I have been reading all the praise about the Win 70 trigger. I have seen good articles about the action. So, what is is about the gun that leads people to build their long range shooters on 700 actions?

I'll generalize here.
For the most part out of the box a Remy is going to be more accurate then a Winchester regardless of age.
But the Winchester lent it self to the custom gun builder by maintaining that mauser look with a modern feel.
Dakota's are a copy of the pre 64 action with some very well though out modifications.
Remy's are easier to blueprint being a tube receiver they lend them selves to ease of manufacture and inherently ease of setting up a second time in the lathe to true up the action.
A pre 64 with a cone breach and flat bottom receiver make setting up to true up a bit more challenging.

But I think the real reason is MARKETING as is usually the case.

Back in Viet Nam when the Marine snipers were using Winchesters they had a great gun but then came along the Remington at a lower cost and a slightly more accurate rifle. The Marines were forced to use a rifle because rule number one of being a grunt is you rifle was made by the lowest bidder. So now that Remington is the supplier to the military and law enforcement they can claim it.

"The Remington 700 used by snipers both in law enforcement the Army and the Marines" That's quite a feather in your cap but does it really mean anything??? Nop It just means that Remy won the contract and nothing else. But you get people that want something just because it's used by the military or law enforcement and they will pay big for it. It's marketing.
Because if Winchester had stuck to there roots of providing a good rifle at a good price maybe Remington would not be the supplier to the government. 1964 was the beginning of the height of the Viet Nam war and it was also when winchester decided to start selling crap for guns.
Remington struck while the iron was hot and scored. They are still benefiting from that move to this day.

quote:

Why aren't there more Win 70 customs

Id say because now days m70 have more collector/resale value being original than they used too be even if they are worn. Least I have a couple that could be doner actions but chooes to keep them complete and unaltered rifles though they show use wear

Two entirely different industries, but the Rem. 700 action is like the Chevy 350cu.in. engine block. Basic in design, easily modified to whatever level your imagination/wallet permits, and they do the job. It is rare to see a Win. Mod. 70 on the firing line w/ long range/prone shooters. Yes, there are a few now and then, but as pointed out, the 700 has been the core of match rifles or a clone of same for quite sometime and 'smiths are skilled in building one in short order. Aftermarket "goodies" are almost endless for the 700 and that ads to popularity as well.

It's REAL simple, just go to any Benchrest match and ask anyone there if a Winchester action would be or even could be made to be competitive. These guys don't care about no stinkin' marketing, they'll pay any amount for any perceived advantage and they prove it on the target.

The Bench Boys don't use Winchesters.

Another well-known but little-publicized fact is that the 700 action is about twice as strong and twice as safe as any pre-64 M70. No braggin' rights though, the M70 along with the Mauser is king of the braggin' rights group.
Regards, Joe

Makes sense guys.

JD,
Tubbs used a custom M70 to win a bunch of his matches. I thought if he used one successfully then it couldnt be that bad, but I never see anyone on here or snipershide.com that use a M70 action for a build.

Tubb is a hard-holder position shooter, pure mechanical accuracy is secondary to his personal skill level. A number of high-power shooters prefer the M70 because of ergonomics or (more probably IMO) emotion, but the fact remains that the Rem is a safer and more-accurate action for the pure precision shooter.

At my own personal skill level, the action choice doesn't really matter that much....
Regards, Joe

Just scanning my log book, I've seen slightly more custom Model 70s in the last year than I have Remingtons. Anectodal for sure, but there are quite a few customs built on Model 70s.

For custom sporting rifles in general, the M70 probably holds its own. The OP was referring to "longrange shooters" with presumably more emphasis on precision accuracy.

David Miller does a fair job with Model 70s, and they seem to shoot reasonably well.

I've refinished several competition rifles built on Model 70s.

Probably not many full blown benchrest rigs out there based on Winchesters, but I'd submit that it has more to do with weight than anything else. Hell, you won't see many Remington based benchrest rifles either, as custom actions are the order of the day.

