Remington 700 vs Winchester 70
- Thread starter HKMark23
- Start date
Well I did read that the grand daddy of all Snipers used an M70. I assume that means its passes the test.
The thing I want to know is, given how much some of you have said about the "new" 70s now in production again, is it that the new 70s are less accurate than their predecessors that made their name famous or is it something else that makes people feel its less tight on the MOA? If so does that mean that having an excellent condition 70 from way back when is different?
The thing I want to know is, given how much some of you have said about the "new" 70s now in production again, is it that the new 70s are less accurate than their predecessors that made their name famous or is it something else that makes people feel its less tight on the MOA? If so does that mean that having an excellent condition 70 from way back when is different?
I own 2 x Remington Model 700's:
.....a VTR in .308 Win. (had to have trigger replaced with a Timney........not impressed).
..... a .416 Rem. Mag. that I customized myself because it was a big heavy "clunker" when I got it that "pointed" like a culvert pipe.......cut barrel to 21", replaced wooden stock with Ramline synthetic stock, installed Williams aperture back sight, installed Timney trigger assembly......the rifle is an excellent rifle now because I made it that way.
I bought a Winchester Model 70 in .375 H&H in 1974 at the old Harkley & Haywood gun shop on Cordova Street in Vancouver, BC (anybody old enough to remember them??) after Winchester was taken over & their stuff went cheap quality......rifle was a piece of crap...I dumped it...experience left a sour taste in my mouth & I'll never buy another Winchester bolt action.......a lot of shooters abandoned Winchester after the "Shytty Line" came out after 1964 & never went back...........me included.I'd have to give the nod to the Remington Model 700.........no more Winchester bolts for me.
I own several Ruger & Savage bolt action rifles and they are better rifles than the Remington Model 700 & Winchester Model 70 ever thought of being. The Savage Model 116 in .30-06 Sprng. is the most accurate rifle I own (1/2" groups all day long right out of the box). The Savage AccuTrigger system is fantastic.
Last edited:
Model 70 push feed, 300WM, 100 yards. Bought it used, cleaned it and shot this (despite the inch of pitting at the muzzle). Might get better if I work up a load for it.
You lucked out.
All of the "out of the box" Winchester bolts I've shot were shytty to mediocre shooters.
Quality & accuracy are more important than tradition & history for me because all my rifles "work for a living" .............no wall flowers.........if they don't perform........they're GONE !
Model 70 push feed, 300WM, 100 yards. Bought it used, cleaned it and shot this (despite the inch of pitting at the muzzle). Might get better if I work up a load for it.
Ya, you should try and tidy that up a bit
.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
While I've always appreciated the M-70, I've never owned one, although I do have a M-54 in .270. I'm not sure why this is, but I suspect it is because the gun shop I hung out in when I was a youngster was very pro Remington and very anti Winchester. When I got into shooting in the '60s there was much hard feelings across the industry towards Winchester for the post '64 M-70s .
Despite that, a M-70 Super-grade in .30/06 was the "ideal" I wanted in a hunting rifle and my Brno ZG-47 in .30/06 might be just a bit better due to the position of the safety. While I am not at all sure that a safety on the bolt is the best idea anyway, the wing safety of the M-70 did have the correct look. I didn't realize what a pain in the ass it could be with a low mounted scope until I hunted with one. I finally gave up on the safety all together and when I found it necessary to carry the rifle with a round in the chamber I simply lifted the bolt handle.
My old Remington M-17 Enfield was the correct blend, controlled round feed, with a safety on the right side of the receiver. For years this club was my go to rifle, it was tough and accurate, much more accurate than my 1903 Springfield, but it was heavy and far from beautiful. IMHO, Remington should have kept the M-30S (essentially a 1917 Enfield sporter) in production as their premier hunting rifle, modernized with a redesigned stock, and an adjustable trigger. To my way of thinking, #### on closing is no disadvantage.
As a hunting rifle, I think the M-70 (pre '64 and newer Classic) has it all over the M-700 due to the controlled round feed feature and the flat bedding surface of a double bridge Mauser. Remington has proven itself on the target range, and my most accurate rifles have been the custom 700s I've owned in recent years. I keep hearing people say how the Remington extractor is bullet proof and can't fail, but I've worn out two, a .30/06 M-700 and a .243 M-7, that repeatedly slipped past the cartridge rims. I used to think that the installation of a Sako extractor on a 700's bolt face was the best solution, but Guntech has convinced me this practice is unsound.
Despite that, a M-70 Super-grade in .30/06 was the "ideal" I wanted in a hunting rifle and my Brno ZG-47 in .30/06 might be just a bit better due to the position of the safety. While I am not at all sure that a safety on the bolt is the best idea anyway, the wing safety of the M-70 did have the correct look. I didn't realize what a pain in the ass it could be with a low mounted scope until I hunted with one. I finally gave up on the safety all together and when I found it necessary to carry the rifle with a round in the chamber I simply lifted the bolt handle.
My old Remington M-17 Enfield was the correct blend, controlled round feed, with a safety on the right side of the receiver. For years this club was my go to rifle, it was tough and accurate, much more accurate than my 1903 Springfield, but it was heavy and far from beautiful. IMHO, Remington should have kept the M-30S (essentially a 1917 Enfield sporter) in production as their premier hunting rifle, modernized with a redesigned stock, and an adjustable trigger. To my way of thinking, #### on closing is no disadvantage.
