THE .250-3000—SAVAGE’S VELOCITY KING
PROLOGUE
In 1914, Savage Arms unveiled its own latest entry in the high-velocity sweepstakes: The .250-3000. It earned its name because it promised a muzzle velocity of 3,000 fps. Over the years, many writers have stated that it was the first commercial cartridge to reach that height—taking Savage’s word for it, presumably—but of course it was not. That honor belongs to the .280 Ross, by almost a decade.
For Savage Arms, the .250-3000 (known more commonly today as the .250 Savage) was but the latest in a line of proprietary cartridges that delivered velocities higher than was normal at the time. Arthur W. Savage, designer of the Model 1899 lever action and founder of the company, learned early, as did P. T. Barnum, that there is no substitute for publicity. One area in which Arthur Savage truly deserves credit as a pioneer is in his use of advertising and bluster to sell rifles and ammunition.
Savage’s first effort was the .303 Savage, a cartridge that is a ballistic twin of the .30 WCF (.30-30) and which may actually have preceded the .30-30 as the first commercial smokeless cartridge in America. The two appeared within months of each other, and it has never been definitively proven which was first. In a David-and-Goliath battle against Winchester Repeating Arms, Arthur Savage turned to the power of the printed word. Shortly after the .303 Savage’s unveiling, ads began appearing with testimonials to its unprecedented killing power, not just in the US, but in Africa and Asia as well. From the sound of it, everything from tigers to elephants gave up the ghost at the mere sight of a .303 Savage.
The .303 Savage was the cartridge that really put both the Savage Model 1899 and Arthur Savage himself on the gunmaking map. With the 99 (as it became known) firmly established as the heretic’s favorite lever action, Savage decided to trump himself with an even newer, smaller, and faster cartridge. He turned to Charles Newton, a Buffalo, New York lawyer, ballistician, inventor, and writer, who was the first really serious wildcatter of the smokeless-powder era.
Newton is often called “the father of high velocity,” and that is actually the subtitle of Bruce Jennings’s 1985 biography, but Newton was at least third generation in the quest for speed. Lt. Col. David Davidson, James Purdey, and Sir Charles Ross had more valid claims to paternity, at least in terms of chronology. But Charles Newton was the first American to make velocity his life’s work, and he was unquestionably the most influential. When Roy Weatherby came along a half-century later, he was building on Newton’s foundation. Some call Weatherby the “modern father of high velocity,” and that’s fair enough. Although Newton’s real work in the field came later than Ross’s, they were contemporaries. Newton was four years older than Ross, and died a decade earlier—1932 versus 1942. The two men bore a remarkable physical resemblance to one another, and sharing a Christian name as they did, Phil Sharpe often referred to Newton jokingly as “Sir Charles.” There are other eerie parallels between them, too, as if the pursuit of velocity carried its own demons to torment disciples.
Savage’s ground-breaking cartridges. From left, the .303 Savage (1895), .22 High Power (1912), and .250-3000 (1914). All seem diminutive compared with the .30-06.
At this late date, it’s impossible to say exactly how much Sir Charles Ross’s work directly influenced Charles Newton, but given the publicity the .280 Ross received on both sides of the Atlantic, to say nothing of the attention given to the Ross sporting rifle, it must have been considerable. Throughout this period, if Newton was competing with anyone, it was with Sir Charles Ross. Around 1915, when Newton designed his own bolt-action rifle, one particularly noteworthy feature was its locking lugs: Rather than using solid lugs like the Mauser, Newton employed an interrupted thread, copying the Ross Model 1910.
Newton’s various biographers list a dozen different wildcat cartridges developed between 1902 and 1914, all but a handful of which are long-forgotten. In 1905, however, he took the .25-35 Winchester case, necked it down to .228, and created the .22 High Power (also called the Hi-Power, or “Imp.”). It fired a 70-grain bullet at 2,800 fps. The very next year, Newton began submitting articles to Outdoor Life, and in the next few years created his 7mm Special and .25 Newton Special. These were both created by necking down the .30-06, making them precursors to the later .280 Remington and .25-06. Newton’s first commercial breakthrough came in 1912, when Savage Arms picked up the .22 High Power and chambered it in their lightweight Model H takedown rifle.
