I am looking at building up a Stainless Steel .338 Winchester. The two actions that I am looking at are the Winchester Model 70 and the Montana 99. Please give me your feedback on your experiences with the Stainless versions of these two actions.

Thanks,

Dave

I think it is going to come down to your personal tastes. The Winchester is slightly more svelt that than the MRC but that extra weight can't hurt in a .338. I don't have enough experience in sheer numbers of actions but anecdotal stories here and elsewhere suggest that the MRC is truer from the factory than the Winchester but it was meant as a gunsmith's action so there is a lot of minor smoothing and polishing that you may want to do.

I have both and can tell you that you'll have an easier time finding a stock for the M-70 than the 99...

The Montana 1999 is a fine action.....I'll take the Winchester because it's a lot less costly in the end than building everything custom

I would just buy a new M70 and try it out. I have not looked at the latest stocks they are supplying but if they are like the injection molded one I got then just buy a McMillian and your all set.

I had a M1999 for a while. It needed too much work to get it slick and to look good. However left handers might not be able to find a factory rifle.

Good luck

Machined forgings or castings, your choice.

The 70's are machined, the 1999 is a casting. If you want a nice smooth action go for the Winchester.

Aaron

I'll take a machined forging any day of the week, and I'll go with the Model 70 every time.

AD

D'Arcy Echols' rifles start life as an M-70. Enough said.

The quality of my MRC action was very poor. I would go with any M-70 including a push feed before a MRC

I have two of the MRC actions and I wouldn't trade them for any Model 70 action. They have the best features of the Mauser and the Winchester in one package. See what Jack Belk and Bill Leeper said.

Sambubba has a point. My gunsmith estimated that it would cost me $250 to slick the SS SA Mag. that they sent me. This must have included some work on the exterior as well.

That's all it would take and then I would have the benefits that Sam mentions. However I doubt that the estimate included work on the trigger guard bow which would not be easy to do unless it was just breaking corners like the Classic M70 is now.

During the MRC excitement I discovered the Kimber line and thats a path of least resistance for me. The thing is that I am after lighter rifles now and that's Kimbers niche.

I'm going to answer this question a little different than some of what has been stated already. My opinion is based on actual product, not hearsay, rumors, or what uncle Fred said.
Here is a picture of two left handed stainless actions. Top one is a Montana 99, bottom is a Model 70

Here's what I see, the extended bolt on the Model 70 is very loose and can move side to side quite a bit, if I rush the bolt it'll bind, the bolt even has a decent amount of play half way closed. The Montan 99's bolt has less than half the play when opened and no play half closed.
The finish on the inside rails on the Model 70 appear to have a rough finish, like they were cut with a dull tool and when the action is cycled you hear two rough finishes rubbing on each other. The Montana action is cast and even in the factory finish appears smoother and operates much easier and quieter. The exterior finish on both is about equal except you can see the cast finish on the Montana where it would be hidden in the stock. A big difference is the bottom metal, Model 70 is two piece, Montana is one piece and a litte heavier and to me better made. The Montana has a feature on the bolt that does not allow gas from a ruptured case to blow back in the shooters face, the Model 70 does not. And from a pure personal opinion the bolt release on the 99 is better looking and easier to use. Now I'm comparing a factory rifle to an unfinished action, so I expect that with just a little work the Montana will become even better. I know this also because I also have another Montana action that was worked on by a gunsmith and made into a great rifle. I had him polish the raceways and lugs along with minor polishing of the exterior surface in palces. He didn't need to square the action to the barrel becasue of the tight tolerance it had already.
This finished product (see below) is one of the smoothest actions I own. I owns a few 700's, Mark II,and A-Bolts and I'd put the Montana action against any of those for quality, fit and function.
For less than the price of a Model 70 action my Montana has been made into a great action with just a little work. So this evaluation is from someone who owns both, uses both, and actually likes both, but I truly feel looking at them side by side you have a better basic action in hte Montana.
This is my Montana 358 in a Serengeti stock.

I must say 'nice post' jbmich. Good points and well said, I just know enough of Echols rifles that I figured the M-70 would be the one, but it ocurred to me that D'arcy may have never even considered the Montana....... great thing about AR, good info from a lot of sources. Nice looking synthetic stock there,--share the details?

Regards--Don.

jbmich, that was a super comparison. It really is a very personal thing whether you happen to prefer a M70 or an MRC. Some people think that the fact the M70 is forged (vs. cast for the M1999) is a big deal, others think it matters very little in the end, as long as the action is safe and smooth to operate. Some people prefer the breeching system of the M70, whereas the MRC crowd points out that the M1999 has clear advantages in safety terms due to both breeching system and the gas shield on the bolt shroud. Some people like the fact the M1999 has a one-piece bottom metal (an improvement over the standard M70 2-piece), others find the M1999 bottom metal a tad too generous. You like the M1999 bolt release, just yesterday I had a conversation with my friend (a custom "fanatic" - he'll excuse the the term, it is well meant), who thinks the M1999 bolt stop should be milled off and replaced with the "hanging box" of a Mauser.

