THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM MEDIUM BORE RIFLE FORUM

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Rifles  Hop To Forums  Medium Bore Rifles    Bases/rings/optics for M70 - 338WM

Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Bases/rings/optics for M70 - 338WM
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
I just picked up a 338WM M70 and would like some opinions on how to set it up.

For rings/bases, I was thinking Leupold Dual Dovetail rings/bases but have also heard a lot of good thing about the Talley rings/bases too. I'd like the mounts to be 1 - strong and 2 - light. I've never seen or used a quick detach set up but that might be nice if it wouldn't come loose unintentionally and would really return to zero as claimed.

As far as a scope, I was thinking about a 2.5-8 or 3.5-10 LVX III. If I went with quick detach rings/bases, I would probably opt for a 3.5-10 and a fixed 6 for a back up.

What do you think???
 
Posts: 1346 | Location: NE | Registered: 03 March 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Brad
posted Hide Post
Heya Jeff. Way to go! Great cartridge. I picked up an action yesterday (stainless M70) to go to the smith for a custom 338WM. I saw you picked yours up over at 24hr. 23" bbl. with McMillan? Good price too, eh?

Anyway, I'm going on my sixth 338... you don't need any more than a 2x7 (that's what I use) or 2.5x8 (matte of course!). I've used nearly every mount (except the Talley's... I dislike vertically split rings) and have come to prefer the Burris Zee's... they're hell for stout. I use an all-steel base (silver on stainless rifle) JB welded to the reciever. I use "low" Zee's, lap them in and apply rubber cement as I'm mounting the scope. If you use Zee's make sure you get the latest generation that incorporate 8x40 Torx's. This is the most bullet proof mount I've found... it's fairly light (4.5 oz's bases and rings) and is QD enough to allow another scope to slide in its place if something goes amuck. It sort of gives you the rugged reliability of the DD's and yet doesn't require you tear a mount apart to replace a scope in the field. I've used the Talley ultralight's and those are fabulous mounts... just a bit too high for my taste with anything smaller than a 40 m objective... they are light however, around 1.9 oz.

If you want to chat give me a holler.

Brad
 
Posts: 3526 | Registered: 27 June 2000Reply With Quote
<allen day>
posted
I have a 2.5-8X Leupold on my .338 Winchester, and I think it's an ideal size for a big medium-bore. The best scope mounts are all-steel in construction, and with a minimum number of screws, etc. A sacrifice of strength for the sake of saving weight is a lousy bargain.

I like Leupold Dual-Dovetails very much, but if the scopemounting holes in your receiver are off-center from the axis of the bore (in otherwords, i.e., the bore is pointing true North, but the holes are pointing 10 degrees NE), Dual-Dovetails simply won't work. Oh, they might work after a fashion, but they can also introduce a parallax problem that'll rear its ugly head once you get much past 150 yds or thereabouts.

In reality, I detest factory scopemounts (price and availability are their only virtues), simply because receiver dimensions vary a great deal, and it's a technical mindblower to expect a set of scope mounts made by one factory on the west coast to match a receiver made by another manufacturer on the east coast.

My suggestion is that you go with Leupold STD mounts (windage-adjustable/two-piece bases) and be prepared to make sure that the mounts don't create any stress on your receiver and cause it to flex. This can cause uneven locking-lug contact, and resultant fliers, etc. Shims (Brownell's) may be required front or back to get things even, square, and right.

In my experience, some of the various commercial scopes mounts are atrocious dimensionally, but Leupold is about the best available, as is Buehler. Buehler's are just a little trickier and require more experience and precise equipment to install, but they're superb.

Other than that, when you can, replace the injection-molded stock with a McMillan, and cut the barrel back to 24"!

AD
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of thirtycal
posted Hide Post
Congratulations, great rifle I have one with a BOSS that prints cloverleaves all day with my handloads. I used the Luepold STD bases and a Leupold Vari X III 3.5 x 10 with Luepold rings. I hate to throw a monkey wrench into your works but I just got a 300 Weatherby Mag for Christmas and The glass I put on that rifle was a Zeiss Conquest 3 x 9. Shot the rifle last week for the first time and it's hard to beat that Zeiss for $400. I compared both scopes at the range and the Zeiss was markedly superior in brightness and clarity compared to the Luepold. By no means would I downplay the Luepold it has serviced my needs flawlessly since I purchased it, but I do like the Zeiss. Let's see if the Zeiss holds up to the recoil, but from what people told me when I posted on the optics board "I will not be dissatisfied with it's perfomance or ruggedness". I also used the Luepold STD bases and Luepold rings with the Zeiss. Good luck and good shooting!!!!!
 
Posts: 156 | Location: NY | Registered: 30 December 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I have a 2.5-8x Vary-X III on my Ruger .338WM. That's a great little scope for Alaska hunting, and I put it through rough use up here. Never had a problem with it, except that one time I put a small dent on the tube when it hit my ATV's handle bar. Sent it to Leupold so they could check it, and no problems were found. They tested it for leakage, cleaned it, replaced the scratched turret caps, and five days later it was at my door step. There was a note inside explaining all the work, and all done free of charge. Needless to say, I buy Leupold.

Keep in mind that is a short scope, and if you have to move it closer to your eye the turret may get in the way. If the stock fits you properly, then that is not a concern.
 
Posts: 2448 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 25 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I, would personally go with the Talley's. Michael S. who posts here sells custom Talley friendly bases for the model 70. These bases are not only astetically pleasing but are a wider better mounting base for the rings. I am going this road with a current model 70 project and Bill Leeper will custom fit these bases to the reciever to ensure perfect allignment and stress free scope mounting.

