I have a problem. Im looking at a Pre 64 Standard and want to buy it, problem is im not sure if it’ll be to heavy for my likes. The owner lived a 150 miles away and is willing to drive up to deliver. I sure would feel bad to turn him down after the drive.
I own a Pre 64 Featherweight 30-06 and cherish that rifle, the standard would be in 300 h&h fwfw.

Meet him half way.

Then decide.

Then you both of you have skin in the game.

Im going to meet him not quite halfway. Just interested in how people who own both compare the two. Im not that concerned about the weight, but more on balance and handling qualities. It’s been at least 15 years since I’ve handled the standard and that was through the lens of a seller.
Thanks for the suggestion.

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly1:
I have a problem. Im looking at a Pre 64 Standard and want to buy it, problem is im not sure if it’ll be to heavy for my likes. The owner lived a 150 miles away and is willing to drive up to deliver. I sure would feel bad to turn him down after the drive.
I own a Pre 64 Featherweight 30-06 and cherish that rifle, the standard would be in 300 h&h fwfw.

Grizz,, If you trust the sellers description and pics and agree on a price then why would you put him in all that trouble just to turn down the
deal.
BTW the 300 H&H is a prized possesion in that model gun.
Am I missing something, do tell?
BB

Big bull,
First, I did not commit 100%, so no worries about me stiffing him so to speak, if I meet him I will go with the internet of purchasing the rifle if description holds true.

Maybe I’ve been unclear? Here’s a comparison to what I am trying to avoid. I love my Kimber 84M and really like the 84L, but do not like at all the 8400 Magnum (all in the Montana).

I am guessing the difference between my pre 64 06 Featherweight and the standard to not be that much different as they share same stock and action with barrel length and contour being the difference, almost 2 lbs different. So, for the hunters who have or have had experience with “both” is there an appreciable difference, if so what.

I hope that clears it up a little. That and I’m kind of struggling with buying another rifle as I’m not a true collector and money is tight. This rifle has me wanting. Maybe I’m looking for a nudge one way or another deep down, who knows!

Thanks-Griz

Grizz: My Featherweight was in 308, which I sold. I still have, and won’t sell, a 300H&H. To me, the 300 simply “hung” better, as the 308 lacked mass to aid in steady holding. Very subjective, of course, but that’s my take on the difference.

Dave Manson

Dmanson, thanks for your input, makes sense that it would be a more solid rifle with the added weight which I don’t mind. Guess it time to do the deal or get off the pot.

The only noticeable handling differences will be about 1 1/4 lb. heavier and the longer 26" barrel.

Sqeeznhope, I may just be putting to much thought into this, happens when a guy wants but doesn’t need!!
Thanks-Griz

mr. Grizzly: I highly recommend you buy that rifle and here is my rational: I hunt with pre-64 model 70s almost exclusively. In fact, I just got back an hour ago from a little coyote calling in back of my place, carrying my pre-64 70 in .220 Swift with standard grade barrel. I have 2 pre-64s with featherweight barrels: one is actually a douglas barrel (.270) with dimensions IDENTICAL to the featherweight contour, the other an 06'. However, the rifle I've used more than any other is a .270 standard grade. I have always felt that when it comes to field use, the standard grade rifles balance and "hang" better. That little extra 2" of barrel, along with the bit beefier contour contribute to the balance. I've shot a fair number of coyotes with that .270 standard weight and think its ideal as far as weight. If you are really concerned about excessive weight, you can use some very light weight mounts and rings. You could even swap the steel trigger guard -floorplates to featherweight ones which saves about 3oz. I believe many folks go off the deep end when it comes to light weight. I prefer heavier rifles. I took a pre-64 .375 to Alaska last spring for brown bear. 10# plus but boy, it sure was rock steady when it came time to shoot. If you decide to pass on that .300, I would be interested in it.

I have a Std. weight M70 .270W. It handles fine but it is the only rifle that I own that hurts me---Hate that metal butt plate. Don't know if yours has one though. I own rifles from .218B up to .416Ruger and that is the only one that hurts.

Hip

I hear you, my 06 would be more pleasant to shoot with a recoil pad instead of the hard one. The 300 has a clean period correct ventilated white line recoil pad that looks factory, but I’m fairly sure it’s not.

Devere, great response, I appreciate and value your opinion and you made some good points to consider.
If I pass on it I will definitely pass along his contact info.
Thanks-Griz

hipshoot: my .270 has a recoil pad, although its not really a soft one, but probably better than the steel plate. A Decelerator would be much better.