The .22 High Power’s moment of glory was brief but vivid. Savage’s publicity department went into high gear, promoting the .22 High Power just as it had the .303 Savage, and suggesting it could handle virtually any game animal on earth. Adventurers were found to carry the rifle to the far corners, and report back on its devastating performance. One who became famous was a missionary doctor named Harry Caldwell. In China, he reportedly killed “many tigers” and other game with a .22 High Power. Not everyone was convinced of the .22 High Power’s prowess, however, even on deer. One of the skeptics was Charles Newton himself.
Savage, however, was so impressed with Newton’s work that it commissioned him to design a new cartridge just for the Model 1899 which, with its short action, could not handle cartridges the length of the .30-06. Newton took his .25 Newton Special, shortened it to fit, and created what came to be known as the .250-3000—one of the great hunting cartridges of all time.
Texas gunmaker Todd Johnson with a superbly restored Savage Model 1899 takedown rifle, chambered for the .22 High Power. The .22 High Power (or “Imp”) was the second in the line of the high-velocity cartridges that built Savage’s reputation, and the 99 was the epitome of lever-rifle sophistication.
SAVAGE AND THE .250
When Newton designed the .250, what he had in mind was a deer rifle firing a 100-grain bullet at 2,800 fps—a step up from the .22 High Power, which he considered marginal. Alas, the Savage company had other ideas. Traditionally, the blame for what happened subsequently is laid on the advertising department. It’s hard to imagine an advertising copy writer having such influence in those days, but certainly someone made the fateful decision. After witnessing the career of Sir Charles Ross, and the splash that his .280 made from the Himalayas to the Rockies, the idea of a bullet reaching the magic plateau of 3,000 fps was on every riflemaker’s mind.
It was possible to reach this goal—just—with Newton’s .250, but only by reducing bullet weight to 87 grains. This allowed Savage to build an ad right into the cartridge’s nomenclature: The .250-3000 proclaimed its prowess on every box of ammunition, engraved on every barrel, and reinforced every time someone mentioned its name. There is no denying it was brilliant marketing. From that moment, the .250-3000 defined the Savage 99 rifle, and did so for the next fifty years.
There are photographs from the 1920s, showing groups of deer hunters with a dozen or more deer hanging up on meat poles, and I have even seen some in which every single man was carrying a Savage 99. In the usual crowd of Winchester 94s and a scattering of single-shots, however, the graceful, deadly 99 fairly leaps out at you. According to those who were there, it was even possible, out in the woods, to tell whether a distant shot came from a .250 or from one of the bigger bores. The .250-3000 has a sharp “crack,” like a whip, and, so the stories go, there was usually just one shot. The 99 in .250-3000 became the deer rifle of the serious hunter, the cognoscenti, the sophisticate.
And it was not just a rifle for whitetails. As with the .303 Savage and .22 High Power, the Savage publicity department pulled out the stops. Probably the most famous appearance of the .250-3000 was in the hands of Roy Chapman Andrews, who hunted and explored the Gobi Desert for the American Museum of Natural History and collected Mongolian sheep and various other game. Again, there were reports of large animals that dropped “as if pole-axed.” Presumably, people in those days knew what a pole ax was. The focus of the cult of high velocity, initiated by James Purdey and perpetuated by devotees of the .280 Ross, was now transferred to the .250-3000, the latest wunderkind.
It was fortunate for Savage that, in those days, chronographs were few. Nor had hunters adopted riflescopes wholesale and begun devoting their lives to shooting smaller and smaller groups. In its determination to have that magic “3,000” associated with its new baby, Savage committed a couple of errors. With a cartridge of less intrinsic worth, or subject to closer scrutiny via chronograph and riflescope, these errors would probably have been fatal. The fact that the .250-3000 was able to soldier on and prosper in spite of them tells us just how good it was.
The two problems were related: Barrel length, and the rate of twist of the rifling. In 1914, many of the mysteries of twist rate and bullet stabilization had been solved, and formulae for determining the correct rifling twist for a given cartridge were well established. It was well known that the faster the bullet, the slower the rifling twist required. However, when velocity dropped, or the bullet lengthened, a faster twist was required to compensate and stabilize it, and a properly stabilized bullet was essential to accuracy. An added consideration was the belief at that time that a bullet could be over-stabilized—that is, if the twist rate was too fast, the bullet would have too much rotation, and become erratic. Riflemakers were just as cautious about over- as under-stabilization. In recent years, this factor has been discounted to a great degree, but in 1914 it was a major consideration.
