Tell me why a Winchester Model 70 made in 1965 is "bad" (post-'64, you know), but a Remington Model 700 made in the same year is "good."

Assume the question is mostly rhetorical. Very early post-64 '70s had pretty unsightly inletting gaps around the bbl channel. This was corrected in short order, but the reputation persisted.

Otherwise, your point is well taken.

Sam

That is a good question
I know this will get ugly, but I never caught the "pre 64" bug and fail to see all the hoopla over that action. I am a Rem 700 fan so maybe that's why.

I ask because I got one for my 15th birthday in 1965. At the time, I didn't know the difference between "pre" and "post" '64. All I knew was I now owned a .30-'06 rifle that would kill anything in America and would last me a lifetime. I was one proud young man.

However, just two years later, when I started working after school at a gun shop, I quickly learned that what I had was "crap" and shouldn't be uncased where civilized gentlemen could cast eyes upon this abomination. Oh I still hunted with it, but, in 1972 I bought a Marlin 336 and left the Winchester in the closet, lest it be seen by other members of my club. There it stayed for some years, until I joined a club with large food plots which called for a flatter shooting rifle than my .35 caliber 336.

By now I was in my late 20s, and not as prone to care about what other folks thought, and besides, the old gal shot pretty good up to 200 yards, which was as far as I needed.

As I got older, and the deer body-count rose, I came to not care at all if folks knew what I hunted with. In fact, most folks I hunted with had never seen a Model 70, pre-, or post-'64 (my how far "The Rifleman's Rifle" had fallen). During the late '70s, '80s and most of the '90s, Remington ruled the woods, or at least my part of the woods.

Over the years, I came to appreciate the perceived differences between pre-, and post- '64s. I remember the clerk at the gun shop where I worked, demonstrating free-floating barrels by bending a dollar bill and sliding it between the barrel and stock. If it didn't stop, the barrel was free-floated. On my Model 70, you didn't need a dollar bill to demonstrate that metal didn't touch wood. You could bend the latest copy of Field and Stream and slide it down the barrel channel, because that's how much space there was -- and it was a good thing, too -- because my channel was cut cattywampus, with the right side of the channel being much wider than the left side, but still, neither side touched.

Also, the pressed checkering on the glossy stock gave about as much positive grip as that screwdriver tip dipped in STP (or was it Slick 50?) in the old commercials. And speaking of the stock, I became convinced that Winchester chose the finest piece of North Georgia knotty white pine it could find to cut it from. By the turn of the century, that stock was more scratched up than a drunk man with a hundred dollar bill at a hooker convention. About five years ago, when I decided to refinish that stock, I found out that beneath the cheap gloss finish applied by the factory, there was a pretty nice -- not great -- but nice, piece of American walnut that looked pretty dang good when completed.

Mechanically, however, my rifle never gave up anything to Remington, or any other gun maker. And ugly as it was, the free-floated relief in the barrel channel did let the gun group well – about 1.5 MOA (not bad from an action that had never been bedded). The trigger, when adjusted some years ago by a friend who was an amateur smith, breaks right at three pounds, and I can’t ever recall any round failing to feed.

Still, a few years ago, I decided that I really didn’t need a Jack-of-all-trades .30-06 anymore, as by now, I had accumulated twenty-or-so different rifles of various “specialty” calibers for whatever intended victim should show itself from 5, to 500 yards. I even have calibers designated for specific species, such as a .404 Jeffery specifically for cape buffalo; and a .260 Remington, specifically for pronghorn antelope; a .300 Win. Mag for elk, etc. So I decided to have my old Model 70 rebarreled to .35 Whelen to serve as my designated short-, to medium-range moose gun. After a three year ordeal (that’s a story for another time), I ended up with a very nice looking, and good shooting, rifle. In fact, the gun actually looks better than ever because the heavier barrel contour used in the re-barrel almost fills up the ridiculously overcut barrel channel originally cut by Winchester. Ironically, the first time afield with this rifle was a plantation cull-hunt on which I took three deer, all between 200 and 300 yards. As yet, the gun has never been to moose country.

So that’s my Model 70 story. Yes, I can see the aesthetic differences between the Remington and Winchester offerings of the time and don’t blame folks for picking the Remington. But in usage, the post ’64 gave up nothing to the Remington competition – unless you count customer perception – in which case it gave up an awful lot!

Other than cosmetics there never was anything wrong with them and other manufacturers like Remington turned out their fair share of dogs too. Who knows, maybe they will have their own cult of collectors someday.

