savage 110 ultralite

[Mule man]

I’ve shot 6 big game animals with my 110 UL in .280 AI this year. With an EGW base, Warne rings, 4.5-14x40 VX-3i, and a Yankee Hill QD muzzle brake and Resonator suppressor, I’m sitting around 8 pounds 5 oz. I’m shooting 162 grain Hornady PH factory loads, and it shoots great. Target is my first 5 shot group at 100 after initial break in. The stock feels cheap but it fits really well with the adjustable LOP and cheek comb. It’s my do-all hunting rifle so it’s nice to not care about the stock getting scratched/dinged/covered in mud. That’s my $.02 for what it’s worth.

Nice group with factory's, great shooting

 

[ZMT588]

I'm getting one of these soon. No sense in buying a rifle right now if I cant buy ammo to shoot it. Torn on caliber choice though.

 

[std7mag]

I just bought my daughter a Lightweight Storm in .308. If I remember the stats correctly, its only about 11 oz heavier than the Ultralight but costs $700 less. It seemed like a much better value to me.

When you consider just the Proof Research barrel is going for $900, you begin to see the value.

Speaking of which, what is the barrel length on the Ultralite?

 

[PsRpOiGrRiAtM]

Barrel length(s) on the Ultralites are 22" and 24" depending on caliber.

 

[noharleyyet]

I've always been averse of the bolt handle location's unaesthetic appeal (to me), but this jazzed iteration is growing on me. A lot of features for the coin, as std7mag stated.

 

[Dunning Kruger]

I'm getting one of these soon. No sense in buying a rifle right now if I cant buy ammo to shoot it. Torn on caliber choice though.

Somebody on another forum said that a savage rep told them theyre not making squat on these guns so the price will be going up soon. If true thats a reason to buy one now, ammo or not. May not shoot it for a while, but if youll be buying one anyway may as well do it before the price increases. If its true.

 

[CoffeeGoat]

Somebody on another forum said that a savage rep told them theyre not making squat on these guns so the price will be going up soon. If true thats a reason to buy one now, ammo or not. May not shoot it for a while, but if youll be buying one anyway may as well do it before the price increases. If its true.

It may just be a "marketing" cost, so they might even take a loss. I know that I hadn't even considered a savage until the ultralight came out. Think of it like a halo model for a car manufacturer, by demonstrating they can do something really impressive they make the rest of the line look better.

In my case I was planning on picking up a couple matching tikka or mauser rifles - one in a practice caliber and one in my hunting caliber. The ultralight is a very attractive package for hunting and would allow me to pick up a much less expensive and "matching" storm 110 or similar for practice. It's definitely made me look twice.

 

[Dunning Kruger]

It may just be a "marketing" cost, so they might even take a loss. I know that I hadn't even considered a savage until the ultralight came out. Think of it like a halo model for a car manufacturer, by demonstrating they can do something really impressive they make the rest of the line look better.

In my case I was planning on picking up a couple matching tikka or mauser rifles - one in a practice caliber and one in my hunting caliber. The ultralight is a very attractive package for hunting and would allow me to pick up a much less expensive and "matching" storm 110 or similar for practice. It's definitely made me look twice.

Really if youre not insisting on the adjustable stock and threaded barrel i think the 110 lightweight storm (or the old 16 lightweight hunter) would be the ticket. Both have the same advertised weight, 5.6lb, as the ultralite, and are crazy accurate. I own two model 16 lwh rifles, 308 and 243. Both do easy half moa or better with factory ammo. First 4 shot group at 200 yards with the 243 was 1/4" with federal fusion ammo and a 2-7×33 scope. My dad has the new version, the 110 lightweight storm in 6.5 manbun. Also shooting cloverleafs with factory ammo. I bought the ultralite so i could put a suppressor on it, but since receiving my 223 suppressor and seeing how much it effects the balance of the gun ive changed my mind on that.

 

[CoffeeGoat]

Really if youre not insisting on the adjustable stock and threaded barrel i think the 110 lightweight storm (or the old 16 lightweight hunter) would be the ticket. Both have the same advertised weight, 5.6lb, as the ultralite, and are crazy accurate. I own two model 16 lwh rifles, 308 and 243. Both do easy half moa or better with factory ammo. First 4 shot group at 200 yards with the 243 was 1/4" with federal fusion ammo and a 2-7×33 scope. My dad has the new version, the 110 lightweight storm in 6.5 manbun. Also shooting cloverleafs with factory ammo. I bought the ultralite so i could put a suppressor on it, but since receiving my 223 suppressor and seeing how much it effects the balance of the gun ive changed my mind on that.

Buh buh but that carbon barrel! If I did the reasonable and thoughtful thing I wouldn't get the carbon barrel and then how would people know I'm a serious hunter.

I think that's the trick with the ultralight, it makes people think twice about savage period. That shiny carbon barrel, with all the features that you get on a higher end custom makes you think perhaps you should re evaluate your expectations of a legacy manufacturer. Even if the lightweight has similar specs the lack of shiny doesn't attract the same buzz.

 

[Dunning Kruger]

Buh buh but that carbon barrel! If I did the reasonable and thoughtful thing I wouldn't get the carbon barrel and then how would people know I'm a serious hunter.

I think that's the trick with the ultralight, it makes people think twice about savage period. That shiny carbon barrel, with all the features that you get on a higher end custom makes you think perhaps you should re evaluate your expectations of a legacy manufacturer. Even if the lightweight has similar specs the lack of shiny doesn't attract the same buzz.