The twist rate decreed for the .250-3000 was one revolution in fourteen inches (1:14). This would nicely stabilize an 87-grain bullet at 3,000 fps. With a 24-inch barrel, the cartridge delivered the advertised 3,000 fps (3,030 fps, to be precise), and the whole package worked well.
There is some disagreement as to the original twist rate. Philip B. Sharpe, in Complete Guide to Handloading, states that the original twist rate was 1:12, but that 1:10 would have been better, offering good accuracy in all bullet weights. All 99s in .250-3000 that I have measured, however, have had 1:14 twists, and most authorities agree that the standard twist originally decreed for the .250-3000 was 1:14.
After the .250-3000’s debut, Savage began making a wide variety of rifles for it, with barrel lengths as short as 18 inches. This included some takedown models, which were very popular at that time. Naturally, the shorter the barrel, the more loss of muzzle velocity. As velocity fell, the twist rate became too slow to stabilize the bullet, and accuracy suffered. Most writers blame accuracy problems in the takedown models on the barrel connection wearing loose, but I suspect it was due to velocity loss and consequent bullet instability.
Sharpe, who knew Charles Newton personally, stated that, in a conversation with Newton shortly before his death, he was told the original design for the .250 called for a 100-grain bullet at 2,800 fps, and the twist rate was to be 1:10. Newton said Savage made a “grave error” in altering his design, and added that he’d been trying for twenty years to interest different companies in making ammunition to the original specifications, but without success. According to Sharpe, Newton died two months later, and a month after that, the Peters Cartridge Company finally came out with a 100-grain load at 2,850 fps. Other companies followed, although most loaded the bullet to a velocity of around 2,700. With the rifles then in use, and their 1:14 twist rate, this only aggravated the situation. Using a 100-grain bullet at that velocity, a twist rate of 1:10 is critical for accuracy.
Comparing weights and lengths: From left, the Sierra 90-grain hollow point, Sierra 100-grain spitzer boattail, 100-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip, and the 117-grain Speer. The Speer is considerably heavier, but actually slightly shorter than the Ballistic Tip. Assuming equal velocity, the Speer bullet could be stabilized with a slightly slower twist rate.
Determining the minimum twist required for bullet stabilization depends on several factors, including bullet length, caliber, specific gravity (SG), and velocity. Specific gravity is required because it affects the spinning inertia of a bullet, and must be allowed for. Lead has a high specific gravity (11.3) while copper is 8.9 and steel just 7.8. A bullet combining lead with a copper alloy jacket has a specific gravity of about 10.9.
The first method of determining twist was the English Greenhill formula, devised in 1879, and it’s still the basis of twist-rate calculations. However, it was formulated for artillery, and above a velocity of 1,800 fps, requires some modification. Another modern development that affects twist rates is the boattail found on many bullets, making them longer for weight. Rifling that stabilizes a 100-grain round-nosed flat-base bullet, and is very accurate, might not stabilize a spitzer boattail of the same weight, and accuracy would suffer.
It is good to remember, too, that twist rates are relative, not absolute. A rate of 1:10 is fast for a .308, but moderate for a .257. Instead of thinking in terms of one revolution in ten inches (1:10), it’s better to think in terms of calibers. As a very broad rule of a very broad thumb, a twist rate of 32.5 calibers will usually provide a reasonable rate of twist for a particular cartridge. By that rule, a .257 needs a twist rate of 1:8.35. That is very fast, and unheard of in .257-caliber rifles.
In the 1962 Gun Digest, John Maynard published an article on determining twist rates, and included a chart that allowed the user to apply those factors and arrive at a specific number. Today, several websites on the internet allow a user to input some data and get a read-out. These are vastly simpler, although Maynard’s chart is still useful because it allows one to see how twist rates change as factors vary up and down. In effect, it imparts some understanding, whereas the internet formulae simply provide information.