Not being a Winchester buff, pre or post, my understanding of the thing is that in the pre era, Winchester's machinery was so old and worn that each gunsmith putting together the rifles kept a box of assorted parts that he would sort through looking for a piece that would fit. Producing each rifle required quite a bit of filing and fitting. So, in effect, you were getting a custom fitted rifle. Not a bad deal at all. Especially considering that Winchester was selling them at a price that was competitive with Remington and Savage. Even though the M70 was Winchester's flagship rifle, I understand that it was a money loser because of the cost of manufacture versus sales price. Winchester made their money from the "cowboy" rifle, the model 97. What lad, growing up on Roy Rogers didn't want one.

The main thing that got them a bad rep was the discontinued the control feed. Too many Americans and even the foreign market felt like the control feed was a must..

These guys were old Mauser, Springfield and pre 64 Win. men, and sot in there ways, I being of their ilk..I want no big game rifle that is not a control feed rifle and many riflemen agreed with that.

The post 64 rifles have little resale value and came about because the dreaded bean counters ruined another fine rifle by going to cheap production shortcuts, and in the end Win paid for that mistake and never became solvent until the company changed hands a few times and the present company returned to their roots and gave us back the new version of the pre 64...Now if they would just cut more wood off the stock, it would be a dandy.

quote:

Winchester made their money from the "cowboy" rifle, the model 97. What lad, growing up on Roy Rogers didn't want one.

When did RR use a trench shotgun???

quote:

Originally posted by Sean Russell:

quote:

Winchester made their money from the "cowboy" rifle, the model 97. What lad, growing up on Roy Rogers didn't want one.

When did RR use a trench shotgun???

Black ops into Mexico.

The push feed M70 is a better action than the Remington but it said Winchester and wasn't what people wanted in a Winchester.

quote:

Originally posted by RyanB:
The push feed M70 is a better action than the Remington ...

Opinion or fact? Please explain...

ops, make that a 94

times change. The Pre-64 was a time when labor was cheap and materials were expensive.

Remington tried to compete with the OM 70 with the M1917 spruced up and called the M30. Didn't work.

After WWII they (Remington) developed the first "tube actions" which were much cheaper to manufacture. They further cheapened them with the stamped trigger guard. They cheapened them even more with button rifling, a WWII expedient to make barrels faster/cheaper.

Eventually, Winchester chose to follow suit, and the Pre-64 went away. It is interesting to note that it did not help Winchester, witness USRAC and the other near-bankruptcy after near-bankruptcy proceedings. Winchester went back to the basic claw extractor CRF design, and they are doing well these days.

If you really like the various 700 iterations, DO NOT, under any circumstances, read Richard Harland's book Ndlovu.
The Spanish Inquisition was kinder to Jews...

Manufacturers in the mass market will always search out ways to cheapen the design and the materials used to build things here, if they cannot shift production out of the country.

I wonder sometimes, if the captains of industry understand that there is a tipping point for the country; that at some point in time the next company to shift jobs overseas will be the one that begins a worldwide depression that they cannot recover from.

These days I only buy factory rifles built before LBJ was president, and customs are OM 70's or Mauser 98 based.

a cheery good night to all...

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
... in the pre era, Winchester's machinery was so old and worn that each gunsmith putting together the rifles kept a box of assorted parts that he would sort through looking for a piece that would fit. Producing each rifle required quite a bit of filing and fitting. So, in effect, you were getting a custom fitted rifle. Not a bad deal at all.

'custom fitted' is a very kind and generous term.
the way I would view it is that the workers basically had to do what they had to do just to get the shoddy standard of combined parts to basically function.
Some factory M70p64s are rough as guts, I don't notice anything especially custom about the standard of fit and finish on those units.

The good thing[to some degree] is that the pre64 now allowed a person to own a .375H&H in the 1930s without having to go to the much higher cost of
a premium bespoke British brand rifle in .375H&H.

Of course for the money you invested in the bespoke British rifle , you got a premium true magnum length Mauser action with dropbox & bow release straddle floor plate.

If one could afford to go to Africa in the time the .375H&H came to be in order to go bust the African BiG-5, you probably wouldn't have had to wait for the production
of a more affordable .375H&H like M70pre64.

I will wade off into this one more time...

I have studied the pre and post 64 Winchesters. I have a push feed and a CRF in Model 70. I have owned several pre-64's and all did not shoot well (read "accurate") and I sold them.

My post 64's all shoot extremely well and my push feed shoots .5 MOA. The fit and finish on my post 64's is better than any of the pre 64's I had. I still do not understand why someone would want a factory gun made over 50 years ago? We like to think that things made in that era were "better" or hand made. I call BS on that. Cars made then do not come close to the quality we have today. I cannot think of anything mechanical made prior to 1964 other than maybe a fancy clock, that is better then than now.

