The Accurate Reloading Forums
New made in 1950

This topic can be found at:
https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3221043/m/220107631

29 May 2004, 03:21
whtailtaker
New made in 1950
found this add;



Winchester Model 70, 30/06 caliber, standard rifle. Mfr. in 1950. 100% new in its original box with papers. Mint bore, original sights. Low comb stock to original buttplate



how much would you pay for this gun??
29 May 2004, 03:29
Major Caliber
I wouldn't give more than $400 for that rifle, it's ugly!
29 May 2004, 04:03
<allen day>
Even if you think it's ugly, at a mythical $400 purchase price, you could at least resell it for a rather handsome profit!

AD
29 May 2004, 07:23
Jim in Idaho
At this point, I wouldn't buy it unless it was ridiculously cheap.

Reason being it is now an investment only piece. New and unfired - okay, maybe someone wants to buy it to shoot, but then you'd ruin the "new and unfired" and it would just be another pre-64 albeit in really good shape. If you just want a good pre-64 M70 to shoot, especially a garden variety .30-06, there are lots and lots of them in very good to excellent shape still around for 1/3 the asking price of this one.

As an investment - that's pretty dicey. What did it cost in 1950 - about $125, maybe $175? I honestly don't know but that's pretty close, right? The ASKING (not necessarily the gettin') price now is $1999. If you had put $175 in any of several good stocks in 1950, I'm thinking they would be worth a lot more than $1999 today.

Someone held onto it too long so that now it's neither a really good, sure fire investment piece but it is way to pricey for a shooter.

'Course, if someone just wants a "new and unfired" American icon just to say they have one, why not?
29 May 2004, 08:44
Stonecreek
I would be very cautious about such an ad. If it is new-in-box, why would the advertiser also say "mint bore"? After all, NIB is supposed to mean NIB. Why would a NIB rifle have anything other than "original sights". And while I don't know when M70's went from "low" comb to "high" comb, something here sounds fishy.

How about it whtailtaker? Are you trying to jerk our chain?
29 May 2004, 12:00
GSP7
I have a 1949 wincester model 70 that has a mint bore , 95% blue and a couple of scrathes in the stock(big deal)original butt plate . I paid $550 for it about 2 years ago .



Mine came with a mint old 4x weaver and redfield mounts. It has a leupold varix III 3.5x10 and new leuplod rings and bases now. So I would give about that ($550) for it.



$1500 is too much
29 May 2004, 16:56
leo
I'll bet it didn't cost more than $75.00 in 1950.
29 May 2004, 17:11
olarmy
The 1950 "list price" for a Standard Rifle in 270 and 30/06 was $123.25.
29 May 2004, 17:18
Shumba
I believe the high comb stocks became available in 1952
30 May 2004, 08:36
<eldeguello>
Quote:

What did it cost in 1950 - about $125, maybe $175?




When I bought my Remington 721 (talk about UGLY!!) in 1953 for 85.00, I couldn't afford a Model 70 at $129.00!! But then, I was only 13. If a 13-year old kid tried to buy a HP rifle today, the powers-that-be would just shit! Where did America go???
30 May 2004, 13:54
leo
Yeah, but that's the "list" price not the dicount gunstore price.
30 May 2004, 23:00
billt
With most guns being "Proof Tested" at the factory, how can they claim "unfired"??? And how would you know either way?? Bill T
31 May 2004, 19:38
Atkinson
Today as described that rifle would bring about $2500., give or take $500. to a collector....If I had it then it would take $2500 plus shipping or I would not sell it..Any new in the box M-70 is better than the stock market or returns.
01 June 2004, 18:54
510wells
Quote:

With most guns being "Proof Tested" at the factory, how can they claim "unfired"??? And how would you know either way?? Bill T




You'll know because they never clean then after the test fire and then ship 'em dirty.