I think the cracked receiver bit comes from the barrels being threaded very tightly on pre-64s. I've owned many pre-64s over the years, yes they're nice. I would only be inerested in the actions anyway. Pre-64s are limited in that a standard caliber cannot be converted to magnum without messing with the action to get it to feed. The new classics can be coverted no problem. To make a long magnum out of a pre-64 you'd better have a 375 or 300 H&H action or a very competent gunsmith. The Classics are no sweat, just remove mag block alter bolt stop and ejector and your good to go. To make a long story short, ya if you're a pre-64 snob stick to pre-64s. If you like Mod. 70 CRFs and are practicle buy Classics. I currently own a bunch of Classics and no pre-64s. To each his own.
winchester model 70
- Thread starter rhino62
- Start date
Hope I didn't piss anyone off with that snob coment. I do like the olds one too. My point is that the new ones do have some advatages. The old ones are well made classic rifles. Most who use the old ones are chucking or selling the barrels and stocks and building on the actions.
rhino62 said:
That is a magical website that lists hundreds of items the store doesn't have in stock. (An in the case of Model 70's won't have until Browning starts cranking them out in Japan in a few years under the Browning label.)
[QUOTE='Boo]That is a magical website that lists hundreds of items the store doesn't have in stock. (An in the case of Model 70's won't have until Browning starts cranking them out in Japan in a few years under the Browning label.)[/QUOTE]
Word is they will be produced in Winchesters South Carolina plant by Winchester which is owned by FN Herstal Group, the company that owns Winchester and Browning. They are waiting for the current labour contract to expire in 2008 and production will start shortly after. They are currently tooling the factory up. Matt Williams, VP of Williams Firearms Company has stated several times on 24hour Campfire that they have been contracted to supply the triggerguard, floorplate and bottom metal for the Model 70. There are many changes in the works all aimed to improve quality far beyond what was produced in New Haven Conneticut which was known for severe quality control and production problems and the reason for its shutdown.
Word is they will be produced in Winchesters South Carolina plant by Winchester which is owned by FN Herstal Group, the company that owns Winchester and Browning. They are waiting for the current labour contract to expire in 2008 and production will start shortly after. They are currently tooling the factory up. Matt Williams, VP of Williams Firearms Company has stated several times on 24hour Campfire that they have been contracted to supply the triggerguard, floorplate and bottom metal for the Model 70. There are many changes in the works all aimed to improve quality far beyond what was produced in New Haven Conneticut which was known for severe quality control and production problems and the reason for its shutdown.
I don't think this is true. Swedish steel of the 30's through the 60's is excellent steel, buttery smooth. But it's not just steel that makes a great rifle. Pre/64's and their European counterparts of that time period were basically hand made by craftsman with very few cast steel or pressed steel parts. Everything was basically made by hand. The biggest test is the test of time. Will your Tikka or Mod.70 Classic still preform flawlessly after 40 - 70 more years of hard use? We shall see.pharaoh2 said:
It would be interesting to have someone with real gunsmith experience actaully take a good critical analysis of the Pre 64 vs the Classic.
I t?ink we would see both have strong points.
Although I think that we woudl still see a Classic as more accurate, on average. Othere than that..well I think they are both good.
I t?ink we would see both have strong points.
Although I think that we woudl still see a Classic as more accurate, on average. Othere than that..well I think they are both good.
It is not all that often I have to struggle as hard as with this thread to keep from just typing "What a load of crap!". Come to think of it, I guess I did just type that, didn't I?
Bishopus, do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
Pre-64 M70's are nothing like 03 Springfields. Different steel, different treatment. Hard and brittle? Horse####! I don't know how many you may have had occasion to drill, but I've drilled a bunch (pre-war models were not drilled and tapped at the rear) and, while these old ones are harder than a new 4140 action, they are not as hard as a hard Springfield or Enfield. The later pre-64 models are relatively soft, both receivers and bolts, which is why they are occasionally a bit "sticky". They do not, however, have the tendency to gall as the new models do. In all my years of gunsmithing, I've not seen a cracked pre-64 receiver or bolt. I have seen two post -64 rifles in which both locking lugs broke right off. Hardly a by-product of superior heat treating or material.