As a hunting rifle, I think the M-70 (pre '64 and newer Classic) has it all over the M-700 due to the controlled round feed feature and the flat bedding surface of a double bridge Mauser. Remington has proven itself on the target range, and my most accurate rifles have been the custom 700s I've owned in recent years. I keep hearing people say how the Remington extractor is bullet proof and can't fail, but I've worn out two, a .30/06 M-700 and a .243 M-7, that repeatedly slipped past the cartridge rims. I used to think that the installation of a Sako extractor on a 700's bolt face was the best solution, but Guntech has convinced me this practice is unsound.
For Joe Average shooter who is not out fighting and/or guiding big bears in the Yukon or doing PH work in dark Afrika, what advantage does CRF offer?
What bedding advantage does a flat bottom receiver have over the 700 tubular design?
.
ginseng503
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- N. Ontario
Generally, the Winchester is a closer copy of a Mauser than a Remington.
Seems most makers, especially big dollar makers, "want to be a Mauser" They all incorporate their own "improvements" to the basic Mauser design. We the consumers, have to weed through all these modifications to see if we can come close to Mauser at any price point.
Not meant to be a hijack.
Seems most makers, especially big dollar makers, "want to be a Mauser" They all incorporate their own "improvements" to the basic Mauser design. We the consumers, have to weed through all these modifications to see if we can come close to Mauser at any price point.
Not meant to be a hijack.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I have just come to prefer a CRF action to the M-700 extractor which in my experience has a shorter life span. In a hunting application the Sako is superior to the Remington, and I would be quite happy with it, so it is not a push feed vs CRF issue to me. But look at what you said SC, all of those folks you mention demand absolute reliability in their rifles. While you might not die while out deer hunting because your rifle fails to extract a cartridge, doesn't absolute reliability provide a greater sense of confidence, and your performance improves as your confidence increases. Having said that, while a M-700 works it works wonderfully. Ross Siegfried used a M-700 when he worked as a PH and the US military continues to field M-700s in the role of sniper rifles.
As to the advantages of the bedding of a flat bottomed receiver vs a round receiver, I believe that the greater bearing surface the action has on the stock, the more resilient the stock will be to recoil and to changes in POI from rough handling. In an environment where a rifle sees hard use, I simply believe that this greater bearing surface is less likely to allow movement within the stock. There are likely some very knowledgeable folks who will disagree with me, but I'll keep my 700s for target shooting and varminting and my Mausers (Mausers, Brnos, Winchester 54, etc) for more demanding work.
My first rifle was Remington 700 BDL DM in .30-06. I still have that rifle. Accuracy is phenomenal with my loads after 11 years still shoots 1/2MOA !!!
The only time I will consider Winchester or any Mauser style bolt rifle is Alaska or Africa, where I can run into dangerous game and need to make sure bullets goes to the chamber with every stroke.
The only time I will consider Winchester or any Mauser style bolt rifle is Alaska or Africa, where I can run into dangerous game and need to make sure bullets goes to the chamber with every stroke.
- Location
- Eastern Edge of the Foothills
I thought I read some internet chatter somewhere that the new m-70's were really well built and really accurate. Has anyone here bought one? Does anyone know?
As for CRF, the only rifles I've ever had jam up on me were
#1 Ruger: CRF
#2 Mauser K98: CRF
#3 Husky 1600: CRF
I've never had a push feed gun jam up on me EVER. Push feed guns that I own are 2 Remingtons, a Tikka, a Browning, and a push feed Winchester [that I've shot for 18 years now]. They've never ever jammed, but the CRF's have.
As for CRF, the only rifles I've ever had jam up on me were
#1 Ruger: CRF
#2 Mauser K98: CRF
#3 Husky 1600: CRF
I've never had a push feed gun jam up on me EVER. Push feed guns that I own are 2 Remingtons, a Tikka, a Browning, and a push feed Winchester [that I've shot for 18 years now]. They've never ever jammed, but the CRF's have.
The day I can afford to go on an African safari will be the same day I can afford a Merkel or H&H double rifle in one of the traditional big bore calibers & I'll by-pass the bolt actions altogether.
That will be the day after my Lotto 649 or Super 7 win.
I'd have to see a Winchester bolt action perform superbly in the hands of a reliable friend before I'd forgive them for their post 1964 "junkie" days & buy another one.
I won't forget how crappy that Model 70 in .375 H&H Mag. I bought in 1974 was..............it was a piece of shyt.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
Last time they updated the M70 (not counting the Post-64 abiomination) what did they change? Pretty tough to improve on the M70 action from a hunting point of view.
All the preproduction hoopla was pointing toward the use of real Williams bottom-metal on this latest incarnation. That would have been nice, a custom quality all-steel assembly that got rid of the 2 piece, 3 screw half aluminum bottom end that hung on for decades. What we got was a half hearted econoend attempt from the people who already knew the answer, but opted for cheap over good. They did lose the 3rd, action warping screw though.
Remember when the post 90 action first came out in the Supergrade? They didn't think that the buying public would pay the added expense on the regular grade, but that proved wrong and the Classic drove the post '64 right out of production. I would have welcomed the chance to pay more for the good bottom-end, but they were just teasing.
