Mule, It isn't even debateable: M70. Why? Because it is a control feed. If you are buying a .375, you will or may use it for dangerous game. The control feed is preferred for this purpose. I also prefer the Win trigger which is adjustable and its safety which is safe. Ku-dude
The Winchester M70 Classic Control Feed is my recommendation. The Remington M700 is a fine rifle, however I think you will be better served by the M70 in a .375 H&H chambering. An indirect point would be resale of the rifle. Controlled feeding is an important criteria in a rifle intended for dangerous/big game. Also, I think the M70 is less expensive than a M700.
Seriously, the model 70 is a far better choice because of its controlled feed design. They are cheap too. A stainless model around here goes for about $650, and the one with the nice wood stock and fancy sights goes for $850.
The CZ550 is also an excellent choice, if you like the stock or don't mind spending some money on a different stock.
A Sako would be a distant third choice. Other acceptable controlled feed rifles tend to be more expensive and are generally available on a custom order basis only.
Posts: 18352 | Location: Salt Lake City, Utah USA | Registered: 20 April 2002
A friend of mine at the club says his favorite rifle is his M70 Classic in .375 H&H. This is the blued model that came with a wood stock. He got a plastic stock from Winchester as he likes them. I know that many say those injection molded stocks are no good but he has at least three rifles with them now and I have one and it's OK but I am just learning about them.
The big thing this guy mentions is the balance of the M70 with it's 24" barrel and this is why he likes it so much. He has been to Africa twice now and shot plains game.
There is no question about it that the M70 is the best choice. I have a like new pre64 in that caliber. The more I think about it the 25" barrel is kind of heavy. But I will just use it as is.
There is a pre64 M70 in .375 H&H for sale in Wallingford, CT with the barrel cut to 23" and a full length stock for about $800. If I needed a .375 that's what I would buy and then put a plastic stock on it. I don't think I would go cheap with the Win stock.
In this forum, there is only one answer you'll hear to that question, and it's the M70. The one thing to consider though is that Winchester has been getting alot of bad press about their quality, so you might want to look over the CZ-550 as well.
Posts: 7213 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 27 February 2001
For big cartridges that make a lot of torque I pick the flat bottom action with controlled round feeding. Bedded rifles sure do shoot better and the bedding lasts longer on the flat boy. The thicker integral recoil lug does not hurt either.
I also believe the Ruger M-77 SAfari model is the best big bore rifle on the market, It has a intregal quarter rib, barrel band swivel and front sight, a M-70 safty and control feed, plus a Circasian Walnut stock....That boils down to one heck of a lot of gun for the money, the barrel alone, in the white, would fetch $1600 in a custom gun and that is not installed or chambered.
Posts: 42401 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000
I guess I have to comment just so that someone will be defending the much abused Remington 700.
I personal think if you find a rifle that suits you and your budget and you don't buy it because it is a 700 you are a fool.
The controlled round feed debate will go on for eternity. Yes the debate has merit but reality is that if you have a M-70 and a M-700 and run a few hundred rounds through each, one will not function better than the other and the game you shoot will not care a hoot.
I have a prejudice against the M-70 because they take so much tweaking to make them a real rifle. The bedding is incredibly bad, the triggers have to be worked over by someone who knows what they are doing, often the rails need work and the workmanship is generally shoddy. After all that you still end up with a heavier than necessary rifle.
With a Remington anyone can adjust the trigger and with a simple bedding job your ready to rock. I replace the followers with the Brownell's version but that is my choice.
The point is that I think you can make a slick functioning and usually very accurate gun from a Remington much easier than from a Winchester. As far as the controlled round feed goes I find it almost a mute point.
By the way I shoot Win., FN Mausers, Dakotas as well as Rem. and like them all very much and I have shot them at stuff that bites back.
I have no desire to create a s--- storm but I find that folks are often so attached to what THEY use or have bought that they lose sight of the fact that there are other equally useful products out there. MHO
Posts: 13145 | Location: LAS VEGAS, NV USA | Registered: 04 August 2002
I would certainly not choose a rifle just because it is controlled feed.I have used 700's for many years and have yet to have a single feeding problem.
