# savage combos



## 87012ga (Oct 1, 2005)

does any one have a Savage Package Series 110G and what do you think about it, i think that from the pic and info it looks like a pretty good gun for under $500


----------



## 1shotWonder (Oct 10, 2005)

I dont own that gun, but I do have an old savage that was my first high power rifle. and like ive alwayse said, the savage rifles are realy boring to look at, but they will shoot with the best of them. the only thing I would suggest if you did get that package, is get some different rings for the scope. the vertical rings have a much higher tendancy to come loose after shooting. so for about 20 bucks you can upgrade to a standard weaver ring.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

The Savage rifles with Accu-Trigger are one of the most accurate out of the box production rifles. They aren't as pretty as a Remington 700 (my favorite rifle), but they do shoot! The scopes and rings on their package rifles are very cheap, and I think a guy is much better to buy the rifle bare, then put on quality bases, rings, and scope...


----------



## thorpebe (Oct 3, 2003)

I have shot a savage 243 for about 8 years and have had good luck with it. I would upgrade to a better scope I believe that optics are what makes a good gun a great gun.


----------



## TN.Frank (Nov 12, 2005)

As a general rule I don't like the scopes that come with the combos. IMHO, the 3-9x scope is about the most useless piece of glass a person can put on a rifle. A good 1.5-4.5x or 2-7x would be a much better choice. Even shooting at 400 yrds you only really need a 4x on deer size game. Remember, a 4x scope would make a deer at 400 yrds look like a 1x scope would at 100 yrds and if you can't shoot a deer at 100 yrds using a 1x(or iron sights) you don't need to be taking a 400 yrd. shot. In my neck of the woods(thick, dense woods at that) a 1.5x is mostly all you'll use since most shots will be at 50 yrds or less. On the rare occation that you get a "long" shot it'll be 200-250 yrds so 4-6x is more then enough power. Anyway, I'll get off of my scope rant,lol, if you find a combo that you like it is sometimes a good way to get everything in one fail swoop instead of having to order or piece together stuff. Talk to ya'll later.


----------



## 94NDTA (May 28, 2005)

TN.Frank said:


> As a general rule I don't like the scopes that come with the combos. IMHO, the 3-9x scope is about the most useless piece of glass a person can put on a rifle. A good 1.5-4.5x or 2-7x would be a much better choice. Even shooting at 400 yrds you only really need a 4x on deer size game. Remember, a 4x scope would make a deer at 400 yrds look like a 1x scope would at 100 yrds and if you can't shoot a deer at 100 yrds using a 1x(or iron sights) you don't need to be taking a 400 yrd. shot. In my neck of the woods(thick, dense woods at that) a 1.5x is mostly all you'll use since most shots will be at 50 yrds or less. On the rare occation that you get a "long" shot it'll be 200-250 yrds so 4-6x is more then enough power. Anyway, I'll get off of my scope rant,lol, if you find a combo that you like it is sometimes a good way to get everything in one fail swoop instead of having to order or piece together stuff. Talk to ya'll later.


TN is a little different than the prarie. 300 + yd shots are not uncommon in ND.


----------



## TN.Frank (Nov 12, 2005)

So for a 300+ yrd shot a 6x should work just fine. Marine and Army Snipers use a 10x scope for 800+ Meter shots, a sportsman shouldn't need anything stronger and 9 out of 10 hunters can't shoot well enough(now, let's be honest out there) to take a shot over 300 yards. I just think that people, for some reason, tend to over scope(just like they over gun) trying to make up for their lack of practice.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

To get you started it is probably not a bad deal.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

TN, I'm a Sniper School graduate and lead a High Risk Entry/SWAT Team. The reason we primarily use a 10X scope on our rifles is because it's the power at which Mil Dot calculations for range estimation, hold over, and hold off are most easily figured.

As stated before, up her in ND, long shots are quite common, and there are lots of guys who can make them. It's been quite a while since I took a deer or antelope at less than 275 yards. The buck I got this year was 340 yards. Of course, I'm shooting at a relaxed deer that doesn't have a clue I'm around, from a rock solid rest, with an accurized rifle that I'm extremely familiar with.