So, for my money, I like the new South Carolina made Winchesters and the new REmingtons. They shoot very well and are accurate....

In the 1950s the scope sight had not completely taken over as the primary sight for centerfire rifles.

By 1964 Remington's 700 had replaced the 721/722 series. The 700 was a better looking rifle to some.

The pre 64 model 70 cost a good bit more than a 700 BDL and significantly more than an ADL.

People began mounting scopes on bolt guns enmass and the perception was that Remingtons were significantly more accurate than the Winchester. Especially the .222 which Winchester declined to chamber for many years.
The Remington 700 had an excellent trigger and it was common for the Remington actions to be sleeved for used by many benchrest winners.

While it was recognized that the extractor was not as strong as a Mauser claw, few of the deer hunter-varmit hunter class gave a crap. The claw only works in Afica BS had not yet been invented. To this day the vast majority of American hunters still do not give a crap about the claw extractor. They buy economy rifles. They don't go to Africa but they kill millions of deer every year.
What's more the white tail might be more dangerous than any animal in Africa due to the fact they cause more than 100 deaths a year by auto accidents.

Ive owned a lot of pre 64s and they all shot well, some needed glass bedding and tweeking but so do the rest of the guns out there.

I much prefer the control feed and with good reason, I have seen push feeds lose a round from falling out on the ground as the hunter chased after a Cape Buffalo and when the shot presented itself you heard the loudest of "click"...This happened to me on the biggest elk I have ever seen, and I didn't have time to work the bolt for a second shot before he disappeared never to be seen again. I have seen rounds stove pipe and almost cut in half with push feeds...I have also seen control feed rifles fail but not even nearly as much, and most of that was operator error or ammo problems. I make notes of all failures.

The 94 was popular because it shot considerably flatter than the then available 45-70s and the black powder big bores, and they soon developed a reputation of killing just as well, something today generation will probably never understand and that's just how well the 30-30 kills deer and elk within 200 yards....I don't remember Roy ever needing a rifle, he was an awesome pistol shot!

I have a '62 M700 and a couple of '65 M70's. Both M70's were more accurate out of the box than the 700.

But all three are fine functioning rifles.

I think the m70's took it in the shorts because they were a step DOWN ( at least in appearance ) from the pre64s. While the 700 was a step UP in appearance from the 721/722s

It was looks.


.

quote:

If you really like the various 700 iterations, DO NOT, under any circumstances, read Richard Harland's book Ndlovu.
The Spanish Inquisition was kinder to Jews...

I would tend to agree with Mr. Harland on this point. (Great book by the way).

Interesting that someone had accuracy problems with pre-64's. Never saw that. In fact, my National Match Course bolt gun was built in '54 or '56 I believe and it's a tack driver. Those did come out of the Custom Shop. But I haven't seen any abnormal accuracy issues with regular pre-64 M70's.

I've got push feed M70's too as well as other push feeds. Never understood the aversion to push feeds as long as the particular rifle and loads feed reliably. But, I do like the new Winchester "classics" better. Have a few of those and have been pleased.

Also have some M70 clones. You might say it is one of my favorite actions.

My first "real" rifle was a post 64 Mod. 70, 270 WCF built in '69 that I bought new in '72. It was superbly accurate. It's been gone many years now but there is a USRA Mod. 70 Featherweight Classic in the same 270 I bought new the year they came out. The light barrel walks after the first three shots....which hover just above or below an inch...same as the '69 Mod. 70 push feed. I prefer either to the Mod. 700 or 77.

'69 was the worst year, especially for PF...

Bought two model 70's in the early 1970's. Rifles looked nice and shot pretty good. Used one to hunt with that year. It was bitter cold (most days in the -25 to -30 deg F) with snow hanging on the trees. Had an apportunity at a huge whitetail buck in the bush. Put the crosshairs on his shoulder and squeezed and all I heard was a sickening click. Called up the local gunsmith that night and he said to bring it over. There must be some grease etc left around the firing pin. He stripped the bolt and it was dry. He then suggested that Winchester had a rather weak firing pin spring and it would be best to replace it with a stronger aftermarket spring. By this time I had lost any confidence I may have had in these rifles. Had a chance to get my money back and took it. Since then I've always prefered a Mauser 98 as a go to hunting rifle.

I have a post-64 M70 that I've had for close to 20 years. I've never had a problem with it. It shoots groups around 1" at 100 yards with most any factor ammo, and will beat that by a little with careful hand loads. I've killed countless deer with it, in all sorts of weather. The post-64 M70 may not be the legendary classic that the old M70 is, but they're generally good, reliable rifles.

