Questions About Pre-64 Win M70 Supergrade

[Jaywalker]

I just had a friend lend me his late father's pre-64 Winchester Model 70 Supergrade in .30-'06 (SN 320XXX) that is in "interesting" shape. The stock has a cheekpiece, but no Monte Carlo comb - it looks much like today's M70 Classic LT Super Grade.

The first thing you notice is the large carved bear on the bolt side of the buttstock. It's really nicely done, and is proof that people value things differently than I do.

Question: The next thing is that this is really a heavy rifle - 10 pounds 1 ounce with a 4X28 scope - call it 9.25 pounds without scope, at an esimate. Does that sound right?

Question: The next thing is the black fore-end tip. Is that normal? I ask, because it doesn't seem to be up to the quality of the rest of the wood fitting. There's a gap between it and the fore-end.

Question: The receiver is a matte finish - is that normal? It contrasts with the deep blue of the nearly perfect barrel - I wonder if he had that done.

I wouldn't want to carry this heavy beast very far, but you can really see and feel the quality. The bolt throw and the safety are smooth, and the trigger very nice. They were men in those days.

Jaywalker

 

[BigG]

I know the receiver on my 375 H&H was matte compared to the polished blue of the bbl and bolt handle. The other stuff sounds aftermarket, bear, etc.

 

[Wildalaska]

Matte receiver is correct

Wildpre64himselfAlaska

 

[Steve Smith]

Matte action blued barrel is correct...lol

 

[Jaywalker]

Good info, thanks. How about the heavy weight and black fore-end tip?

Jaywalker

 

[Steve Smith]

Weight is weird. Maybe something in the stock or a heavy barrel?

Fore-end is hard to imagine...need pics.

 

[BigG]

They did make a varmint bbl, IIRC, but 30/06 is not a typical caliber for that imho. Also the Super Grade - was it marked on the floorplate? I saw them like that. If the bbl were original it would be marked -Winchester Proof Steel-

In short, if you are thinking of that as a collectible, I would be leery. It sounds like a homebrewed job and may be nice but Winnies are supposed to be stock to be valuable. If you want a shooter, it may be great. HTH

 

[Jaywalker]

No, it isn't for me - the owner has a sentimental attachment to it. He does want to shoot it, though, so I'm just looking it over for him.

The weight is weird. I stuck it on my scale and came up with 10 pounds 7 ounces, then I took off the mil sling and got it down a little. He also left with me a Remington 03-A3, and it only weighs 9 pounds 3 ounces. (I'm not used to a Springfield feeling light...) OTOH, the floorplate screw is buggered up - he may have added lead weights to it for all I know. It would reduce recoil, wouldn't it? I'll measure the barrel this evening.

It has "Super" on the floorplate. Funny thing is, the floorplate and the trigger guard have a different hue. The FP is "blue," while the trigger guard is kind of "brown." Doesn't look at all rusty, though.

I'll do pics tonight if I can get my throughput above 16K - (bad telephone line - they're fixing it.)

Jaywalker

 

[BigG]

I hope one of the local eggspurts - Jim Keenan or Old Fuff sees this and responds. They can help you pin this thing down faster that a cat can lick her ---, um, they are very knowledgeable about older classic firearms.

 

[Jaywalker]

I'll post the pics - let's see if I can make them appear, magically -

 

[Jaywalker]

Try again.

 

[Jaywalker]

Last pic...

 

[Dan Morris]

Bear was not stock, black tip was. Floor plate had the words Super Grade on it. Weight sounds about 3lbs heavy.Possible weights in the stock? As to trigger, I don't have a pre 64 that is over 4.5. It may have dried crud in it thusly making it a hard trigger.
Just my scant observations from the ones I have.
Dan

 

[Jaywalker]

Trigger surprised me at 5.5 pounds - it feels much better than that.

Jaywalker

 

[Steve Smith]

You are asking us to verify the value of the gun, and it may have "issues," but you give us a picture of the damned bear? I don't care about the bear! Let's see the issues that need to be discussed!

 

[Jaywalker]

Steve,

Nah, I don't need a valuation, thanks, since it isn't for sale. I was mostly interested in whether my friend's Dad had altered it in some way (other than the bear, of course - he had that done in the 50's). I now know the black fore-end tip was standard, and the receiver should be (and is) matte, so most of my issues are resolved. The weight remains open, but I'm not sure I want to take it out of the stock to look for lead inserts, so it may remain open. At least I know it's not supposed to weigh 9+ pounds, so I'm ahead of the curve.

There should be one other pic in addition to the bear. I had a lot of problems posting these last night. For some reason THR froze up multiple times, so I could only upload two of the four pics. The only other pic I could get the site to accept had less detail than I would like, but at least it wasn't the bear!

The scope you see is a Bushnell Banner, BTW. Maybe he never heard of higher rings and chose this one as the only one that would clear the rear sight. It's certainly well-loved - used for fifty years and not abused (again, except for the bear!)

I'll try to post again this evening asnd see if I have any more luck with the site. I've never had these problems before, and I've always been able to upload pics, then link the image in so the pic appears in the thread and doesn't have to be downloaded - I couldn't get past step one last night.

Jaywalker

Edited to change "front sight" to the proper "rear sight."

 

[Jim Watson]

My 1958 standard '06 weighs 9 lb 2 oz with an old steel Weaver.
A Super Grade would have fancier, heavier wood, but a pound? I doubt it. There may be some lead in the stock somewhere. Where does it balance? Mine balances about the floorplate hinge.

Serial no looks like a 1954 model.

 

[Steve Smith]

His rings are higher than mine...

Personally I want my scope as low as I can get it.

 

[Jaywalker]

I'll check the balance point this evening, but it's not too far away from normal or I'd have noticed it. If lead weights are present, they'd likely be in both the fore-end and butt.

These rings are pretty low - the objective of the small Banner barely clears the rear sight. I suspect the scope was chosen with that in mind, and even so, required some fore- and aft- adjusting.

The sling attachment points are not the simple screw-in post we see today, either. They're kind of an elaborate affair, with cut-outs to either side. I've never spent much time looking at pre-64's, so this is a kick for me.

Jaywalker

 

[Steve Smith]

The estimation of 1954 is probably right. My M70 is from 51 and I believe it's s/n is in the 100K range.

 

[Jaywalker]

The balance point is 1.5 inches behind the floorplate bolt.

 

[Jim Watson]

Sounds like it has ballast in the butt, then.
Call me wimp, but I would want something in a .30-06 I was going to shoot more than carry.

 

[Jaywalker]

Nope, no ballast under the steel floorplate. I'll look under the grip cap next.

Jaywalker

 

[Jim Watson]

I doubt there is a pound under the grip cap. The difference might just be in the denser walnut of the Supergrade and a tendency of the company to understate the weight of a rifle. But it does seem like a lot.

 

[Jaywalker]

I'm hoping it's 18 carat gold. I'll keep looking.

Jaywalker