No to the red tint to my eye.

The left hand side has a lot of dark mineral striping.

The right is lighter.

The bolt is like it is running on glass covered on ice and snot.

This is not hyperbole. It is the best I own. All you fill is the bolt lift. My wife did it w one finger and her palm on a full magazine.

This is a 2024 rifle.

Here is the gunbroker listing:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1076240513

I can email pics


Now my fil’s new extreme he got today is about as nice.

Taste like shit? what does shit taste like? you need to wash them out before you eat them..Half the buffalo shot in Africa take a follow up second shot going away and they eat well. Read some more magazine trash!

That is as good as you will get in todays wood Heym. I have a couple of the Carolina made 70's, the wood is nice, but not that nice.
I have three 264's, the throats are different in all three. You may want to choose your bullet and throat it to take advantage of the mag length for the bullet.
A novel idea, shoot game how you want, and not tell others to do what you do. That works good for everyone.

Winchester have upped their game on the Super Grade stocks.

Much better grade wood and nice shadowlined cheekpieces.

I was going to get her scoped today.

However, I went rabbit hunting and killed a mess of rabbits that had to be cleaned and burched. Then MIL had food done.

We will get to it.

I have 300 140 grain NorthForks in bound.

Obviously how a rifle fits is very individual.

For me, Ruger stocks are just not quite right.

Winchester M70 are good, but not perfect.

I brought an older Don Allen pre Dakota rifle, and it was a match made in heaven. I now have my guns stocked to that pattern if possible (it has a bit of cast off to it.)

The newer Win M70’s are a lot of gun for the money. I do prefer them to Rugers, but I’m now in TB40’s group of having a lot done to a new rifle before it becomes a field user.

If the super grades are that much better, I might get one- but I haven’t seen for sale yet.

I guess "a lot of work" depends if you do it yourself or not.
I always take the stock off and make sure the wood is properly sealed. I properly bed the recoil lug and first 2" of the barrel, and the tang. Set the trigger to my preferred weight for the intended use. Stone camming surfaces, polish feed ramps. When I choose a favorite bullet, I throat it to accept it to full magazine length, possibly alter the feed ramp angle better to that bullet, if needed.
All simple things if you dont have two left hands. If all else works good, I may do some stock altering. I hate re-doing checkering that is only half there from sliming or opening grip angles. But it can be done also.

Ha.

I probably could manage part of it, but it’s one, more time than I have available, and two, if I do woodwork it tends to look like a drunken beaver has been in the wood shop…

Folks,

I can't say I've used the TX Heart Shot a bunch but it certainly has worked for me. I shot a big bull caribou as he came out of the river and shook of the water. The only shot I had was right up the butt. He went straight down and hardly twitched. A six point bull elk did the same. I had wounded it and there was no way I was going to let it get over the hill. Up the butt and he just flopped over dead. In both cases I had very little meat damage. With a premium bullet there's no need to pass on that shot.

I grew up hunting whitetails in the woods of Maine. If you didn't take the shot presented you might not get another chance. Nobody turned down a shot up the butt or a running shot.

Mark

Ray made a valid comment. Obviously, everyone would take a full frontal shot on a deer. Depending on how well the bullet penetrates, the bullet could end up in the butt. One up the butt could end up in the chest of the deer. What's the difference ?

The difference is could being the controlling word and shooting off hams. You have a lot more to penetrate to get past chest. Also, if you don’t, the deer is probably going to die after running all over Georgia, and leave little blood on the ground.

Look if you want to do, just have the bullet construction and cartridge to get through.

In the frontal you are taking the vitals more or less first.

Not for nothing, but some phs will not allow a frontal on dg. The issue being not placing the bullet right and going down the hide.

quote:

One up the butt could end up in the chest of the deer. What's the difference ?

You hit the vitals first.

It can still leave a mess.

I shot a small buck front on with my 416T 350gr mag tip at 2450fps. DRT.

He was mush from front to back.

A very messy gutting job.

I said I will not to that again. Caliber and bullet.

Now with a different combo I shot several others head on not that big of mess.

Personally I refrain form Texas heart shots.

They tend to be very messy.

Now on wounded game getting away I put bullets into them.

I'm with Heym and PD. As I have said, others may do as they wish.

