Savage rifle quality decline

[460harry]

I used to own a Savage model 111 in 30-06 that was manufactured in about 2009-10. It was a synthetic stock but it had more steel on it. The trigger guard was steel, the entire magazine was steel, the entire bolt was steel, and it had a nice blued finish. It weighed over 9 pounds

I ordered a new model 111 a few weeks ago thinking it was the same gun, but this one is in 338 win mag. I assumed I would get the same 9 pound rifle. Guess what? The entire trigger guard and magwell is plastic. There is actually a piece of the bolt that is plastic. The magazine is made of plastic so cheapy and haphazardly designed that I have to hit it with substantial force to lock it into place, and gone is the nice blue'd finish, now there is a very cheap, ugly phosphate finish over the whole gun. The old savage's steel magazine gave a very assuring and secure "click" when it was easily locked into place. Guess what else? This gun weighs about 7.8 pounds. I get to shoot 338 win mag in a 7.8 lb rifle.

Oh, and another thing; the Indian Chief is gone, entirely. What I am wondering is why even still use the Savage name? If you're that afraid and/or ashamed, why even sell rifles?

If I had known this, I would NEVER have bought another Savage. Two of my favorite bolt guns, the model 10 and the 700, have completely gone down the drain. I am not angry a much as I am just depressed. Rant ended.

 

[bgrafsr]

Yep, the bean counters and political correctness are ruining good, quality manufactured goods.

I have 2 Savage bolt action rifles a .223 Remington and a .22 Long rifle. Both are very good, accurate, and nicely made. Purchased several years ago.

 

[Sgt911]

I bought a 25 classic in .204 it has a standard weight barrel. I didn't want a heavy barrel. It does have a plastic magazine and trigger-guard assembly, but overall is a beautifully finished rifle that is incredibly accurate. It is my favorite bolt gun.

 

[sigp220.45]

Savage seems to have staked out a chunk of the low-end once-a-year shooter market. Its sad to see.

I had an old 110 in .308 Win. It had a plain hardwood stock, but was nicely blued and shot great. It was low-priced, but not low quality. If there was any plastic on it, it must have been the buttplate.

Now - they look like your new lightweight .338 Mag. They do have some wood stocked guns left, but I'm not sure if they also have the plastic parts.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Lefty here, have owned several Savages.
Recently bought this Axis in 223.
Haven't shot it enough to give a full report.
So far, not crazy about the Magazine.

 

[gregintenn]

Savage, along with most other American manufacturers dropped quality from their list of concerns in the 1960's.

I have some high quality Savage rifles. They average about 100 years old.

 

[mauser9]

Seems so many taking shortcuts these days. Ugly matte finishes, plastic mags, plastic trigger guards, and even synthetic triggers! The bluing leaves much to be desired in my opinion. I bought a Rem.700 back in 83. Walnut and high polish bluing that looks like a mirror. Glad I held onto my older stuff. Used to be just run-of the-mill decent quality. Looks almost custom compared to offerings today.

 

[STCM(SW)]

My Salvage I put a wood stock on. Got it about14 years ago. 25-06 and extremely accurate with a high MV....

 

[460harry]

Savage seems to have staked out a chunk of the low-end once-a-year shooter market. Its sad to see.

I had an old 110 in .308 Win. It had a plain hardwood stock, but was nicely blued and shot great. It was low-priced, but not low quality. If there was any plastic on it, it must have been the buttplate.

Now - they look like your new lightweight .338 Mag. They do have some wood stocked guns left, but I'm not sure if they also have the plastic parts.

I wanted to get a wood stock version in 338 but none are available, anywhere. I am not sure that Savage even does a wood gun in 338. I am going to order a Boyd's stock and acquire steel aftermarket parts because this sh** is unacceptable. I thought the 111 plastic stocks were still pretty decent like they were 12 years ago. Just goes to show you should never assume anything.

Also, I would like to meet the clown at Savage that thought the bottom bolt release was a good idea. There was nothing at all wrong with the side bolt release. It was a proven design that no one didn't like and never requested a change. Not once in all my reading and talking to guys did I ever hear a complaint about the side bolt release.

 

[460harry]

Savage Arms


FYI, it's true, Savage does not make a single wood stock gun in 338 win mag. Neither does Remington. If you want a 338 win mag in a wood stock and which doesn't have a plastic magwell, trigger guard, and magazine, then you have to pay about $1,500 bucks for a model 70 made in Portugal, a Sako, or some other.

