Model 70 Winchester stock and bedding project

Status
Not open for further replies.

Wreck-n-Crew

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,516
Location
ohio
Warning pic heavy!

I've been planning this project for a little while and for the past several days I have been working on it. I have a Model 70 with a Synthetic stock and blind mag. I wanted to put a wood stock and bed the action with Devcon. My first thought's were using a Boyd's stock to save a little cash, cut down on workload, etc. But I found an older (90's or older) Walnut stock that needed some love so I went for it.
Stock before...

My first hopes was to be able to touch the stock up but that was not the way to go as I soon realized. It had a few dents and dings but several scratches and needed to be redone. So I stripped the stock and used a wet washcloth and iron to pull out the two dings. They came out well and finished with a bit of sanding.

Next I realized that the adapter I ordered would not work so I had to make one. I grabbed up a Piece of 1/4" aluminum and went to the shop. Tools even there are limited but the work space is much better. I had access to a cut off saw, a bench grinder, and a drill press there. So I cut out an oversized blank and made a pattern of the stock. transferred the outline to have something to go by and got to work grinding, drilling, sanding and buffing.

The plate needed to have a stepped undercut to go under the trigger guard. Then the trigger guard need some slight stepping so that the two pieces could be held on with the center screw. Cme out well and got the fit I needed...

So on to bedding there is not much to tell. Modeling clay, Rotary tool Prep, Bed with Devcon, sit 24hours (only needed 18), and cleanup. I removed the trigger assembly and used a steel grinding bit for the rotary tool (have a Dremil but batteries stink) that plugs in to the wall for long projects. The Bit made quick work of removing the material I needed to have some thickness in the bedding. Inletting done!

When the bedding was done I finalized the accuracy work by free floating the channel until folded paper (color flyers a little thicker than notebook paper) passed easily down the whole channel. All it took was 120grit and follow up with 220 grit sand paper and done!

I may powder coat that to blend in later.

I used a Hogue but pad (not a slip on) and had to mate the two because the older style stock had a curve so I leveled it up and finish sanded the stock butt and screwed on the recoil pad. Then shaped it to the stock....Done!

Along the way I decided to use Polyurethane but I wanted a satin or matte finish. Wasn't going for the shiny look. I even was considering Linseed oil. But my time may have run out and I needed to get things done. Getting things done was not the way to go when choosing a polyurethane.

Anyhow I went to a local hardware store to get some and I was trying to figure what I wanted in a finish. Like Most Ace Hardware stores the guy working there came up and offered help. I really didn't need it as I was planning a brush on polyurethane. Anyway he suggest the spray. He said I could brush it on and that it was thinner down and covered better for light coats. All I can say is bad advice, wrong and I learned a lesson. The poly came out shiny. Not what I wanted. Wrong can too or brand I don't know but it wasn't dry after 24 hours so (mistake) I read the can. 5 days full cure! are you kidding me?



Affter the second day (good thing I had more things to do) it hardened pretty well and I stripped it again (ugh). At this time I'm thinking Linseed but I had some Teak Oil. Teak oil is mainly for Teak by description but is for hardwoods in general. Teak can be applied and after 3 days can be gone over with polyurethane. Plus it cures to handle and use after only 8 hours. Turned out too shiny. but after another wipe down with some mineral spirits the shine settled down. That's the look I wanted!

This is where I am now. Polyurethane later, should be the same look...at least I hope so!


I started this project on the Gunsmithing section of THR and figured why not share it with the rifle section. I'm no pro by any means and any input is welcome!
 
That looks pretty good. If you ever decide to dress it up a bit more consider converting it to a floor plate with PT&G bottom metal. It is reasonably priced and looks good. The aluminum bottom metal saves about 1/4 lb compared to the steel used on factory guns.

http://pacifictoolandgauge.com/522-winchester-long-action-bottom-metal

It is made for newer stocks and actions that only use 2 screws, you'll have to buy or make an adapter to make it work with the older style stock but it ain't hard and you can obviously do the work
 
That looks pretty good. If you ever decide to dress it up a bit more consider converting it to a floor plate with PT&G bottom metal. It is reasonably priced and looks good. The aluminum bottom metal saves about 1/4 lb compared to the steel used on factory guns.

http://pacifictoolandgauge.com/522-winchester-long-action-bottom-metal

It is made for newer stocks and actions that only use 2 screws, you'll have to buy or make an adapter to make it work with the older style stock but it ain't hard and you can obviously do the work


I thought about that but I don't plan on using a bottom plate. I can't think of a need either. Your right about weight because I added a little by dumping the synthetic stock and putting on the Walnut stock. Magazine functions fine from testing dummy rounds but I need to shoot it to make sure spring doesn't do anything funny. I don't see it happening but again you never know walking into unknown territory.

