Been wanting a winchester safari express in 375 but they are somewhat hard to find. CZ requires too much work and money to get it what I want, so that leaves whitworths.

How are they compared to model 70's? I basically want an all around 375. Thoughts

I've had 1 for about 12 years or so. It's a 375 H&H. The only thing I did to it was adjust the trigger (It has a good 1 to work on),and glass bed it.
Its been to Africa, hunted Deer, and Elk here in the states.
Never had a problem, or hiccup. Built stout, and shoots very well.

My brother and I both own Whitworths in .375 H&H. The action is a Zastava commercial Mauser that features CRF with all-steel construction, including the bottom metal. Both rifles are nicely finished and sport express sights, a barrel band with a sling swivel, and a trigger that is easily adjusted. Both actions cycle smoothly without any binding. The stocks are "Turkish" walnut that are well-figured and skillfully checkered. It is possible that the stocks were finished in England (as some have claimed), but I'm betting that they were only "inspired" by the English Whitworth style and were actually finished in the former Yugoslavia, just as the barreled actions were.

Both rifles are quite accurate with any load we've fed them and are responsible for three cape buffalos, a crocodile, and 2 Alaska brown bears, as well as smaller stuff like impala and nyala.

The main criticism I've heard from the DG purists is that the sliding safety only blocks the trigger, and that the gun would be more useful with a wing safety that disengages the sear. Personally, I think that falls into the realm of esoterica because we've had no accidental misfires with our Whitworths; in fact, the only issue I've ever had with a sliding safety was with a tang Ruger 77, and that was due to my monkeying with the sear engagement on one of the old-style triggers.

IIRC, Mule Deer also owns, uses, and likes his similar Whitworth as well.

Funny you should ask.... I just bought one on Gunbroker on Tuesday.... I pick it up today... I will let you know but for the money... goodness I can still put in a good amount and not be to the base price of a new model 70... and lets not even get started on some of the others....

I paid $620 for mine... nice stock and very clean... barrel band, express sights... etc.

Add a plus 1 to this.

When you use a Whitworth until it looks like this, it might--and I mean MIGHT--be considered a little used up.







This was a PH's everyday carry gun in Zimbabwe, and he was thinking about passing it down to his apprentice. The PH wasn't losing any sleep over the safety.

You probably bought the one i was watching. I almost bid on it and held off

only kind of sorry about that.... I shot it today off the back porch standing at about 75 yards... 2 shots about 1 inch apart.... Looking forward to being able to shoot it more and load some for it

The gun I have is well made... very good wood to metal fit, glass bedding, extra bedding block under barrel, good trigger and good well fitting stock... not a big cluck of wood like the CZs.

I've got 2 rifles in 375 H&H. One is a Rem Model 700 Classic and the other is a Whitworth. Both are extremely accurate and both have been to Africa. The Rem is a little lighter to carry but that also means it kicks a little more. If I decide to sell one, it will be the rem and I'd keep the Whitworth.

I've had both the Witworths, several of them and a Model 70 . I greatly preferred the Witworth to the Winchester.
All they ever did was shoot very accurately and feed and eject flawlessly. .
And they looked pretty good to boot

I have both and the Whitworths are the better rifle. My present Whitworth is in 416 Rem. A re-bored and chambered 375 it seems. I had a 458 win in a Whitworth, it was a very accurate rifle and well balanced.

I have three Whitworths left - I sold the .458 due to severe arthritis and fibromyalgia. I have a 7mm, .300 win mag and a .375H&H, all with DST. The .375 has claw mounts. I will soon try to sell the .300 and the 7mm because I will soon not be able to hunt longer than 2 days at a time, and I will be buried with either my .375 Whitworth or my SAKO .375 carbine: maybe both but that would be wasteful and my really good friends would dig me up and save the rifles.

Terry

That looks every bit as nice as the Rigby I owned without the cost of the "grill plate".

