Savage "packages"-good idea?

[lilabner]

I've been considering the Savage 11FNS with synthetic stock and accu trigger but I can get the same gun packaged with mount bases, rings and a 3X9X40 scope installed for about 10 bucks more. I'm thinking even if the scope is nothing to write home about, the mount bases and rings have to be worth more than 10 bucks and I can get a better scope. I'm assuming that the synthetic stock with pillar bedding will probably make for a more cconsistently accurate gun than the wood stock.  Comments?

[mountainview]

I have both the synthetic and wood stocked versions of the package and I am highly satisfied. I even like the looks of the Savage rigs. Accuracy of both is excellent with the free floated barrel and the Accutrigger is superb. The rings/bases and optics may not have the highest/best rep but I have not had any problems yet at either the range (I handload and shoot almost weekly before hunting season) or woods.

I also have to give the optics manufacturer high marks for customer service since they replaced a scope on a used gun I bought without balking. Someday I may upgrade the scopes, but for now I see no need to. Not to say that there isn't any junk on the market but I suspect that a lot of optics problems tend to be self inflicted and that lower priced rigs tend to receive a lot more abuse because they are inexpensive.

Safe shooting.

[safetysheriff]

you're shooting a short-action in that rifle, no?    if the caliber is mild, up to a .260 REm' I'd guess, the recoil won't hurt that scope -- if all goes well.    if it's a .308, however, i think you'll need a better scope and rings.

good luck,

SS'

[mountainview]

SS, I am actually shooting one LA (30-06) and two SAs (7-08 and 223). If something does go wrong with the scopes, I figure the frequent range sessions should reveal any problems before hitting the woods. Once the kids get out of school, I may decide to treat myself to some new glass.

Safe shooting.

[KYsquirrelsniper]

If they are still putting the same scope on them for this year (I'm pretty sure they are), it's an el-cheapo Simmons 8-Point 3-9x40 mounted in el-cheapo aluminum rings (with very small and weak mounting screws BTW) and Weaver-style bases. If you can get the package for only about $10 more, then maybe it's worth it just to have back-up components, but if you have to give much more than that, save your money for decent stuff.

As for the synthetic stock, they're flimsy in the forearm area, so you need to make sure they have plenty of clearance around the barrel or they can touch when shooting from a bipod, sling, etc. The wood stocks are pillar bedded also and are more sturdy in the forearm area, but of course they're more susceptible to moisture and can get dinged up. Really it comes down to whether you'd rather have a stiffer forearm area or you'd rather have the all weather stability of synthetic. I have about an equal number of both types, but I slightly prefer the wood stock for most applications due to the more sturdy forearm.

Overall, the Savage rifles are usually very accurate and the AccuTrigger cured most of the trigger complaints. About the only thing left for me to whine about is the flimsy forearm of the synthetic stock, but it won't cause any problems as long as there's plenty of barrel clearance.

[Graybeard]

I guess they are OK for folks who are not really serious about their hunting. And who don't go way off from home and spend big bucks on a single hunt. I can't imagine anyone who does those things buying such a set up. If you never get more than 50 miles from home and never go on an expensive hunt and don't hunt more than 10-12 days a year it should suit you for awhile.

Once you start to travel out of state and spend big bucks on hunts far from home you'll want more from both your rifle and scope. I like to chose the rifle, mount base, rings and scope to suit my particular needs. No package anyone would put together would ever suit me.

[victorcharlie]

I caught a 110 package gun on sale at the Wally world.  There are 2 problems here.  1st there seems to be a lot of people on the forums that have a distinct dislike for savage.  2nd the same people, (including me) have a dislike for wally world.

That said, don't let any body kid you, the savages are very good shooters straight out of the box.  I wasn't sure I was going to like it, until I shot it.  It's kinda like an ugly woman that knows how to cook.  You don't want your buddies to see her, but you can't wait to eat.

Mine is the synthetic stock, and the forearm is flimsy, the action isn't the smoothest I've felt, the optic isn't that great, but I've had few rifles which shot this well straight out of the box.  Nothing wrong with the package but perception provided the price is right.

Heck, even the looks are growing on me.....got to go....I'm hungry......

[trouble]

I think anyone who has hunted in low light conditions with a high end scope will immediately appreciate the benefit of quality optics.  I really don't think that is what Savage intended to try to do with the whole package idea.  

