Buying Winchester M70 30.06??? Help!

[DerbyDale]

I'm looking at buying my first bolt action hunting rifle. I'm not a hunter, but may someday. Right now I just want to be able to hit a target at 400yrs. So that means I need a accurate rifle with a scope and bi-pod. I already have a 1903A3 in 30.06 so I want this rifle to be 30.06 as well.

I've been reading that the Winchester Model 70 is one of the most popular bolt action rifles ever made. I think I want this rifle in 30.06 with a synthetic stock. Trouble is when I look at prices, I see them range from $600 to $1000. What is the difference?


The Remmington 700 looks to be cheaper. Is it just as good?

Also... What is a good scope that won't break the bank for 200-400yards?

 

[jmr40]

On a budget this is the rifle I'd buy.

http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/catalog/detail.asp?family=001C&mid=535114

Actual prices in a store will be around $550 or so. It is the same rifle, just with a cheaper stock. The stock will work fine for most uses.

This is my personal favorite.



http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/catalog/detail.asp?family=001C&mid=535110

Once again, same rifle, but in stainless, with a fluted barrel to reduce weight, and a better quality stock. Actual gunstore prices between $800-$900. I bought mine used for $700.

I'm of the opinion that Winchester is making the best USA made rifle at the present time.

Any quality 3-9X40 scope will do what you need. There is no need for anything bigger. Right now for under $200 the Vortex Diamondback is the best scope for the money.

http://swfa.com/Vortex-3-9x40-Diamondback-Rifle-Scope-P11237.aspx

Nikon, Burris, Redfield also make good scopes that sell for right around $200, but the Vortex compares closer to scopes in the $400 range. The Nikon Prostaff and Redfield retail for around $150 and are the cheapest I'd recommend. Anything less is probably wasted money in the long run and for just $50 more you can get a far, far better scope.

 

[eastbank]

i shoot a rem 700 in 3006 with a leupold 3x9-40 AO,and with my reloads with imr 4350 and a 165 nosler BT bullet it will group 3.5-4 inches at 400 yds from a good rest and i would shoot at a standing deer at that range. i am going to check out 125-130gr nosler BT bullets to see how they group as i was given about 800 of them. eastbank.

 

[joed]

I own Remington and Winchester bolt action rifles. I have even owned Savage rifles but sold them off and don't know if I'd buy another. Given a choice between the current Remington and Winchester rifles I'd pick the Winchester. I have nothing against Remington I just think Winchester is currently building a better rifle.

My advice is do not cheap out on the stock. That is my complaint with Remington, they are putting cheap, worthless stocks on the lower end rifles. My last Remington was picked up cheaply but right from the start I had to order another stock. Sorry to see Winchester is following that trend. I'm a believer in free floated barrels on bolt rifles, go this route and you won't regret it.

 

[USSR]

I think I want this rifle in 30.06 with a synthetic stock. Trouble is when I look at prices, I see them range from $600 to $1000. What is the difference?

At those prices, you're looking in the wrong place, friend. Suggest you consider a slightly used rifle. Winchester made a lot of synthetic stocked Model 70's, and most used hunting rifles have been shot very little. Check out GunBroker.com to see what is available.

Don

 

[Lee D]

Howa rifle and Nikon scope...great combo for the money

 

[sage5907]

When I think about my experiences with a rifle the safety is the most important item on the rifle and for that reason only I would buy a Model 70 Winchester. Their safety is second to none. The Model 70 safety locks the firing pin instead of the trigger. You can cycle cartridges through the chamber with the safety on. In the rear position the safety locks the bolt handle down so it can't be accidentally pushed open. All great features.

If I was wanting to buy a new Model 70 I would look at the Featherweight. Like USSR says above though there is no reason to buy a new rifle. Some of the best buys are in used guns on GunBroker.

I wouldn't let a wood stock keep me from buying a particular rifle. McMillan makes a great Model 70 Monte Carlo composite stock that is a drop-in model that can be purchased when you have extra money. They cost over $500 though and can be added in the future.