How about that improved bolt stop? I'd like to learn just what the improvement was. Both bolt stops are a flat blade pivoting on the trigger pin. The new bolt stop is tensioned by a clothespin-like spring, the old one used a coil spring and plunger. The pre-war models featured a notch in the bolt stop which contacted a mating surface at the rear of the slot in the receiver. This way, the shock load was transferred directly to the receiver rather than to the trigger pin. Maybe the elimination of this feature is the improvement we're looking for. By the way, I do like the little gas block used on the classics and frequently retro-fit these to pre-64's.
The elimination of machined feed rails in the magazine well and the substitution of lips on a sheet metal box would be another improvement, I guess. It's difficult to modify those Pre-64 rails but anyone with a pair of pliers can adjust the feeding on his new M70. Luckily, the pld one didn't generally need adjustment.
Another improvement on the modern receiver is the way they broached the locking lug raceways right through the receiver ring threads. This gave the new receivers an interupted thread. This thread created some problems when the barrel tenons were distorted when the barrel was tightened into the receiver and the chambers made oval. The pre-64 had a complete thread.
Barrel quality. When it comes to interior surface finish, the new barrels are
normally smoother than the pre-64's. What they don't seem to be is more consistent dimensionally. One frequently sees the hammer forged barrels with tight or loose spots. This is not common, mind you and, in general, I think the new barrels are just fine. I think the old ones were just fine too. I've not seen a single pre-64 in good condition which could not be made to shoot 1 MOA or better if properly bedded. I've seen a few new ones which just plain would not shoot. Improved barrel and all.
The bolt improvement. Bishopus didn't mention this one but it's another one that is a little difficult for me to see. The pre-64 action used a one piece bolt. The handle and bolt body were one piece. The new model uses the bolt handle which is silver soldered onto a knurled extension at the rear of thebolt body. I've never seen a broken off pre-64 M70 handle. I've seen and repaired a half dozen post -64 bolts on which the handle had come adrift.
Given the choice, I would choose the pre-64 action every time. The one real advantage of the new action is it's length. It will hold a 375 or 300H&H. without modification to the receiver.
I almost forgot to mention one other real advantage to the pre-64 rifles; they were never made in any of the WSM chamberings! Regards, Bill.
Bishopus, do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
Pre-64 M70's are nothing like 03 Springfields. Different steel, different treatment. Hard and brittle? Horse####! I don't know how many you may have had occasion to drill, but I've drilled a bunch (pre-war models were not drilled and tapped at the rear) and, while these old ones are harder than a new 4140 action, they are not as hard as a hard Springfield or Enfield. The later pre-64 models are relatively soft, both receivers and bolts, which is why they are occasionally a bit "sticky". They do not, however, have the tendency to gall as the new models do. In all my years of gunsmithing, I've not seen a cracked pre-64 receiver or bolt. I have seen two post -64 rifles in which both locking lugs broke right off. Hardly a by-product of superior heat treating or material.
How about that improved bolt stop? I'd like to learn just what the improvement was. Both bolt stops are a flat blade pivoting on the trigger pin. The new bolt stop is tensioned by a clothespin-like spring, the old one used a coil spring and plunger. The pre-war models featured a notch in the bolt stop which contacted a mating surface at the rear of the slot in the receiver. This way, the shock load was transferred directly to the receiver rather than to the trigger pin. Maybe the elimination of this feature is the improvement we're looking for. By the way, I do like the little gas block used on the classics and frequently retro-fit these to pre-64's.
The elimination of machined feed rails in the magazine well and the substitution of lips on a sheet metal box would be another improvement, I guess. It's difficult to modify those Pre-64 rails but anyone with a pair of pliers can adjust the feeding on his new M70. Luckily, the pld one didn't generally need adjustment.