One of the prime objections of the Rem.700 is the issue bolt handle, too short. For XC shooters using bolt gun, bolt must come to hand easy and quickly and for long range shooters need the extra leverage to open bolt without coming out of position. Extended bolt handles almost always added. Model 70 bolt handle a bit longer and is OK as is for most. I have shot with Mr. Tubbs at Perry and truth of the matter is, he could use a Model 12 Winchester and come out looking pretty good!!

Well lets clear one thing up right now.
Any action so long as the designs are basically equal can be made with the proper amount of work to shoot just as accurate as any other.
To say that on action is more accurate over another is completely false. If the action is trued, lapped, honed, squared, to bolt and receiver threads all thing being equal it will shoot just as good as any other equal action.
Now does this mean that they will both require equal amounts of work to make them accurate? No. The Winchester needs more work to make it right with the world. But if enough time is spent It could be made to shoot as well as any Remington

Now out of the box accuracy is another issue. A Remy will kick a Winchesters butt nearly every time right out of the box.

This is the same BSI hear about cartridge case design lending it self to the accuracy of the rifle. How many times have you heard "Oh yeah the .XXX is a very accurate round."
What???? No it the bullet design, Barrel, And load that make a "round" accurate Not the shape of the case. Or at least the design of the case could only change the accuracy of the cartridge very little and there are far to many other variables to consider when speaking of accuracy

I would never build a custom on a Rem action, or a Browning, or a PF Win for that matter.

And that is where the confusion lies.

To me a "Custom" is a very nice elegant rifle or shot gun.

I don't know what you would call a Tactical rifle built on a Remy action But it is not a Custom in my book even though it may have been "custom made" for the shooter.

There is nothing better then a Mauser or P64 action in a nice piece of english walnut with a touch of engraving. throw in some talley rings and bases and a nice ziess scope.

I think you'll find a lot more high end custom hunting rifles built on winchester M70 actions than remingtons. The "bubba custom" of preference is probably a remington M700 because it's cheaper and easier to true up. Any gunsmith worth his salt can chuck a M700 in a lathe and make it straight, a M70 winchester is harder to true up because it's not a round tube like the remington. For a long time the M700 was the action of choice for benchrest rifles but now the custom actions are the rule in benchrest. I'd imagine it's been many years since a competetive benchrest rifle has been built on a remington M700.

quote:

Originally posted by boltman:
I think you'll find a lot more high end custom hunting rifles built on winchester M70 actions than remingtons. The "bubba custom" of preference is probably a remington M700 because it's cheaper and easier to true up. Any gunsmith worth his salt idiot can chuck a M700 in a lathe and make it straight, a M70 winchester is harder to true up because it's not a round tube like the remington. For a long time the M700 was the action of choice for benchrest rifles but now the custom actions are the rule in benchrest. I'd imagine it's been many years since a competetive benchrest rifle has been built on a remington M700.

Exactly. Though I changed the words a bit Mod 70s are hunting rifles. Rem 700s are cheap rifles. They are cheaply made both in (lack of) quality and design; therefore price (cheap to make, hence all the clones). It is really easy to work on a simple cylinder. What are the prerequisites for a "benchrest" action (not rifle)? Boiled down to one: pull trigger -> ignition. (bedding and sleaving are done to the action for accuracy). A hunting action needs to feed and extract reliably in addition to just going boom. As far as out of the box is concerned who cares....we're talking about custom rifles.

KCStott,
I normally agree with you, but not in this case. BR shooters shoot the most accurate equip and components made regardless of cost. The receivers are Remington clones. If the shape and design of the cartridge made no difference we would not go to the trouble to make the 6PPC wildcat out of the 220 Russian brass made by Lapua. In the last 15yrs or so 99.5% of all the equipment list shows the 6PPC as the desired cartridge. People have tried different cartridges, but have not made them work consistantly.
Butch

the question on bench guns?
rigidity and locktime ... both of which the 700 beats the 70 on, hands down

LOTS and LOTS of high end customs done on m70s, fewer on m700s.

i am indifferent .. both are great actions, and have a reasonable overlap in use ... but a m70 aint a professional level benchgun ...

Rem 700: safer, stronger, more accurate, better trigger, higher quality but - the kiss of death in some folks' eyes - they're available to anyone & everyone, the 'great unwashed', for a reasonable price. IMO they ARE uglier but that's about their only disadvantage.

