I forgot to mention that I have replaced the factory-installed MIM extractors on my post-64 New Haven Winchester Model 70 CRF classics with forged, Williams extractors.

I don't like the idea of using MIM extractors. A Mauser-type claw extractor is essentially a spring, so I prefer that it be made of forged spring-quality steel.

I should also add that, from what I have seen of it, I also don't like the FN SC Winchester's new trigger.

It's more complicated, to be sure, but that is no improvement, IMHO.

50+ year old metallurgy, crude machining, receiver polish that looks like it was done in a sandblast cabinet, so-so accuracy, mediocre stockwork. Yeah, a guy would be a real fool to buy one of the new FN rifles when he could have a pre-64 for twice the price or more.

Some of you guys amaze me, you apparently believe that progress stopped in about 1960. There isn't a pre-64 Model 70 that was ever made that is even one-tenth as nice as these new ones.

Really, funny thing, but, with many rifles over many years and having managed a gunshop, I can only reply that the 3-4 smallest groups I have ever shot were ALL from P-64 Mod. 70s and one from another "old" rifle, with a reputation as being "inaccurate", my first M-S carbine.

Let me ask you, just how many of these rifles have YOU actually shot to base your comments on? My almost stonemint P-64 Alaskan-.338WM, will put three 250 NPs into .6" at 100M. consistently and at 2800 fps-mv. WTF more do you want....this is a HUNTING rifle and one of the finest ever made.

The latest ones are an improvement over a lot of the crap that is out there and I would love to have several in my collection, but, at my age, with 37 rifles left of all I have owned and several unfinished projects, I am TRYING to resist the "siren call"........

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:
Really, funny thing, but, with many rifles over many years and having managed a gunshop, I can only reply that the 3-4 smallest groups I have ever shot were ALL from P-64 Mod. 70s and one from another "old" rifle, with a reputation as being "inaccurate", my first M-S carbine.

Let me ask you, just how many of these rifles have YOU actually shot to base your comments on? My almost stonemint P-64 Alaskan-.338WM, will put three 250 NPs into .6" at 100M. consistently and at 2800 fps-mv. WTF more do you want....this is a HUNTING rifle and one of the finest ever made.

The latest ones are an improvement over a lot of the crap that is out there and I would love to have several in my collection, but, at my age, with 37 rifles left of all I have owned and several unfinished projects, I am TRYING to resist the "siren call"........

Compare one of the new rifles side by side with a pre-64, I have done this but I suspect you have not, there is no comparison. The new ones are also more accurate. The fit and finish on the new rifles compared to the pre-64s is a joke, the pre-64s look like they were finished by a drunk with a file and a piece of sandpaper while the new ones are gorgeous. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, I guess.

A slight thread drift, but whilst we are here...

The Classic compared to the new SC M70? Same action design, different trigger.

How does quality compare? I've not seen many Classics here in South Africa. I've heard quality was patchy at one point. From what I've seen the Classics had nicer chequering and the new SC wood might be a bit prettier. The metalwork seems similar to me.

I'd like to hear from the guys with hands on experience and who know! I don't claim to.

quote:

Originally posted by Dark Continent:

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:
Really, funny thing, but, with many rifles over many years and having managed a gunshop, I can only reply that the 3-4 smallest groups I have ever shot were ALL from P-64 Mod. 70s and one from another "old" rifle, with a reputation as being "inaccurate", my first M-S carbine.

Let me ask you, just how many of these rifles have YOU actually shot to base your comments on? My almost stonemint P-64 Alaskan-.338WM, will put three 250 NPs into .6" at 100M. consistently and at 2800 fps-mv. WTF more do you want....this is a HUNTING rifle and one of the finest ever made.

The latest ones are an improvement over a lot of the crap that is out there and I would love to have several in my collection, but, at my age, with 37 rifles left of all I have owned and several unfinished projects, I am TRYING to resist the "siren call"........

Compare one of the new rifles side by side with a pre-64, I have done this but I suspect you have not, there is no comparison. The new ones are also more accurate. The fit and finish on the new rifles compared to the pre-64s is a joke, the pre-64s look like they were finished by a drunk with a file and a piece of sandpaper while the new ones are gorgeous. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, I guess.

I posted earlier on this thread that I own a somewhat customized sts. Classic .338WM, reworked by Martini Gunmakers here in BC. It is my "beater" or "truck gun" as we often carry a heavy rifle for 10 months of the year here and this is less costly than my other five .338s.

I also posted that I HAVE examined a number of the FN-made versions and am not enthusiastic about the trigger and they are a little too shiney for my taste in a hunting rifle. So, your comments are not really correct insofar as where my opinions are derived from.

However, each to his own and whatever blows your skirt up.

Dan Pedersen, the AZ barrelmaker, has a Model 70 type CRF action in a receiver with the Remington 700 footprint for sale at very good prices. Brian Pearce of Rifle magazine reviewed one of these recently. Dan is taking orders for his rifles right now and will also sell actions and barreled actions if someone wants them. Just mentioning one more option, and, considering Pedersen's reputation, a very good one . . .

One has to be careful about model 70 Winchesters as they tend to multiply in ones vault or safe and become a habit of owning more than one. I love the way the factory has added all those "bells & whistles" on before it leaves their skillful hands.

quote:

Originally posted by reddy375:
Other than nostalgia what is so great or different about the pre 64 winchester rifles .....

I've heard a pic is worth a 1,000 words, so...


You got a 70 year old rifle that will still shoot like that?

Because I wanted a classic rifle in .300 H&H that I could own under a C&R license.

I have shot quite a few sub moa groups with 180 gr. bullets (partitions and hornady's).

It's rough around the edges, it's not a bedded action, the trigger pull is, in fact, rather heavy compared to other rifles i own.

But it feeds a .300 H&H slick as glass and it comes up to my eyes fast and easy.

Could I do better? Perhaps. But why? I also have an A-bolt that will do dime sized groups all in .300 winmag. I let me dad use that one...

Ray I am sure glad that you posted that picture! I thought for a moment I was going to have to strain my eyes to read all about another great model 70 rifle. I thank you sir, cause you made my day and put a smile on my face.

quote:

Originally posted by RaySendero:

quote:

Originally posted by reddy375:
Other than nostalgia what is so great or different about the pre 64 winchester rifles .....

I've heard a pic is worth a 1,000 words, so...


You got a 70 year old rifle that will still shoot like that?

My 74 year old Oberndorf Type B will consistently shoot both Norma factory 286 and my handloads with the 286 NP and the 286 Hornady into groups just like that. The latter two hit the same p.o.i. at 100M.

My P-64s have often shot like that, however, the oldest is mid-'50s and so is not a ...70 year old rifle.... The standard .270s, .300 H&Hs and some .30-06s I have had shot like that and worked better than most other rifles when carried in harsh BC weather in rugged mountains....that, is why I like them as I could not care less about "cult" status and what others think of my rifles.

Thought I'd throw in a few commens about old M-70 accuracy here...

I keep reading posts by folks in this thread who say the new Model 70's have it all over the old ones for accuracy...oh yeh?

When Roy Weatherby rechambered my Pre-WWII-built .300 H&H to .300 Wby in 1948, he didn't do anything else to it...no bedding added, no action truing, none of those modern tweaks. When I got it, I tried one load in it...84 grains of the original 4831 (called "4350 data powder" when Bruce H first started selling it in 100-lb drums for $50 and threw in a few thousand primers for free). For bullets, I used the same ones the Weatherby ammo used back then...the 180 gr. standard cup-'n-core Hornady. My first 100 yard groups averaged 3/8th inch...and still do. (I'm talking hunting rifle groups here...the first 3 shots from a cold, clean, oily barrel, shot on multiple different days.)