As to a scope, Leupold makes great quality scopes. I like the dual dovetail mounts with a matt finish. Either the Leupold Vari X 3 or European in 3 to 9 power would be great. Select a 40 MM objective lense. BW

 

[mdauben]

I've been reading that the Winchester Model 70 is one of the most popular bolt action rifles ever made. I think I want this rifle in 30.06 with a synthetic stock. Trouble is when I look at prices, I see them range from $600 to $1000. What is the difference?

Mechanically, I think they should all be pretty much the same. There are features like barrel fluting, stainless steel, etc. that add to the cost. If all you are concerned about is a good, qulaity, rifle, the cheapest M70 is probably just as good as the most expensive for your purposes.

The Remmington 700 looks to be cheaper. Is it just as good?

Many people make a major deal out of minor differences in the mechanics of the two guns but lots of people swear by Remmington and the 700 is a very popular gun with both hunters and marksmen.

If money is an issue, you might also want to consider a Savage rifle from their 111/114/116 lines (not the entry level AXIS line). Their guns tend to be a bit less expensive than either Winchester or Remmington, and have a well deserved reputation for accuracy right out of the box.

Also... What is a good scope that won't break the bank for 200-400yards?

Probably the most common "hunting" scope is 3-9x40 and this will probably serve for most hunters, although 4-12x40 are probably a close second. Nikon and Leupold both make excellent scopes like this in the $200-300 range. There are cheaper scopes available from other makers, but personally I think its false economy to put a $50 scope on a $700 rifle.

Target shooters sometimes like more powerful scopes with 50mm objectives and maximum powers of 14X or even 20x. Such are generally more expensive, larger and heavier all of which count against them on a hunting gun but are moot points in a range gun. If you think you might like to use the gun for hunting at some point, I'd go with the "hunting" scope.

 

[jmr40]

My advice is do not cheap out on the stock.

The only problem is that virtually none of the rifles in current production offer a quality synthetic stock. Remington, Ruger, Winchester, Savage, Weatherby, all of them are low quality. The good news is that they still seem to shoot well enough. I use quality aftermarket stocks on all my guns and have never noted an improvement in accuracy. I change to get a stock that looks better, fits me better, is much stronger, and is considerably lighter

A $1,000 Kimber uses the only true quality synthetic out there and is actually a bargain since it would cost you at least $550 to get an aftermarket stock of that quality.

The B&C stock Winchester uses is probably OK, but is 1/2-3/4 lb heavier than most of the better aftermarket stocks and is quite chunky and thick.

I run McMillan Edge stocks on all of my serious hunting rifles, but also have a couple with Brown Precision and High-Tech stocks. There are 2 ways to approch this.

#1, buy the rifle with the good walnut stock and then sell it to recover some of the costs of a quality aftermarket stock. #2, and the way I've found to be the most cost effective, just buy the gun with the cheapest stock and replace it with a better quality aftermarket stock. Even if you trash the cheap stock you'll be money ahead instead of buying the more expensive gun, and you can often sell them for $50-$100.

If for some reason you decide to sell the rifle, put the factory stock back on it and sell the rifle and aftermarket stock separately. If you buy a McMillan you will have no trouble selling it, and often very near the same price you paid. They are custom built with a 3-4 month wait. I bought 3 of my 4 McMillans used to be able to get them NOW instead of wait. Saved a few dollars over ordering new, but not a huge amount.

 

[sage5907]

The Winchester 70 was manufactured with two types of actions. The pre 64 model is a high quality controlled feed and is preferred for the quality. From 1964 for several years they sold a push feed model that is similar to the Model 700 Remington. In later years they again started manufacturing a controlled feed version that also should be good. I personally prefer the controlled feed model. I looked a GunBroker today and there are 18 featherweight rifles for sale from new to used and both types of actions. BW

 

[joed]

The only problem is that virtually none of the rifles in current production offer a quality synthetic stock. Remington, Ruger, Winchester, Savage, Weatherby, all of them are low quality.