They are a steal for 300-400 clams, compared to most of the shit out there today.

16Bore,

comparing OM 70's to anything except the M98 Mauser is like comparing bit coin to $20 gold pieces...

Opinions may vary, and usually do here, but the past fifty years have shown the folly of building a custom rifle on any action other than the two above listed.

Buy what pleases you and fits within your budget, but all the wishing and wanting in the world will not turn ANY PF bolt action into a collectible. Unless, of course, Freedom Group acquires that company.

They share one fundamental trait of the fedguv, like an alchemist they can turn gold into shit...

take care,

Rich
Just an old school collector of OM 70's and M98's and turns rough ones into fine custom rifles.

American shooters had a love affair with the pre 64, but, sales did not reflect the love. I was told that Winchester was losing money on every pre 64 they sold and I believe it. Not every pre 64 was perfect, my Gun Club President, a pre 64 fan, said his first, factory new pre 64, bought in the 50’s, had some sort of a problem, like not feeding from the magazine, or not going bang. I forget which. But a well manufactured pre 64 is an excellent rifle and the standard grade are capable of excellent accuracy.

I was very surprised how well this 257 Roberts shot.




This 300 H&H is all original except for the rubber pad, which in my opinion, is a great idea. It shoots well.




I think Winchester did the right thing in modifying the M70 to make it manufacture able, but I am of the opinion they did the wrong thing by calling the post 64 a M70. Brand awareness and brand names are a very valuable thing. All the time we see products coming out of China with old American brand names. Schrade knives are an example, same models, same name, same name recognition, Chinese made Schrade knives cost more than similar Chinese knives with names such as “Warrior” brand. People are willing to buy for the brand, even though there is no essential difference between the knives. Being a shameless corporate entity, Winchester kept the name, for brand awareness, even though the post M70 is a new model.

The post M70 was too much change for the times. As has been stated, pressed checking, big barrel gap, I think less polishing, it was too radical for the American shooter of the time. The post 64 is a good rifle, it used to be a common action to build target rifles. It is still slick and smooth, only the cocking piece nose and extractor break on the things, and that, rarely.

Even pre 64 cocking piece noses break, though when I told my gunsmith mine had broke, he gasped, and said “pre 64?!!”.






The push feed extractor will wear and I have helped shooters replace the extractor on the firing line. The M70 push feed extractor is more robust than a M700, and given time, all push feed extractors will fail. A pre 64 extractor will last, basically forever, as long as you always feed rounds from the magazine.

Winchester put more time and effort into later post 64’s, and a well built post 64 is a fine rifle. Some shooters are snobs, conspicuous consumption is their way of showing off. I never understood why guys put museum grade wood on rifles. My shooting rifles get bashed all to heck in my hands, I consider a using rifle a tool, pretty wood does not make them shoot tighter, I won’t pay extra for the stuff. Still, people spend money on prestigious things even if they can’t hit the broad side of a barn with the thing. Might say, those squirrels have the nut, but they do not have the teeth.

I am of the opinion that the pre 64 Featherweight is not ever going to be target grade. The Featherweight had a very light barrel, it heats up quickly, expands, and so, mine don't shoot tight ten shot groups. So what, you want a lighter rifle you have got to live with the limitations.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
16Bore,

comparing OM 70's to anything except the M98 Mauser is like comparing bit coin to $20 gold pieces...

Opinions may vary, and usually do here, but the past fifty years have shown the folly of building a custom rifle on any action other than the two above listed.

Buy what pleases you and fits within your budget, but all the wishing and wanting in the world will not turn ANY PF bolt action into a collectible. Unless, of course, Freedom Group acquires that company.

They share one fundamental trait of the fedguv, like an alchemist they can turn gold into shit...

take care,

Rich
Just an old school collector of OM 70's and M98's and turns rough ones into fine custom rifles.

I'm faaaar from a "collector", sans a peacemaker and wouldn't have a PF had I not been the swell guy that I am. But I'm prone to making chicken salad outta chicken shit on occasion. A whipper snapper would be better off with any M70 over the mossburg/marlin/savage abortions, were he budget restrained. Give me a blank check and I can promise you that those two actions and a chunk of wood won't be on the bill.