Pre-64 M70: they don't make 'em any more so therefore anyone owning one can fool themselves into thinking that owning a pre-64 just automatically makes them a 'special' person. They ARE better-looking and Jack O'Connor liked
'em so they have braggin' rights, but those are almost their only real advantages.

high-quality Mauser: safer, smoother, better trigger, higher quality, best braggin' rights OF ALL but scope mounting is sometimes an issue and bolt lug setback can be a serious problem.

Snooty types can hold their noses if they like, but the Remingtons and their clones are still the undisputed accuracy champs. Just as the Mausers and their clones are still the undisputed charisma/braggin' rights champs.

For the record I own 8 Mauser bolt rifles, no Winchester bolt rifles but do have a number of Win single shots & pumps. The only Remington arm of any description I've owned in the last 20 years is a converted Smoot revolver that lives in my truck's glove box.

BTW Remington is not the cheapest tactical-rifle bidder, Savage is. Both Savage and Remington have about equal levels of accuracy and reliability, far FAR better than their competitors, but Remington usually gets the nod because of their splendid & proven track record. The rest aren't even in contention because the differences are so stunningly obvious.
Regards, Joe

I prefer the win P64 or M70 classic to the rem 700 actions. Out of the box rifles are a piss poor representation of an actions capabilities, but in my experience winchester rifles are just as accurate as remingtons factory rifles. I prefer the winchesters for 3 reasons: controled round feeding, three position safety and a simple trigger that can be adjusted without taking it to a gunsmith. Remington has the advantage of a good amount of aftermarket parts available to make improvements. My opinion, the action has the least effect on accuracy when compared to the barrel, properly bedded stock, trigger, chamber and crown. When talking about an out of square action, you're only talking about a few thousandths of an inch, unless it's a peice of junk. An action that is square and true, held to the same tolerences and barreled with the same degree of care will be equally accurate weather its a winchester or remington.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
the question on bench guns?
rigidity and locktime ... both of which the 700 beats the 70 on, hands down

LOTS and LOTS of high end customs done on m70s, fewer on m700s.

i am indifferent .. both are great actions, and have a reasonable overlap in use ... but a m70 aint a professional level benchgun ...

LOL---lots of posts by folks who are just guessing. Pretty funny actually.

A "professional level bench gun" is not a "Custom"
A Bench rest rifle is just that a bench rest. It will not have three or four X wood, will not have skeletonized Grip cap and butt plate, No engraving, No niter bluing, no oil finished wood, No elegance, It's a Universal receiver with a heavy barrel and a stock that is only shootable from the bench. I'm Not knocking A bench gun but they are not a custom In my mind. They are a assembled gun not a custom

Actually some of us have wood stocks. You have no doubt heard of Mustafa Bilal? He has wood on his Br rifle that is as good as any I have seen on a "custom"? Lots of nice checkering and ours that are CM receivers have nice bluing on them. I even have a few blued CM barrels.
This thread has gotten away from the question, but Competition rifles are customs in their own way. I have several of both types. I will see if I can get a photo from Mustafa to post.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by kcstott:
A "professional level bench gun" is not a "Custom"
A Bench rest rifle is just that a bench rest. It will not have three or four X wood, will not have skeletonized Grip cap and butt plate, No engraving, No niter bluing, no oil finished wood, No elegance, It's a Universal receiver with a heavy barrel and a stock that is only shootable from the bench. I'm Not knocking A bench gun but they are not a custom In my mind. They are a assembled gun not a custom

Depends on who builds it.... Have "custom" sporters that will almost shoot with my competition rifles. Why---same reamer, barrel albeit smaller, same rings and bases also shoot the same ammo-----different action but a 700 clone, or a BAT, Kelby, 1.5 lb trigger vs. a 1oz and of course a different stock configuration but for some of us the differences are not that great. Most of the wood stocked “customs” in the safe started from what the Model 70 tried to emulate.

Kerry,
This is an example of some of the wood used on BR rifles. This is one of Mustafa Bilal's rifles. It is one hell of a shooter.
Thanks for letting me use this picture Mustafa.

Butch

quote:

Originally posted by kcstott:
A "professional level bench gun" is not a "Custom"
...they are not a custom In my mind. They are a assembled gun not a custom

Kerry,
Does that preclude a heavy barreled, synthetic sock, short barreled, .375 alaskan hunting rifle, that has none of the "features" you mention?

Yes, I agree these are different CUSTOMS, but they are custom guns, none the less

Most of the features you mention in a custom gun I dont' care for .. I don't like 3/4x wood on a gun i am going to hunt, not the skelly gripcap, i dont' like engraving (no offense, Roger.. i DO appreciate it, just don't like it on guns) NEVER a butt plate, or nitre bluing ... oil finished wood .. that's kind of a dicey thing to cal, lots of bench guns have wood stocks finished with 'oil".. just what are you calling oil .. and they are NOT "only" shootable from the bench ... they are custom rifles built for a specific purpose, and only the really heavy guns aren't fully huntable .. but I think 7-15# is a huntable gun ...

Boss Hoss -- are you infering that i am "just guessing?" ... If so, Which part of my post did you find to be guessing or inaccurate? Please, fill me with your knowledge that makes my statements inaccurate, wrong, or just a guess ..
thanks

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by kcstott:
A "professional level bench gun" is not a "Custom"
...they are not a custom In my mind. They are a assembled gun not a custom

Kerry,
Does that preclude a heavy barreled, synthetic sock, short barreled, .375 alaskan hunting rifle, that has none of the "features" you mention?

Yes, I agree these are different CUSTOMS, but they are custom guns, none the less

Most of the features you mention in a custom gun I dont' care for .. I don't like 3/4x wood on a gun i am going to hunt, not the skelly gripcap, i dont' like engraving (no offense, Roger.. i DO appreciate it, just don't like it on guns) NEVER a butt plate, or nitre bluing ... oil finished wood .. that's kind of a dicey thing to cal, lots of bench guns have wood stocks finished with 'oil".. just what are you calling oil .. and they are NOT "only" shootable from the bench ... they are custom rifles built for a specific purpose, and only the really heavy guns aren't fully huntable .. but I think 7-15# is a huntable gun ...

Boss Hoss -- are you infering that i am "just guessing?" ... If so, Which part of my post did you find to be guessing or inaccurate? Please, fill me with your knowledge that makes my statements inaccurate, wrong, or just a guess ..
thanks

Jeff---no the comment was not about what you posted---on the contrary I am agreeing with you..

Always good to ask .. I was trying to figure that out .. thanks for clearing it up

quote:

Originally posted by kcstott:
A "professional level bench gun" is not a "Custom"
A Bench rest rifle is just that a bench rest. It will not have three or four X wood, will not have skeletonized Grip cap and butt plate, No engraving, No niter bluing, no oil finished wood, No elegance, It's a Universal receiver with a heavy barrel and a stock that is only shootable from the bench. I'm Not knocking A bench gun but they are not a custom In my mind. They are a assembled gun not a custom

A custom rifle is one that starts out with an action and then goes to finished product via many a route......whether it be a wooden stocked BR rifle or a synthetic stocked hunting rifle.

And don't forget when you talk custom there are different types........some custom are really pretty rifles with all the bells and whistles where a lot of attention is made to detail work. Fancy wood, great metal details ie integral this and that. Adequate hunting rifles, but made more for show.

Then there are other customs where a lot of the detail is done on functionality. Guy's like Echols, Miller, Holehan, Sisk etc, while not guild guys do top notch stock work (though Charlie in synthetics), frankly which rivals any guild rifle. Where these guys shine though is that they spend a lot of time on slickin up an action. Flawless feeding/etc/actions and near BR accuracy. Echols/Miller build their own scope mounts, Holehan welds/builds up integral double squares etc. Nothing fancy, but these rifles all shoot and do it well.

Depends upon where you want to spend your $.

the biesen's seem to like the pre-64's...

Mod 70 customs are out there... not in the numbers of mausers and such, but that could be because in stock form, the Win is a fine rifle!