To give some comparison figures, a 100-grain .257 bullet (Nosler Ballistic Tip) is 1.11 inches long. At a velocity of 2,700 fps, it requires a minimum twist rate of 1:10.9. A 117-grain bullet (Speer spitzer) at 1.084 is actually slightly shorter than the Nosler 100-grain, because it lacks a boattail and does not have a polymer tip. Being heavier, however, it will have lower velocity. Assuming we get 2,500 fps, it requires a twist rate of 1:10.7 inches. The Sierra .257-caliber, 90-grain boattail hollow-point is .900 inches long, and a 1:14 twist will stabilize it provided it reaches a velocity of 2,950 fps. As you can see, it is possible to get good accuracy from a short-barreled .250-3000 provided it does not lose too much velocity.
Savage had introduced a ground-breaking cartridge and then inadvertently hung several millstones around its neck. In spite of this, the .250-3000 racked up a very impressive record and established a reputation as a spectacular killer on deer. Sometimes this was attributed to the sheer velocity of the bullet, but the fact that it was a cartridge of moderate recoil, and easy to shoot accurately, was also a factor. As well, many users of .250-3000s were more serious hunters and shooters, the kind of guys who liked to shoot and practiced a lot, and could put the bullet where it belonged when the time came. That undoubtedly helped.
Some of the stories of its prowess on larger game may have been apocryphal, but not all. Jack O’Connor reported that the Yukon outfitter, Jean Jacquot, habitually carried a .250-3000, and had killed many grizzlies with it at a time when grizzlies were considered a nuisance and shot on sight.
Jim Carmichel, O’Connor’s successor as shooting editor of Outdoor Life, commented on the .250-3000 in his 1975 book, The Modern Rifle. “I wouldn’t consider (the .250-3000) a very good choice for elk,” he wrote, “But I have to point out that the ‘quickest deadest’ I ever saw a bull elk dropped was with none other than a Model 99 in .250-3000 caliber.”
One thing that is under-reported, either because of embarrassment or because the evidence disappears, is the number of times an animal is hit and does not do the vaunted pole-ax routine. If there is no evidence of a hit, and no blood trail, a hunter would assume he’d missed and go about his business, while the animal might die several terrible hours or days later. With a heavily furred animal like a grizzly, this could happen more often than not. The anti-high-velocity crowd was always eager to report instances of bullets “blowing up” and leaving horrendous surface wounds without killing cleanly. It would seem likely, to me at least, that for every one of those horrifying examples there might be several more where the bullet wounded an animal but did not kill it, yet showed no indication of a hit and was counted a miss.
The reason this debate has raged for 150 years, beginning with James Purdey’s express rifles and continuing on through the .280 Ross, the .250-3000, and later the Weatherby cartridges, is because there are genuine solid examples on both sides. Neither argument is clearly and conclusively right, but neither is clearly and conclusively wrong, either.
Savage chambered the .250-3000 in the 99 for about forty-five years, discontinued it briefly in the early 1960s, then brought it back in 1973. It remained in the line until the mid-1980s.
Over that long period, the company made the 99 in a dazzling array of models, variations, and grades. The differences were mostly in stock design and barrel length, but it also changed from the original rotary magazine to a detachable box, and was adapted to riflescopes. During the course of its life, the Model 1899 progressed from the old, crescent-shaped, sharp-cornered “rifle” buttplate of the 1890s to the flatter, more moderate shotgun- or carbine-style buttplate, and finally to recoil pads. The rifle began with a straight stock and slim Schnäbel forend, and ended with a pistol grip and a bulky, blocky forend more suited to a benchrest rifle. In some later models, its sleek, almost reptilian lines, were obscured by Monte Carlos, pistol grips, and beavertails. As you might expect, some of these rifles were better than others, and one or two could even be called downright bad.
My own search for the perfect Savage 99 .250-3000 began around the rifle’s one-hundredth anniversary, and did not end for a dozen years. During that time, I owned several .250-3000s. One was a late-production solid-frame rifle with a 24-inch barrel; another was an early takedown, which was in bad shape, but I had it restored; today, I own only two .250s. One is a Model EG from around 1949. It has a pistol grip, Schnäbel forend, 24-inch barrel, and a scope. It was owned originally by a rifle nut who obviously admired and cared for it.
The second rifle is what I consider to be the epitome of Savage 99s, as defined by G. T. Garwood and his theories of eumatics, and by my own idea of the perfect rifle for still-hunting and prowling creek bottoms and wooded ridges in search of whitetails. It is, quite simply, a wonderful hunting rifle.
