Pre-1964 Winchester Model 70

Boomholzer said:

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.

Click to expand...

murf said:

pre-64s are hand made, post 63s are cnc made. i can't think of anything else that would explain the premium price paid for the pre-64 guns.

my grandmother's pre-64 270win and my son's post-63 270 win are both well under moa accurate. both had work done on them (trigger, bedding) to get there.

pick one,

murf

Click to expand...

rambo2_981 said:

Thank you all for the really informative, and great responses which is why I come here. I went to a local gun store that has a large GunBroker presence and looked at 5 rifles (two were pre-'64 Winchester 70's, a Remington 700 and a 721 along with a Browning). I then went to the counter and the store manager suggested I consider a Tikka. I ended up buying a new Tikka in 270 Winchester with a Vortex 3-9 scope. There was a significant weight difference with the Tikka being much lighter, and much of our white tail hunting is walking. I still like very much the stocks on the older Winchesters and Remingtons (the Browning was beautiful), but the praticality of it led me toward the much lighter Tikka (I also won't mind as much if I knock the stock against a rock). I'll see how it shoots, but I hear nothing but good things about Tikka. Thanks again!

Click to expand...

.38 Special said:

I'll probably get my "rifle loony" card rescinded for this, but I've rarely seen much of the "quality, handmade, best of everything" in pre-64s. As a young man, I bought into it, but the more of them I handled, the less I was impressed. I'm at the point where I think they generally are good quality hunting rifles, with very reliable and adjustable triggers, but otherwise, nothing terribly impressive. Checkering, wood quality, wood-to-metal fit... they're all fine, but rarely perfect, and often notably imperfect. Collectors, in my opinion, have driven the prices beyond all reason.

If I needed a good rifle, I wouldn't turn down a pre-64 if I found one at my price range - and that still happens on occasion, if you come across one that has been significantly altered, or has a badly refinished stock, or something similar. I wouldn't, though, spend any extra on one in preference of, say, a post 64, or a 700, or even a decent old Savage or Ruger.

Click to expand...