The safety is the only thing I am not real happy with on my Whitworth .375. The existing safety is very stiff and does not seem to engage positively ... sort of a short throw between on and off position with no real point where you feel like the safety has fully engaged.

Am considering a model 70 style conversion. Any experiences I should keep in mind from folks who have traveled this path?

Another option to a Whitworth is the Remington 798 Safari model. The Safari model was the Cadillac of the 798s. They came in 375 and 458. The difference between the Whitworth and the Safari are the Safari has a 22" barrel and does not have a multi leaf barrel sight. I found mine, like new, for $800.

Win M70 in 375 H&H is my go to rifle. A Whitworth 375 H&H is my back up rifle. I've never needed it but it is accurate on the range and I trust it.

WHITWORTH'S are far and away BETTER than any Winchester that is shootable.

I would ( and did...) take a Whitworth over a Winchester....

Very nice.

Had a 3 position Gentry put on my Whitworth and like it and the Timney trigger a lot. 375 H&H that shoots the Barnes X 270 very well.

How so?

The nicer ones with Birmingham proof marks have nice finish two position safety and have "lively" feel to them.

Dennis,

Remember the one my son James had at Quemado in 06? Think y'all were shooting it up on the range. Well it arrived back yesterday from JES and now it's a .35 Whelen. Suppose we'll be shooting it this weekend!

A Mauser action is superior to a M-70 for one thing.

Now you've done it!

I have a Mark X in 458 win, its a slick rifle..Need to find a stock for it and do it up right this time..Its busted the last two even with proper bedding, just chitty wood I think.

Yes in some ways I think it is.

This subject just makes me sad to contemplate. I traded away a Whitworth, and yes it was a fine rifle.

I'm no connoisseur of fine CRF rifles but I have handled and shot a lot of Model 70s and about one third as many various Mausers. All the stuff being brought up is purely subjective.

I really want to know are we being snobish here or is there something to it? My Winchesters feed good, look good, shoot good- what am I missing? I looked for a perfect 375 or 458 Mauser and didn't find one but I did find a really nice model 70 and I want to know what I am missing out on not holding out for a Browning or a Whitworth?

The Win M-70 is closer copy of the Springfield than a Mauser. The are several cost cutting changes. In the case of a catastrophic case failure the M-70 will send gasses into the shooters face, the Mauser will not. The M-70 action does not have a full set of barrel threads, the Mauser does have a full set of barrel threads. The Mauser bolt acts as a safety lug the M-70s does not. Just to name a few advantages of the Mauser action.

that is one coool looking rifle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dennis I all take a stab at this even though I won't hit them all since I am no expert.....I am not going to knock a M70 because pretty much that's all I have hunted with for quite a few years.

There are some minor differences, but to Mauser mavens they all add up to making them "better".

- Extractor: Its a bit more robust because the extractor is supported by a "hook" under the extractor that fits into a circular recess at the head of the bolt. This "hook" grabs more tenaciously the harder you pull on the bolt and in theory makes it more difficult for the extractor to slip over the case rim and leave it in the chamber during extraction.

OTOH the M70 extractor depends on the spring tension of the extractor itself to exert tension and hold the case rim. In theory it could (might?) slip over the case rim in the event of a severely stuck case.....sometimes....maybe.The M70 extractor also depends on that same spring tension to properly grip the case during feeding and align it for passage into the chamber. This is why a MIM extractor on a M70 is such a disaster waiting to happen on the M7 Classic;it will bend and hold a set,even break, but does not behave like a spring steel extractor. They should be replaced every time.

Ejector: The M70 depends on a a spring actuated bladed ejector that slides up out of a recess in the bottom of the bolt raceway. It it gets gritty down there the spring may not function well enough to "time" the ejector rising up as the bolt is operated in rapid fire and the case will not eject. This rarely happens,but can if the rifle is poorly maintained and it takes a lot of neglect but it can happen.

OTOH, the Mauser ejector cams off the bolt release(correct description?),does not depend on a small spring, and is a bit more robust in operation.