Thanks guys.
 
Good looking work.

You may want to open the fore end barrel channel a little more. That .013" thick doubled paper gauge test can be misleading. I've measured sporter stock fore end tips bending up twice that much as they rest on bags on a bench top from stock holding pressure. The rifles weight alone bends fore ends up a few to several thousandths. The barrel's vibration amplitude at fore end tip can be that much before the bullet leaves.

The dollar bill syndrome still thrives.
 
I don't know if you care or not, but that stock looks exactly like the one that came on a 1964 M70. So the age is probably mid- to late-1960's.
 
Good looking work.

You may want to open the fore end barrel channel a little more. That .013" thick doubled paper gauge test can be misleading. I've measured sporter stock fore end tips bending up twice that much as they rest on bags on a bench top from stock holding pressure. The rifles weight alone bends fore ends up a few to several thousandths. The barrel's vibration amplitude at fore end tip can be that much before the bullet leaves.

The dollar bill syndrome still thrives.
Thanks.

When I first tested it I folded it twice for four sheets of thickness and all testing was done with barrel weight on the stock as if on the bench. . It made it to within 1.255" of the recoil lug. A single fold ( 2 sheets thick ) made the whole trip. I figured a little more work and I could get 4 in there and maybe be good. Since I have to pull it apart one more time I figured I would do it then. But your saying towards the front? That end I think I can get 6 in. Would you open it more?

I don't know if you care or not, but that stock looks exactly like the one that came on a 1964 M70. So the age is probably mid- to late-1960's.
That does narrow the time down for me. I was always curious about that. It looked like it was from the 70's or earlier, but looks can be deceiving and I have no reference to see when they were made other than pre 90's. Do you happen to know then the style changed?


Anyway I had a range session today and took some loads out that faired okay to good. I only had a chance to test 2 loads and one was okay but the other Varmint weight load was showing much promise. Six of the 10 shots were same hole practically and measured in at .6" and the whole group came in at .9". One of the "outliers" I know was me when I did it and grew the group from .75". Im' not expecting even that much from this rifle or myself for that matter and it was one test on one day and I count it as a good day to stay in perspective. I would be happy with an average of 1.25" all day long. I'm looking forward to testing that load again and some new loads I've been working on.
 
Do you happen to know then the style changed?

1964 was the first year of that style. Winchester changed the entire design of the M70 that year. Hence the collector value of "Pre-64" Winchesters.

I don't know how long they kept that style. I happen to have a 1964 M70, which is how I recognized that stock.
 
But your saying towards the front?
Yes. The fore end hinges at the receiver. A lot of fore end bend moves wood near zero under the chamber. Maximum at the tip. Clearance can grow from receiver forward. A 1/16" gap (.0625") ain't too much at the tip. Especially if it warps.

Winchester gapped their fore ends for a while back in the late '60's or early '70's; great idea for accuracy. Too many complaints from customers insisting on perfect fit of fore end to barrel. Aesthetics and appearance ruled. They stopped opening up barrel channels. Maybe they should have touted better barrel cooling with more air space between metal and wood.
 
That's what I thought you were saying about the clearance. There is more gap to one side than the other. I noticed it before the bedding job and it couldn't be lined up to split the difference telling me it has a slight warp in the for end. Not desirable but not uncommon I would think given the circumstances
.

Now curiosity has a grip on me. The Checkering style I can only find in the 64! Guess I'm going to do some more research. Dang it.
 
That is a 1964 or 1965 stock. The style was introduced in 1964 and changed in 1966. The barrel channel had a 1/16 plus or minus 1/32 manufacturing tolerance for the forearm channel. A different style of checkering was introduced in 1966 with many small diamonds. The pistol grip on the 1966 model had 9 small diamonds on each side instead of 3 larger ones.
 
Last edited:
That is a 1964 or 1965 stock. The style was introduced in 1964 and changed in 1966. The barrel channel had a 1/16 plus or minus 1/32 manufacturing tolerance for the forearm channel. A different style of checkering was introduced in 1966 with many small diamonds. The pistol grip on the 1966 model had 9 small diamonds on each side instead of 3 larger ones.
That's good to know, thanks for the share!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top