I think the Savage Arms Co. wanted to put together something that someone could buy and take home an be able to shoot immediately without spending the hours that most serious hunters spend to get their equipment ready.  Sadly, many deer hunters don't take the responsibility of killing game as serious as I wish they did.  

This is a fair package for the occasional hunter.  Personally, I put no value to the scope and just consider the gun.  The gun is typically a surprisingly accurate item from the factory, most of the time.  I don't knock the Savage line.  They make a low cost gun that has a tremendous amount of "out of the box" performance for the price.

[Questor]

I don't think the rifle is the issue. It's the mounts, rings, and scope. Good mounts are expensive and are as important as the rifle or the scope. Ask anyone (like me) who has had one fail (Weaver).  Same goes for scopes. With the low cost scopes you may get a good one (like some of the Tascos), but it's more likely you won't.  To get something really decent, you can get the Savage. Then spend $250 or so to get a decent mount, rings, and scope.

The Savages are good guns. Their synthetic stocks are cheap but functional.  Good synthetic stocks are fiberglass and are quite expensive.

GB's point is well taken. I used a $75 Tasco varmint scope on a recent prairie dog shoot. But it was on a backup gun and if the scope had failed, it wouldn't have bothered me because there were other guns to use. If it were my primary gun, then I'd have good glass on it.

[Broken-arrow]

I don't want to get a big argument going here but IMO Savage makes as good a rifle as any nowadays.  Just pick up a new synthetic Rem. ADL and look it over real good, the Savage is just as well made and will more than likely outshoot it. So whats the problem, lets have an open mind here.  I've got "Remchesters" but my 110 has been thru mud, rain, and snow,it's been dropped and abused, and by golly it's never let me down.  Yes it's been restocked, I polished the trigger and installed a lighter spring, and yes it has good glass and mounts on it.  I've had it for 20+ years and it is still the one I trust the most.  And at the range I have yet to see a sporter barreled rifle, of any brand out-shoot it. And thats with my own HUNTING hand loads. It may not be pretty, but I didn't buy it to look at, I bought it to hunt with, and it does that quite well.   So there, I've gotten that out of my system.  :wink:

[Lawdog]

My M10 in .270 WSM is one of the package jobs.  The scope that came with it was a cheap Bushnell 3-9x.  The reason I got a discount is the scope came pre-broken, broke during shipping.  The detachable swivels and leather sling is all right, cheap knock-off of a GI issue.  I believe they are worth the money and if the scope doesn’t work out buy a better one.  Lawdog
 

[Zachary]

I'm probably going to get a lot of slack for saying this, as I sometimes do in the optics forum of which I am also the moderator, but I don't think that hunters should spend $10 bucks on a scope.  Save your money and get a better scope.  Yes, I understand that not everyone can afford to buy a $1,000 Zeiss, and nor do I think that such a scope is necessary - in fact, I think it's overkill.  Nor do I think that you need to buy a $400 Elite 4200 or Nikon Monarch, or Leupold VX-III (depending on mangification model), although it wouldn't hurt.

But there are great scopes out there in the $150 or so range - like the Elite 3200 and Nikon Buckmaster.  Even the Bushnell Trophy is an okay scope, and I wouldn't recommend one any lower on the Bushnell line personally, but it's much better than those cheap scopes on the package deals.

I have an Elite 3200 1.5x-4.5x-32mm mounted on my customized .375H&H.  I'd say that the gun, with customization, cost over $1,000.00 and the scope was only about $160 or so.  Still, that scope has help up wonderfully, although it's optics are not as great as the Elite 4200.  It's rare for me to have such a cheap scope on an expensive rifle.  On the other side of the spectrum, I have a customized .300 Win Mag that also costs over $1,000 but it has a Nightforce NXS 5.5x-22x-56mm Illuminated scope that also costs over $1,000.  Do I really need that scope for hunting?  Nah, I readily admit it.

The thing with scopes is that you get what you pay for, up to a point.  From $0 to $200, the quality seems noticeable with every $50 mark or so.  The quality is still noticeable from $200 to $400 or so, but not as noticeable as from zero to $200.  After $400 or $500, it's really kinda hard to tell the difference, and even then it's really not worth an extra $500 to buy a $1,000 scope when you are getting a much smaller percentage in quality (i.e. a a $1,000 scope may not be 2 times better than a $500 scope).

I'd say, if you really want to buy a Savage, then fine, but get a better scope and better rings.  It will be a better investment in both the short-term and long-run.

