Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors Considering a Model 70 lightweight : Sheep Hunting

I'm just not a huge fan of Kimber Montanas. I've been considering taking a Model 70 SS G Series Short action and removing some metal from behind the recoil lug, and milling out the bolt handle. Using a McMillan edge stock with 1/4" recoil pad.

A friend of mine did this same exact thing, and his rifle shoots 3/4" groups with a #2 contour 30 caliber barrel chambered in 300wsm.

I'll likely go with a #1 7mm barrel and choose the 7mm-08 or 260 Rem.

I'm still a huge fan of the older style Winchester triggers, and the overall asthetics of the Model 70 actions.

What are your thoughts?

You just built a Kimber Montana with bottom metal.. Why don't you like the Kimber montanans?

I'm with 79s, why don't you like the Montana?

Sounds like a good plan Sako, maybe go with a winny fwt contour and save a little more weight.
The SA montana's stock doesn't fit everybody and he's looking for the old style M70 open trigger.

Maybe something like this? About 7# as you see it. A short action should come in lighter...

I know when I put together a lighter rifle I'll copy Bob's blueprint. Pretty hard to go wrong.

I'm in the same boat as SH264, the Kimbers are nice but I just like my 70's...

Like you, and Bob, I much prefer the old M70s to a Montana.

I had this 280 Rem put together a few months ago on a transition pre-64 action. I didn't go all-out to make super-light but it is my backpacking rifle. I used a Brown Precision kevlar Pound'r with blind mag as you can see to make it tougher and lighter. The barrel is 23" and measures .575" at the muzzle, that is enough barrel to make it a bit muzzle heavy like I prefer for hitting from field positions.

I used steel DDs, a 14 oz scope, etc. It weighs in at 7 pounds 5 oz as shown.

With a Leupold 6X36 in those same rings it weighs 4/10 oz over 7 pounds.

For what it's worth, I did one VERY similar about 15 years ago on a short Classic M70. You do not save much weight going short action, and give up a lot of cartridge options.

Looked it up. Here's my old short action 284 Win in a Bansner stock with Pac Nor #1 barrel.

Nice 280 Rick!

I like the central theme.

You guys are preaching to the converted here! A few very nice rifles.

This one weighs in at 7 lbs-11oz. a pre 64 M70 action, fwt contour barrel and williams 1pcs. BM so if you went with PT&G BM you's be under 7 1/2 scoped...a great weight.

Sounds like a plan, plenty of nice rifles posted for inspiration.

Hey, I love my pre 64's too. Build it and they will come I guess.... Hard to go wrong with a pre 64 action, custom barrel and nice light stock like a Brown pounder. I say this since a couple of you posted pics of yours. My 338 is 7 pounds 12 oz's pictured: Not muzzle heavy like some of you guys like, but just right .....:

Like this ?





That is a whole 1.78 ounces milled off including cutting the tang.

after some epoxy and paint, a 4x Leupold in Talley LW rings, and alloy pre-64 bottom metal shortened and fit.

It weighs 6 lbs 9 oz as shown. With 5 rounds aboard, BC scope caps, and a nylon sling it came out about an ounce over my target of 7 lbs hunting weight.

Another fellow liked it more than I did and bought it off me weeks after I'd finished it. It was more of a 'for the heck of it' build at the time

All look great. I've come to conclusion, it's hard to touch the weight of a Kimber Montana.

It sure is. The Montana is kind of like a miniature model 70..... Smaller, usually does weigh less...

I may just have to take the Montana plunge. My gunsmith said he has had great success with a good bedding job, etc. more importantly is cutting a totally new crown which he says has significantly improved the accuracy of these rifles. I'm going to buy one in 270 Winchester. I already own 4-5 270 caliber rifles, however the intended purpose of this rifle will be strictly for sheep hunting. A west Texas free range Audad is next on my hit list.

My proven load will consist of H4831SC and a 140gr Accubond. .