Well of course a broadside shot is a better option but a Texas Heart need not be passed on and the head shot or neck shot has wounded more animals than any other shot and left an animal to starve to death with a broken jaw..This holier than thou BS just dont cut it with me. It all depends on the option in each case as to what shot you take..

Ive hunted 8 or 9 or more days for a certain animal without a seeing the hunted, and Im sure not going to pass the option of a THS that kills fast and sure. As to meat waste and "messy" thats too much gun or wrong bullet, gutted and washed out works for my family, the claim is a over reaction, and my freezer is always full..

Most of my last 40 years included 30 to 60 or more days in safari camps wherein the total diet was wild game much gut shot by bad shooting or follow up shots at running away game, we ate it all and no complaints I don't really understand this thread, it rings false to me.

How a discussion about the quality of newer made Winchester rifles got to a debate on whether or not to take a bearing 180 shot is somewhat strange to me.

Rifle fitment makes a difference, regardless of target choice.

As to the Texas heart shot, I’ve used it, on game animals usually after the initial shot, but I have used it on unwounded animals- with great success.

Let he who has never shot at a going away game bird step forward…

It’s part of your calculus in deciding to shoot- am I certain I can kill this animal with what I’m shooting at this time? Is this a reasonable and ethical shot to attempt?

The only holier than thou poster here is Ray.
He must have a bug up his ass.
Not one person who said they dont use the shot, claimed others shouldnt use it if they like. Shoot them in the lips for all I care. But to get pissy because some choose not to is stupid.
So until Ray is lord and master of all game shot, I and others will shoot as we wish.

I did not read anything as being hostile.

Ray asked why folks do not like the Texas Heart Shot. Someone else asked what is the difference going head on versus butt on.

They were given answers. No one has to accept those answers.

The how we got to this point of discussion was comparing the new Model 70s to Ruger M77 in handling as it relates to making shots on running game. That was the nexus to the THS.

Folks can take discussion where they want.

That is how folks have discussions around a table or campfire.

In this age of runaway technology, I think it is good to include discussions of ethics - but think we should try to maintain the usual AR decorum.

I had never heard theback40's high ground formalised before but he does make a point. I've only shot one deer running directly away, a sambar while testing my new .450/.400 about 16 years ago. The animal ponked and took off; I thought well, these rifles are meant to handle like a shotgun and the bullet should penetrate well, so aimed for the middle of the body. Fortunately (on that occasion), I failed to pull the bead hard down in the express V and the bullet hit the spine. So, a .30-06 would have done as well but had I been using one I might not have taken the shot.

The original question: Looking for owner evaluation: What do you think of the New Model 70 CRF from Portugal?

It was Rays snide comments to those that dont use the shot. Such as, "holier than thou" if you dont use it, of which no one responded that way.
As to the portugese 70's. I have 2 SC versions, and they sound the same.
I floated the barrels, adjusted the triggers, bedded them the way I like. I throated one a little deeper, and adjusted the feed ramp angle a touch, for better contact. All standard touch ups to me.
If they were going to be my primary two rifles. I would open the grip angle and rechecker, and thin and lower the comb a smidge. As they are just another horse in the stall to me, I will not bother. I like to try too many other rifles to set myself on two.

I have given my evaluation. Out of the box they require no mandatory work.

They and the SC brothers are better rifles than the pre 64.

I own every iteration of the Model 70.

It’s closer’s counterpart in a factory rifle is the Ruger. I will never buy another new Ruger for the reasons I have stated.

When folks buy a CZ and have certain packages done to them, they are buying a rifle to turn into a Model 70.

The Standard and featherweight stocks now have gotten very plain. Their price accurately reflects this. A standard will cost you 800-1000 dollars. I actually think the 500-700 dollar savings over the Supergrafe makes the standard a better donor build.

I've owned several, all have been excellent. and while I like the pre's fine, over several decades one thing my records show is EVERY post 64 i've ever owned (that hadn't been jacked up by some nitwit) has been more accurate than ANY pre-64. not that the pre's were ever bad in any way, all shot about as well as i could hold particularly 257's, 270's and oddly 375's. but all the post 64's would beat them, and i've had about the same number of each.

Roger