Zachary

[lilabner]

My thought was the scope is not one I would want to rely on but the bases and rings would be serviceable. Sounds like that may not the case. In my experience, 90 percent of the good heads show up in low light situations so you better have decent glass. This gun will wear a Bushnell Elite which is a good scope for a reasonable price. As for the Savage stock, it is much like the synthetics on Winchester, Remington and Ruger factory rifles. Quality synthetic stocks cost hundreds of dollars and are normally an aftermarket purchase. I just want a serviceable stock that won't swell up and change POI on me every time it rains. The gun will be  a .243 and will not be used for anything larger than deer. It will also be used for pronghorns and coyotes.

[safetysheriff]

I guess they are OK for folks who are not really serious about their hunting. And who don't go way off from home and spend big bucks on a single hunt. I can't imagine anyone who does those things buying such a set up. If you never get more than 50 miles from home and never go on an expensive hunt and don't hunt more than 10-12 days a year it should suit you for awhile.

GB'

You're sugar-coating it !        Don't sugar-coat it !       Give it to him straight !  :shock:

SSSSsssss...........    SSSSSSSssssssssssssssaaaa.........      those dam' 'rifles' aint worth havin'  :-D      They are a cheap knock off of a real firearm is all.......a cheap imitation.      And it's no coincidence that they carry a cheap scope on top of a cheap stock, held in place by cheap aluminum rings !     :shock:

To repair a SSSSSsssssssssssss..........   just remove the stock, the barrel'd action, the scope, rings, sling, and the box it came in.     Deposit all of them in the trash  :lol: and replace all components with those manufactured by either Remington or Ruger.     Then you're on your way to a real rifle.

Glad to be of help......

SS'

[daddywpb]

I had a Savage 110 package rifle in 30/06. It was all I could afford at the time. I used it, and it always shot fine at the range, but I never liked the feel of the wooden stock, and the scope was crap. If it's you're only option, get one. I never experienced the accuracy that I've read about from other people, but it was a good shooter.

[trouble]

Lilabner,
I have a Savage .243 package gun that I would like to trade for a smaller caliber.  It is brand new in the box and never shot.  I might be able to make you a good deal on it in trade if you are interested.

Send me an email if you want to discuss it.

mlambeth@sbcglobal.net

Thanks,
Mike

[tbonecpa]

Savage rifles are a great value.  Accurate, great trigger, and they kill 'em as dead as the more expensive guns.  Is the gun a Sako?  No, its a Savage.  Is the scope a Swarovski?  No, its a Simmons.  However, you will get at least what you paid for and probably quite a bit more.  I should warn you that my view may be out of line because I have used Bushnell Sportview ($50) scopes for years with no problems. Either I was lucky or they aren't as bad as people make them out to be.  In fact, I have three big bucks on my wall that wish they didn't work so well.   The day you decide the glass isn't good enough just spend about $200 for better mounts and optics.  I will never understand why Savage gets bashed.  Actually, last week I ordered a 116 FSAK in 338 WM so you could say that I put my money where my mouth is.  

Look at the specs on that gun:

Stainless
Synthetic
Free floated
Pillar bedded
Accu-trigger
Adjustable muzzle brake
Price $450

Another great Savage value.

[mountainview]

Sorry GB, I hate to be the exception to the rule but I traveled 450 miles out-of-state to hunt using my package set-up, did the same thing last year come to think of it. It was the only rig I could take with me what with non-resident licenses, gas, etc. which represent some serious expenditure of capital for me. This may be heresy but I had full confidence in my setup and was not worried given that most of the pre-season was spent practicing and becoming intimately familiar with its performance since my belief is that the bloke behind the buttplate determines success or lack thereof to a greater extent than the rig being carried.

[KYsquirrelsniper]

My thought was the scope is not one I would want to rely on but the bases and rings would be serviceable.

The bases are really the only decent part of the deal, because they seem to be just about as good as the plain old aluminum Weaver bases (which they could be, but I don't know). Actually, I put less faith in the rings than I do in the scope (now there's a scary thought :eek: ) The ring's mounting screws have a tiny shank and threads, and of course they screw into aluminum. So I'm not sure which would happen first, if the screw would break or the threads would strip, but either way it wouldn't take much to do it. Frankly, I think the el-cheapo aluminum Tasco rings from Wal-Mart are stronger.