Keep us posted on how you like the Montana. I may eventually end up buying one to try out as well. I've looked at them in the fun stores and really like the light weight of them. They are also stainless, so they are better in adverse conditions. Our coated pre 64's can only take so much.

If it were to get a Montanan it would be in a 06 and I would use 165gr accubonds, 165 nosler partition or 168ttsx and one would be set for anything in North America even Brn Bears probably just use the 168gr ttsx or partition then..

After shooting that new 7mm08, you might just change your mind????? Maybe..

It's possible to get a M70 under 7 pounds if you watch everything....but you will never get it as light as a Kimber Montana.

Probably not I have that 06 I got off you while not a Montanan it feels just right..

My M70 Classic FWT weighs 6lb 10oz(w/o a scope but w/Weaver bases). It has a Winchester/McMillan stock(w/plastic butt plate)which weighs 29oz. I've got a 6x40 scope w/rings at 13oz. So it finishes at 7lb 7oz. A bit over 7 1/2lb w/a 2oz sling and 3 rnds.

Not planning on doing this. As a blind mag set up without the floor plate but with the trigger guard,3 action screws,spring w/follower,and box I could lose 6oz not counting filler material. So maybe 7lb 3oz ready to hunt? Not bad for a factory set up.

If/when I build another rifle, it will be on the above blueprint, on a pre 64 action. Very hard to improve on Bob or Rick's rifles.
For me, 270 or 280 (fwt or #1 profile), quality synthetic lightweight stock, talleys and a leupold (variable) will be as close to perfection as I can afford!

Pat after too much didddling around over 40+ years, I have decided that the 270 of mine shown above is as light as I ever will need a BG rifle.

I know others will shade that weight wise, but not an issue at all for me.

Usually?

Bob, I am with you on that point. I have had a few rifles significantly under 7 lbs and, for me, they get nicer to pack but a lot tougher to shoot well. (even more so offhand, which some of us still use when necessary!). At that point you may as well pack a pistol, if you want to take the ultralightweight to an illogical conclusion! (not even an option for us north of the 49th!)
At the other end of the scale, anything over 8 lbs better be in a significant cartridge with something much bigger than deer in mind or I will not be packing it at all when hunting.

this has been a rather interesting topic for me to read. I've always been comfortable with a heavier hunting rifle than most so weight is not my # 1 issue. The Kimbers have a lot going for them: classic good lines, controlled round feeding, some M70 style components such as safety, extractor, etc. and very nice workmanship. If weight is the #1 issue, then perhaps the Kimber is the way to go.

However, for me, probably action design is where it all starts in the selection of a hunting rifle: most everything else can be easily changed. Details separate the really good designs from the great ones, both functionally and aesthetically. Some of that involves proportions and that is just one of the things where old M70s shine. Bolt handles are just one example: the angle of the bolt, the size of the knob: while form DOES follow function, these type of details also effect function. Stuart Otteson in his classic book "The Bolt Action" said it best describing the old M70 receiver, calling it a "work of art from solid steel." While many criticize the coned breech, it sure does create slick feeding. The cocking cams are inherited from the Springfield, cut with a true helix affecting the ease of cocking.And then of course, the bullet-proof trigger design. I could go on and on.

So for those who expressed the very good question "why a M70 and not a Kimber" that is my 2 cents worth.

Well said, I agree

Now you know why I always drug that one off into the field. Most times leaving my pre 64's at home... . That rifle will do everything from long range precision shooting to up close and personal, or offhand at 100-200 yards. It just feels right in the hands... My pre 64 model 70 fwt 270 win feels the same way, only lighter... That's the only reason I let it go...

I am the guy who bought this from my good friend "free-miner" and then installed good irons and QD mounts on it. It is a FINE little "truck gun" and I have a matching Classic 70 sts-.338WM to match, also started by "fm" and customized by the guy who did the .308. They are for my 4x4 in BC's sodden country.

I have about a dozen old 70s, HVA 4100 and Brno 21H based light .270s, .280s and .30-06 much like those shown here, all run from just over 7 lbs to just about 8 on the button.