SAVAGE MODEL 99 E
Savage Arms introduced its first “Featherweight” models in its 1904 catalogue. The company may not have been the first to use that term, but it was certainly the one that made it famous, and lightweight rifles stayed in the Savage line until 1973. At the time, Savage claimed its Featherweights were the lightest big-game repeating rifles in existence, with some examples weighing as little as six pounds. That is a light rifle even today, never mind in 1904.
Various means were used to reduce weight. Stocks were slimmed down to the maximum degree, and even hollowed out. Barrels were shortened and given the narrowest profile possible. The barrels were so thin, it was impossible to cut a dovetail for the front sight, so in the earliest models sights were brazed on. Later barrels had an integral lug—the first use of this feature by Savage Arms. The first Featherweights were available in .25-35, .30-30 Winchester, and .303 Savage. Two years later, they were made available in a takedown model as well.
In 1920, the entire line was revamped and renamed. The Featherweight became the Model E, and the takedown version the Model F. Logically, perhaps, it should have been the other way around. The Model E was available in five calibers: .22 High Power, .30-30, .303 Savage, .250-3000, and the new .300 Savage. The first three calibers were given 20-inch barrels; the .250-3000 had a 22-inch barrel, and the .300 Savage was 24 inches.
Whether by accident or design, Savage had, in its Model E .250-3000 Featherweight, created almost the perfect stalking rifle.
It had a straight stock with no pistol grip and with no trace of the perch-belly lines of early 99s. The forend was a short, slim Schnäbel. There was no checkering, but that was hardly necessary anyway, and no sling swivels. The front sight was a blade in an integral lug, held in place by a cross pin. As it came from the factory, it was fitted with the usual open sight on the barrel. The buttplate was steel, gently rounded with horizontal grooves for stability. My rifle, unloaded but fitted with a Lyman Model 56S receiver sight, weighs 6 pounds 10 ounces.
In .250-3000, fitted with a Lyman 56S receiver sight, the Savage 99 E is a near-perfect stalking rifle.
The Model 99 E’s lines are graceful, economical, and deadly.
In my opinion, 22 inches is the ideal barrel length for a .250-3000 provided you intend to use 87-grain bullets. For 100-grain bullets, only a 24-inch barrel can deliver the velocity required by the 1:14 twist. Alas, factory ammunition of any sort for the .250-3000 is nigh impossible to come by today, which makes shooting any .250-3000 largely a handloading proposition. This is no problem, since Sierra makes a 90-grain hollow-point bullet intended specifically to be tougher than the average 87-grain, which these days are usually intended as varmint bullets for use in more powerful cartridges like the .25-06 and .257 Weatherby. As mentioned above, the 90-grain Sierra HP requires only 2,950 fps to stabilize with a 1:14 twist, and it can easily be loaded to reach that velocity in a 22-inch barrel.
It has the usual Savage rotary magazine, similar in operation to that designed by Otto Schönauer, but not quite as refined. The cartridges do not press down into it quite as effortlessly, and if you don’t get the angle right, can actually be annoyingly difficult. In operation, however, it works very well. One drawback is that, unlike the Schönauer, it is not in any way detachable. If you get dirt, moisture, and debris down in the magazine well, it is difficult to clean. Also, the only way of unloading is to partially run each cartridge into the chamber and eject. Still, compared to the tubular magazines commonly found on lever rifles at that time, it allows the use of ballistically better hunting bullets, and it does not worry about cartridge length provided they are short enough to fit. Because of the expense, presumably, rotary magazines have never been widely used, although in recent years, Sturm, Ruger & Co. produced a series of scaled-down bolt rifles, chambered for cartridges like the .22 Hornet and .44 Magnum. These use detachable rotary magazines, and work beautifully.
I think of the Model E as primarily a rifle for woods prowling, carried as Theodore Van Dyke decreed for the still-hunter, in one hand at the trail, or in both hands like a bird hunter walking in on a point. I would not want to take a shot with it beyond 250 yards, and in that situation the vast majority of opportunities will be at considerably shorter range anyway. For this purpose, the Lyman sight is more than adequate, and with no scope to get in the way, the rifle is as comfortable to carry as the Winchester Model 92 covered earlier.
The Savage rotary magazine is well-designed and beautifully made. Each cartridge is cradled in place and prevents bullet deformation under recoil. Feeding is smooth and reliable.