Breach: The slick feeding for which the M70 is noted, is due in part to the coned breach. Downside is that more of the case is unsupported by the chamber. The Mauser breach supports more of the case in the chamber(in fact more than a Rem 700, too).

Gas: The mauser is better in the case of a burst case or some other mishap. Gas is diverted down the left lug raceway,and in military actions the cut out in the left raceway provides an opening for diversion. The bolt shroud has a gas shield, absent on a pre 64 M70 and most Classics, but newer SC M70's,and some very late Classics, have a shield.

Trigger: The original Mauser trigger is about bomb proof. I don't like enclosed after market triggers fitted to Mausers. In a dangerous game rifle, the Mauser trigger requires a smaller inlet in the trigger mortice...helpful with heavy recoiling rifles to minimize stock splitting I hear. Anyway if I had a Mauser I'd get a M70-style trigger for it.

Feeding is true CRF provided the action is modified to the cartridge. Use a case too short,or otherwise not suited and the CRF thing sort of goes out the window IMHO. On some Mausers there is a protrusion on the head of the bolt that serves as a guide for the cartridge to be carried under the extractor and into the chamber and helps with alignment.

Safeties with scope....same/same. There are other differences but too detailed. You need a book.

The sloppy bolt travel is a result of loose tolerances so that bolt operation is easier and more certain if it gets dirty or icey.

The action was designed as a battle rifle for doomsday scenarios,like a bomb shelter.Conditions have to be pretty bad before advantages show up and few sporting rifles are afield for months at a time under bad tropical or other nasty, dirty conditions. So most don't see, or need, the advantages, but for those who do, they can make a difference.


That's all I can think of. Will leave the rest to the experts.

Rant over.

Bob,

About the only other thing you could have mentioned is the one-piece magazine/floorplate assembly in the Mauser, which is theoretically more fool-proof, especially if it's the military style (which has been used on some sporter 98's) which cannot fly open at an inopportune moment.

John yes...I guess you could write a book,and some have. I tried to keep it short.

Yesterday I was at the LGS and tried to open the floor plate on a JC Higgins/FN Mauser 30/06....had to use a jackknife to hold that button in so I could open it. I thought, you'd never see a bombs away with that outfit!

bobinNH did a great job of detailing the technical differences in the 98 & 70 actions. Like him, I've used 70s almost exclusively for many years. However, one might conclude that the 70s are lacking when it comes to hard use in rough conditions. Looking at a few (all pre-64s) that were used in about as rough of hunting environments as you might find for many, many years and and they look pretty impressive when it comes to reliability.

Here are a few that come to mind. Wally Johnson, the Ivory Hunter and PH for many, many years, used a pre-war (1938) .375 as his primary rifle for many, many years, mostly in Mozambique. I've spoken to his son Walt many times over the past couple years about the rifle and the conditions it was used in and Walt never recalls a hitch in its operation, even in the terrible dirt and dust is was used in. He repeatedly would say to me "they were good rifles." (the pre-64s)

Then there was Morris Talifson and Bill Pinnell, the brown bear men on Kodiak Island. They bought their .375s in 1949 and 1950 and used them until they retired in the 90s. I hunted Kodiak this fall and it is some rough country. I've talked to a good number of the men who worked for them over the years, including some who know guns, and again, they never remembered a single hitch in those conditions. The close-up pictures of those 2 rifles show incredibly worn and beat up rifles.

The same can be said of Hal Waugh, another of Alaska's great brown bear guides. His old 70, originally a .300 H&H was rebarrelled to .375 Weatherby. Again, sterling performance for many, many years in really rough environment.

Then I spoke to Middleton Tompkins, the great big bore target shooter who won 6 national titles, all using old 70 actioned rifles. I asked him how many rounds he put thru some of those actions. He said he didn't really know for sure, but thought it could be as many as 50,000. What about parts breakage: 1 extractor collar. That's it. While target shooting isn't in rough conditions, thats a lot of shooting for one action.