How heavy is heavy; how hard is recoil? If you are really sensitive to weight, then no Model 70 is light. If you are sensitive to recoil, then no 270 kicks, lightly. No one can answer your questions.

dpcd, I realize I’m the only one who can decide, I only want to hear about the difference between the Featherweight and Standard Models from hunters/shooters who have experience with both. I hunt with and love the Featherweight, is there a big difference between the two is all I’m asking.
I do own a representative Model 70 from 63 to the last of the Baco made in USA. I have a Classic stainless 375 H&H for guiding and personal hunting here in AK and used it for over 25 years so I’m not recoil or weight sensitive.

So for the folks who have “both”, do you like both or one over the other?

I’m concerned about the weight for balance and handling only, from a shooters perspective. The pounds don’t bother my arms.

Thanks-Griz

If you don't care about the weight, then what is the issue? The FW is not a lightweight rifle; only compared to the standard is it "light". Just the barrel contour, length, and the aluminum bottom metal is different. It's just a matter of personal preference. I use the standard, but definitely not in 270.

Just looking for insight like what dmanson posted

Ok, you won't like a FW in 270. It is too muzzle light. For me.
Or you might. If you like muzzle light rifles.

The recoil and muzzle flip don’t bother me at all with my 30-06 FW, I love that rifle. How do you like the Standard pre 64 compared to the FW?

Since they are in vastly different calibers, there is no comparison, with mine. (308 vs 375)
If you already have a 30-06 FW, I guess I don't understand your concern. It will be the same. If you get a standard rifle it will kick less and feel like it has two inches more barrel length, and be 1.5 pounds heavier. More or less. It's all a matter of personal preference and no one can give that to you. I'd get the standard weight, and report back.

I bought my .270 Std. wt. back when my take home pay was $77.00 a week. The rifle cost me $95.00!

Sorry for the interruption!

Hip

Thanks for the input guys, called and set up a pick up time and place for this upcoming Friday. I’ll be sure to post initial thoughts. To be honest, I haven’t been this excited about a gun purchase is many years, can’t wait!!

I have a Pre-64 in .300 H&H. I don’t mind the weight or balance. However, you mentioned you have a Kimber 84M. I also have one in 7-08. There is no comparison. That little Kimber is a sweet handling rifle.

I don’t believe I have any standard M-70 FWs, but will have to check. They must be in the back of the vault.

The .300 H&H has that ventilated pad, but the rubber has hardened. Recoil doesn’t affect me too much, but it makes sense to mitigate it and replace the pad.

The Super .30 is a great cartridge and I only have two, but want more.

Good points DSC.
What recoil pad are you thinking about for a replacement?

Grizzly: One other point on the .300. You didn't say whether the stock was a high or low comb. I'd prefer a high comb for scope use, although a low comb would work. The transition from low to high took place in the early 50s. I certainly wouldn't turn it down just because it was low comb. The .300 H&Hs were made in the entire period of the pre-64s production 37' thru 63'. Serial number will give you the approx. DOM and Rule's book can give you the DOM right down to the month and year. Good Luck.

Dan

devere, Good point you bring up, it is a high comb 1959 dom, I have a Leupold VariX llc 3x9-40 that will top it for now. Condition is said to be 96%+ with ventilated recoil pad. Comes with one box of Nosler Custom ammo AB and 50 pcs Winchester brass. The provenance is it is a safe queen from TX from (OB).
I’ll give an update and maybe a pic or two if I can figure out how to post them from my phone.

Thanks-Griz

Grizzly: that sounds great in every way. I look forward to some pictures.

dan

I shot and hunted the 300 H&H off and on for years, its a favorite and I prefered the pre 64 win in 300 H&H to most any hunting rifle Ive owned, Its just better off hand than a fwt, especially after a short run and out of breath, it settles faster, Its usually about a 9 lb rifle depeending on your scope, mine always wore a Lupold 2x7x28, same size as my 4 powers..I custom stocked it and it came out at 8-3/4s about right for me..My pre 64 30-06 fwt. is 8.5 lbs scoped, so not much different in weight, but the 300 points and handles better for me..

Nostalgia rules at my house, after reading alll this 300 H&H stuff, I regret selling my pre 64 300 H&H..I guess I will just buy another one in a Rrem 721 or Pre 64 Win. AR can sure be costly..

I wish the buyer I sold that old beater too would call me and sell it back to me!!

I would not even consider a 300 H&H in a fwt rifle of any kind..fwts need be 06, 270 etc..IMO A 300 should weigh 8-3/4 to 9,5 lbs with a 4x size scope dimensionally .Mine was a 2x7x28 Leupold same as the 4X of the day.

I think any experienced hunter/shooter would like a std wt. 300 H&H pre 64 Win..