1989? Savage 110e 30-06 questions

[Eddy G]

Hello everyone,

I have what I believe to be is a 1989 (maybe 88 or 90) Savage 110e 30-06
What I believe is the serial number E683233 is stamped on the receiver.

I don't actually remember buying it (back in 88/89?) but I'm pretty sure it was brand new at the time. I know I bought it at the Kittery Trading Post in Maine because a Reminton 308 semi I had at the time was jamming up and I needed something quick for deer season.
The scope was an inexpensive Bushnell sporter something from Kmart but it worked. Cheap see through rings that allowed me to use the iron sights if needed sat on two small rails that screwed into the receiver.
So with that I ran less than a dozen rounds though it, sighting it in and took it on one (unsuccessful) hunt to Maine.
It then spent the next 30+ yrs locked away in a closet.

I recently pulled it out of the closet and cleaned it. I still had a full box of shells that I must have bought with it (price tag was still on it $7.95!).
Took it to the range and it was still sighted in, didn't group well at 100 yrs but on the target. Pulled the scope and it grouped shockingly well at 50yrs with iron sights. Before anyone starts with the iron sights debate, no I can't just keep the iron sights. My eyes aren't that great and I don't like shooting them past 50yrs.

So I ordered a new scope from optics planet but the mounts/rings didn't line up.
In fact none of my other scopes looked like they would match up.
The tubes aren't long enough. So I ordered a multi-slot base for the Savage 110.
The first one came with 8/48 screws. The next one came with 6/48 screws but the receiver on the rifle is flat on one side and curved on the other.
It will mount but I have no confidence the screws will hold up on the curved base connecting it to the flat receiver.
I mounted the new scope but it sits way to low in the back so the scope runs out of elevation clicks.
I was able to shoot it and got pretty good groups (all really low) at 100yrds.
So to raise it up I shimmed the rear ring.
I simply placed metal tape in the ring to bring the rear up a bit.
Now I was able to zero in at 100 yrs but at the very bottom of the adjustment (zero clicks left).
Obviously that was just a temporary fix and I don't want to leave it that way.

The real problem Im having is there seem to be so many versions of the 110 that its hard to figure out what works and what doesn't on this thing.
What base/scope rings would work best for it?

I'd like to get it set up and practice with it at the range this summer. I think it will make an excellent back up rifle for black bear hunting in Maine this fall and just a great old 30-06 to shoot at the range.

Anyway, any info on the rifle, scope base, anything at all would be greatly appreciated.

[pdog06]

Welcome to the forum!

Your rifle was made in 1986 based off the serial number given.

So what you have is a 110 staggerfeed flat rear non-accutrigger long action.

Scope bases are tough for the long action hunting rifles. Most hunting style scope are too short to use 2 pc bases. IMO the best option is a 1pc picatinny base that will give you multiple mounting options to achieve the correct eye relief. The “flat rear” bases are getting harder to find but are still out there from a few manufacturers. You have to look for tags like “staggerfeed”, “pre 2003”, “flat rear”.

Here’s a couple options:

https://egwguns.com/savage-flat-back...icatinny-0-moa

https://www.opticsplanet.com/warne-r...-scope-ri.html

[NF1E]

Just installed the exact EGW rail suggested above on a Savage Long Action flat back. Ordered the rail direct from EGW two days ago and Fed Ex delivered it at lunch time today. I do have the same mount on another same vintage Savage and it has worked very will. Gives you plenty of length for pretty much any scope. Whatta Hobby!

[Robinhood]

As the other two fellas suggested. Those old flat back long action were often smooth fine shooting rifles. Good luck with it Eddy.

[PatrickBruce]

Warnescopemounts.com also has flat back rails that will fit. Good luck and have fun!

[Eddy G]

Thanks everyone, this is what I ordered on Amazon today.

EGW Savage Flat Back Long Action Picatinny Scope Mount 20 MOA

I went with the 20 MOA to bring that rear end up and get some extra adjustment out of the scope.

I really appreciate all the help.

When I bought this rifle I sanded the factory stock down and gave it a few coats of satin poly for protection. I like the look but was thinking of using a synthetic poly stock or updated chassis style system. Is it worth doing?.

[NF1E]

Thanks everyone, this is what I ordered on Amazon today.

EGW Savage Flat Back Long Action Picatinny Scope Mount 20 MOA


I went with the 20 MOA to bring that rear end up and get some extra adjustment out of the scope.

I really appreciate all the help.

When I bought this rifle I sanded the factory stock down and gave it a few coats of satin poly for protection. I like the look but was thinking of using a synthetic poly stock or updated chassis style system. Is it worth doing?.