Interesting, as a few friends and I have purchased the Remington 700 SPS rifles. The barrel was not free floating and used pressure points for bedding. All 3 of us sprang for B&C stocks and have seen improvements of at least 1/2".

I will admit the Savage 10fp I owned had a flimsy free floated stock but shot OK. I've had no complaints with any Winchester synthetic stock I've owned either.

 

[Smith357]

The older 72 to mid 80s push feed Winchesters are quite possibly one of the best "Bang for the Buck" rifles out there. Everyone who wants a Winchester wants the Mauser extractor. I got my 1974 M70 with Leupold 3x9 for $450 used and it shoots right at MOA. Plenty good for a lightweight hunting rifle that get carried all day, fit and finish is far better than any of the sub $800 budget rifle offerings. Another viable option is a sporterized Mauser or 03, they are good rugged rifles that can be had cheap because everyone wants one in military dress. If you are worried more about punching holes in paper very close together then buy a new rifle, they are good for that, if you want to put meat on the table those older rifles have been just fine for harvesting game for years.

 

[USSR]

The older 72 to mid 80s push feed Winchesters are quite possibly one of the best "Bang for the Buck" rifles out there. Everyone who wants a Winchester wants the Mauser extractor.

+1. While the CRF rifles get all the glory, the Winchester pushfeeds are really nice. I've had custom rifles built on both actions, and the pushfeeds give up nothing to the CRF rifles.

Don

 

[rcmodel]

I might mention that your 03A3 is perfectly capable of hitting a target at 400 yards if you are.

With open sights, without a bi-pod.

rc

 

[ms6852]

I own a 30 year old rifle that is a model 110c, it's a Savage. This rifle does not come with the accu-trigger but I can hit milk jugs all day long at 600 yds. My rifle is a 30-06. The point I am trying to make is that your answers will vary because everyone has a different brand and most people will be brand lovers.

The reality is this, regardless of price or manufacturing practices most rifles you purchase, out of the box, this rifles will shoot minute of angle at 100 yds with the correct ammo. Advances in metallurgy and technology makes them accurate and possible. The problem with this statement is most shooters are not minute of angle shooters. Buy the rifle that feels right for you. If it is in your price range buy it. If it is not, be patient, wait a few extra months and save, than buy it. Rifles are like women, they all feel different in your arms, go handle a few of them...(rifles), and see which one you like.

 

[gamestalker]

I would go with any one of the top names in production rifles, Remington, Savage, Winchester are all very nice actions and can be had for $400 - $1000 depending on how many bells and whistles you want. One thing I would consider more inportant than who makes it, and that is the stock. Synthetic stocks on standard production rifles are garbage. So what ever you decide on, get it with a wooden stock. I have a newer Rem. 700 SPS with a synthetic stock and it is junk, absolute junk!

So far as optics are concerned, I would buy a Leupold 3x9x40 Hunter for just over $200. I honestly don't think $200 will buy any better glass than what Leupold has to offer. Granted, there are lots of quality optics now days available in the $200 - $300 range, but I have a great deal more confidence in a company that has been getting it right for as many decades as Leupold has. And there customer service is the standard by which all others compare too.

 

[Kachok]

Super accurate and on the cheap, there is a word for that, it is spelled S.A.V.A.G.E. Owned many of them and they would all shoot like a dream. Tikka makes a hella tight shooter too. Avoid the Remingtons, their build quality has gone to $#!^ recently. I won't touch another one until they fire their whole QC staff and start over. The Model 70 never has been known as a match grade rifle, but is very well built and is more accurate then you would ever need in the feild. They also have the best action this side of Sako/Tikka.

 

[CB900F]

Fella's;

"The Model 70 never has been known as a match grade rifle". Uh, I seem to remember that a fella name of Hathcock, Carlos, one each USMC in color, won the Wimbledon Cup at Camp Perry in 1965. There were something around 3000 competitors that year. I do believe he used a Winchester model 70 in .30-06 to do it.

900F

 

[Ridgerunner665]

The old M70's were "hit or miss" on accuracy...no pun intended, LOL.

The new ones...I have 2 of them (one actually is my sons, but I am doing the load development)...I only have about 60 rounds or so through each rifle but with ammo they like both are sub-MOA at 100 yards, even with factory ammo (Winchester Power Max Bonded 180 grain)...and even better with reloads using Nosler 168 Ballistsic Tips.

I haven't had time to work with the rifles much...but it didn't take long to notice that they WILL shoot.

IIRC...they cost around $680 each (out the door, tax and all)...$$$ well spent IMO.

EDITED TO ADD: These rifles are both the Ultimate Shadow model in 30-06.

Scopes...my son bought a Nikon Buckmasters 4-12x40 SF with a Mil-Dot reticle for his but I didn't mount it before I had to return to work. We both checked out the Buckmasters vs. the Monarch and I swear the Buckmasters appeared to be the better scope (better glass, the clicks felt better, even the turret covers felt better)...it wasn't cheap, but I noticed last night that both Cabelas and Midway has these and many other scopes on sale for reasonable prices...I haven't decided on what scope I want for mine yet...I do want 4-12x40 and preferably SF too, so I might end up with the same scope (minus the Mil-Dot reticle).

 

[sage5907]

There is a reason the Winchester Model 70 was called the Rifleman's Rifle. For the average rifleman the action design was far superior to anything that was built before or has been built since. When I read some of the comments it proves the point that experience can be shallow. I bought my first Model 70 in 1968 and I was lucky to have found something early in life that was to serve me well. I have owned Remington, Weatherby, Sako, FN Mauser and Browning but no other rifle can compare to the Winchester Model 70 for quality, accuracy, dependability and ease of use in the field. No other rifle! BW

 

[Kachok]

Fella's;

"The Model 70 never has been known as a match grade rifle". Uh, I seem to remember that a fella name of Hathcock, Carlos, one each USMC in color won the Wimbledon Cup at Camp Perry in 1965. There were something around 3000 competitors that year. I do believe he used a Winchester model 70 in .30-06 to do it.

900F

Carlos shot matches with a custom 300 Win if I remember correctly. Don't get me wrong, I am not calling the Winchester inaccurate either, I want one myself, but I am not expecting out of the box accuracy to beat my Savages, but still be more then adaquate for hunting. Accuracy in the feild is much more about the shooter then the rifle, even a 2 MOA rifle is acceptable out to 300yd if the shooter can hold it right. Out of the box I would expect the 70 would go for 1-1.5 MOA, and with well tuned handloads I would expect in the .75 range, better then I can shoot proped on a tree limb for sure.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Out of the box accuracy...with reloads, shooting off my Primos shooting sticks in the sitting position (prone would likely tighten it up a little)



The rifle is an FN made Winchester model 70 Ultimate Shadow in 30-06...





I absolutely HATE the factory stock...its too thin everywhere, doesn't feel right to me...I have a McMillan ordered for it...its McMillans "Winchester Supergrade" stock...that will likely help accuracy a little too. These new Winchesters WILL shoot...I believe both mine and my sons will consistently deliver .5 MOA when I'm done with them (which will be in about 12 weeks...when the stocks arrive) and a little more load tweaking.

I also plan on upgrading my scope to a 4-12x side focus (probably a Nikon)

This isn't the only Winchester M70 I've ever owned (the other is an older Safari in 458 Win. Mag...never shot it much), but it is the first one I've gotten familiar with...and based on that I've decided this...The M70 is a better action than the M700 because its easier to disassemble the bolt, the extractor IS better, accuracy is just as good, the safety is better, the MOA trigger is every bit as good as the X-Mark, the M70 feeds smoother (more noticeable in short actions), ejection is more user friendly...just to name a few...

Its reputation as "The Riflemans Rifle" is well deserved in my opinion!

 

[Robert]

I have got to get my new M70 to the range. Stupid work, always in the way of my fun...

 

[Kachok]

Nice cannot say anything bad about a factory rifle shooting 3/4".

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I have got to get my new M70 to the range...

Which one did you get?