Just a note here that wood stocked rifles that use a good blank and that means the right species of wood grown in the correct part of the world laid out properly will shoot better than almost everyone who reads this can shoot it especially on a sporter. The guy in this picture won these trophy’s and set world records with a wood stocked 6ppc fyi. He also uses composite stocks but when the money is on the line so to speak he will get out his “table leg” as he calls it…….

World Class Shooting With A Wood Stocked Rifle

I'd just like to add something that I haven't seen as input here.

I think the reason that the Mod. 70 action is not used as often as a Remington 700 has to do with magazine length that comes with the action. You are quite restricted with the short Model 70 magazine versus the Remington 700.

Lets be clear here I did say "In my mind"

When someone says the word "Custom" it conjures images of fine wood, Banded hooded front sights, Perfect wood to metal fit, Engraving albeit modestly engraved Not something gaudy. Something like that.
Yes in the true sense of the word. Any rifle that started out as a group of parts is "custom" But I mean more of a Built rifle then an assembled one.

I can buy parts here and there and call it a custom but in my mind that rifle is assembled not built.

Here's a past thread I bookmarked a while ago regarding the same question with some informative posts.

M70 vs. M700

Some of the posts on the other thread were quite informative but at least one of the longer ones is quite wrong. The Rem/Sako extractor conversion was originally instituted for use with the short PPC cases with their very deep powder chambers that leave little thickness at the web junction; the very high pressures used by Benchresters sometimes caused case-web blowouts unless the bolt noses were shortened somewhat and the barrel shanks lengthened accordingly, ergo the various extractor conversions. If in doubt about this, please note that the extractor conversions weren't even instituted until at least 20 years after the introduction of the 7XX series, around the time that the PPC cases were first popularized.

Some of the arguments supporting the comparative accuracy of the flat-bottom actions appear (at first) to be superficially persuasive on a subjective, personal, anecdotal level; however I personally have never seen or heard of a flat-bottom action winning any serious benchrest competition in the last few decades. They appear to be competitive in some areas where shooter skill is more important than pure accuracy such as long range and any of the position-shooting games, but they aren't as accurate and can't be made that way.

Yes, I said that they, the flat-bottomed actions, can't be made to shoot as accurately as the round-bottom actions. For a good primer on the various forces and receiver shapes affecting a rifle's accuracy, I highly recommend Harold Vaughn's book Rifle Accuracy Facts.

If any of you have even heard of a flat-bottomed action winning any national benchrest competition or setting any BR records, I'd be very interested to hear about it. Local maybe, national no.

Few have mentioned safety so far. IMO the Rems are far, FAR stronger than any Winchester ever made and they handle escaping gas far, FAR better than the pre-64 M70. Not as well as a Mauser but far better than a pre-64 M70 for sure. For supporting evidence I refer you to the picture of a blown Winchester M70 receiver in one of Ackley's books, it's in several pieces.

I challenge anyone to show a corresponding pic of a Remington receiver.

As a previous poster commented: if the Wins are just as good then how come so many folks use the Rems? To me it comes down to the avowed purpose of the rifle; do you really want to shoot in the most accurate way or do you merely want to look PC to your friends while making the attempt?
Regards, Joe

quote:

Some of the arguments supporting the comparative accuracy of the flat-bottom actions appear (at first) to be superficially persuasive on a subjective, personal, anecdotal level; however I personally have never seen or heard of a flat-bottom action winning any serious benchrest competition in the last few decades. They appear to be competitive in some areas where shooter skill is more important than pure accuracy such as long range and any of the position-shooting games, but they aren't as accurate and can't be made that way.

Yes, I said that they, the flat-bottomed actions, can't be made to shoot as accurately as the round-bottom actions. For a good primer on the various forces and receiver shapes affecting a rifle's accuracy, I highly recommend Harold Vaughn's book Rifle Accuracy Facts.

If any of you have even heard of a flat-bottomed action winning any national benchrest competition or setting any BR records, I'd be very interested to hear about it. Local maybe, national no.


Regards, Joe

Stiller Viper?

Stolle Panda?

Nesika Classic?

You're right, those actions can't be the basis of a phenomenally accurate, winning comp rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by MRAMSAY10:
I have been reading all the praise about the Win 70 trigger. I have seen good articles about the action. So, what is is about the gun that leads people to build their long range shooters on 700 actions?

