quote:

---

Originally posted by Pathfinder:
I'm not trying to offend anyone but I seriously wonder if some of the posters have even seen a pre-64 winchester let alone a 98 mauser or springfield. I have two pre-64 winnies, a 270 and 300 h&h in standard grade and they're anything but well finished. Both were made in 1954. The stocks are mediocre at best, but well fit and while the actions are smooth running and feed flawlessly it doesn't take a tool maker to find machine marks and finishes on the rougher side.I won't even get into the 98 or springfield except to say the finish on the winchesters are better by far. Maybe what you have seen are custom guns, highly worked or in some cases a super grade finish. I own several of the newer classic actions as well and the ones I have are finished better BUT all needed some work to ensure feeding and action fitting. Someone did say recently that virtually all guns purchased today are "in the rough" and need some adjusting. Seems true. I've owned most of the major and minor brands over the years but have settled on the winchesters. In some ways I find it stange that my favorites were made when I was just 12 yrs old, the first year I hunted.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by allen day:
If I were buying an off-the-shelf production rifle today, I'd go with Weatherby.

AD

---