Yeah, ill have to agree. But for me the selling point was the weight combined with a threaded barrel. The barrels on the 16lwh and 110 lightweight storm are slightly too small to have threaded it seems like. Used witt machine clamp on brakes for my 16s. The carbon wrap on the barrel basically just increases diameter to allow threading without adding weight as far as my concerns go. If id have knows id change my mind about getting a suppressor id not have bought this rifle. But in the end im glad i did, as my unconventional scope set up needed the highest comb piece on the accufit stock, or ida had to screw around with putting a pad on. But really, their cheaper lightweight rifles may not be glamorous or come with cool boy prohunter street cred, but they are extremely functional, extremely light and accurate. They just dont have the flashy paint job. Know several guys with high dollar custom rigs that cant outshoot my lighter, cheaper 16lwh setups.

 

[PsRpOiGrRiAtM]

I like the idea of a heavy-enough barrel for threaded options, as well as the extra length. The LWH models are 20" if I'm not mistaken? Granted, I know that 2-4" doesn't mean a lot in real world applications, but I also just like the looks of the carbon guns. Maybe if I get a bonus this year, but who knows. I saw that Savage has a $75 rebate on all Accu-fit models, so that could knock a chunk off the final price tag.

 

[Dunning Kruger]

Yeah the ultralites do have their benefits, hence the extra cost. But for the budget minded guy, their cheaper lightweight rigs will fit the bill. May not be fancy, but they work. $550 gun, $280 2-7×33 scope, all said and done just over 6lbs and under $1000. 1/4" 4 shot at 200 yards with factory ammo. Just blows my mind when people bad mouth savages. Its always "stocks feel cheap" or "accutriggers suck" but hey, results are what matter to me. Lotta guys may have stocks that dont feel as cheap, but their guns dont shoot like these.

 

[PsRpOiGrRiAtM]

Yeah the ultralites do have their benefits, hence the extra cost. But for the budget minded guy, their cheaper lightweight rigs will fit the bill. May not be fancy, but they work. $550 gun, $280 2-7×33 scope, all said and done just over 6lbs and under $1000. 1/4" 4 shot at 200 yards with factory ammo. Just blows my mind when people bad mouth savages. Its always "stocks feel cheap" or "accutriggers suck" but hey, results are what matter to me. Lotta guys may have stocks that dont feel as cheap, but their guns dont shoot like these.View attachment 163201View attachment 163202View attachment 163203

No, you really can't argue with that performance. I must say, though, the Savages of the past several years (current gen, and one prior) are head and shoulders above previous ones in regards to aesthetics.

 

[CoffeeGoat]

No, you really can't argue with that performance. I must say, though, the Savages of the past several years (current gen, and one prior) are head and shoulders above previous ones in regards to aesthetics.

Much of the criticism I've heard leveled at savage stem from poor quality control in the past, do you think that has improved as well?

 

[PsRpOiGrRiAtM]

I never saw/heard true QC criticism. In fact, it was always along the lines of something like, “I can’t believe something that ugly shoots so well.” So I’m sure they had their share of lemons, but I suspect no more than Remington or Winchester had. Maybe it was also just the perception that they got that much praise in spite of the fact that they looked like 2x4s with a pipe strapped to them so it stuck with me.

 

[CubSlayer]

When you consider just the Proof Research barrel is going for $900, you begin to see the value.

Speaking of which, what is the barrel length on the Ultralite?

Just because the barrel costs $900 doesn't mean its worth it. The stock 110 Savage rifles are very accurate. To pay $700 more for a rifle that adds: 1) Adjustable comb height and 2) threaded barrel just doesn't seem worth it to me, at least on paper. All academic for me anyway; The kids get the fancy new rifles - I get the old ones.

I have to agree with Dunning Kruger on this topic ("6.5 Manbun" - frickin' awesome!)

 

[CubSlayer]

Much of the criticism I've heard leveled at savage stem from poor quality control in the past, do you think that has improved as well?

I bought my first Savage rifle in 2013 - a Model 11 Trophy Hunter XP with the Nikon scope in .308. This remains my primary cub slayer, although I am moving to .338 Federal.

For various reasons (including good, old-fashioned addiction), I have been buying bolt-action hunting rifles from Savage steadily ever since. Both build quality and design quality have been improving steadily over these years, though I consider the build quality of my first Savage to be more than acceptable. Was this "poor quality control past" before 2013?

From my seven Savage rifles, two have had to go back to the factory. The first had a stock that wouldn't stay put, even after being locktited. The second, a .338 Federal DOA hunter, had a chamber burr. The gun functioned, and the burr was slowly wearing away, but I figured "Why should I put up with this?". I also had no interest in attempting any home gunsmithing.

 

[CubSlayer]

BTW, as much of a Savage fan as I am, I have one Savage Axis II, and I would not buy another. It works, but the model 110s are so much better for not much more money.

 

[tom338]

I bought the 6.5 PRC ultralight. Bolt is not user friendly. Very jumpy and not smooth at all. Then I lost track of how many rounds I put thru it to find a decent load. It's definitely not a shooter. I have a new barrel ordered for it. I have 2 other proof research barrels that shoot just fine. But this barrel won't shoot worth a darn. I disliked the bolt so much I swapped it for a regular non fluted bolt in the gun.

 

[PsRpOiGrRiAtM]

Can you elaborate on it some more? Did you shoot any factory ammo through it as a baseline? Did you send back to Savage? (I would opt for that instead of buying a new barrel and at least see what they say.) I'm also curious as to how the replacement bolt would be any different than the fluted version. The dimensions would be the same, correct? Or is it just the aesthetic part that you dislike?