My son works for one of Alaska's most well known brown bear outfitters. While in Kodiak this fall, I met and spoke at length with one of the outfitter's guides. This man has hunted a lot, including Africa. His rifle of choice: a M70. We talked recently about action design and despite being a model 70 man, I suggested that the 98 is quite the action. He told me what many experienced users feel, which is that the smooth slickness of the 70 is why he prefers them over the 98 when the heat is on.

So my point is, while technically speaking, the 98 MIGHT have some very slight advantage in a couple of action details, experience with the old 70s over a lot of years says that they have a remarkable record of reliability. No wonder so many users are so fond of them.

Big Nan .. 78 gr of ...

I had Dave Gentry install a 3-position on one of my Mark X rifles and tune the trigger before he died. Great work. I think his son is doing it now.

akrange: I had a chance to handle "big nan" a few years ago. Really neat rifle that is the real deal. Its in the Brown Bear Gun Shop and Museum in Kenai, Alaska.

Merry Christmas R....

I hope you have a blessed Christmas as well akrange. Where in Michigan are you? I'm just outside of Cadillac.

I will if someone buys my Whitworth which is about as good as it gets in CRF .. Your a long way from Utah...

ruffedgrouse: Thanks!

The M70 is anything but fragile and I have seen it keep trucking when conditions shut down other stuff.

I'd trust it for anything.

This was my point, I hear folks lament the model 70 and praise the Mauser for its better specs but has anyone really hunted with both that has found real short-comings in either one?

Yes.. If I was in a pinch again I'd use either..Remember to keep the Front Sight below the Nose....

dennis I think in general the answer is "no",although there are some guys who will argue this.What follows is purely anecdotal because I have never had any problems with either design but like you mostly I have used M70's and just in NorthAmerica.

I think both have very good reputations for field performance.Pro hunters like Finn Aggard liked and used both as an African professional. I don't recall him saying anything adverse about the M70..in fact his favorite 375 was a pre 64 M70; his favorite 30/06 was a Mauser 98. I'm certain there are some pro's who won't use anything other than a Mauser and vice versa.

I think this is kind of like standing over two dead elk, one killed with an Accubond and the other with a Partition, and trying to argue persuasively which bullet is better.

On one hand the 98 Mauser was designed as a battle rifle that was later adapted to sporting use, while the M70 was designed originally as a sporting rifle that was pressed into some military and target use. The demands were different.

The 98 is regarded by some as more resilient, more likely to keep working under harsh conditions because it was designed to withstand the abuse and rigors of wartime,i.e. trench warfare,constant neglect,adverse conditions, in the hands of panicked troops under the stress and rigors of warfare.

Plus it was designed during the black powder to smokeless transition, when brass and ammo were not as reliable as they are today, so the likelihood of ammo malfunctions and blown cases was higher. (JWP called me this morning to remind me of this and other mauser features).

Other stuff he mentioned was that the Mauser has three locking lugs,two up front and a third auxiliary lug back beneath the rear bridge in case the front two should let go from an overload or burst cartridge....if we count the root of the bolt handle, that makes 4 lugs(!). It had a heavier firing pin fall to reliably light up balky ammo,vs the lighter but faster lock time of the M70.

So what you had was a system designed to provide maximum protection to the user while insuring the most reliable function under adverse conditions in a manually operated battle rifle. Some guys feel that if it will handle those conditions, it will handle most BG hunting conditions in stride.

Plus it's hard to prove a negative....if you spend 10 days tracking lions in the Kalahari with a Mauser 98,and the rifle gets filled with blowing sand,but goes bang when it has to (it had better!),you are hard pressed to say at what point and how much sand it would have taken before a M70, or anything else,would have stopped working (I mention this as an example because a pal who posts here hunted the Kalaharia and said his rifle needed constant daily attention just to work the bolt, it got so clogged with wind driven sand).

The point being that everything "works" until it doesn't...how much abuse it takes for something to quit is one of the unanswered questions but there is no doubt some designs are more prone to shutting down or failing to function properly than others. I think that Mauser users simply want to hedge bets;the known design differences give them a sense of security and confidence in their rifles.

