Direct descendant, evolutionary development.... take your pick.

June 7, 2014, 10:07 AM	#17
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	I'm the same. I've never heard of there being any legal issues between Savage and Winchester. And Winchester certainly didn't muscle in and usurp the military development process, either. They were part and parcel to it pretty much from the get go. Military interest in a shorter cartridge of approximately .30-06 power began during World War II. The .30-06 had a bunch of dead air space between the powder and base of the bullet, and there had been severe materials shortages of copper and cartridge brass during the war. Shaving off that dead space would make the cartridge lighter, and it would conserve vital materials. The military called in Winchester to assist in the initial development because the military research and development teams at the Frankford and Springfield Arsenals were up to their eyes in other projects. I'm not 100% sure, but I think the first guns converted to the short cartridge were M 1 Garands and Browning M1919 machine guns, and were first converted to .300 Savage dimensions. It was found at that time that the short neck on the Savage design did not work and play well with automatic weapons. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

June 7, 2014, 01:10 PM	#18
McShooty Senior Member Join Date: January 4, 2012 Location: Northern Missouri Posts: 480	Here's one for you. Resize your .308 to 300 Sav, but do not trim the necks. Get a chamber reamer that cuts the chamber neck and leade and lengthen to take the resized 308. Then you will have a 300 Sav with a long neck, thus eliminating the usual only complaint about the 300 Sav. I have contemplated this for a long time, but have never done it, as have had no problems loading and shooting the standard 300 Sav. I think it would be nice if someone else would do it and report on it, however.

June 8, 2014, 08:49 AM	#19
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Why bother? Why not just ream the chamber to .308? __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

June 10, 2014, 10:26 AM	#20
McShooty Senior Member Join Date: January 4, 2012 Location: Northern Missouri Posts: 480	I bother to do a lot of things because I am curious as to how they would work and I have an experimental bent. The shooting world is filled with reports of results from minor differences in cartridge characteristics. As you know, the .300 Sav has a bit different case shape involving a shorter shoulder and a steeper shoulder angle than the 308. That arouses my curiosity about a long-necked 300 Sav. Those whose major interest is shooting game and nothing else could all be told to "just get a 308." No need for any of the other mid-range thirties. In fact, you could tell the OP to just get a 308 and forget the trouble of case reforming. Not for me. I am going to continues investigating rifle performance with both major and minor cartridge differences, safely, of course.

June 10, 2014, 10:52 AM	#22
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Well sure I could tell them that, but where would that leave me with my 3 rifles chambered in .300 Savage? __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

June 10, 2014, 11:05 AM	#23
McShooty Senior Member Join Date: January 4, 2012 Location: Northern Missouri Posts: 480	I guess about where I am, with my three rifles chambered for 300 Savage. With that many, we could afford to use one for experiments with a long-neck 300 Sav.

June 10, 2014, 01:57 PM	#24
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Crap, I forgot... FOUR rifles chambered for .300 Savage... I have two Remington 722s, and one would be a good candidate... It's been chopped to hell and back. First, though, I'd have to see if my friend wants it back. He gave it to me when he moved to California, and I never really understood if it was a loan or a gift. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

June 10, 2014, 03:55 PM	#25
math teacher Senior Member Join Date: February 5, 2012 Location: Southwest WA Coast Posts: 559	Shortly after the 308 first came out, I approached a well known gunsmith of the time and asked him about reaming out my Savage 99 in 300 to the 308. He said that it was more involved as he would need to heat treat the receiver to handle the higher pressure of the 308. Supposedly later 99s received such treatment.