I hate to say it, but guns suck these days. The market is bent on ruthless cut throating of buyers. Complete screw job everywhere you look. It's remarkable that I am here looking back to 2008 and 2010 as a golden age.

 

[Gene L]

Lefty here, have owned several Savages.
Recently bought this Axis in 223.
Haven't shot it enough to give a full report.
So far, not crazy about the Magazine.

I had an Axis in .243. The trigger was so bad I called Savage and they told me 8 pounds is acceptable. With the bad trigger, it would shoot 1 1/4 MOA, but I had to work for it. I got a replacement trigger and it still shot 1 1/4. Just less work. I found out from that gun if you take your time on a bad trigger, you can reach the full max, or almost the full max of the gun's ability..

 

[clang444]

Hunting season will be over soon and there will be plenty of old rifles in the used section of the gun shop. Many of them have no more than a couple of boxes of ammo through them. I have two 110Ls from the early sixties, one in .243 and the other in .30-06 and they have good triggers, are accurate and look great:

And you wouldn't believe how inexpensive they were.

 

[jimbo728]

I have an Axis II in .223 and a Model 10 TR in .308.
Yes, one does have to make sure the mags are seated. I got used to it.
Both have nice Accu Triggers and the M-10 has the Accu Stock.
What counts is the sub MOA accuracy they both deliver. Maybe Savage does not have all the desirable features of the vintage guns but the barrels still deliver top notch accuracy.
No complaints I cant live with.
Jim

 

[6string]

I can totally sympathize with the OP.
But, it's not just Savage.
As long as buyers are willing to pony up the dough, manufacturers will continue to cut corners.

Unfortunately, it's not just the entry level market that exhibits this trend, either. I've seen cheesy plastic parts appear on some surprisingly expensive goods.
And, that's just the corner cutting that can be readily seen. How many makers fabricate every part in house? How many outsource anything and everything from small parts to major components?
How much actual "making" goes on vs "assembly"?

In some ways, these are age old questions that get redefined over time.

 

[mauser9]

Guess $350-400 may have seemed like a lot 40 years back but we all got some quality it seems for our money. Am sure the higher cost of materials, walnut, and labor has led to these shortcut cost saving measures. I agree with scrounging the used gun racks for guns made years back. Am often surprised how reasonable the prices can be.

 

[Herky Bird]

Quality of firearms hasn't gone down, they are just built to a certain price point. In terms of precision and performance the new stuff is light years ahead of the old stuff. If one so desires a "polished beautiful" something built with wood and metal parts it'll cost you $1,200~$1,500. The plastic-fantastics are an amazing bargain if one only cares about function over looks, look at the Ruger Precision Rifle as an example.

 

[Sgt911]

Quality of firearms hasn't gone down, they are just built to a certain price point. In terms of precision and performance the new stuff is light years ahead of the old stuff. If one so desires a "polished beautiful" something built with wood and metal parts it'll cost you $1,200~$1,500. The plastic-fantastics are an amazing bargain if one only cares about function over looks, look at the Ruger Precision Rifle as an example.

and for what's it worth $400 in 1980 is $1,263.25 today, so they are cheaper dollar for dollar so I cant complain too much. You seem to be spot on.

 

[460harry]

Quality of firearms hasn't gone down, they are just built to a certain price point. In terms of precision and performance the new stuff is light years ahead of the old stuff. If one so desires a "polished beautiful" something built with wood and metal parts it'll cost you $1,200~$1,500. The plastic-fantastics are an amazing bargain if one only cares about function over looks, look at the Ruger Precision Rifle as an example.

"1,200-,1500"

Really. Savage was making a model 114 "American Classic" which was chambered in 338 win mag among others (I should have bought one" just about three years ago for about $750-800. The wood 111's were slightly cheaper. Why did they stop?

My theory is that they are purely screwing us. It does not take a $1,200 or $1,500 price tag to recoup the cost of a wood stock, sorry but I refuse to believe it based on the guns I've seen before. They are deliberately withholding manufacturing wood and blued guns, drowning us in the plastic garbage, and then using our frustration to force us to pay 3 or 4 times the actual cost of wood stocks for a $1,500 gun. It is pure cut-throatery.

 

[diyj98]

I honestly never thought Savage quality was that great to begin with, but some of the plastic stocks they're sticking rifles now are flimsy junk. I've seen rifle that actually rock in the stock even when the action screws are properly torqued down. And forearm that are free floated but pinch the stock when the rifle is put on sandbags.

 

[s&wchad]

Savage was always innovative. Their 1895/1899 were years ahead of their time and the quality was typically first rate.