I don't know if this answers your question but it's the best I can do. maybe someone else will weigh in.

This Lion was ready to attack while I was cleaning my 7x57!!

The Element of Surprise. Catnip !

Dennis,

Model 70's are fine rifles, but I have seen a few instances where a 98 would have made a difference.

I have personally fired both rifles when a case let go. This is rare today, but happens, and with the Mauser only felt a slight puff of hot air on my left cheekbone. With the Model 70 I got a full blast of gas in the face. Luckily I always wear glasses.

Have also seen a Model 70 extractor "hop" over the rim of a case stuck in the chamber, something I have never seen with a 98, though with a worn old Mauser it might be possible as well.

A minor point I previously alluded to is the 1-piece bottom metal on 98's. I usually take the barreled action out of my bolt rifles when traveling, in order to use a take-down case. The one-piece Mauser magazine/floorplate can be screwed back onto the action, protecting the trigger, something that doesn't work very well with the 2-piece M70 bottom metal.

One of the times Finn was in our camp he and I would discuss the same pros and cons of M-98's over M-70's and we discussed pretty much all the same aspects that have been brought up here. And although Finn's 375, that he dearly loved, was a M-70 - when he had to bet his life of a rifle and stop an animal his 458 was a Mauser ! He said he had seen problems in Africa with sand and dust in the bolt of the M-70 but the much longer and stronger fall of the M-98 striker was a better design for reliability.
Finn's assessment was brought home a couple of days later we went to the rifle range and one of my guides, who was using a M-70, sat down to fire the rifle only went "click". We pulled the bolt and firing pin and found it was fouled up with old, sticky grease and rust and after cleaning that out the rifle worked perfectly.

I know that while I also carry my M-70 9.3x62 most of the time, when I absolutely have to kill something I grab my MK X 458 Mauser.

I rely on 1959 Model 70 and it is simple, rugged, reliable rifle. It is almost as good as English finished ZCZ with Birmingham proof marks. The best I could do on Model 70 was $700 I have seen Engish finished lesser caliber Yugo sporters for $200 to 300 less. Another good one is 1950s english Mauser by BSA (famous bicycle manufacturer from Birmingham). These are easy to recognize in used rack by "cage bar muzzle break" and Weatherby Mark 5 type safety catch.

That about says it all.....wrap it up and put this thread in the can.

Shake -up ..

May I add a third choice?

How do the Ruger Express rifles compare to the Winchester 70 and the Whitworth rifles?

Merry Christmas everyone

They are good, but big and heavy. I would opt for the Ruger African if I couldn't get my mitts on a Whitworth.

With one of these you get the solid three position safety, but its shape and positioning in the rearmost notch leaves a LOT to be desired. A good option, but only if the buyer spends the money to have a metalworking gunsmith re shape that blasted safety!

Has anyone mentioned getting a Whitworth and just adding a David Gentry or Ed LaPour safety to it? Best of all worlds, there.

Also there is the excellent Kimber Caprivi and finished rifles from the Montana Rifle company or Dakota that would all be terrific options here. Real honest to gosh Mausers with great safeties.

Today truly is the golden age of fine yet affordable firearms available for purchasing and of great calibers avaiable, IMO.

Which of the Mausers is really the nicest? Is the Whitworth better than a Browning safari or??

safariman,

I don't know about the Kimber Caprivi, but I do know the Montana 1999 and Dakota do NOT have the 98's locking angle behind the extractor claw that keeps it on the rim of a sticky case. That's one of the features making the 98 just a little more reliable than almost any other controlled-feed bolt action. I say "almost," because the only commercial CRF action I've found with the feature, other than commercial 98's like the FN and Mark X, is the CZ Magnum action, which is one reason my "big" rifle is a CZ .416 Rigby.