The talley rings that go on this rifle are the screw lock QD but probably won't come off the rifle very often. If ever. I also will add a second scope set up in the same rings, but will use the exact same scope (agonizing over the 2.5-8 or the 3.5-10 Vari X III at the moment). This way, familiarity will be there if a switch ever has to be made. I would also suggest the McMillan and shorter barrel, but from reading Brads post it sounds like you are already there.

May I be so bold as to drop another suggestion. Order a Williams extractor. They are very nice and functionally superior to the factory original. Wisner's also make such a part and theirs is what will adorn my rifle. But, the Williams (have both in my hand) is very nicely done.

Now if I could talk Williams into making it longer. That, however, is another story.
 
Posts: 2659 | Location: Southwestern Alberta | Registered: 08 March 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Quote:

Other than that, when you can, replace the injection-molded stock with a McMillan, and cut the barrel back to 24"!





Allen,

Believe it or not, it came with a 23" barrel and McMillan Supergrade stock and practically looks new. In addition, it has the screw on the bolt shroud that you have suggested to look for(earlier mfg?). I'm really excited about this gun!

Why are aftermarket extractors so much better? Also, is there anything else that would be very beneficial to have replaced?

Thanks.
 
Posts: 1346 | Location: NE | Registered: 03 March 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Andre Mertens
posted Hide Post
I paired mine with a Swarovski 1,5-6x42 with rail in an EAW fixed mount.
 
Posts: 2420 | Location: Belgium | Registered: 25 August 2001Reply With Quote
<allen day>
posted
Yes, the firing pin stop crew that is located on the left side of the bolt sleeve does indicate earlier manufacture, and is a desirable feature.

A properly functional external extractor must be constructed of spring-steel. An external extractor must 'spring' out to properly grip the rim of the case as it slides up from the magazine, it must then hold it in position as it slides into the chamber, and it must grip the case as it is extracted from the chamber and ejected. The it has to 'spring back' into position. This basic, fundamental set of requirements was established by Paul Mauser, and continued with 1903 Springfield, pre-1964 Model 70 Winchester, commercial FN Mausers, etc. All of these rifles, plus others based on the original Mauser system, were fitted with true machined, spring-steel extractors.

When Winchester re-introduced the controlled-feed style Model 70 circa 1990 it, of course, was fitted with an external extractor, ala pre-64. Unfortunately, machined extractors of spring-steel are expensive to produce (most gun-related things "done-right" are expensive to produce!), so, regretably, USRAC decided to go with an injected, non-spring steel extractor. This part works (most of the time) after a fashion, but not as well as it could if it were made the right way to begin with.

In a telling move, throughout this period USRAC machined and fitted true spring-steel extractors in their Custom Shop for special order Model 70s. These are NOT available for seperate sale from USRAC (Winchester).

But you can buy a beautifully made spring-steel extractor from Jim Wisner and be in business.........

I haven't been without a .338 Winchester in the last twenty-five years. It's one of my all-time favorite cartridges, and it'll take in just about all of the hunting you'll ever undertake. It's not at all "too big" for deer hunting, either. You'll love it!

AD
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Nebraska,

Sent you a PM.

Clearwater.
 
Posts: 43 | Registered: 16 July 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I use Burris Signature ZEE rings on Weaver bases rings on all my guns 338- 338-378 -416.I have shot the 416 about 1600 times with those rings and 3x9 Nikon Monarch .They have never moved.I usually have 3x9 on my 338s but I loved the 3.5x10x50mm I set up on my Winchester Model 70 Stainless.You could see at night with that scope with snow on the ground.My friend I let borrow it also likes it .He has had it 5 years and gotten 5 moose.I like those stocks like you got on your rifle looks good.I have had good luck with those rings when scope mounts drilled off center or to raise scope to hit higher .Those Nikon scopes are tough also.Thats a good deal you got on that gun you will enjoy it.
 
Posts: 2543 | Registered: 21 December 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
One thing you need to check out is the ring spacing. I have the VX-II 2-7 on my mod. 70 with the dual dovetail mounts and the fit of the rings between the adjustment ring and the front bell is tight to say the least. I believe the VX-III in 2.5-8 is even a little shorter, and you might run in to trouble. The VX-III in 3.5-10 has plenty length and it would not be a problem.
 
Posts: 49 | Location: Western Montana | Registered: 04 February 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Neb,
Congrads on your newly acquired 338WM. If memory is correct, the time you called me I was putting my Win 70 338 together on a McM Supergrade stock.

You need to reconsider the DD mounts if you want to mount up the 2.5-8 scope. There was not enough ring spacing on my Win 70 to mount that particuliar scope. The Talley alloys in lows would be my first choice for scopes with objectives of 40MM.

For Leupold scopes with objectives of less than 40mm then go with the Low Burris Zee rings on Weaver bases as suggested earlier. I mounted a Leupold 2-7X33 on mine and lapped the rings, applied rubber cement as Brad suggested. You could run into alignment problems as Allen Day suggested but it is rare. Easy to check with a good straight edge.

You're going to love that McMillan Supergrade stock!

I would go with one of Matt's (Williams Firearms) stainless extractor units. No fitting required and offered at a good price. What loads you going to shoot?

MtnHtr
 
Posts: 254 | Location: USA | Registered: 30 May 2002Reply With Quote
<allen day>
posted
Good looking, practical, honest hunting rifle.

I have the McMillan Super Grade stock on my old .300 Win. Mag. Excellent stock.....

AD
 
Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Rifles  Hop To Forums  Medium Bore Rifles    Bases/rings/optics for M70 - 338WM

Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia