Pre-1964 Winchester Model 70

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are the pre-1964 Winchester Model 70 rifles worth what people are asking and paying? There's a noticeable bump in price with pre-1964's. And if you think they are, why? I've been looking for a Winchester Model 70 270 cal. for a new deer rifle for white tail in PA.
Welcome to THR, rambo2_981!:)
Not to be a wise guy, but yeah, if people are paying what other people are asking for certain rifles (or anything else for that matter) then that's what those rifles are "worth.";)
Not to me, however.:D I have a pre-64 Model 70, and my wife has a post-94 Model 70, and I like my wife's Model 70 better. Both of our Model 70s are highly customized, but the fit and finish of my wife's rifle was better than mine to begin with, and it has a "smoother" action and better trigger.
I guess a person could claim my pre-64 Model 70 has more "nostalgic" value (I bought it way back when) but I'm more into "usefulness" than "nostalgia" when it comes to most of my guns - if you know what I mean.
At any rate, if I was looking for another deer rifle, a current production Model 70 Winchester would be near the top of my list of rifle choices. The fact is, if you've seen a some of my other posts in the last few months, you know I'm considering getting myself a new .257 Weatherby for deer and pronghorn hunting. However, I sure do wish the .257 Weatherby was chambered in a current production, stainless, synthetic stocked, Model 70 Winchester. As far as I'm concerned, that would be "the cat's meow.":D
Edited to add: don't just take my word for it, rambo2_981. Run some searches about pre-64 Model 70s versus current production Model 70s. You'll see that I'm not the only hunter that likes current production Model 70s better.
BTW - I'm NOT talking about post '64, but pre-94 Model 70s. If you gave me a Model 70 that was built between 1964 and 1994, I'd sell it and have a couple of nice dinners out with my wife.;)
 
Last edited:
Eh, maybe. There is a 270 Featherweight Pre 64 at the local Scheele's for a $3k or so. It's not worth it to me. I'd not pay that much for a rifle to drag around while hunting. And as far as accuracy, the new rifles are just as good or better.

Unless you just really want to say I have a Pre 64, or just really need the hand checkered stock, I'd spend the money on a new rifle, good scope, and ammo. Not to mention that some of the early, Win 70 are not stocked to be used with optics. The cheek weld can be terrible with scopes.
 
I have a pre-64 Winchester in 270 Win.

oRK2eYDl.jpg

Its been a good rifle and I have killed a lot of ground hogs, my one and only coyote, and a deer with it. It was given to my father by my grandfather and handed down to me from dad. It has a lot of sentimental value for those reasons.

That said if I did not have that rifle and wanted to buy a 270 Win bolt action rifle for hunting season (not as a collector) I would not bother with seeking out a pre-64 Winchester. There are lots of good makers making Mauser actions that will shoot as well or better than a pre-64 Win. Personally I would skip the Mauser action all together and get a Rem 700 clone but that is another can of worms. You may or may not get a good shooting pre-64 depending on how it was treated by the previous owner(s). But if you buy a new rifle you get a new barrel and that is, assuming you buy from a reputable maker, going to result in the highest probability of it being a solid functioning and better shooting gun with less work on your part to make that happen.

TL;DR: Unless a pre-64 falls into you lap I would not spend much time looking for it and more time research current production guns that have the features you want.
 
In 1964 until about 1992 ANY pre-64 sold at a premium. It isn't so much that the rifles made prior to 1964 were better, but Winchester completely redesigned the rifle in 1964 and went with a much less expensive to produce push feed action vs the older Controlled round feed of the original. Many people were willing to pay a premium simply to get a CRF rifle.

The quality of Winchesters after WW-2 was already in decline during the 1950's and early 60's. With manufacturing technology of the day it was much more expensive to produce the original CRF rifle. Winchester was losing sales to Remington, Savage and others who were producing cheaper rifles. Going to PF actions allowed Winchester to compete.

But modern CNC machining made it possible to reintroduce CRF Winchesters in 1992 at reasonable prices. That is about the same time Ruger started making true CRF rifles too. Today Kimber is also making them. With the option of buying a modern CRF rifle today that is actually a better rifle than the pre-64's prices SHOULD have dropped on MOST of them. If someone has one made prior to WW-2 it has some collectible value. As do some post war rifles in rare chamberings or configurations. But a common 270 or 30-06 made in the 1950's and prior to 1964 is just another old, but nice rifle. But it shouldn't sell at a premium.

The problem is that lots of folks haven't gotten the memo. Lots of sellers asking premium prices for common rifles and there are just enough folks who don't understand the history who will pay those prices. If I had a common pre-64 with family history I'd never sell it. But I'd not buy one either, especially at the premium prices some ask.

If someone is interested in a CRF rifle the Winchester "Classics" made between 1992 and 2006 are some of the best Winchesters ever made. Other than very minor design differences they are about 99% the same as the pre-64's and generally better made and more accurate. Plus they cost less.

Even the current FN produced Winchesters made in Portugal are a pretty darn nice CRF rifle. The only very minor complaint is that they didn't retain the original Winchester trigger on the FN rifles. The old trigger is the most rugged, simple, reliable trigger ever made. They usually needed a little work to be refined, but could be very nice. The newer trigger is smoother out of the box, but not as rugged and simple for hard use.
 
The pre 64s have become a collector gun now .They were made with high quality materials, buy americans in america .The steel,wood ,finish was the best in its day .It is like anything else, you get what you pay for. They were not a cheap gun when new.It boils down to history and quality .You can go buy a new Chorvette or you can get a 67 stingray.I will take the 67 Stingray over the new any day, but thats just me!
 
They are worth it to the guys old enough to remember using them back in the 50's and 60s and to their sons. There are as good or better shooters for less money. That premium is not due primarily to performance, more due to sentimental reasons, but that is not to say that they are not good shooters. They are. I have good memories popping milk jugs at 100 yds off hand with the open sights of a Model 70 30-06.
So I would say you could spend less if you are looking for just a good shooter.
 
They are worth it to the guys old enough to remember using them back in the 50's and 60s and to their sons.
Not necessarily. I'm 73 and I already said I like my wife's post-94 Model 70 (built in about 2000 I think) better than my pre-64 Model 70. As a matter of fact, I like my wife's post-94 Model 70 better than the pre-64 Model 70 that one of our grandsons inherited from his other grandfather.
That premium is not due primarily to performance, more due to sentimental reasons, but that is not to say that they are not good shooters.
I'll go along with that. "Sentimental reasons" are the only reasons I hang on to my pre-64 Model 70. It's a "good shooter" alright, but it's not as good as my custom .308 Norma from Montana Rifle Company. "Good" is relative.
BTW, my Montana Rifle Company rifle is basically a "beefed up" pre-64 Model 70 - controlled round feed, claw extractor, 3-position side-swing safety and everything.;)
 
As a shooting or hunting rifle, no. Some of the newer model 70’s are better. Are they worth it to collectors, yes or else it would not sell. I choose to buy a very nice post 64 for my hunting rifle.
 
Pre 64 at the local Scheele's for a $3k
:what:

For something to take to the range, shoot 10 rounds, then put back in the safe til next time a pre-64 may be a better investment. (But not if it takes 3 grand to get a foot in the door.)
The premium is more due to collector interest than functionality or accuracy.
 
$3k for a pre 64 FWT is ridiculous unless it’s a rare variant of some kind. Most pre 64 FWTs are going for about $1200-$1500. I just picked up a Pre 64 FWT in 06 for $900. It’s in excellent shape except for the butt plate was really beat up. It took me about an hour with some sand paper and fine steel wool to make it presentable again.

Before.

6D93B8E3-0567-4F54-9061-6897EE2E29C3.jpeg

After…

610F346F-3D34-4BA0-974B-3CECA0D41B92.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Are the pre-1964 Winchester Model 70 rifles worth what people are asking and paying? There's a noticeable bump in price with pre-1964's. And if you think they are, why? I've been looking for a Winchester Model 70 270 cal. for a new deer rifle for white tail in PA.
For hunting? No.
As an example of the gunmaker's Art? Yes.
With a pre-64 you're paying collector's prices, not shooter's.
 