As for GB's comment of wanting more from your rifle, I have to disagree. I would trust any of my Savages on any hunt in the world. Of course I could say the same thing about several other types of rifles too, but on the average, my Savages are more accurate than the other brands of rifles I own, and my Savages are as reliable as the other brands of rifles I own. Now, as for trusting that el-cheapo scope on a big game hunt, I may be a little goofy, but I'm not that crazy

[Broken-arrow]

Tbone, the savage-bashers are just jealous because our cheap ugly rifles outshoot their expensive pretty ones.  My 110 has Talley one-piece rings and bases and a 3X9X50 Elite 3200 and It is one rock-solid combination.  The elite is a very good scope , I like it better than my VXII , the rain-guard gives it the edge.

[MGMorden]

I've got one of the Savage 110's (.30-06) and love it.   Accuracy is SUPERB.  When you look at the cost of the Savage it's usually cheaper with the scope than other rifles without it, so putting down the quality of the scope doesn't really hold up as an argument.  Just consider it as a free bonus .  I ended up replacing my included scope and ring combo.  I went with Warnes bases and rings and like them (I went with Weaver Grand Slam bases and Burris Zee rings on my Swede m96 sporter and they are equally as good, and didn't cost as much), and went with a Millet Buck Gold scope.  It's not anything special, but works a heck of a lot better than the included Simmons scope did.

I also replaced my magazine follower and trigger guard with metal versions as well.  The parts from Brownells weren't that much and considering how many other manufacturers have plastic components these days I don't really consider the above parts a shortcoming of the Savage.

And I hunt from season opener here  (Aug 15) to season closing (Jan 1) with that rifle, giving it breaks only when duck season is in :lol:.

[lilabner]

I guess I don't agree with Graybeard's reasoning on this one. I packed a J.C. Higgins 51L with an old Weaver K-4 scope on my BC hunt for moose and woodland caribou. Cheapest gun in camp but I was totally familiar with it and confident it would get the job done. On an outfitted elk hunt in Colorado, I packed a Herter's rifle (actually, a BSA) and filled my tag with a good bull the first day. Same deal - I knew the gun, knew I could shoot it well, end of story. I hunted Texas whitetails last month using an old '03 Springfield Sporter I inherited from my dad with a Bushnell scope. It was clearly the cheapest gun in camp. The 3200 I put on the Springfield is the first scope I've owned that cost over $100. I wanted the rainguard feature and it works!  I've hunted bighorn sheep, pronghorn antelope, mule, blacktail and whitetail deer, moose, elk and caribou. I've hunted in Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Oregon, Washington, Texas and British Columbia and I've never used what you would call a prestige outfit. I've never had an equipment failure on a hunt, probably because I shoot a lot and everything I take is well tested beforehand. The Savage is my kind of gun.

[Zachary]

Tbone, the savage-bashers are just jealous because our cheap ugly rifles outshoot their expensive pretty ones.  My 110 has Talley one-piece rings and bases and a 3X9X50 Elite 3200 and It is one rock-solid combination.  The elite is a very good scope , I like it better than my VXII , the rain-guard gives it the edge.

I don't know if I would be considered a Savage basher (and I'm not saying that you did).  In my personal opinion, I think that the overall quality of a Savage is below par, but then again, regardless of quality, and for whatever reason, there is very little dispute that Savages are real shooters.

My earlier post was mostly focused upon the package topic in terms of the scope - I would never purchase such a package unless I was out in the middle of no-where and it was my only option for survival.  However, like I alluded to earlier, if you spend a little extra money and get a good scope, just like the Elite 3200 you did, then I wouldn't hesitate in buying a Savage (although I still greatly prefer Tikkas and Remington 700s  )

Zachary

[stork]

The bases are really the only decent part of the deal, because they seem to be just about as good as the plain old aluminum Weaver bases (which they could be, but I don't know). Actually, I put less faith in the rings than I do in the scope (now there's a scary thought :eek: ) The ring's mounting screws have a tiny shank and threads, and of course they screw into aluminum. So I'm not sure which would happen first, if the screw would break or the threads would strip, but either way it wouldn't take much to do it.

I know my rings were stripped when I had some pretty weird groups.
I replaced my rings and bases with Leupold rings and bases.  I also replaced the scope with a Bushnell Trophy.  This combination works very well.  My savage is a 30-06 and the rings and scope had to be removed after 60 rounds.  

I do not have an Accutrigger model, so my trigger is not that great.  the Accutrigger is supposed to be very nice though.

The stock is crap and like someone else said inlett the stock so when it flexes it will not contack the barrel.