Another improvement on the modern receiver is the way they broached the locking lug raceways right through the receiver ring threads. This gave the new receivers an interupted thread. This thread created some problems when the barrel tenons were distorted when the barrel was tightened into the receiver and the chambers made oval. The pre-64 had a complete thread.
Barrel quality. When it comes to interior surface finish, the new barrels are
normally smoother than the pre-64's. What they don't seem to be is more consistent dimensionally. One frequently sees the hammer forged barrels with tight or loose spots. This is not common, mind you and, in general, I think the new barrels are just fine. I think the old ones were just fine too. I've not seen a single pre-64 in good condition which could not be made to shoot 1 MOA or better if properly bedded. I've seen a few new ones which just plain would not shoot. Improved barrel and all.
The bolt improvement. Bishopus didn't mention this one but it's another one that is a little difficult for me to see. The pre-64 action used a one piece bolt. The handle and bolt body were one piece. The new model uses the bolt handle which is silver soldered onto a knurled extension at the rear of thebolt body. I've never seen a broken off pre-64 M70 handle. I've seen and repaired a half dozen post -64 bolts on which the handle had come adrift.
Given the choice, I would choose the pre-64 action every time. The one real advantage of the new action is it's length. It will hold a 375 or 300H&H. without modification to the receiver.
I almost forgot to mention one other real advantage to the pre-64 rifles; they were never made in any of the WSM chamberings! Regards, Bill.
Bill: I'm glad a person with your expertise chimed in on this. I'd take the pre-64 every time and have over 50 years hard service from one that I own. As for barrel quality I've always found the pre-64 barrels to be very good, as good as any manufactured in their time and better than most overall.
I certainly am no expert and would put my trust into a qualified gunsmith's opinion rather than all those....well, you know what. Anyways, as recently as yesterday, I have it from a gunsmith whom I hold in high esteem to stay clear of any mod. 70 made in the year and a half before Winchester closed up shop. Good enough for me, advise well taken. 
Well, there you go..Hard to argue with Bills experience with working with rifles!!
Leeper said:
Bill, what were the circumstances that the bolt handles came off?
.
Before reading this thread I was holding my very nice Mdl 70 Classic 300WSM rifle, built by none other than Bill Leeper.
I've owned, shot and collected pre-64 Model 70's for most of my life, and I've never seen or heard of any of the issues some of you guys are talking about.
The pre-64 Model 70 represents a high point in North American gun making. Yes -- they are the "Rifleman's Rifle". -Never have I seen one that someone had worn out. They were a hand made, hand fitted, precission made regular production rifle. Time and modern expenses just caught up with Winchester by 1963. By 1964 it was Human Nature to want more for less. Most expected to be paid top buck for their own labor, but did not expect to have to pay that in return for what they wanted. So began the "Stamp, Push and Press" technology.
I've owned, shot and hunted with both post 64's --- the push feed and the CRF. They were okay, I guess, but I didn't really care for them. Didn't care much for the stocks, the skinny buggers had a kick that was rude. I can shoot my pre-64 375 H&H, 338 Win Mag, 300 H&H and love the straight back kick; but I shoot a post 64 30-06 and the kick pis+ses me off. Also the triggers on the post 64 are made from castings instead of machined, hardened chrome molley winchester proof steel. Therefore the sear and trigger doesn't give that crisp, light pull. The pre-64 trigger pull is crisp, like bitting down on cold cellery.
One post 64 M70 30-06, I had, scared the hell out of me one time hunting. My newbie nephew was admiring my rifle and asked what a three position safety was, so I flipped the safety off with my thumb and the rifle fired. Usually if I was to take a shot I would ease off the safety. When I returned home I stripped the rifle down and inspected the trigger and sear. The trigger, being made of casting, had rounded off and when the safety was let go the trigger just slid right over the sear. I repaired the trigger and sear with a fine file and a hard Arkansa Stone. I already had two pre-64 30-06's in my collection; a pre-war and a post war, but didn't want to take a chance on damaging them on a hunt. So I bought another pre-64 30-06 that had a couple of scratches and bluing wear and made that my hunting rifle. Took both post 64's to the next gun show and sold them.
