I hope to get a Win. M-70 Classic Stainless in .375 H&H in the not to distant future BUT some of the postings in 2001 (early 300 pages) indicate a recoil lug is "welded" to the barrel and in many cases has an adverse effect on accuracy, POI, and versaitility (ability to handle various bullets and loads). One reply to a posting asking for recommendation M-70 vs CZ550 indicated the CZ was "much" stronger and "closer" to a true Mauser.
I have been a Pre '64 M-70 user and admirer for a long time and am asking for input from this forum on the "welded" recoil lug.
Do they weld them on the M-70 Classic Stainless w/the composite stock? Have they cured the problems mentioned above? How does the M-70 Classic Stainless compare with the CZ 550? Is there a CZ550 in Stainless with a composite stock?
Thanks ahead of time for your input, I do value the opnions of those that "have been there".
H. Longino

Neither of the two stainless M70 375 H&H's I've owned had any kind of lug (welded or otherwise) attatched to the barrel.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
Neither of the two stainless M70 375 H&H's I've owned had any kind of lug (welded or otherwise) attatched to the barrel.

I think the blued safari model does.

I have had 3 of the P-64s in .375 H&H and still have a very nice one, paired with a .30-06 FWT, both in Rimrock stocks. This is in case I ever go to Africa or some other place suited to this classic pairing, as I know that my usual choice of .270s, .280 and .338s is simply NOT cool in worldwide terms...........

I had another .375 in a Clifton Arms stock, which I used extensively as my working rifle when "personning" fire lookouts in Grizzly country. I also had a Brno 602 and have examined a few CZ 550s.

Quite frankly, I think that the CZ is THE buy in rifles right now and I would buy one over any Winchester, old or new, have it tuned by somebody like Mark Penrod or Dennis Olson and give 'er. It holds SIX rounds, has excellent iron sights and my Brnos have always shot well; I would put a Micky syhthetic stock on it, as well.

"Old" Mod. 70s in .375 are wonderful rifles, but, they are a cult object as well and they cost far more than they are practically worth. A CZ will cost less and has better gas handling as well as the true Mauser controlled feed, I think it's a hell of a gun.

My lefthanded M70 (blue) 375 H&H has the lug welded on the barrel and here's how it shoots the 260 grain Nosler partitions at 100 yards.

My blued 416 had one... probably to keep the wood stock from splitting.

4570 Forever,

The winchester model 70 is an American Riflemans Rifle!!! There is just something about the feel and the tradition behind a Model 70. If I ever get to retire I plan on a Last Safari to Africa and a Brown Bear hunt on Kamchatka. You can bet the farm that I will be toteing a Stainless Model 70 in one of the appropriate calibers. I have never had recoil lug problems with one and never had one that after a bit of tinkering wouldn't shoot well enough to kill anything as far as I would want to shoot.

Hawkeye47

The Win. 70 stainless dosn't have a recoil lug on the barrel welded or otherwise and dosn't need it. Mine shoots great by the way and is made in the USA!

I have both rifles and both have their virtues and faults. The CZ has a lot of nooks and crannies that can cause problems on long wet hunts. the stainless M-70's are simple and rugged and for all around Alaskan conditions I think I would recommend a well tuned stainless M-70 to the CZ.
For African use the CZ is a well though of and proven rifle and I like it's larger magazine capacity.

My Mdl 70 stainless is in a David Miller laminate and is fully glass bedded. It has put 20 consecutive rounds in .7 with Nosler 260gr Partitions. No cooling between shots, just normal reloads. Due to stock design magazine is reduced to 2 rounds down 1 up so 20 rounds required 7 refills. No barrel lug and none needed. Probably 1500 rds thru it and it still shoots good. It was one of first SS 375's.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I have both rifles and both have their virtues and faults. The CZ has a lot of nooks and crannies that can cause problems on long wet hunts. the stainless M-70's are simple and rugged and for all around Alaskan conditions I think I would recommend a well tuned stainless M-70 to the CZ.
For African use the CZ is a well though of and proven rifle and I like it's larger magazine capacity.

458Win,

Where are those nooks & crannies on the CZ, and what type of problems would they cause?
I like the extra capcity magazine feature of the CZ, too. Because it's about the only rifle of its type with that capability, it is being considered as yet another step up as a future purchase for me, including bumping up in caliber.
( Lon Paul built a rifle that was shown in an issue of BIG BORE RIFLES years ago...it was a CZ with a black synthetic stock and muzzle brake, shown with two Leupold scopes )
THAT picture sticks in my mind as the Big Bore Rifle I would like to have.
I know I'm 'into' the Remington 700, but since the safety works the same way on the CZ now, the rest is incidental.
I'd have the extra magazine capacity, CRF, bigger cartridge/bullet, and familiar operation.
Before I committed to the Remington 700, I wanted a .375 H&H, and the stainless Winchester Model 70 was what I had in mind until I read about the CZ's.
This Topic really grabbed my interest.

There was another magazine article about Lon Paul building a rifle for Joe Coogan, called 'The ULTIMATE .375', about the same time as the other article.
I've liked the CZ rifle ever since reading about them.
Just wondering what the problem would be and how it would be different in Alaska vs. Africa. The magazine capacity would be nice no matter where it was.
Thanks for filling in the blanks.

Lon Paul is the person who just commented to me about the little nooks and crannies in the CZ as he now has my Rigby and is working on it. He says there was rust in the smaller recesses. I do think that the CZ has more moving parts than I like on a serious using rifle; especially in the trigger. Still it is a good basis for a serious rifle - even in alaska if you keep an eye on it and clean it more than once a year.

My CZ in 416 Rigby feels and performs "just right". It has been my favorite "bowling for bison" rifle. The CZ in 375 H&H seems too heavy and clunky to me. Perhaps due to a smaller hole in the same diameter barrel? I'll measure the next chance I have.

In the 375 H&H and 416 Rem Mag class the Model 70 seems much easier to tote and swing to me.

LD

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
My CZ in 416 Rigby feels and performs "just right". It has been my favorite "bowling for bison" rifle. The CZ in 375 H&H seems too heavy and clunky to me. Perhaps due to a smaller hole in the same diameter barrel? I'll measure the next chance I have.

In the 375 H&H and 416 Rem Mag class the Model 70 seems much easier to tote and swing to me.

LD

Your right lawn dart, the cz's all use the same blank, meaning the .458 is the lightest, .416 middle and .375 heaviest, if you swapped the weights around for the .458 and .375 they would be perfect.

I contacted Win. a very nice gentleman named Marcus told me the SS Win M70 DID NOT have a recoil lug on the bbl, only the "wood" stocked blue ones to help prevent stock cracks. If I remember correctly he said POI/POA problem was associated with unsquare reciever faces. Thanks for all the responses I really appreciate the input. HL

When you get your Winchester M70 Classic Stainless in .375 H&H you will probably want to replace that brick of a butt pad. I just used the prefit Pachmayr, which required a little sanding.