1964 Remington 700 versus 1950 Winchester Model 70

[Paradiddle]

The price is obviously different but I'm curious about the quality of the early Remingtons - I've read they weren't the "best".

I'm buying a first time hunting rifle. Understand that I'm in Cali so prices will be higher then rest of the free states - and I don't want or need a giant debate on price.

First let me state that my first choice of caliber is a .270 but 30-06 is a CLOSE second.

Rifle 1
1950 Winchester Model 70
.270
Stock has been modified slightly but still looks good - not collectable
has factory iron sites
metal is clean
"a shooter - groups about 1.5" at 100 yards with Wolf .270" per seller
original Redfield rings, and old 4x Weaver - will need replacing
some ammo and brass
$800ish

Rifle 2
1964 Remington Model 700 ADL
30-06
Stock rifle - metal is very clean
trigger job
"an accurate rifle that shoots great" per seller
Leupold Rifleman 3x9 scope in Leupold rings
some ammo, brass, and a reloading die
$500ish

Obviously the value is with the Remington because it wears a $200 scope that I can use. I like both the 700 and the 70 that I've handled and I'm somewhat torn on the action - I like the idea of CRF, but since I've never hunted it's not a requirement.

How was the quality of the early 700s? I realize the 70 is in the PRIME years for Winchester so I'm assuming it's what a model 70 should be.

I've not handled either rifle yet.

Thanks,

Jeff

 

[glockman19]

No contest. You want a .270 and IMHO the Winchester is a better rifle.

 

[Horsemany]

I have to agree with glockman. Pre 64's are as classic as an American rifle can be. Even if it's just a shooter remember the pre-64 action is worth $500 just for a fine custom gun. There were only 600,000 total Pre 64's made from 1936 to 1963. The earlier pre-64's especially before the mid 50's were works of art. If you buy and de-stock it you'll see what I mean. You could drive fenceposts with the bottom of the receiver.

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

The Winchester, hands down.

I just gave my dad's rifle to my son, a five digit serial number pre-64 Model 70 that dad re-chambered to 300 Win Mag in 1964. The finish on the wood is long gone, and dad's handprint is worn into the barrel where he held it.

Lots more elk left in that rifle. "Grandpa's Elk Medicine".

 

[Slamfire]

Get the pre 64.

There is no advantage to buying a 1964 vintage ADL over a 2008 ADL. No collector advantage (I think), no technology advantage. The M700 is a excellent design in its own right, but they have been made, in one variant or another (M721) since the late 40's.

But a pre 64, they ain't been made since, 1964.

 

[Gordon]

The solid bolt Model 70s were the best rifle ever made IMHO.

 

[freonr22]

any thoughts about a model 54 to a model 70?

 

[Horsemany]

Model 54's are well made guns as well. The biggest difference is the bottom metal is machined and very well made on the M70. The 54 used thin bent metal. The 54's have been largely ignored by collectors but they are very nice classic guns IMO.

 

[HPJeep]

Go for the Winchester. It'll always be more collectable as times goes on. You can find original stocks if you want to keep it factory correct.

 

[10X]

Go for the pre '64 Model 70.

 

[Art Eatman]

Unless that old Weaver has gotten sorta dim from faded coating, those old K4s always worked. The main drawback for my "druthers" is the crosshairs; odds are they're not the duplex setup which I prefer.

 

[oregonhunter]

get the model 70, you won't regret it.

 

[japaneezy]

I have a pre 64 .270 model 70. I love it. Solid as a rock. People tell me not to shoot it because it's semi-rare and a collectors item. I say screw it. They weren't designed to be hung on a wall or stuffed in a closet.

 

[SwampWolf]

I think the nicest, standard factory centerfire bolt-action rifle Remington ever made was the Model 725. Would love to have one, no matter the caliber!