I have Gentry 3-position safeties on three of my commercial Mauser rifles: FN's barreled to 6.5x55 and .338 Winchester Magnum, and a Mark X .375 H&H. They work great, but I am not convinced the Model 70-type safety is the greatest on earth. Jeff Cooper picked the rocker-type safety on the 1917 Enfield, in the same position as the Rem. 700's, because it also locked the bolt down and cammed the firing pin back, but didn't require as much movement as the Model 70-type, and didn't stick out so far it could be inadvertently moved. The CZ has exactly that type of safety, which is why I have never changed the one on my .416. Unfortunately, nobody offers a 1917 safety for Mausers.

Mule Deer is spot on, just because an action has an extractor that resembles a Mauser it doesn't mean they are equall

Dennis,

The Browning Safari actions aren't always true Mauser 98's, as some have push-feed instead of claw extractors.

The true 98-style FN's are very good, as are Brnos and some others. Mark X's are also very good, but unless they're Whitworths they're not usually as finely finished as FN's. The best bargains are often Mark X's; as a matter of fact I picked up a complete Mark X .300 Winchester Magnum a month or so ago in a local store for $299! That's unsual, and I have no idea what I'm going to do with it, but the price was too good to pass up. Often, however, you can find JC Higgins rifles with FN actions for $400 or so. Both my 6.5x55 and .338 are built on FN actions from JC Higgins rifles.

Once in a while you can also find relatively cheap custom rifles with military 98 actions that have been correctly sporterized. My 7mm Remington Magnum is such a rifle, well-built on a 1909 Argentine action. It looks like the rifle was never quite finished, for who knows what reason, since the nice classic-style stock isn't checkered, and the military trigger hadn't been replaced. There are no markings to indicate who made it, or even the barrel, but it shoots very well. I got it off the Campfire Classifieds for $400, about what many here would pay for a Remington 700 donor action.

Well, not so fast. With all due respect to the posters, the M-70's failure to fire was the result of an inattentive guide not maintaining his rifle. The "old, sticky grease and rust" did NOT just appear overnight but over an extended period of time.
This does not, in my opinion diminish the M-70 but demonstrates what can happen if you are lazy and irresponsible.
This was a "failure to perform" that resulted in a "failure to fire".

Same could be said of the 700 and many of its "flaws"..but if its a M70 it gets a pass..

Joe I have picked up M98's packed with cosmoline so heavily that you pulled the trigger and the firing pin would not fall....so yeah I guess you can pack enough crud in the bolt body so that they won't fire, too.

That guides M70 situation might fall into the "proving a negative" category and asking ourselves how much crud before it fails to work vs a Mauser. I sure can't say and that's an unknown.

I am working from memory here,so will stand corrected....but my memory is the Mausers have a large vent in the bolt body(I think it's a gas vent)that would in theory serve to drain any water that might get into the bolt body, as opposed to trapping and holding it.

I just checked a Classic M70; the bolt body has two small vents; the pre 64 has one. Both are smaller than the vent on a Mauser 98.

The other thing is that a M98 has a heavier, slower firing pin fall than a M70 and might be more inclined to light a fire if gunked up. Again we can make any of them "fail" but the Mauser was designed to handle more abuse.

Another nice little touch on the 98 is that the interior of the bolt body is machined with a recess that fits a shoulder on the firing pin; if the firing pin is not aligned with that recess the rifle will not fire (meaning the bolt handle has to be fully down before the rifle will go "boom"). A Rem 700 or a M70 does not have this feature...I know you can get a Rem 700 to drop the pin without enough force to light up a primer if the bolt is partially lifted, and pretty sure a M70 will do the same thing.

Maybe the Mauser will do it too but I doubt it.

One thing about a Mauser is it all looks simple enough but you learn after awhile there is not a part, or a feature, or a machine cut,that did not have an important function,all designed to work in sync. Many of us may have no use for these features because we do not abuse rifles on tough hunts and lesser stuff gets us by. But those whose lives depend on a rifle under harsh conditions may have a different mind set to all this. I understand where they are coming from.

