Winchester model 70

There was a tremendous difference between pre and post Model 70s. The post models had free floating barrels with so much clearance that a complaint of hunters was the gap around the barrel soon filled with spruce needles in the bush.
The ones made right after the change were generally the worst, and they were made considerably better as years went on.
 
The world might have been a different place if Winchester hadn't changed the M-70 and if Coke hadn't messed with "the recipe" . While there has been a market for economy grade guns ever since the HBC sold trade rifles to the indians, the enthusiasts have always wanted the best, and mostly have been willing to pay for them. Winchester should have produced the push feed rifle but sold it under another model number, while the M-70 could have continued to sell at the price Winchester needed to remain in business. Instead of just competing with Remington, their flagship product should have competed with Weatherby. Had Winchester won the military rifle contract in the mid '60s, their immediate financial problems would have been solved, but their vision was instead was to produce an inferior product, and to a large degree the American sporting arms industry has been a race to the bottom ever since.
 
They claim the rifles made at or near 1964 are the worst because the machines used to make they were so worn out the tolerances were so bad . I personally don't know as my Model 70's are either in the 50's or the 1980s so have nothing to gauge from. When I was living at Wainwright AB the gun store there had a great price on a Model 70 in 30-06 because nobody would buy one as it didn't say magnum on it.
 
I've also heard the claim that worn out machinery resulted in some poor quality M-70s in the period leading up to the model change. I'm not sure I buy it, and I think its an oversimplification of the problem they had at Winchester. The only parts that really wear out are the various cutters, and these can be sharpened and replaced as required. I expect the real problem was the bean counters pushed for faster production and the accepted tolerances went by the wayside.
 
Boomer said:
I've also heard the claim that worn out machinery resulted in some poor quality M-70s in the period leading up to the model change. I'm not sure I buy it, and I think its an oversimplification of the problem they had at Winchester. The only parts that really wear out are the various cutters, and these can be sharpened and replaced as required. I expect the real problem was the bean counters pushed for faster production and the accepted tolerances went by the wayside.
Click to expand...

I have a '62 version and I had a '63, both Featherweights and I didn't see any difference between these and my mid fifties models.
 
When the post /64s came out, there was very little said about going to the push feed, because when Remington went to push feed with the 720 series in about 1951, they poured on the advertising about it being the strongest action ever produced, with three layers of steel around the cartridge head.
Thus, when Winchester went push, it was hyped as an improvement, at least in strength.
Of course, Mauser designed their Model 1898 to withstand a hundred thousand pounds of pressure, which they claimed to be the strongest action ever.
But the US hype would say little good about the Mauser 98, especially when they lost a law suit with Mauser, and had to pay a substantial fee, for copying parts of the Mauser design, when Springfield armories built the 1906 Springfield military rifle.
So the 98 Mauser was the king of the controlled feed actions and all others, including of course, the Springfield, the p14 and 17s, as well as the Model 70, were all close cousins of the Model 98 Mauser.
A good 98 is still my favourite action and I now have the best one I ever had; an FN Supreme with a Sako trigger, on a rifle built by Marlin for a very few years in the 1950s. Mine is a bit more unique in that Marlin must have made a deal to have Eaton's sell some, and rolled into the 22 inch micro grooved barrel on mines is, "EATON'S OF CANADA, MODEL 100," and "Made in the USA.
I guess the only thing in question is which of my grand sons will end up with it!
 
jTin said:
I always hear pre and post 1964 model 70 prices , is the 1964 worth anything it's chambered in .264
Click to expand...

In your neck of the woods a 264 would be a nice deer rifle. The fact that it's a Post 64 reduces it's value significantly, but you still have a $450 shooter, assuming it's in good condition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom