I have ordered a new Model 70 in .416 Remington. Does anybody have experience with the post-New Haven Model 70s? Did you full-length glass bed yours? How do they hold up as they come from the factory? Thanks.
USMC Retired DSC Life Member SCI Life Member NRA Life Member
I have an FN South Carolina Supergrade 270 Win and FN South Carolina 475 HH Alaskan.
My FIL has a whole bunch more.
They are the only wood stocked rifles I have not had bedded. The 270 Win even in my hands with good bench is sub moa. I called at 115 yard head shot on a doe with it a couple of years ago.
I have killed three whitetails, my biggest Fallow, two boar with that rifle.
The 375 I have only shot at 60 yards with iron sights. Off sticks at 50 you can write your name with it.
The Supergrade looks better than a catalog picture. Both rifles were made in 2012.
Posts: 12566 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky | Registered: 31 July 2016
I've had very good luck with ones I've bought. My .375 Safari Express is by far the most accurate rifle out of the box I've ever owned. I like the new trigger too.
Roger ___________________________ I'm a trophy hunter - until something better comes along.
*we band of 45-70ers*
Posts: 2815 | Location: Washington (wetside) | Registered: 08 February 2005
My Father in Law just got a new Model 70 Alaskan in 30/06. The temp has been too hot to shoot, but it is well fitted, the trigger break is 4 pounds and like crushing glass just like the others. This is a Portages made rifle, like they all are now.
The Portages rifles have less deep roll marks.
All have unfinished wood inside the stock except the skim bedding points. The Pre 64 also had the wood unfinished on the inside.
Posts: 12566 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky | Registered: 31 July 2016
I've had one for a few years in 416. Probably have put about 100 rounds through it with the factory bedding with no issues. I did find one of the crossbolts a bit loose. Better check those.
I have a 375 H&H Alaskan, SS with the laminated stock. Very accurate and pleasant to shoot. The late Weatherby award winner Kenn Barr also used it on a savannah buff in burkina!
Why they stopped making them An Alaskan in SS with a laminated stock beats me!
Posts: 2584 | Location: New York, USA | Registered: 13 March 2005
Originally posted by reddy375: I have a 375 H&H Alaskan, SS with the laminated stock. Very accurate and pleasant to shoot. The late Weatherby award winner Kenn Barr also used it on a savannah buff in burkina!
Why they stopped making them An Alaskan in SS with a laminated stock beats me!
Collector's item there that will command a premium on used market. IIRC they only made it in 2012 and only about 200 of them, many more of the walnut and blue ones.
Posts: 28032 | Location: KY | Registered: 09 December 2001
Originally posted by reddy375: I have a 375 H&H Alaskan, SS with the laminated stock. Very accurate and pleasant to shoot. The late Weatherby award winner Kenn Barr also used it on a savannah buff in burkina!
Why they stopped making them An Alaskan in SS with a laminated stock beats me!
I have been trying to buy one of those for years.
Posts: 12566 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky | Registered: 31 July 2016
You will like it. I have had several of the new ones. All shoot well and are more accurate than pre-64's. I know that is a blasphemous statement, but unless the pre-64 actions are tuned, squared and the barrels checked, the new ones shoot more accurately.
Posts: 10429 | Location: Texas... time to secede!! | Registered: 12 February 2004
Hi , I would like to ask some advice on this new Model 70 I have bought. it is a modern FN made Ultimate shadow. a 270 Winchester That I bought at a very good price. I was thinking of using a 2 piece scope base. Are the bases a universal fit between the pre 64 / Post 64 and the new FN receivers . I think it is a 2014 vintage
Originally posted by dogcat: You will like it. I have had several of the new ones. All shoot well and are more accurate than pre-64's. I know that is a blasphemous statement, but unless the pre-64 actions are tuned, squared and the barrels checked, the new ones shoot more accurately.
Jim Carmichel used to shoot 1000 yard matches with a post-64 Mod70 - he said as much. I have a Mod70 .338 Edge with a Benchmark bbl (bought it off a guy on AR) that is incredibly accurate.
I was unaware of Carmichael using post-64 M70s in long range matches. I don't have that much experience with the FN rifles, except for a 30-06 featherweight I bought a while back. I've had the chance to look over a number of other new 70s. This one is a South Carolina made rifle. I've owned several of the New Haven CRF rifles from different decades, 3 or 4 of the push feed rifles, and several pre-64s. I think the new FN rifles are the best finished of the bunch. It feeds and functions better out (without any attention) than the others. The rifle is plenty accurate although I haven't fully explored that. Several of the others were also very accurate, so I can't say there was a difference there. The late New Haven CRF examples needed the most work. The factory stocks on the pre-64s are not very ergonomic. More recent riles are better suited to scope use. Of course that can be changed. The one piece bottom metal on the FN guns doesn't present any trouble with assembly, not that the two piece is a big problem, but there's enough play in the inletting to assemble that so it binds if you don't pay attention. The 70s push feed guns were accurate but the inletting was sloppy. They had started putting a glop of bedding compound around the recoil lug then. The FN rifles also have that.
People often criticize the change of the trigger from the traditional M70 design to the new design. The original trigger was great although adjusting it could sometimes impact other functions, such as the safety's travel. The newer trigger is easier to adjust. I put a spring kit in mine and very lightly polished some surfaces. It is an excellent trigger. The criticism that the enclosed trigger housing could trap debris may be true, but no more so than many similar designs that are used in custom Mausers and other rifles, such as the Timney. People don't seem to worry too much about those in dangerous game rifles. I'm ok with it.
That's my 2 cents. Of the different M70s over the years, I prefer the new ones.
Posts: 1034 | Location: Central California Coast | Registered: 05 May 2007
Originally posted by Vaughn Gunthorpe: Hi , I would like to ask some advice on this new Model 70 I have bought. it is a modern FN made Ultimate shadow. a 270 Winchester That I bought at a very good price. I was thinking of using a 2 piece scope base. Are the bases a universal fit between the pre 64 / Post 64 and the new FN receivers . I think it is a 2014 vintage
I believe the answer to that question is a yes and a no. I know that pre-war guns use a special mount because of the way the rear of the receiver is designed and I'm also aware that the model 70 expresse, stainless classic 375, and other large caliber's use a different screw spacings then the small caliber model 70's! But I do believe most pre-64s, post 64s, and the current classics use the same mounts.
you guys are a little rough on the Riflemans rifle, the pre 64 mod. 70.Ive owned dozens of them that shot great out of the box, and I suspect the new ones are about the same..however any hunting rifle should be glass bedded IMO..At least the pre 64s today have finally aged and cured, something no wood stocked rifle today can claim..
I have a FN South Carolina 375HH. I think it is the best finished, new production rifle that I have bought in years.
Being a tinkerer, I like to tune the action and trigger on everything I get. This rifle was perfect, smooth cycle and feed with excellent trigger. I didn't dare touch it with a stone. I glass bedded the action just for fun, but I doubt that it made any difference.
IHMSA BC Provincial Champion and Perfect 40 Score, Unlimited Category, AAA Class.
Posts: 3417 | Location: Kamloops, BC | Registered: 09 November 2015
