Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors 1961 Winchester Model 70 Supergrade Featherweight - Special Order 30-06

The only thing that can explain the plate not being composite is the fact it is a special order. Just a guess naturally as none of us were there.

One thought comes to mind in late production guns is the fact that there are often many left over parts from earlier production guns. In factory guns, there are many late productions sent with early production parts just to clear the inventory of parts.

Winchester having left over aluminum BP's does not seem to far fetched to me.

I'd still like to see the underside of the barrel without the stock.
The barrel channel has been opened up.
Should the bolt and follower be jeweled?
I'd almost think that it should be.

I hit on those same things in my previous posts...

BSA. In regards to the bolt, I have been told by folks that I have high respect for in Winchester knowledge that late production model did not have jeweled bolts.

Would you mind sharing the reference books you use to make your acknowledgements?

Mr. Green. The composite butt plates were crap to put it lightly. They cracked over time. I've actually inletted stocks for the aluminum butt plates myself because of this. It's been done by my smith as well. A good preventative measure and the aluminum plate will last forever.. If you don't mind, I think a few of us would like to see some pics of the bottom of the barreled action where the supergrade stamps should be. Could you also show us the stock's barrel channel and glass bedding? Thanks..

Rules book. States that the bolts were jeweled and "it was a common cosmetic treatment for supergrade rifles after 1954". Page 175. Please don't tell me you don't have the rifleman's rifle book written by Roger C. Rule... Also trust me when I say this, I don't get all of my information from this book. I also know people that know people

There is a pic of a late SG Fwt. (p. 232 in Rule) without jeweling....agree that the barrel channel is not right.

Not trying to step on any toes here gentlemen but rather confirming my agreement with your own observations BSA.
The underside barrel stamps or lack of will go a long ways in this discussion.
One other observation regarding the butt plate.
Does anyone else find it odd that the only marks on the finish appear fresh around the screws while the rest of it hasn't incurred a single mark since 1962?

BSA, by no stretch am I saying every rifle represented as a SG really is one but I've yet to see a SG Featherweight stock that has been faked, not saying they aren't out there but I can't imagine being able to fill in a sight boss that perfect that I couldn't tell it was filled in (especially considering we would know right where to critically inspect it). If it was hogged out to free float it enough that the boss inletting was in line with the barrel channel it would look like a truck could drive between the barrel and stock. I would love to see one of these SG rifles that everyone always talks about.

I'd love to see pictures of the underside of the barreled action.. I think Popgun would also like to see it. I'm sure it has the correct stampings, but my curiosity has gotten the best of me.. Jeweling or no jeweling, one thing is for sure it should be stamped "SUPER" and have the reversed "S" on the bottom of the recoil lug..

Reelman, I know you have a supergrade and you like to defend each and every one of them. I personally will never own one..

I'll never own a super grade simply because I can't afford one. But that would be the ultimate pre-'64, to me.

Can't beat a nice Super Grade....

Nice Super Grade????

Not a SG expert buy any means, but here is my take even if it is authentic. Poorly done cheekpiece, screws not timed, screw ends not flush with metal where they protrude, wood to metal fit not all that great-check out the trigger guard for one glaring example-finish nothing to get excited about nor is the wood anything special along with a hogged out free float. However, a little extra in the free float is not a bad thing. Stick with the run of mill FWT, because there is little custom that I can see with the exception of swivels and a black nose.

Wasn't talking about this gun....

I've looked at others and there are not any significant differences. If this one is authentic it is representative of the standard.

Not everyone of them, I really have to question the SG National Match that has been pictured here quite a bit.

I'll throw in my .02 cents for exactly what it's worth.
Turning a regular pre-64 SG stock into a pre-64 SG FWT stock is pointless. You could never match the barrel channels as already pointed out.
I also think that any stock maker who could turn a standard Pre-64 FWT stock into a FWT Pre-64 Super Grade stock would be the most talented SOB that God ever stuffed guts into.
If such a person exists he would not have to alter existing FWT stocks because he'd be too damn busy to mess with shady stuff like that.
Not to mention it would be easier starting with a XXX walnut blank rather than the plain grade stuff in existing old FWT stocks.
JMHO and worth exactly what you paid for it.

Not only that but how does that explain the sightless barrel? Is that custom made with Winchester stamps on it to perfect specifications? This would require both a wood and metal master.

I know BSA wants me to take it apart for the barrel stamp. I have never detail stripped a model 70 and I am not personally going to risk even lightly scratching or messing this up.

I know that I dont need to as the idea that this is not from the factory is silly. It's not like I bought this out of a pawn shop or some dude on the street in a trench coat.This came out of one of the most respected model 70 collections around.

Naturally I could be blind. I do respect people that are able to reference facts in publication to support thought.

Seriously, I hope it is legit. But removing the stock from a Model 70 involves 3 screws and one is already buggered.