There are just too many ways of looking at this to come to a final conclusion that action A is better than B, C or even D.

Personally, I think the M1999 is an awful lot of action for the money. It can be made even better with a bit of work. Is a M70 better?? It probably has the better name, but the ones I have owned were as much in need of work as any other factory action. A lot of gunsmiths have perfected the process of sprucing up the M70, and they sure produce some accurate and nice guns. Case in point: our very own Bill Leeper does a pretty mean job on M70s.

- mike

Fish30114,
the stock is a McMillan. I had to order it with an extra long LOP. It was custom painted by a gentleman named Rick Binn. I'd highly recommend both the stock and Rick's paint job.
Here's more info. on it.
http://24hourcampfire.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=2HO&Category_Code=MM

The newer M70's have one piece bottom metal. If you buy a classic ss it will probably be two piece. If you buy an ultimate shadow, it will be one piece.

My opinion on the bolt release is that the M1999 release is hideous. If you want a good looking bolt release, look at a Dakota. For that matter, if you buy a M1999 have to pay to have all the work done to it, why not buy a Dakota to begin with?

Aaron

Yeah, it's only three or four times the cost that you ain't never going to get back anyway. This is why the price keeps going up on beater pre 64 mod 70s. Makes the 4 to 5 hundred you lay out at a show not look to bad. And guess what people do really want the old ones too.

AaroninUtah,
See the post titled "would you grade this exhibition" and then ask again why I'm not interested in a Dakota.

Please bear in mind that this is a stainless steel action. If I could find a decent Stainless Steel Model 98 action with a Model 70 style safety, I would look there also.

Dave

jbmich, Thanks for the feedback. I will follow up with Rick Binn, I'm working on a new project and I really like the style of that stock.

A good friend just got a CZ in a WSM which is built around an Montanna action, I don't know how much if any work CZ does on the action, but this rifle functioned nicely and also shot very well right out of the box with factory ammo.

Regards--D.

Hello,
I well realize that what I am going to suggest is a mortal sin, but if you want to have a very solid, super strong action to serve as the heart of your rifle, the Rem. 700 action is as good as it gets. No frills, no three way safeties-on or off!!, superb triggers (when properly adjusted,) super fast lock time, (some actions you can use an hour glass to time the lock speed,) design of action easy to bed and produce extremely accurate rifles. Check out which action is used more than most for super accurate match, long range rifles?? Yep, Remington Model 700 and guess which one the military uses for their "designated shooter" weapon? Yep, the Remington Model 700. NO the triggers do not "go off...." when the safety is taken off, and NO the extractor does not routinely slip off the rim of the cartridge head. Have shot many thousands of rounds in "hot" match loads (suitable for 1000 yards) in both magnum and non magnum calibers and yet to have a failure in the action. Ask a quality gunsmith which action requires more work to bring into specifications or "true up..." and believe you will find it will not be the Rem. 700. If you feel you must have true steel bottom metal, that is available, high quality synthetic stock-more available for the Rem. 700 than all the rest put together probably. McMillan, HS Precision, etc. they all build for the humble Rem. 700. Stainless steel actions readily available in about any caliber or bolt face needed. Not sure why so many want the stainless version for the so called stainless actions, barrels will indeed rust and pit in severe conditions. Stick a magnet on one of the "stainless guns..." (Not much "stainless" there) Now, does the 700 have the profile and appearance of the pre 64's, and their clones, well, no they do not. However, if a super accurate, dependable, highest quality hunting rifle is your goal, then it would be the 700.
I would not worry much about whether the action is forged, machined from bar stock, or investment casting from any one of the current rifle mfg's for they are all suffeciently strong to do the job. Trust me, the legal eagles for each mfg has all of that covered long before the product ever sees the field.
I do not own any stock in Remington, but to overlook the Rem. 700 is missing an excellent option to build a rifle. To each his own and if we all thought the same way, what a boring place it would be.
Favor Center!!
dsiteman

There are those of us out here who choose the M70 or its clones (MRC, Dakota, etc.) because we desire the controlled-round feeding aspect of these actions. While very few of us will never find ourselves hanging upside down from a banyon tree in darkest Africa while an enraged dik-dik threatens our next breath, it's nice to know that if we do, the next round we stroke into the chanmber is not going to fall out of the rifle and cause us to have a bad hair day. It's a personal choice thing; a freedom to choose thing. And we are all for choice on this site, correct?