My pre-'64 FWT M 70 in .270 was/is not quite as accurate. The first load I tried in it was Jack O'Connor's 62 grs of the same original "4350 data" powder (4831) in Winchester brass, again with Hornady bullets (130 grain ones). That load consistently produced 1-1/4" groups at 200 yards.

My least accurate M70 is another one built Pre-WWII. The only load I ever tried in it before taking it hunting was the same old 4831, behind the Nosler 200-grain Partition bullets...the old ones with the brassy appearing jackets, the lathe or screw-machine cut cannelure on the outside of the jacket right where the partition is, and a lead round-shaped nose. It reliably shoots 5-shot groups under an inch, but not a whole bunch under.

Now, none of these rifles has ever been "accurized" in any way. No bedding added or tweaked. No "blueprinting". No truing, no re-barelling, nada, zip, zero. None of them have modern scopes on them...in fact, none of them have scopes any better than an old Bausch & Lomb Balvar-8A...the one with no internal adjustments. The others have similar B&L scopes of 6 power or less.

Well, maybe the new Model 70s will shoot better than that. But who cares? The accuracy of my old Model 70s is great for hunting, and I've never had to screw with testing all kinds of loads...the first loads tried in them were plenty good enough so I've stuck with them.

When I want to go hunting, I take them to the range a few days or weeks before the hunt, and check the zero (if I'm spending enough money to go some distance away to hunt). Finding it hasn't changed (it doesn't ever seem to), I put them in their case(s) toss in an MTM 50-round box of ammo (just to make sure I have plenty for the game, any coyotes I run onto, or to kill pine knots after I've filled my tags) and Voila!...rifle-wise I'm ready to go.

I like to bug my buddies. When someone asks about their gun I say that they can't hardly afford new ones so have to shoot the old clunkers. I've had a bunch of Pre-64s including a couple of H&Hs, I like them but only the actions. I have no use for complete guns. I've been useing Classics since they came out. Longer actions from the factory, easy to make into full length rounds. I also like my Stainless ones for obvious reasons. My new FN Featherweight is very, very nice. Super accurate and very smooth right outa the box. There is something to be said for packing a 50-60 year old gun, it's just cool. Serious hunting requires funtional tools and I just think the new ones work for me. Just personal opinion, I like the old ones too and would never put them down.

Simply put, the Pre'64 Model 70 is the finest factory built magazine rifle ever made. Now that we got that out of the way, if you would like more information on these fine firearms. May I suggest that you read Roger Rule's book The Rifleman's Rifle for a better Understanding of these fine firearms.

Bo Rich that is kind of the way I got the message way back in 1958 believe it or not. Yep, and old timer who fought in World War-1 told me that you just can not buy a better hunting rifle than a model 70 Winchester.

The I had a lengend of a bear guide in Alaska, tell me almost the same thing and selected the caliber for me on the spot. The words .375H&H in a model 70 Winchester came out of his mouth. Now that skinny old man, knew his P's & Q's about hunting bears to a T. Thank you Morris!

quote:

Originally posted by Bo Rich:
Simply put, the Pre'64 Model 70 is the finest factory built magazine rifle ever made. Now that we got that out of the way, if you would like more information on these fine firearms. May I suggest that you read Roger Rule's book The Rifleman's Rifle for a better Understanding of these fine firearms.

Exactly what makes the pre-64 M70 better than the new rifles coming out of the FN plant in SC? This claim is tossed about constantly without any substantive facts to back it up and in my experience is a myth, so I would like to know just what is better about the pre-64s that makes them finer rifles than the new ones. I'm not talking about aesthetic preferences like "some pre-64s had a steel buttplate" or "I like the matte finish and the stock shape better" or "I like sights on a rifle" but rather what actually makes them better. You admitted on a prior pre-64 vs. SC M70 thread that you have never owned one of the SC guns so upon what do you base your claim other than your own admittedly one-sided experience and a book that was written before the advent of either the Classics or the SC M70s? I'm not trying to bash you or pre-64s, they are good rifles and you are entitled to your opinion, but I think there is a whole lot of myth that has grown up around them that isn't necessarily supported by reality.

quote:

Originally posted by Cane Rat:

Exactly what makes the pre-64 M70 better than the new rifles coming out of the FN plant in SC? .....