Other than the stock Savages are very accurate reliable guns.

[tbone]

Tbone, the savage-bashers are just jealous because our cheap ugly rifles outshoot their expensive pretty ones.  My 110 has Talley one-piece rings and bases and a 3X9X50 Elite 3200 and It is one rock-solid combination.  The elite is a very good scope , I like it better than my VXII , the rain-guard gives it the edge.

Some folks really like a pretty gun but I could care less about looks.  I prefer stainless metal and synthetic stocks for utility.  Guns are simply tools to me.  I care more about looks when it comes to cars and women.  Then it matters.

[Hiwallhunter]

My,my,my... such passion about a "tool". There will be a public flogging in the village square next Saturday & some of you will be invited!! If Lilabner is satisfied with purchasing this combination & it meets his needs...what of it? I, once had possession of a Savage 110 LH with a Weaver K4 on top that would shoot the eye outa a newt at 100yds. They are [out of the box] incredibly accurate rifles. I have never purchased a "package" Savage rifle but I gotta tell you gentlemen, that my Simmons 3x9x40 Whitetail Expedition has accounted for 3 moose and 2 deer in the last six years- mostly at just after "legal" shooting time. There are folks in the world who want to drive a Mercedes or a Cadillac and then there are some who [for their own reasons] are satisfied with a Chevrolet or a Honda. GB has indicated that he would be averse to taking one of these firearms on an out of State hunt or a hunt which might last more than say... 12 days. I've been out in a hunt camp with a Savage 7mm mag. LH for more than that, anchored my moose and had no shift in my scope's impact.So unless there is an absolutely catastrophic occurence Savage rifles with the package scope or any other for that matter will fill the bill.
Zachary has made an important point in all of this discussion & that is when you get to a certain price point it's hard to differentiate between scopes [manufacturers] offerings.It becomes what a person perceives as desirable at that point,at least that's my read on the subject.
Where I'm from, there are very few people hunting with Savage rifles. We suffer from the same misgivings about the product it seems. I can tell you this that if someone buys a Remington,Ruger or Winchester and goes up against a Savage user [all things being equal] and there be  no "tweaking" of the action they're in for a run for the money so to speak! I've purposefully left out Sako and Tikka because they'll usually out do all the others. Cheers!

[Broken-arrow]

All this debating and no-one has even mentioned the other advantage to the savage ( besides incredible accuracy).   When deer season is over ,in 20 minutes you can take off the .308 bbl & put on the 22-250 for coyotes. And I forget who said " Beware the man with only one rifle, because he probably knows it well"  :wink:

[Bart Solo]

For most deer hunters the Savage package gun is an outstanding buy.  What gun folks forget is that most people who buy rifles are just buying a tool.  Accuracy out of the box is more important to most folks than a lot of the features that many of you all find vitally important.  If a hunter can buy a damn good shooting rifle with an adequate (admittedly not good) scope for $433, then most hunters consider themselves well served.  They will use the extra money to pay for diapers or the wife's new dress, or any one of a million things the hunter considers more important.  Savage markets to those people and those people have kept Savage afloat when a lot of others have gone belly up.  

After a couple of years, when the average owner of the package rifle has saved up enough money,  he will probably buy that $200 scope, but until then he will get good use out of the scope that comes with his package hunting whitetail or mule deer on his father-in-law's back 40.    Waiting to save up another $200 might just mean that he doesn't get to hunt this year, or if the season is over, that he doesn't get to practice in the spring.

[tomaldridge]

Anyone else remember when surplus military rifles were considered junk?  I paid $9.99 for my first centerfire, a 7x57 Mauser, and had to wait a week to buy cartridges.  I also had a $100 car.  One guy told me he would walk before he drove something like it.  I had to get to work.  Forty years and a lifetime of work later, I have more disposable income and no regrets.

[Don Fischer]

Something that all you Remington fan's who seem to be Savage basher's need to think about. They're both going in opposite direction's, Remington downhill and Savage up!  

I've used and loved many Remingtons, in fact still have a few like that. But the last Remington I bought will be the last one I buy!

As for the cheap scope, it's free or at least cheap and it will work well on a 22 rimfire. I had one of those cheap scope's on a 25-05 and ruined it in a couple hundred round's. The ring's holding in the glass were aluminum and stripped out. Bases and rings just aren't that expensive for decent one's and I must admit that I find the one's on the Savage kit's awful ugly, not really confidence inspireing.