Why is the current M70 classic considered to be inferior to the original pre 64 version? (my stainless/ wood LH classic M70 in 06 has a PLASTIC Follower! ) What would have to be changed/ added to a classic action to bring it up to par with the original pre 64? Or is this not possible with the current versions? What are your opinions/ comments?

I have read some of Jack O'Connors old stuff where he talked about the pre 64s averaging 2- 2.5" at 100 yards as they came from the factory. Most of the new "classic" versions I've seen(but not all) have been able to better that. Is this perhaps an area where the current version is superior to the old?

They are both good rifles. What's wrong with a plastic follower?

Most pre 64's have steel or aluminum butt plates. What's so good about that?

They should have made a one piece bolt like ruger and machined the cocking cam to a proper helix. Also they should have CNC'd the extractor and the cocking piece instead of casting them. Plus with a little better internal finish it would be a lot closer to the pre 64, maybe better.

As for accuracy, I tried to work up a load for my stainless classic 338 for last hunting season but gave up and went back to my old pre 64 30/06. It always shoots great.

Hart

It is my understanding that the "classic" handles escaping gasses better than the pre'64. Personally, I miss the hump in the barrel, and the sights.

I own quite a few Pre-64 M70's. I have been able to get hunting loads to shoot at least MOA, if not better, in every single one of them. I am a hand loader and a few of the rifles have taken a bit of time and testing to find the right loads, but they are all shooters. My Pre-64 M70 in .270 is one of my most accurate rifles and will shoot many different factory loads, as well as handloads, consistantly under 1".

I find it much more appealing to hunt with the older Pre-64 rifles, although I do own a few newer rifles by Sako, Remington & Winchester.

Tim

i feel the debate between pre64 and classic has about as many rounds, and just about as much fact, as the debate better a 69 camero z-28, 302, convertable and a 2003 z-28, 350, convertable.

yeah, having a 69 is COOL.. but the 2003 outperforms it in EVERY fashion, from ET, to MGP, to comfort, to life of the vehicle.

and I would still buy a 69 with a 302, but i would have to go through 10 of them to find 1 worth having...


change the extrator, collar, follower, and polish the new classic, and it's a better action. cost? 100 bucks, total over the priceof the gun...

say you want a 375 HH, that's a 2000$ pre64... or a 799 + 100 dollar new one, today

it's a question of tastes

jeffe