Model 70 featherweight or sporter?

[Rustle in the bushes]

Im trying to pick which new model 70, 30-06 to get. Theres only a difference of 4 oz in weight according to their site- and a difference of 2 inches on the barrel. featherweights at 22" and the sporter is at 24"

Im gonna hunt with this thing eventually but Im also gonna shoot it at the range as I dont even have my license yet. its gonna be my scoped full size rifle that isnt a .22.

Im worried the featherweight might have a thinner barrel and heat up right away, making it a bit lame to shoot at the range. As well- the sporter stock has a raised cheekpiece which is a bit more comfortable.

But the featherweight has classier looks and is a bit more carrieable/quick to point for close shots should they come up.

Does anyone know if the featherweight has a thinner barrel, who is the featherweight for?

 

[Abel]

The FW is for somebody who walks for a couple miles to get to their deer stand. Its not a range toy in the sense that you said. Its a hunting rifle.

 

[sage5907]

I have both and for a 30-06 I would buy the featherweight. It is a serious hunting rifle and will shoot as good at the range as the sporter model. The current featherweight looks to have the same diameter barrel as the sporter, only being 2 inches shorter and shorter length is where most of the weight savings occurs. Only the Jack O'Connor version has the original featherweight contour barrel. A variable power scope and mounts will weigh about a pound so when you get a variable scope and sling on the featherweight it will weigh a little over 8 pounds and that is a really good weight for a hunting rifle. As for the sporter with a cheekpiece, if the sporter feels better and the cheekpiece gives you increased control it would also be a good choice. You would gain about 60 feet per second in velocity with the longer barrel. BW

 

[Clipper]

That schnabbel forend is soooooooo sexy...That's why I bought mine.

 

[murf]

looks like the 4 oz diff is the two inches of barrel. the feather weight compact is four ounces less than the feather weight (it has a 20 inch barrel).

pick the longer barrel imop, puts a little more weight out front. if you want a shorter barrel, you can cut off two inches later.

murf

 

[jmr40]

The Featherweight is a featherweight in name only. When introduced in the 1950's it was a little lighter than guns of it's day, but by todays standards it is no lightweight. Many standard sporters made by almost every other company weigh the same or less than Winchesters Featherweight.

It does have a slightly thinner barrel, but it would be my choice between the 2. The weight and balance are near perfect for most uses. Not too light to shoot well, not too heavy to carry in the mountains. No, it would not be the best choice for shooting 100 rounds a day at the range, but neither would any 30-06.

 

[bushmaster1313]

Get a pre 64 Featherweight
Not really that light, so you can enjoy it at the range too.

This one sold for $848:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=291572729

 

[TurtlePhish]

Get a pre 64 Featherweight

Any Featherweight that rolls out of the factory today will be just as good or better than a pre-64 for all purposes other than collecting. Unless the OP is a collector or plans on selling the gun for profit in the future, buying a pre-64 won't do anything but increase the price paid for the same features.

 

[YJake]

That schnabbel forend is soooooooo sexy...That's why I bought mine.

That's why I bought mine!

Get a pre 64 Featherweight
Not really that light, so you can enjoy it at the range too.

This one sold for $848:

Many would argue that the current production FN made Model 70s are some of the finest guns produced by Winchester since '63, and I would have to agree. Not only that but my gun was right at $600 with tax and I didn't have to "Hunt" for it online.

I have seen some stunning examples of Pre '64 craftsmanship though.

-Jake

 

[skoro]

My Model 70 is a 3 year old featherweight in .243 and it's a heckuva nice rifle. If I was to get another 30-06, I'd likely get another featherweight. The new "FN" Winchesters are excellent.

 

[mshootnit]

I would go for the sporter. If you want a 243 I would go to the featherweight for sure.

 

[oldguy870]

Sporter all the way. The featherweight barrel heats up too quickly. This makes it hard to sight in and shoot decent groups in practice.

4 ounces is NOTHING. NOTHING. My pocket knife weighs more than 4 ounces. Not worth the tradeoff.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

My M70 is the Ultimate Shadow model (30-06)...fully loaded, with sling and scope...it weighs right at 9 pounds.

My scope is heavier than most (Vortex Viper HS, 20 oz.) by about 4 oz.

The best you can do is let the caliber you want be the deciding factor...long action, get the longer barrel...short action, get the shorter barrel.

If you decide you want the FW....Get it in 308 instead of 30-06, because from a 22" barrel they are the same...the 308 just does it with less powder and recoil.

Sent from my DROID RAZR MAXX!

 

[Maverick223]

Many would argue that the current production FN made Model 70s are some of the finest guns produced by Winchester since '63, and I would have to agree.

I disagree. As far as a shooter, I think that the new ones are better than the pre-64s. for the money, they are unbeatable IMO.

If you decide you want the FW....Get it in 308 instead of 30-06, because from a 22" barrel they are the same...the 308 just does it with less powder and recoil.

Even out of a 22in. bbl, the .30-06Spd. still tops the .308Win. by a fair margin, as well as being more versatile with loads (e.g.: heavier bullets). The added 2in. is nice, but the ole '06 gets my vote for the Featherweight or the Sporter. Personally I would like to see the Featherweight stock with the 24in. bbl, but until that happens I'll take the Featherweight and sacrifice a few fps.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Not in my experience...

A 22" 308 will get 2,700-2,750 fps with a 165 grain bullet...

A 22" 30-06 might get 2,800 fps with the same bullet...and if its a Remington barrel it'll do good to match the 308 @ 2,750.

My 24" 30-06 (new Winchester) has a pretty darn good barrel...and it tops out at just over 2,900 fps with 168 grain Ballistic Tips, 2,820 fps with 175 grain Bergers, and 2,850 with 180 grain Ballistic Tips...maxxed out, all bullets are more accurate when loaded a little below max though (at least in my rifle).

The usable difference is NOT all that much...my 22" 308 will sling 168 grain BT's @ 2,750 fps and be darn accurate doing it.

I like the 30-06 too, and the 308...but as I said, short actions go with short barrels.

I can find no good reason to use a bullet over 190 grains in a 30-06...and with a good 165 grain bonded bullet (Accubond), I'd be willing to hunt ANYTHING in the lower 48 states with it (308 or 30-06)

If a person just wants a 22" 30-06...thats fine, they should get one...but if a person wants a good 22" hunting rifle that will do anything the 30-06 will do...they should get a 308.

I'm not a 308 fanboy...I hunt with a 30-06, but it has a 24" barrel and I've spent a small fortune making it just the way I want it...because I plan on using it for some rather expensive hunting trips in the coming years....that is to say, I chose the Sporter in 30-06 over the FW in 308...then made a few changes (McMillan stock, Vortex scope, adjusted trigger to about 3 lbs., just the right sling, just the right stock color, etc.)....

Yeah...I love my 30-06!

 

[Maverick223]

Different barrels will always have different speeds (particularly when sourced from different manufacturers), but I believe that the difference averages about 100-150fps, which makes the .30-06Spd. still worthwhile IMO. At 20in. the difference is less subtle, making the '06 a less desirable option. Again, I prefer a 24, it just isn't an option with that nice Featherweight stock.