Savage 64F

[artkat2]

   Does anybody have any experiences with the Savage 64F line of .22 semi auto's? Big 5 has them on sale for $159 right now. I haven't found any aftermarket support for them, or for that matter anywhere that has mags for them. I'm sure Savage sells them but I haven't found them on their website yet.
   Maybe a Savage based LTR?
Thanks
  Andy

[AZRedhawk44]

Very old topic, but I just bought a Savage 64F as an LTR candidate.

It was $129 at Sportsman's Warehouse... less than my favored candidate, the Marlin 795 (at $139).  Magazines are available at MidwayUSA and CDT for ~$14.  Rifle doesn't come with sling swivels like the 795 does, but $9 fixed that.

The big benefit I see to this rifle, though... the magazines are STURDY.  Made of Russian Peasant Steel, not wimpy aluminum baking sheet material.  Actually, I think they're zamak... but they are incredibly thick and rigid.

The one weakness I've found in the 795 over other price-comparable options (the 10/22 doesn't count, being $100 more than the Rem 597, Marlin 795 and Savage 64F), is the 795 magazine lips are very fragile.  An over-eager kid (or adult) can slam the mags in forcefully and bash the lips against the bolt, smashing them down so that the bolt fails to strip a cartridge off.

I think this will be impossible with the 64F.

While no TechSights exist for it, I will be transferring my inexpensive scope from my current 795 to the new Savage.  The 795 is getting a set of Williams FoolProof Firesights with target knobs for easy adjustment.  Always wanted to try those out.

Also:  The barrel-to-stock fit of the 64F is much better than that of the 597's and 795's available for comparison.  I could take a dollar bill and slide it up the entire length of the barrel, to the receiver, with no resistance, with the 64F.  It was properly relieved so it would not rub against the stock when fired.  The 795's I've seen (and own) require some stock relieving to eliminate stock effect on the shot.  Never owned a 597 and I may try one as my next LTR (depending on the results of the Williams sights experiment on my 795, as TechSights are not available for the 597), but the stock squeezed on the barrel pretty badly.

That leaves me with an LTR library consisting of:
1 - Marlin / Coast-to-Coast model 42 (A Marlin 795 predecessor), equipped with TechSights
2 - Marlin 795 with Williams FP-TK sights
3 - Savage 64F with a Swift 3-9x40 scope on 3/8" rails

I have another GI sling on the way for it and 2 more spare mags for a total of 3.

[AZRedhawk44]

Update on the Savage 64F, after some extended use.

I bought it as an experiment with regards to the "LTR" concept for Appleseed use, about 16 months ago.  It's been loaned out to about 8 or 10 people and perhaps has 2500 rounds through it at this point, along with my perhaps 300 or so rounds through it.  It ain't my favorite among my .22's... that spot is filled with a Marlin 795 with a Willams FP-TK sight set on it (for harassing small game) and my new AR-15 in .22LR for plinking and practice.

When I first bought it, I did a quick lubing and strip-down of the action from the stock just to make sure there wasn't anything terribly offensive.... metal shavings or anything like that.

It's been cleaned once, about a year ago.  Again, just a strip-down of the action from the stock and an irrigation with WD-40, allowing it to dry, and then applying fresh lube.

So, it's been another year and I did a FULL strip-down on it.  Everything.

I'm struck by the gawd-awful design that requires you to take the barrel off the receiver, to clean the bolt and its channel.  I'm double-struck by the bone-headed idea of mounting the ejector to the barrel, and making it magically somehow align with the recess on the bolt during re-assembly.  I've got a scope on this rifle and I mounted it so it just barely clears the inadequate iron sights that ship with the 64F.  Well, the bell of the scope's forward lens interferes with the assembly process.

I am left wondering, now that it's all back together, whether my scope's zero is going to be off after taking the FREAKING BARREL OFF THE RECEIVER.   

What a dumb design.

The only good thing about it (that captured my interest originally) is the robust design of the magazine.  It's made from what appears to be die-cast zinc or whatever Hi-Point pistol slides are made from.  Very strong, for a .22 rimfire magazine.  I've had drama with kids whacking my 795 magazines hard into the receiver of my Marlins, bending the feed lips down and inducing malfunctions.  I was hoping a different design such as the savage would resolve that issue.

Unfortunately, the mag's forward face also doubles as the feed ramp on the Savage.  If your forearm rubs against this while prone, the magazine is pushed out of alignment with the barrel and you get all sorts of fun jams.

And, the manual of arms is very awkward with it.  Most people I loan it to, never really got comfortable with it.  I've had several people shoot Rifleman scores with my Marlins.  No one has yet shot the score with the Savage.  Not for want of accuracy, but rather due to difficulty with magazine changes and bolt manipulation.


I think I'm going to "Backpage" this thing and get another Marlin instead.  I've got a healthy bit invested into it though.... The rifle itself, 1.25" sling swivels, a GI cotton sling, and 5 magazines, rimfire 3/8" groove rings and a Simmons 4x32 scope on top.  I'm hoping I can recoup enough to get another Marlin 795, some TechSights or Willams FP-TK sights, and a couple extra magazines.  Probably not sell the sling or the 1.25" swivels.


"But Redhawk, why aren't you just running Ruger 10-22's?  Their mags are robust and you don't have to take the barrel off the receiver to clean them!"

Several reasons.  Marlins cost half as much as a Ruger, and typically outshoot Rugers out of the box.  Marlins come with a last-shot bolt hold open feature, while Rugers do not (nor does the Savage).  The bolt release is not black magic on the Marlin (Ruger's 10-22 bolt release often confounds new shooters).  Marlins cost less to get "Appleseed ready" than a Ruger does.

I wish someone made a $150 rimfire rifle that had good magazines and a suitable manual of arms.  If Marlin would just widen their mag well and use a stronger, reinforced magazine design... everything would be hunky-dory.