Personally, I prefer a 3-12 up to 4-16 variable power scope on my big game rifles. The better I can see the target, the better I can dope the wind and place my shot precisely....


----------



## Dave_w (May 25, 2005)

I'd take a look at their 10FP-LE2. A little trickier to get a hold of, but when you find one and shoot it, it's...sublime. Accurate, reliable, not expensive.

As for scopes...much better to just track one down that precisely fits your needs.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

I agree with Dave's assessment of the 10FLP. This is the rifle I went through Sniper School with, and I gave up nothing to the guys with custom Remington 700's from the metro agencies...


----------



## fmsniper (Sep 21, 2005)

go and get the LE2, super rifle


----------



## Dave_w (May 25, 2005)

The only difference between the basic 10FPs (LE2, LE1, so on and so forth) is barrel length. The LE2 is the shorter-barreled "urban" model. I found it a little easier to maneuver, position, and carry. The other one is a 26", if I remember correctly. Something's up with the Savage website, they changed around the way they had the FPs laid out.

Give them a good, hard look.

Now, as to the hyper-tuned 700s...well, I go through the same stuff. When I shoot .22, I'm shooting against guys with Russian biathalon guns. When I shoot .308, I'm shooting against the tuned-700 crowd, the Tikka crowd, and the Sako crowd.

No one I shoot with is so good that their $2500 rifle makes a difference. Wow, their guns can shoot a 1/8 MOA group! But they can only shoot a 1 MOA group if they get amazingly lucky, because they're just not that good. Me, my rifle can do 1/3 on a good day, and I can keep it in the 1/2 MOA size.

It's not about getting the most accurate rifle you can get. It's about getting a rifle that's as good as you are. Any extra money you spend is just a waste.

But if you're making shots when it really counts, when missing means the wrong people get killed, by all means...blow some taxpayers' money. Especially if it's my @$$ on the line.


----------



## TN.Frank (Nov 12, 2005)

Dave W said a lot there, most people can't shoot as well as their equipment. Practice with the rifle that you end up with will help you become a much better shot then someone with an expensive rifle that only shoots a few round a year. 
Also, I took a 1.5-4.5x scope that I sold to a buddy that he's not picked up yet and put it on 4x. I then looked at my wood stove(approx. the size of a deer from top of back to bottom of chest) and at 15 yrds. I could pretty much see all of it. Maybe 4x isn't too much for close shots, heck, if I get that H&R Handi-Rifle in 30-'06 I just might put a straight 4x on it just to keep it simple. Anyway, whatever ya' get remember practice, practice, practice.

:beer:


----------



## Dave_w (May 25, 2005)

lol Thanks, Frank. You got a point about the scope. Honestly, the kill zones on a deer aren't exactly tiny, and field of view is much more important. I'd rather be able to acquire my targets 1/2 a second faster than be able to count the hairs on his head.

That said, I'll admit I'm using a rather high level of magnification. Actually, a NcStar 6.5-24x50mm. Mostly because the paper is always in the same place in relation to me. I can shoulder it naturally, no-scope eye it, and then look at the scope. But you can't do that nonsense in the field. By "field", I mean hunting field. The area of tactical marksmanship, as much as I study it (very important lessons for the target shooter), is outside of my experience, so I'm not going to say anything.

Iron sights, so long as they're easy to use, tend to be just fine. The problem is that at 100 yards, it starts to get a little tricky. What I have a hard time understanding is why people who are hunting don't use red-dots with, say a 4x magnification. Most are designed for the military/law enforcement community, but the requirements are the same.

First, both the hunter and the fighter need to acquire targets quickly. They need a sight that will perform reliably. They need one that's stealthy (laser beams suck, might as well wear a shoot-me shirt). Speed is more important that absolute hair-splitting precision.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that for hunting in moderate cover (not plains), for deer-size game and up, the red-dot with a 2x or 4x mag level and a nice wide objective would perform superbly.


----------