Rosco I won't throw a M70 any slack....if it breaks I am not a happy camper, no matter what it is. Nothing bugs me more than a piece of gear that doesn't work when you need it too.

This is where I differ from the crowd.I dont buy it. Pretty sure more lives depend on 700's than any rifle these days, albeit the conditions might not be as rough as a grueling safari...

THAT is some great info and intel that I was not privi to! Thanks for the education.

I am a big fan of the 1917 rocker safety as well. My big wildcat 338 is built on a 1917 and I am hoping to dig up the scratch to buy one of Hubel458's customized 1917's in 585 Hubel Express to play with.

I replaced the safety on my CZ because the one it came with did not look or feel very robust to me, and at the time all of my other regular use big game rifles were Model 70's. I wanted continuity between them all. In all reality, so long as the safety is forward to fire I doubt that the minor differences in shape will make much difference for most folks.

That forward to fire deal, though, is why I do not have any CZ 527's in my varmint rifle battery, even though they are CUTE little mausers and would otherwise be royally fun little rifles.

Bob, I agree that the M98 is an excellent design. But using the example of an inattentive guides' "failure to fire" as an example of the better M98 is just hooey.
How would the guide feel if he absolutely needed that rifle to fire in the field?
Maintenance on any mechanical device assures that it is available if needed.
We can probably turn this around to an improperly maintained M98 failure vs. a clean M70 going bang.
If the experts here deem the M98 to be a bit better than a M70, that is fine. But do it while comparing them in similar conditions.

Bob,

Model 70's will fail to fire if the bolt is lifted slightly.

There's also a combination where a slightly lifted bolt with the safety in the middle position (where many hunters put it when expecting action any moment) will lock the safety, so it can't be pushed forward. Apparently this can can happen with "Classics," and was part of a well-known Cape buffalo run-in a few years ago where a hunter got severely injured, partly because the safety on one of the other hunters' Model 70 would not go forward. (However, I have not been able to reproduce this condition with a pre-'64, though I've only tried it on three.)

Joe no doubt.....the guide was inattentive


John that middle safety position snafu is one I had not heard of. Interesting. I will play with pre 64's and Classics here to check it.

Possibly this is because I never use the middle position in that situation. Following anything up, it's always in the full back position,including when my first brown bear got into heavy cover....and likely because I know the bolt handle can lift in that position so always practiced with the safety fully back.

In fact I was playing with a new BACO 375 H&H the other day, the Alaskan model that has the barrel lump. It was pretty nice for the money,and like all these BACO M70's I've handled, when you whack that safety with your thumb, it FLIES forward....very fast. Not mushy but a crisp "snap" and it's off. I like that.

All this Mauser talk is making me itchy. I don't have one right now.

The guy who had the safety in the middle position was a VERY experienced hunter, and he was astonished when it happened. Afterward a gunsmith I know did considerable experimenting and found it happened more than once in a while with M70 Classics, and also came up with a solution.

I just tried it on the O'Connor Commemorative M70 Featherweight I bought this year, and the safety locked up in the middle position with bolt handle lifted slightly--but only after I pulled the trigger to "test" the safety, as many hunters feel compelled to do. I also got it to happen without pulling the trigger with the Gentry safety on my
.338 Winchester, but it wouldn't happen on my .375 H&H Mark X with Gentry safety.

I'll be very interested to hear what happens with your pre-'64's, because as noted earlier I couldn't get it to happen in a limited number of rifles.

As to the condition Mule Deer mentions, I tried it on 2 Kimbers and 4 pre-64 Fwts..
All six allowed the safety to be pushed fully forward.
All six kept the trigger locked.
All six released the trigger when pushed forward and the bolt still slightly up.
However, the bolt was first "pushed down" (without me touching it) when I pulled the trigger and then the spring released the firing pin.

My standard is to keep the safety ON until its time to fire. My exception would be for an anticipated encounter at close quarters from an animal likely to attack then retreat. Wounded or not.