Posts: 3104 | Location: alberta,canada | Registered: 28 January 2002
I also have to vote for the M700. I've got one in 375 H&H and have never found a time when it failed to feed. Mine's been on several safaris and it will go on a lot more before I'm done with it. My experience is that the Remington's tend to be more accurate out of the box, easier to do trigger work on, lighter, and I completely hate the safety on Winchesters. And I for one don't care about CRF or push feed because when I go against the big uglies, my double does the work.
That said, go to a gunshop and look at every maker you can and pick which ever trips your trigger. Can't really go wrong with any of them these days.
Mac
Posts: 1638 | Location: Colorado by birth, Navy by choice | Registered: 04 February 2001
I wonder if I'm the only person in the world that has experienced extraction problems with pre 64 mod 70's? There are a lot of good reasons to pick either rifle but I would lean toward the 700 they tend to be more accurate. They are lighter and I wonder of all the so called experts out there touting controlled round feeding have ever had feeding problem with any of the push feed rifles. The cz550 with a properly designed stock has to be serious consideration.
quote:
"There are many things about which a wise man wishes to remain ignorant"
Hey bluemule, I just spent about 3 yrs studying the options. Ended up buying a Ruger M77 in .416 Rigby as the mostest rifle for the leastest $. It now joins all the M70s in my vault as the "lonesome Ruger".
I would definitely prefer the M70 because I like M70's but if you find the 700 fits you better, get the safety replaced with a striker-block version. I've never been charged by anything so I don't have enough experience to demand CRF but I have been around trigger block safeties that didn't. Can't be havin' that when there's so many damned people around like you find on safari.
Posts: 2690 | Location: Lakewood, CA. USA | Registered: 07 January 2001
I would steer you towards the Model 70 Winchester in the pre-64 action or the Ruger model 77. I don't in my mind believe there is a better production rifle for the money made out there on the open market today. Winchester has been at the top of that pole for many a year. Just look what you get for your money! Large extractor, (beefy) Control Fed Action, A SAFE, 3 position safety. Ruger has this as well. These are Dangerous Game Rifles elite!
Don't forget the savage 116s, is avalible in 375 H&H also. still a push feed though, excellent basis to start with. M70 takes more time to bed properly, round bottoms are easier, not necessarily better. Montana rifleman's New 1999 action is even better choice, and controlled feed to boot. personally I have never had problems with either method, as a side I replace a lot more M700 extractors than any other, never a m70!
Check out the Ruger and the CZ as well. The CZ is cheaper and works ok if you can stand the stock. A Ruger comes just the way I like it except for possibly a $50 trigger job. To get a similarly set-up Winchester would cost more for no real benefit.
Posts: 3174 | Location: Warren, PA | Registered: 08 August 2002
If those were my only choices, I would choose the M-70. Although Winchster has had quality control problems, I think the new M-700 is a bigger piece of crap, but that's only my opinion. Ruger makes a pretty good product but to get one in 375 you have to buy the expensive version of the M-77, but it's well made.
Posts: 3317 | Location: USA | Registered: 15 November 2001
I have not fired the Rem or the Win., but I have handled both. The method of feeding PUSH or ClAW was not my deciding factor on which I would prefer since the most dangerous game I will face in Nebraska is my wife if I fail to do the HONEY DO'S...all kidding aside, it was the barrel. It "seems" the 'wizard kids' at Remington used the same barrel contour and weight on my Rem/700/300UM/308 dia. as on my Rem/700/375H&H/375dia....only bored it out to the larger 375..to me that showed CUTTING CORNERS....
Everything I have ever read -over 30 years of reading gun magazines- tend's to say heavier, thicker barrel's, heat up less and tend to be more accurate because of less barrel-whip! Have you EVER seen the BOSS system on anything but a skinny light weight barrel....hmmmmm?
At this time I do not have either rifle BUT during the next 48 hours I will find out if I have a Winchester stainless model with a heftier barrel, steel follower, coming my way...(12-30-2002)..had a rem/stainles/700/375H&H but sold it without even firing it!!!!!!! Everytime I think about that skinny, thin barrel on that Rem, in that caliber, I start cussing, swearing, kicking dirt, breaking pencils...etc......
By the way try to find a Winchester (Win has gotten cheap..the turd's) MODEL 70, should that be your choice: WITHOUT A PLASTIC FOLLOWER... AND GO WITH STAINESS AND NEVER LOOK BACK, once you shoot the barrel in...you will be amazed at accuracy!
I hate to bash the 700, as that has been beaten to death, but there are several reasons for choosing the M70 over the M700, and the claw extractor is just one of them.
Bluntly put, the pre-64 M70 was an extremely well designed hunting rifle action, the the M700 was designed solely to be cheap to build, the fact that it has some accuracy benefits are purely an asside.
Ignoring the extractor/ejector, here are the additional superior features of the M70. I hate the term safety, as only the nut behind the but provides safety or danger. That said, the M70 3 position physically blocks the travel of the striker in the bolt, the M700 only blocks the trigger. In addition, the M70 bolt can be easily field stripped and cleaned w/o tools, the M700 can only be dissasembled with specialized tools, or with great difficulty in the field.
The trigger. The M70 trigger, IMHO is one of the best designed hunting triggers. It is a simple design with few moving parts, and provides a fine trigger release when properly adjusted. The M700 is an overly complex design, which is difficult to clean.
Finally the bolt handle. On the M70 the bolt handle is one piece of steel with the bolt. On the M700, the bolt handle/extractor cam is silver soldered onto the bolt body. There have been many documented cases of the bolt handles falling off the bolts due to being poorly soldered at the factory.
Posts: 7213 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 27 February 2001
I just purchased a cz .375 over the M70 and am over the moon that I did. I love it, even the stock has warmed on me a little. It handled well the other day with the few shots I put through it. Whopped pretty well everything I shot at.
Posts: 7505 | Location: Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002
The only rifle out of the box that meets all of the criteria for a hunting rifle is the Winchester Model 70. Classic or pre-64 doesn't really matter. They are both very good. Without an exception, you will spend much more trying to get as good a hunting weapon out of a Remington, Sako, CZ, etc. than you will tweaking the model 70. All need bedding, all need trigger work(none better or easier or more reliable than the Winchester), and the safety!!!!!please not a remington!!!!!!!! not on a real hunting gun.The ruger might work but it cost almost twice as much and many wont shoot accurately.The bedding is the worst in the industry-----only ruger does it. If you want to make a mauser 98 into a hunting gun, you still have a poor trigger and safety by contemperary standards, and on other than a commertial action bad bottom metal. So the biggest band for the buck is still the model 70. But I am not prejudiced, all of my rifles are on "mauser " actions even if they are engraved with WINCHESTER or ORBERNDORF.
Anyone who wants to really understand the workings of the Remington 700 and Model 70 actions should obtain and carefully study Stuart Otteson's wonderful book, "The Bolt Action".
Amoung other things, and as Otteson (an engineer) indicates, one of the Model 700's shortcomings (there are others) is the bolt nose/counterbore design that is vulnerable to being shut down by dust and gunk. By the way, Ed Matunas was the only modern gunwriter with extensive African experience to correctly point this out. Since Africa is a very, very dusty place in most hunting areas, it's a prudent move in my estimate to choose an action that was built BY DESIGN to function under the worst possible conditions that might be encountered.
For my purposes, that means Mauser 98, Model 70 or similar action. For my money, the Model 70 is the action to beat. Besides the smooth-feeding, forgiving coned-breech design, controlled-feed Mauser extractor, etc., the Model 70 bolt can be taken apart without any gimmick (unlike the Model 700), and that big, flat-bottom receiver simply doesn't flex as much as a Model 700 or even the Mauser 98. The Model 70's chrome-moly steel and heat-treating is a big improvement over the Mauser as well.
So in the Model 70 you have the best of all worlds, and my Model 70-based .375 H&H is the last rifle I'd ever sell if I could only one one hunting rifle.