As you can see, your post has sturred up quite a debate. It is a Ford vs Chevy kind of thing - literally.

Like the Chevys of the 1960s,'70s, '80s, & '90's, the Rem. is designed with the idea of ease of manufacuring/cost to yield the most profit. Somewhere along the way they managed to get a pretty damn good barrel also which has given them the accuracy feather in their cap. (Unfortunately I've never experienced this) The action is strong, strong to the point that it can handle some pretty high pressures. (That was a good thing because back when DuPont owned Remington/IMR reloading components, their quality control was horrible.) I once had a can of new IMR 4831 that had ball powder mixed in it.....from the manufacturer.

Because of the M-700's simplistic design, it lends itself quite well to being modified. Knock out two pins and intall a aftermarket trigger. Screw on anyone's barrel. Slapp on anyone's stock. Competition shooters usually don't have safeties on their rifles. Remington never had a safety so agian it lends itself quite well to that fact.

As I have read, modern day snipers never go out alone. They have a spotter with them. The spotter carries the full auto for backup. Competition shooters/snipers generally don't use hotter loads in their rifles. Snipers genrallay use arsenal loaded ammo. Competition shooters use "accuracy loads" not hot/high velocity loads. Modern day snipers and competition shooter clean their actions on a very regular basis. Again, all of this plays right in to the M-700s scheme of things. I mention this because should one have a hot load in the M-700, the action can handle the pressures but the lousy extractor design can't pull the stuck case out of the chamber. (I have experienced this also.) If you will notice on most forums it is the Remington people that are most obsessed with pressure signs on reloaded ammunition. I think this is why.

As someone mentioned the M-700 vents excessive gases quite well. Yes, this is true. It goes right straight back through the bolt in to your eye! I have personally experienced this back in the late '70s with some DuPont/Remington 9&1/2M primers that were faulty.

The Winchester M-70 (like Fords)was designed for those (ie. hunters)who stay out in the field for extended periods of time with minimal supplies, parts and cleaning equipment. The M-70 was also designed to be safe to carry and function in the worst of conditions in locations that are far, far away from medical attention.

The Remington M-700 was designed to be cheap to produce and thus covers all of the remaining scenarios.

Winchester M-70s are designed for hunters.
Remingtonn M-700s are for shooters.

quote:

Originally posted by CAS II:

Stiller Viper?

Stolle Panda?

Nesika Classic?

You're right, those actions can't be the basis of a phenomenally accurate, winning comp rifle.

What does Tony use? If he uses one of these in any of his match rifles I'd be surprised. Sure, he's not the only one winning BR matches and setting records but he's the poster child for BR wins, and has been THE MAN for many years now. Several decades AAMOF, as was already mentioned.

Just because it's expensive and/or widely touted doesn't mean it's the best or even acceptable, reference Weatherby, Dakota and many others. Sure, flat-bottom actions can be made to shoot perfectly adequately in almost all cases but there's a REASON why the top dogs keep coming back to the round-bottom actions. These guys don't blink at spending whatever it takes to win and so I figure that their equipment list will indicate the best choices.

If you'll check the current BR records, I believe you'll find that the majority are held by round-bottom actions. The vast majority.

Kinda hard to argue with success.
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

I personally have never seen or heard of a flat-bottom action winning any serious benchrest competition in the last few decades.

Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

If you'll check the current BR records, I believe you'll find that the majority are held by round-bottom actions. The vast majority.

Kinda hard to argue with success.
Regards, Joe

So which is it, they don't win at all or they do win? Since you state that round bottomed actions hold "the majority" of Br records, are we to assume by your own words that flat bottom actions hold some records? Would that implicitly mean that they also won, as I can't imagine shooting a record and coming in second place.

surely cost plays a significant factor here as well. the machining time on a round receiver differs greatly from that of a flat bottomed. why spend the extra dough on a flat bottomed receiver when a round one is EQUALLY accurate and generally less expensive?

this debate will likely live on until someone builds two actions identically, one flat, one round, with identical bolt play, case head support, etc. and compares the two.