I just tried it one rifle, my pre 64 FW M70 and got the same results as Joe. I even tried lifting the bolt handle almost horizontal. The safety went off,and the firing pin dropped at each level.

In each case as the firing pin fell, the bolt handle snapped all the way down into the closed position, no matter how high I had the bolt handle.

Whether there was enough force to light up a primer I can't say,but it sounded like it.

On the Kimber 257, the bolt does not have to be lifted very high at all before the safety locks up in the middle position. It feels different from the M70.

However, with the safety off, the firing pin falls and the bolt handle snaps down to the full down position.

bigwhoop,

I hadn't thought to try it with Kimbers, but just did with two and got the same results you did.

As I recall, the gunsmith I mentioned couldn't get it to happen with any pre-'64's either, and in fact analyzed his fix for Classic M70 safeties by comparing them to pre-'64 safeties.

Murphy's Law as applied to rifles

The safety is my least favorite feature of the Mod 70 and amazing to me that so many go to such great lengths and expense to replicate it on other actions. I much prefer the Mod 30 safety and Enfield or even the simple safely on my Sako.

John, I realize that some of the Brownings are "short extractor" but are the long ones true 98s?

As far as the bolt/extraction and gas-blocking system goes, yes. But they don't have the firing-pin-blocking safety on the bolt sleeve, instead using a trigger-blocking safety to the right of the sleeve. But then neither do Mark X's.

There are some people who'd argue the only "real" 98's are military actions, with stripper-clip thumb slots in the receiver wall and simple 2-stage triggers. There are all sorts of degrees of 98-ness!

I must admit to preferring the military trigger, converted to a decent single-stage pull, for truly hard-use rifles. It's just about unbreakable, very weather-resistant, and in the event of a real disaster can easily be replaced in a few minutes by another military trigger that can be purchased for a few bucks. But I also have to admit I've never had any problems with the Timney, Mark X, or other "non-98" triggers on some of my other Mausers. Though I haven't hunted with them in Alaska or northern Canada, as I have with my .338 and its modified military trigger.

John what do you think about the bolt stop/bolt release mechanism of the FN Browning? I like the Mauser style original myself.

Merry Christmas!

The Browning system works OK, but if anything goes wrong it's much easier and cheaper to find 98 parts.

One thing I don't particularly like about the Brownings is they use the same contour barrel for all the magnum rounds. This is fine with bigger-bore cartridges, but it makes the 7mm and .300 magnums pretty heavy. Of course, if you're going to rebarrel the action anyway that doesn't matter, but darn few people buy Brownings just for the action!

I found an old Whitworth bare action stil in the box about 10-12 years ago. I had it barreled and used one of those much hated Great American Gunstock patterns on it. I thought it turned out pretty nice.


I thought it was a lot of rifle for the money I had in it. The sheetmetal modified magazine was a little tacky but it didn't affect the rifles function.

My Africa plans went away and so did the rifle. IMO, it was a little much for Mississippi whitetail . I really liked it though.

TC: I would say that turned out very nice!

That is very nice TC, what cartridge is it chambered for.

.375 H&H

Great composition on your first pic. The background sure showed the rifle. Very nice rifle.

tag

That rifle was very suitable for young nobleman. Too bad it was to much for southern deer and you let it go. Don't feel bad I found rare Ruger 10,75x73mm at good price but it was too much for our hoofed game so I had to pass on it. It came with several boxes of RWS ammo. Those were lovely bound in hard cardboard of black and blue coloring.

Is anyone looking for a Whitworth in 375 HH? The rifle is in very good condition.

Hows about a Whitworth - .375 H&H - DST - Rear removable claw mounts (allows a large ocular scope to be used) one solid rear sight with two folding. VERY good condition - proven on buff in Tanzania. - Photos to private 4e-mail if serious. Price $1,200.00 including LL Bean aluminum rifle case.

Terry

I also have two others - a .300 Win Mag and a 7mm Rem mag - all with DST - excellent condition.

Let me know!

Campboss, pm me some info