AD
[ 01-01-2003, 22:13: Message edited by: allen day ]
I also have to cast my vote for the Model 70. I do however have issues with Mr. Young's comments. The Mod 70's trigger is easily adjustable by anybody using a couple everyday tools. Every Model 70 I've owned shows infinetly better wormanship than ANY post 1989 Remington. Also, Allen's observations on reliability is arguably the most salient point of the argument for a Model 70. A 375 is generally used for animals that "bite back" and the reliability issue becomes paramaount. Having said all of that, the argument will always remain a "ford vs chevy" issue. For example in Layne Simpson's latest book ( Cartridges for Big Game, I think that's the title anyway)he states that the claw extractor issue is garbage. He is a BIG Weatherby proponent, so naturally he HAS to eschew the claw extractor argument. He goes on to say that the majority of PHs worldwide used pushfeeds instead of CRFs which is at variance with the facts. In myriad surveys of PHs the facts reveal the exact opposite. Accordingly, the remainder of his opinions are suspect. Too bad, it's really a pretty nice book otherwise. jorge
Posts: 7154 | Location: Orange Park, Florida. USA | Registered: 22 March 2001
I have 2 Model 700s and BOTH have given me problems with respect to extraction. The first was a 7 STW that had to go back to the factory.....once returned, the rifle still had difficulty extracting high-end loads. Basically, that little bent piece of metal that they call an extractor would ride-up over the rim of the case upon opening the bolt. The second was a .300 Ultra Mag and again the same thing occured. Every other bolt gun in my collection is either a Model 70 or Mauser 98.....you can't beat controlled feed actions. Also, don't buy into the myth about accuracy......my Winchesters shoot every bit as good out of the box as any standard Remington I've seen.
Given those two choices, I would seriously consider using a pointed stick. The Remington will eventually be declared a "zip gun" and banned by Congress. Winchester hasn't had a clue what it wants or needs to do since 1964. If the rifle is free, take the 70 and sell it. Put the funds toward a CZ or Ruger.
KurtC, If he sells the model 70 and buys a ruger or CZ he will have incurred more trouble than he had. The ruger still costs more and does not perform as well. Has a poor trigger a problem is shares with the CZ and the ruger has the worst bedding system in the industry. The barrels are some of the worst in the industry-some shooting well and others outrageously poor. If one reads the post on the mauser 98/winchester CRF vs. ruger/cz the main detriment to model 70 ownership is that there is an occasional feeding mismatch in the newer Classic line. No one faults the trigger or the Safety or the bottom metal.The stock design is more for Scope work than Iron sight work--most hunters in America will never use the Iron sights anyway so you have to go with the odds. The coned breech on the model 70 is only a help to positive feeding. Winchester takes the game to any other action system other than a similar action. lb404
I would definitely vote for the cz 550 over the m70, but then again I am another completely satisfied cz owner whom now has two supurb rifles with all steel Square bridge masuer actions at a great price, one in .375 another in .416
They are a close copy of the mausers, check out J.Belks review on cz's over at HA. If that man gives them the seal of approval then I will take notce, value for money they can not be beat. But get what ever you like he. But they are not plauged with problems at all.
Posts: 7505 | Location: Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002
I don't have any loyalty to a particular firearms company, so I tend to look closer at them when choosing a new rifle. If the company needs a Custom Shop or Performance Center to produce quality (not fancy) firearms, then I can only assume that their standard line is crap and that they are aware of it. Their solution to have real gunsmiths pick quality parts and charge 3x as much $. I do not trust that company unless I can afford their best product. CZ and Ruger do not have custom shops. They take pride in their standard line and do their best to give the consumer the best product they can, at a resonable cost. I respect that. I currently do not know of any production rifle that meets my choices for caliber, style, etc. But I figure that a rifle built with the right intentions is a good place to start. I try not to compare flaws on individual rifles. As with any mass produced item, you may get a pearl, or a piece of crap.
I am not in any way comparing a cz to a dakata or Heym, or a custom job I know that better rifles exist, but value for money for an out of the box rifle the old cz's are pretty hard to top, they all shoot well to. I undertsand what you are saying however .
Just out of interest what are the styles/calibre choices you like ??
Posts: 7505 | Location: Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002