The cracked receiver story, I'ved never heard before. Did hear about the early Spingfield 03's from Rock Island and Springfield Armouries. These were WW I rifles made with the single heat treated proceedure. Also, the 30-06 cartridge when first put out didn't carry the punch it does today.
The bolt stop and bolt release on the pre-64 M70's work just fine for me. In fact, these rifles in my opinion are the best. Check out "Guns International" or "Guns America" to see what these pre-64's are really worth.
Back before 1964, these M70's were a production rifle and used as such with lots of them surviving in excellent condition despite the useage.. They weren't a collector's piece back then.
There's beauty in simplicity -- just like a natural Pretty Girl. No need for cheap decorations and frills. The quality is already there.
---------------------------------
The pre-64 Model 70 represents a high point in North American gun making. Yes -- they are the "Rifleman's Rifle". -Never have I seen one that someone had worn out. They were a hand made, hand fitted, precission made regular production rifle. Time and modern expenses just caught up with Winchester by 1963. By 1964 it was Human Nature to want more for less. Most expected to be paid top buck for their own labor, but did not expect to have to pay that in return for what they wanted. So began the "Stamp, Push and Press" technology.
I've owned, shot and hunted with both post 64's --- the push feed and the CRF. They were okay, I guess, but I didn't really care for them. Didn't care much for the stocks, the skinny buggers had a kick that was rude. I can shoot my pre-64 375 H&H, 338 Win Mag, 300 H&H and love the straight back kick; but I shoot a post 64 30-06 and the kick pis+ses me off. Also the triggers on the post 64 are made from castings instead of machined, hardened chrome molley winchester proof steel. Therefore the sear and trigger doesn't give that crisp, light pull. The pre-64 trigger pull is crisp, like bitting down on cold cellery.
One post 64 M70 30-06, I had, scared the hell out of me one time hunting. My newbie nephew was admiring my rifle and asked what a three position safety was, so I flipped the safety off with my thumb and the rifle fired. Usually if I was to take a shot I would ease off the safety. When I returned home I stripped the rifle down and inspected the trigger and sear. The trigger, being made of casting, had rounded off and when the safety was let go the trigger just slid right over the sear. I repaired the trigger and sear with a fine file and a hard Arkansa Stone. I already had two pre-64 30-06's in my collection; a pre-war and a post war, but didn't want to take a chance on damaging them on a hunt. So I bought another pre-64 30-06 that had a couple of scratches and bluing wear and made that my hunting rifle. Took both post 64's to the next gun show and sold them.
The cracked receiver story, I'ved never heard before. Did hear about the early Spingfield 03's from Rock Island and Springfield Armouries. These were WW I rifles made with the single heat treated proceedure. Also, the 30-06 cartridge when first put out didn't carry the punch it does today.
The bolt stop and bolt release on the pre-64 M70's work just fine for me. In fact, these rifles in my opinion are the best. Check out "Guns International" or "Guns America" to see what these pre-64's are really worth.
Back before 1964, these M70's were a production rifle and used as such with lots of them surviving in excellent condition despite the useage.. They weren't a collector's piece back then.
There's beauty in simplicity -- just like a natural Pretty Girl. No need for cheap decorations and frills. The quality is already there.
---------------------------------
Gatehouse,
In those cases where the bolt handles came loose, the cause was a faulty silver solder joint due to a poor fit of the handle onto the knurled extension and insufficient solder. I suspect the problem surfaced when more than normal force was used on the handle.
For about 15 years, altogether, I did Winchester warranty work. In this time, I saw a half dozen loose handles. Not an epidemic! I mention it only because it seems appropriate to the discussion. Regards, Bill.
In those cases where the bolt handles came loose, the cause was a faulty silver solder joint due to a poor fit of the handle onto the knurled extension and insufficient solder. I suspect the problem surfaced when more than normal force was used on the handle.
For about 15 years, altogether, I did Winchester warranty work. In this time, I saw a half dozen loose handles. Not an epidemic! I mention it only because it seems appropriate to the discussion. Regards, Bill.