I have a very light Mod. Seven, full custom by a pair of BC's best smiths. STS, lovely piece, 6.25 scoped, 7-08. Fine little "mountain rifle" and super nice to pack. It and the .308 shown are my lightest along with a Kreiger-tubed .280 on a HVA 4100, Bansner handle, Talley QDS and 23" tube-shoots sub-moa consistently.

THEN, in May last year, I traded a singleshot rifle I inherited with this house, into a Kimber 84L MA .280AI, Talley QDs, Leupy 3.5x10x40, spare Leupy 3.5x10x50 HD, in spare Talleys and it runs 160 NPs over RL-26 at 3000 fps-mv.

As a HUNTING rifle, for serious BC mountain hunting and I will bet I have done more of this since 1964 than most here, suspect "fm" will back me up on this, I simply LOVE this rig.

My three P-64 70 Fwts in .270 Win. ARE fine rifles, wear Micky Edge stocks, installed by top smiths and one Brown Kevlar from the 1990 era, but, they are NOT the "mountain rifle" that the KMA is and now just sit with greased bbls. in my "spare gun" safe.

Most of my other rifles also now seldom see the light of day and will be sold as I get to it---and the economy improves---but, I might even buy a second KMA identical to this one and pair them with my Dakota 76-.338WM, light, accurate and a superb cartridge combo, IMHO.

Each to his own, but, I tend to prefer the Kimber action to the MOd. 70s, of which I have owned/used 45 and still have a dozen.

SNAP, no more ZG-47?

I could say "why" but it would bring an avalanche of moaning and wailing raining down on me by folks whose only consideration in a BG rifle is how much it weighs.

So I won't.

Who need to listen to the bull shidt?

My favorite Rifle is a Remington in 06. It has a Kevlar stock and a lightweight Leupold 4x. I like fixed power scopes.

One may wonder about why I have a 5 gallon belly and that I need to have Kevlar stocked rifles.

I would say lighter is better however ,...hopefully everyone is posting about rifle weight while they are working out , because the most important weight when sheep and goat hunting isn't the weight of your gear , its your weight.

Client : "Does this rifle make me look fat?"
Guide : "No its the fat that makes you look fat"

I love this rifle!

That would be neat to carve up a mod 70 for weight but don't know if I could bring myself to it...
I did a light weight on a 579 sako in 308... I used kesselring aluminum rings which saves a bunch...no bases needed...McMillan edge...
I would have fluted the barrel for a few more ozs but the thing just shoots too good and is plenty light for my needs...

Amen to that. I have tried a few sub- seven pound rifles in my days as well, and I find that I just shoot better with a 7.5-8 pound rifle. Especially off-hand or when out of breath from running up a ridge at 10,000 feet. I can save a lot more weight for a lot less cash on items that won't compromise my shooting like a high quality lightweight pack, clothing and rain gear. A Stone Glacier pack is a good example.

And, it's all for naught if I am 20 pounds overweight anyway.

Here is my main mountain hunting rifle. 270 Win, pre-64 action, Krieger barrel, Legend stock. Weighs about 7.75 pounds with a fixed six Leupold.

But....but...Chet! It's a 270!

No one with any REAL hunting experience uses one of them! LOL!

Nice rifle!

I am comfortable with my alternate lifestyle........

Yep Chet, totally agree with you...thanks tuam76

Well, you and I are in the same camp, but based on comments on this forum we're also in the minority.

I guess all those military snipers with their heavy rifles are complete idiots for lugging them around when a Kimber MT or similar lightweight will do the same job.

I'm not getting rid of my lightweights, but I'm also aware of their limitations. For me, I think a good midweight (7.25 - 8lbs all-up weight - scoped w/ sling and rounds) is about ideal for an all-around hunting platform, including one for the mountains.

But I will admit I'm a bit of a pussy and like packing lighter rifles in the highcountry

And yes, count me in as one of those alternate lifestyle 270 users.

I don't know how pussy didn't get bleeped out....

Funny chit right there..

did you do the milling?