With its light weight, straight stock, and short barrel, the Model E is as quick to mount and shoot as a London game gun (well, almost), and lends itself to instinctive shooting at short range. Recoil and muzzle blast are moderate, and the rifle is simply fun to shoot. This leads to a lot of practice, which in turn leads to proficiency.
My rifle was manufactured in 1922, shortly after the model was introduced. Many of the early weight-saving measures had been scrapped with the changeover in 1920. In the 1932 catalogue, Savage listed average weights at around seven pounds—still very light for a big-game rifle. The next year, the Model E was discontinued, although the takedown Model F remained in the line until 1940. In 1935, Savage combined some of the features of the Model E with those of the Model G (pistol grip and more substantial forend, although still a Schnäbel) to create the Model EG, which became one of the most popular 99s ever made. It was suspended with all other civilian rifles during the war, but production was resumed after 1945—a measure of its popularity, when so many rifles and shotguns disappeared for good.
In 1955, Savage introduced another rifle with the Model F designation. This time it did stand for Featherweight, which leads to some confusion with the earlier Model E. Fortunately, the new Model F was the first Savage rifle to have the full model designation stamped on the barrel, which makes it easy to differentiate from the original Model E of 1920. It included various “refinements” that served only to water down the virtues of its forerunner, and it displayed many post-war “improvements” such as impressed checkering. The new-series F was dropped completely in 1973.
There was also a new Model E, and it stayed in the line through the 1970s and into the ’80s. When Savage reintroduced the .250-3000 around 1973, it was in the Model A, a plain rifle that resembled the original Model E Featherweight, with its straight stock and Schnäbel forend. The Model A had only a 20-inch barrel, but with 1:12 twist it should work well even with heavier bullets at lower velocities.
Jim Carmichel, in The Modern Rifle: “Interestingly, both the .250 Savage chambering and the prewar straight-stock “A” model styling seemed a dead and forgotten issue only a few years ago, but just to satisfy some remote clamourings, the Savage people made a limited run of 99s in this combination. The item proved such a big seller that it’s now (1975) a standard Savage catalog item. I’m not surprised at this success, because the .250 Savage is one of the best possible choices for deer-size game in all sorts of hunting conditions.”
Jim Carmichel: “The .250 Savage is one of the best possible choices for deer-sized game in all sorts of hunting conditions.”
Having owned nine Savage 99s over the years, ranging in vintage from 1912 to the 1970s, in six different chamberings, four of which were .250-3000s, I have come to several conclusions about them. One is that Savage consistently missed opportunities to turn a fine rifle into a truly great one. My Model E is the exception that proves the rule. During the course of almost a century of production of the 99, and more than sixty years of the .250-3000, one would think they could have made many that would qualify as great; instead, there are only one or two, and then for very short periods.
I now have only one other .250-3000, a Model EG from around 1949. It has a 24-inch barrel, a pistol grip, longer forend (though still a Schnäbel), and was fitted by a previous owner with both a sling and scope. The twist is 1:14. As outfitted, but unloaded, the rifle weighs 8 pounds 10 ounces—exactly two pounds more than the Model E. The addition of the scope and sling render it almost impossible as a still-hunting rifle, never mind the additional two pounds. Here is an interesting point about the sling. When prowling the woods, still-hunting, one would tighten the sling to the “parade” position, to keep it from flopping around, making noise, or catching on branches. When you do that, however, it gets in the way of operating the lever. Definitely non-eu, as Gough Thomas would have it (see chapter 12).
One of the traits of a really good still-hunting rifle is that you can hold it by the grip with one hand while using the other to part branches, and have the rifle ready to come into action in an instant. I can do that hour after hour with the Model E, but, because of the extra weight, not with the EG.
I do admire the EG—it’s a nice rifle—but I dearly love the Model E.
* * *
Savage Model 99 EG in .250-3000, manufactured around 1949. With its 24-inch barrel, Leupold scope, and sling, this is a rifle more than a carbine, for careful, deliberate shooting rather than stalking and fast action.
The Savage Model 99 E, along with the classic Marble hunting knife and C. C. Filson wool, were emblematic of an age when beauty and craftsmanship were married to utility.
New Winchester Model 70 Featherweight.