I think so. Added an ORYX chassis and a new Criterion 26" SS .223 barrel to mine. Started break in procedure today. Whatta Hobby!

[Eddy G]

I think so. Added an ORYX chassis and a new Criterion 26" SS .223 barrel to mine. Started break in procedure today. Whatta Hobby!

Forgive but I don't the exact term but my rifle has an "in the stock", non-removable , non-detachable magazine. Would a chassis work with my rifle? Would I be able to then use a detachable magazine?

[KMW1954]

The term you are looking for is "Stagger feed, blind magazine."

Most of the chassis stocks will use a detachable box magazine (DBM).

https://eabco.com/choate-tactical-st...series-rifles/

Otherwise look at Boyd's stocks.

https://www.boydsgunstocks.com/

[Blue Avenger]

EGW Savage Flat Back Long Action Picatinny Scope Mount 20 MOA


I went with the 20 MOA to bring that rear end up and get some extra adjustment out of the scope.
.

So if I understand your first base you tried was round on both ends? Understandably it would not mount correctly for proper relation to the bore and the scope travel was hampered. Now going to the correct style and making a 20 moa change may be a bigger change then you expect. The "Flat Back" was hand sanded / polished and all very a bit. But going to a 20 moa with a proper fitting base is likely to make it unable to zero at a 100 yards unless you have a scope with a lot of travel.

[NF1E]

Forgive but I don't the exact term but my rifle has an "in the stock", non-removable , non-detachable magazine. Would a chassis work with my rifle? Would I be able to then use a detachable magazine?

Both of my 110s had internal stagger feed mags. They are long actions so the mags are for 308 or 30-06. I was able to remove a small section of the rear of the feed lips on the mags so no cutting on the receiver was necessary. Slight manipulation of one of the mags feed lips allows perfect function for .223. Whatta Hobby@

[PhilC]

So if I understand your first base you tried was round on both ends? Understandably it would not mount correctly for proper relation to the bore and the scope travel was hampered. Now going to the correct style and making a 20 moa change may be a bigger change then you expect. The "Flat Back" was hand sanded / polished and all very a bit. But going to a 20 moa with a proper fitting base is likely to make it unable to zero at a 100 yards unless you have a scope with a lot of travel.

This is spot on advice, a lot will depend on the intended use. If primarily for hunting under 300yds, a 0 moa base would be best.

[Eddy G]

So if I understand your first base you tried was round on both ends? Understandably it would not mount correctly for proper relation to the bore and the scope travel was hampered. Now going to the correct style and making a 20 moa change may be a bigger change then you expect. The "Flat Back" was hand sanded / polished and all very a bit. But going to a 20 moa with a proper fitting base is likely to make it unable to zero at a 100 yards unless you have a scope with a lot of travel.

I ordered a 0 MOA today. I'll have them both by Fri. That will be #3 and #4 haha...One of them has to work and I'll just sent the other one back......

[pdog06]

Ha ha you didn’t give us time to answer the questions before you order. You were online shopping like my wife…lol

I agree with the others that the 0 Moa is the best one for ya. And you can’t compare the scope adjustments to what you had with the round rear base on there with shims. It’s a whole different animal. The flat back is much thicker and should get you right where you need to be. When they all show up use the 0moa first and you likely won’t even need to take the others out of their packaging.

[J.Baker]

Forgive but I don't the exact term but my rifle has an "in the stock", non-removable , non-detachable magazine. Would a chassis work with my rifle? Would I be able to then use a detachable magazine?

A chassis would bolt right onto your long-action, but on short-actions they used different screw spacings over the years so you have to watch for that and make sure the chassis spacing matches your action. You may have to open up the bottom feed port on the action a little to accommodate the detachable magazine when doing so. Never done that conversion myself so hopefully someone who has will chime in.

[NF1E]

Or you could simply remove some of the rear portion of the feed lips that are not used anyway and not mess with the receiver at all. Mags are way over length in the long action for most calibers. Whatta Hobby!

[Eddy G]

The 0 MOA is the winner….
Was able to return the others…
Base and scope mounted
Rifle zero’s right in at 100 yards no problem.
Shooting nice tight groups…
Ran a little of everything through it this week. 150 to 180 grain hunting and match bullets…All without any trouble…
Thank you everybody for all the help it’s much appreciated..

[KMW1954]

Congratulations, glad to hear you got it worked out! Now stick around and enjoy the group.

[charlie b]

Ditto.

[PhilC]

+3! Nice when it all comes together with the right stuff.

[pdog06]

Nice! Glad it all worked out…