Damn Cat Rat, you are just hard headed!

Why don't you buy one of those new-founded SOBs and post a target from it!

Until then, I hope you remember those 3 small close holes - If not you can keep coming back to the above post and refresh your memory

quote:

Originally posted by RaySendero:

quote:

Originally posted by Cane Rat:

Exactly what makes the pre-64 M70 better than the new rifles coming out of the FN plant in SC? .....

Damn Cat Rat, you are just hard headed!

Why don't you buy one of those new-founded SOBs and post a target from it!

Until then, I hope you remember those 3 small close holes - If not you can keep coming back to the above post and refresh your memory

I already did buy one of the SC rifles, it's posted at the top of this thread. It shoots sub-MOA easily with just about anything I feed it.

If accuracy is the only criteria then consider this 3 shot group I shot at 100 yards a couple of years ago with my vintage late 1980s USRAC Push Feed .300 H&H M70. Guess by your reckoning that would make it a better rifle than either my SC M70 or your pre-64.

Just wanted to chime in and say that the notion that any particular "old" rifle won't shoot as well as a new one is an overgeneralization.

It's probably true, if all rifles ever made are included in the sample. Or if the sample is limited to long range bench rest work, etc.

But for hunting purposes, I am here to tell you that a well-made (and well maintained) "old" rifle will shoot as well for hunting purposes as a well-made new one.

I have seen it happen many times, and even own a few of the "old" ones that certainly pass that test.

quote:

Simply put, the Pre'64 Model 70 is the finest factory built magazine rifle ever made.

Only if one chooses to ignore the Brno zg47.

-integral bridges
-shroud mounted safety
-straddle floor plate/bow release BM
-straight low bolt handle [like often installed on custom p64s]
-more consistent production quality.

I have owned probably at leat 35 pre-64 model 70's over the years and probably at least a dozen of the model 70 classics. I have no doubt the metal is better in the new rifles than it is in the pre-64's but I have not seen any difference in the accuracy between the two, provided the barrels of the pre-64 is in reasonably good condition.

In my book either rifle is accurate enough for any reasonable big game hunting application. There is just something about the look or styling of the pre-64 that I like better than the new guns. But by the same token I can't see the outrageous prices people think they should be able to get for the pre-64, especially in caliber like the 300 H&H and 375 H&H. They are great guns but right now way over priced with what else is out there.

quote:

Originally posted by Cane Rat:

I already did buy one of the SC rifles, it's posted at the top of this thread. It shoots sub-MOA easily with just about anything I feed it.

If accuracy is the only criteria then consider this 3 shot group I shot at 100 yards a couple of years ago with my vintage late 1980s USRAC Push Feed .300 H&H M70.

Damn LOL - I missed that! LOL

Like that target from the 300 H&H, too.

Here's a couple of pics of the one that shot the target above:





1941 M70 customized in 1970.

quote:

Originally posted by RaySendero:

quote:

Originally posted by Cane Rat:

I already did buy one of the SC rifles, it's posted at the top of this thread. It shoots sub-MOA easily with just about anything I feed it.

If accuracy is the only criteria then consider this 3 shot group I shot at 100 yards a couple of years ago with my vintage late 1980s USRAC Push Feed .300 H&H M70.

Damn LOL - I missed that! LOL

Like that target from the 300 H&H, too.

Here's a couple of pics of the one that shot the target above:





1941 M70 customized in 1970.

Ray, that rifle is beautiful. Gorgeous piece of fiddleback. You're right, that sucker is nicer than the new ones, LOL. Thanks for sharing.