Their .45 Trials pistol and 1907 were great guns and their current Accutrigger has a strong following. The external barrel nut on their bolt guns is pretty ugly, but it works really well and keeps costs down.

Premium gun companies had a habit of bellying up over the years. It's a shame, but cost/performance has always beat out quality in the American market.

Some of the older 99's were as good or better than anything on the market!

 

[Igiveup]

I am to the age I have enough rifles, but grandson has a wood stock Mossberg .243 that is a good shooter. I have built most of my rifles thru the years on Mauser based actions, but the new (to me) Howas are a good bang for the buck. Got a couple of them, not wood stocks, but they take abuse and shoot good.

 

[bulletslap]

I gave my grandson-in-law an old Remington 721 30-06 before hunting season. He said wow this was when they made real rifles. I told him that in it's day a 721 was looked at as an economy rifle in comparison to Winchester model 70 and the Remington model 30.

 

[460harry]

So, I shot the 111 today. 40 .338 win mag rounds off the bench. 250 grain soft point bullets with 69.5 grains of IMR 4955. Specs are about 2,640 fps. The gun is accurate, I nailed bullseye at 100. Had some difficulty getting it on paper at first, hence 40 shot rounds.

Not going to lie, I think I have a slight concussion. Later today I had a slight headache and couldn't remember what I did this past weekend, and remembered that I mostly cooked on Saturday. Just generally felt weird. Let me tell you this; a 338 win mag with that load in a 7.8 lb rifle makes a 300 win mag of any load in any rifle look like a .308. This thing would make Elmer Keith flinch. You definitely want a 9 or better 10 pound rifle if you intend to shoot this round regularly.

 

[LVSteve]

I see the "plastic = cheap" philosophy is alive and well on this forum.

As for the recoil, two words: muzzle brake.

 

[CH4]

For me Savage stop making rifles when they discontinued the 99. I also like the 24 and vintage bolt guns 22s, but I could never warm up to their newer bolt rifles. Accurate perhaps, but they're just ugly and feel cheap.

Sincerely

The gun snob

 

[LVSteve]

...

Sincerely

The gun snob

ROFLMAO!!! I think you just won the Internet for a day.

 

[rwsmith]

I've got a....

....very basic Savage 110 that does fine. Looks like it might be a 70's model. It has a synthetic stock. I won't b buying any new ones.

 

[diyj98]

I see the "plastic = cheap" philosophy is alive and well on this forum.

As for the recoil, two words: muzzle brake.

All my hunting rifles have synthetic stocks, but not the cheap soft plastic g that Savage has been using on their rifles. I have a number of firearms with wooden sticks, but they seldom see hard use in the woods.

 

[growr]

I care less about what it looks like, but really like how well my Savage Axis in .223 and .243 shoot!!!

Have never seen a Savage that shot poorly.....some shot better than others but they have all shot quite well for me.

And yes, I own Win. M70's, Rem. 700, a Rem 40x, several Anschutz etc. so I know a little about accurate rifles.

Randy

 

[Chukar60]

Savage was NEVER known as a top tier producer of fine firearms. Savage was built on budget minded guns that performed. Savage has had and maintains today, a reputation for the best accuracy out of the box you can get for a production grade gun.
Younger buyers today want one thing. Performance.
Savage has been way out in front for this change. You could say the market moved to the Savage strategy. Lower costs. Save the money from the wood stock and fancy high gloss finish or labor intensive oil finish. Save the money from polishing and bluing the metal and invest it into accuracy enhancement.

Here is a group I shot with my Ruger American 17 about 3 weeks ago. No it is not a Savage, but it is plastic stock, flat metal finish and a plastic trigger guard. $389.00 rifle with a $200 scope @ 100 yards outdoors.The other groups were 5/8- 3/4". Keep in mind this is a rimfire gun.



I have a Kimber 308 Custom Select Stainless that wont do that. It will shoot MOA and sub MOA on a good day but it will never shoot 1/2 MOA and it cost almost triple the price of the little Ruger and I can hand load custom ammo for the 308.
Stop and consider what younger shooters are enjoying right now. Performance we dreamed and tinkered for hours to achieve right out of the box at a price that allows them to enjoy our sport.

What us old folks view as value has faded into the dust bin of history. Now younger buyers want accuracy and could care less about aesthetics. They like the plastic stocks and flat metal finishes and they are enjoying that performance for the same prices we were paying way back then.
I am happy gun makers have found a way to keep costs down and improve performance. It keeps our sport affordable for younger shooters on a budget. Not a bad thing at all.