Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Model 70s -- Old and New

Yesterday snooping around a local shop, I found an old pre-64 Model 70, the upgrade model with the inlet rings in the fancier wood. (It's the equivalnet of the Browning Safari Grade, but my brain is not working smoothly as that rifle's action did.) It had a few flaws. Some clown had inlet diamonds made of plastic and pearl on both sides of the stock and it had a bit of honest wear and a throw-away scope.

Next to it was the new "best model 70 ever made" according to the clerk. The wood to metal fit was just wrong -- gaps that screamed at you and the quality of the wood was nothing special. It was priced a few hundred dollars less but IF I was looking for a bolt gun at those prices, it sure as hell would not be my choice. I'd rahter have a flawed masterpiece than a high priced POS.

1B

The pre-64 M70 in the better version was known as the Super Grade (I know, slap your forehead cause you knew that and couldn't remember!) I have seen some of the modifications you are describing; I remember seeing pictures of Roy Rogers and of John Wayne getting their custom Weatherby's from Roy Weatherby and they had those diamonds and inlets on the stocks - must have been a popular enhancement in those days. If done decently I wouldn't let the inlet's stop me from buying a Super Grade if the price was right - the inlets would be vintage to the gun (heck, if you are lucky if could have been Roy Rogers Winchester!) You can throw away the "throw away" scope too.

What he said......

I must be crazy but the 2 '08 model winchester featherweights I looked at IMO are nicer than the pre 64's, wood to metal fit was very good, the barrels were free floated with perfectly matching clearance on either side of the barrel. I frequent alot of internet sights about my various interests, sometimes a pack mentality forms about a product, most of the pre 64's I have seen have very ruff looking machining and tool marks, this seems to be forgotten by the pack mentality of the internet

My experience, over many years, has been that it�s difficult to lump Winchester Model 70s into clear quality divisions. I�ve handled and owned Pre-64s that seemed poorly put together, with sub-pair woodwork and very rough triggers. Others have been great. I can say the same for post-64 Model 70s. Some good and some bad. The later ones from the old plant seemed routinely bad.

The new FN Winchester Model 70s that I have handle thus far seem pretty darn good. Not perfect, but pretty darn good. The stock fit and metal work on the new M70s I�ve picked up has been quite good. And the out-of-the-box triggers seem a HUGE, HUGE improvement over what New Haven was most recently slapping out.

My point is that it seems to me that not all pre-64 Model 70s were perfect and certainly neither were the post-64 models. In fact, the later post-64 models were too often quite poorly done. I�m glad the new FN Winchester Model 70s are MUCH improved (IMHO), although I expect that individual rifles will vary.

The new FN Model 70s look good enough to me that I�ll probably buy several. And during the last ten years or so that the M70s were made up in New Haven, I swore I�d not buy another because of questionable quality. I rather like the new FN models.

I have a 1952 standard grade 30.06 and it is no beauty. It shoots OK but is HEAVY and the stock is clunky. Trigger is great. I have a '56 in 270WCF and it is not much different-a little less clunky but still heavy compared to what we are used to today.
A buddy has a 375 from 1940 and it is marvelous. He ran into the same gun in South Africa with the next serial number last year. The original owner's son had it still.

I have a 2008 gun and my sentiments match Timberline's exactly. The new production guns are MUCH better than the two Classics I owned, which both went back to the factory multiple times. All the pre-64s I have had have been pretty good guns, but I prefer the new production to even those.

New model 70 Feather Weight here also. I got one this week and the stock fits very nice and even. Barrel is floated and a business card slides through easily. Metal work is smooth. Feeds smoother than any other rifle I own.

Those out there seeking perfection and skin-tight inletting of metal and wood are not going to get it for $700-800 bucks,and can count on spending several thousand if they have a clue what a real custom looks like.

So when I got a new FN 270 FW that snuggles groups at 300 yards into 3" or less (when I do my part) from field prone positions,functions great, has shown no inclination to throw fliers,and holds POI like a rock, I grew to like the evenly floated barrel and can tolerate the new trigger design,even though I like the old one better.The only thing I did to the FN is tighten the screws and slap on a scope.Most of the Classics I have messed with were projects in a box.

It sits among a pile of pre 64's which do the same things but maybe took a little coddling to get them that way.I have no major issues with the FN M70's,at least right now.....they are good rifles for the money.

I don't agree with you on the amount of tool marks or overall quality of pre vrs post 64 M70's or for that matter if 'tool marks' are all that important to function. What matters most however is how a rifle functions and how strong it is.

I have a battery of pre 64 M70's and I have sent the post 64's down the road over the years. The post 64 has that brazed on bolt handle and I would rather have one attached in a better way.

Looking over the M70 SS Classic that I have I see that the "Winchester" and caliber etc. on its barrel is stamped in a sloppy manner. On a pre 64 Featherweight 308 that I use the barrel is stamped in a perfect manner and then the entire barrel has been ground smooth so that the lettering is perfect. In fact that work on the lettering is superior workmanship. In no way does the 'classic' come even close to the pre 64.

The cocking piece on the 'classic' is rough with tool marks and even the surfaces that are even are not rounded off or ground like the pre 64 is. Again the pre 64 is far far superior in finish.

There is absolutely no comparison to the fabulous finish on the pre 64 M70 to the 'classic'.

Match this pre 64 M70 Featherweight in .358 Win. with a post 64.

The new FN model 70's certainly compare in quality to Kimbers, Brownings and Remingtons being built today. That's all we can ask for in guns produced in todays developed countries with labor rates the way they are and consumers willing to pay $700 or so for a deer rifle. No they aren't built like a pre 64 with old school machining and hand fitting. CNC is the word today to meet consumer price points. Yep the last New Haven M70's got sloppy, but so did the pre 64's in the 60's and the 50's pre 64's were no pre war. The FN model 70's are acyually getting better, I hope people accept the M70 for what it is today so it can stay with us.
Dan

Well, when the new FN Extreme Weather rifles come out in 325 WSM, I'll probably sell or trade my FAL for one. My Model 70 SS classic in 270 came with an excessively sloppy chamber, and Winchester refused to replace the barrel, so that soured me on them, even though the rifle shoots great with fire formed cases, and the trigger is near perfect. I hope FN cares more about their product. So far the stainless x-bolt I have is working out perfectly. If the new Winchesters shoot as well as the Brownings, FN will have a hit. Of course, "fit and finish" don't have quite the same meaning when buying stainless and synthetic like I do.