This old rifle has really nice wood too! D9F08B6C-AB32-4922-98B6-6F8BBB91640B.jpeg

Is a pre 64 better than a modern Winchester? That’s kind of like comparing a 1966 Fast back mustang to a modern mustang. Pre 64’s are good rifles, they have character, they were hand crafted there was more care and skill involved in their construction. They also all tend to need a good bedding job and some trigger work to make them shoot at or near MOA.

Of course many modern M-70’s do too. But overall you absolutely do not need a pre 64 unless you just want one or are a geek like me and simply love pre 64’s and old M-71’s and such.
 
The best buy for the money right now is a pre 64 Model 70 featherweight 30-06 in very good condition for about $1200. I look for rifles that have a recoil pad installed even if the pad is in poor condition because a replacement Pachmayr Decelerator works really well. When it comes to buying the rifle it's all about the condition of the metal. Featherweight rifles have aluminum bottom metal and even if the paint is scratched and worn it can be easily painted. What people fail to know is that with a modern scope, modern bullets and modern powders these rifles will shoot less then moa. There is a wealth of parts available to change anything that you do not like. Most of the negative comments about these rifles are made by people who know nothing about the rifles. They are a joy to own.
 
Between my father and I, we own factory M70s in 300WM’s and 338WMs, there isn't much difference in load tuned accuracy. It’s a spread from early 70’s, mid 80’s, and a later model CRF. 2/4 are super grade for the wood, not that it matters. They are all 26” long tube factory sporters and 1.5 MOA at very-very best rifles with ammo work. I stress the work or effort and the repeatability isn’t like other rifles I favor. Perhaps more on me. It’s not a rip on Winchester, its reality. Everything is more precise on the internet. Plugging anything into these animals exhibits allot of variation.

On a side note, there is internal ballistic efficiency that becomes appreciated with the 338WM against the parent trio for Win. Bullet mass and exit velocity vs pressure ignoring BC.

I don’t have any practical love with CRF actions. Anything custom I have is DM based and PF is preferred. The real difference is in the extractor, ejector, lockup, the non-circumference external receiver geometry, and recoil lug. There are multiples in the previous statement that define common actions, some are a Win (yes pun). From a speed and reliability standpoint, function vs time must be considered. NO one is demanding CRF, other then parent actions that have it.

Some of these are Winchester wins and some of it is the ironic nature of starting with less more easily making it more (M700). And I love old Winchesters. The last parallel is Savage. Its easy to correct for a factory bolt face with floating lugs. It’s a horrible action to work.
 
Are the pre-1964 Winchester Model 70 rifles worth what people are asking and paying? There's a noticeable bump in price with pre-1964's. And if you think they are, why? I've been looking for a Winchester Model 70 270 cal. for a new deer rifle for white tail in PA.
The shooting public has long been the victim of gun writers Especially the ones that advertised Winchester rifles. The pre-64 is legendary to fans of old time gun writers who created controversy and imaginary benefits to sell the magazines they wrote for and the guns they advertise. This has created a demand for the pre -64 Model 74 and also .270 ammunition. The guns have great lines and function very well. They look like a rifle should. The ammo also works well as hunting ammo at normal ranges. In my opinion they are both vastly over rated but I don't sell magazines. They are nice rifles and enjoy them or hang it on the wall. One of my best friends has a pre-64 model 70 in 300 Holland and Holland. It is a work of art and I admire it greatly. But he shoots a more modern rifle and cartridge and gave to a son that doesn't hunt much as a wall hanger. If you want them they demand a premium. Modern rifles are in most cases more accurate and rugged. But I understand the desire to have one. More as art than a weapon.
 
Are the pre-1964 Winchester Model 70 rifles worth what people are asking and paying? There's a noticeable bump in price with pre-1964's. And if you think they are, why? I've been looking for a Winchester Model 70 270 cal. for a new deer rifle for white tail in PA.
Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them.

So, yes, those pre-1964 Winchester Model 70s are worth those prices to those people, to the benefit of the seller.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top