But that's just my varied opinion....

quote:

Originally posted by SlamFire:
American shooters had a love affair with the pre 64, but, sales did not reflect the love. I was told that Winchester was losing money on every pre 64 they sold and I believe it. Not every pre 64 was perfect, my Gun Club President, a pre 64 fan, said his first, factory new pre 64, bought in the 50’s, had some sort of a problem, like not feeding from the magazine, or not going bang. I forget which. But a well manufactured pre 64 is an excellent rifle and the standard grade are capable of excellent accuracy.

I was very surprised how well this 257 Roberts shot.




This 300 H&H is all original except for the rubber pad, which in my opinion, is a great idea. It shoots well.


[url=http://smg.photobucket.com/user/SlamFire/media/M70%20pics/300HampHMagnumpre64M70195mfgr_zps7ab30538.jpg.html][IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M70%20pics/300HampHMagnumpre64M70195mfgr_zps7ab30538.jpg[

Is the extractor missing from the 257?

quote:

Is the extractor missing from the 257?

No, the extractor has lost all its finish.

I really like the older Winchester shotguns such as the Model 12 and the like as well as the last ditch effort the Super X Model 1. But that isn't the question.

It had to do with fit and finish as well as perception. Winchester had been THE rifle company. And the Model 70 The Riflemans Rifle. But costs and labor of the way business was evolving just changed it.

On a separate note I thought the Model 70 Classics were better built than all of them. Better materials and better machining and some updates but retaining the M70 features. But they could be hit or miss at times on QC.

But I wanted an Extreme Weather Model 70 and I went and looked at the new SC built Sporters that were on the shelf here at the local gun store. The new ones are dang nice. But they couldn't get an Ext Weather for me so I hit the Buy It Now on GB. So I hope my new Extreme Weather is as nice and shoots well too.

quote:

Originally posted by 16Bore:

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
16Bore,

comparing OM 70's to anything except the M98 Mauser is like comparing bit coin to $20 gold pieces...

Opinions may vary, and usually do here, but the past fifty years have shown the folly of building a custom rifle on any action other than the two above listed.

Buy what pleases you and fits within your budget, but all the wishing and wanting in the world will not turn ANY PF bolt action into a collectible. Unless, of course, Freedom Group acquires that company.

They share one fundamental trait of the fedguv, like an alchemist they can turn gold into shit...

take care,

Rich
Just an old school collector of OM 70's and M98's and turns rough ones into fine custom rifles.

I'm faaaar from a "collector", sans a peacemaker and wouldn't have a PF had I not been the swell guy that I am. But I'm prone to making chicken salad outta chicken shit on occasion. A whipper snapper would be better off with any M70 over the mossburg/marlin/savage abortions, were he budget restrained. Give me a blank check and I can promise you that those two actions and a chunk of wood won't be on the bill.

But that's just my varied opinion....

Here you go... I bought a Winchester Ranger .270 with a Weaver scope from a cousin a few years ago for $450 and have since made a couple of custom stocks for that barreled action. I've invested less than $1000 in this rig here:



Only $700 in this one:



If I had the money, you bet I'd be all over the pair of Springfield barreled actions by Heilmann in the classifieds right now. No doubt. Maybe I am just too young to feel the post-64 hate, but until then I have no qualms over hunting here with a .270 that fits great, shoots great, and isn't awful to look at (in my opinion). Maybe I just got lucky with one that happens to feed too?

I have owned both types of M70s. I`LL take a pre-64 at any time.
The post64 I had in 7mmRem had a hard time feeding correctly as it often jammed.

My new Extreme Weather came today. While it is not nearly as pretty as those above, it is slick and it appears well built.

Interestingly the box said " Made in USA " and " Assembled in Portugal ".

I did have a pre-64 sitting right there, a 1955 built Model 70 in 243 and I would say that for my purposes the new one is better and its outward overall attention to detail does not appear any less.

I have a push feed 70 featherweight. It is one of the smoothest feeding rifles I have, and extremely accurate. It will actually feed empties from either side of the magazine and no other gun I have will do that. It had some extraction problems when I first got it but a gunsmith put in a stronger spring, and now it is very reliable.

I'm amazed at the variation in the quality of post 64 M70's. To lump all post 64's in one category isn't fair. Function is one thing, but I've seen some really nice rifles and some that were just pitiful in fit and finish. I just took a look at some new Grade 1 FN M70's and the fit was just pitiful around the barrel channel and the extractor appeared to have been cast not machined. 3 slots down was another M70 and the F&F was decent. The latter was a grade 3 according to the seller, not bad and only $125 more. The stock was rather nice and the extractor was nicely machined. I guess I'm saying buy with your eyes not by the model or designation alone. Moreover, I saw some new FN's listed on GB as Pre-64 CRF action. I'd say that is pushing the envelope a bit.