Anyone know why Winchester designed the Model 70 so that when the bolt handle is turned down it clicks into an intermediate position, before full closure?

Need additional info. Not sure what you're describing. Is this with just one gun, or you've experienced this phenominon with more than one M-70?

DF

Dirtfarmer,

Current production (I checked a few). But I suspect all model 70's have the same behaviour.

When the bolt is turned down (in preparation to fire) the bolt first clicks or "notches" into a spot about 1/4 turn (note: the bolt will stay in this position if the rifle is put down). Then from this intermediate position the bolt is closed smoothly and quietly.

I find this feature useful when stalking - as a fire control technique - but I'm interested to learn if Winchester designed it for this or some other purpose.

what you are feeling is the cocking piece being let forward to the sear.

the cocking piece rides under spring pressure against the rear face of the bolt and the cocking notch, then when it is held back by the sear, it is no longer in contact.

My M-70's, pre and post '64, close pretty smooth. I guess I don't pay that part any attention, just closing the bolt in one motion. Guess I'll have to do a slow motion closing to see if I can pick up on what you're feeling.

DF

I think free miner got it right.

I don't think it was ever designed to run "hot" and leave the bolt at 1/4 cocked while stalking game,safety off.....if this is what you mean, it does not strike me as such a good idea.

I use it during the final moments of stalking, when walking slowly and rifle carried carefully in both hands.

I prefer to chamber a round only minutes before taking a shot, and not to use a safety at all, because it makes a noise when released that can spook game and I don't like the practice of carrying a loaded rifle on shoulder because I worry that the safety might be bumped off.

If the trigger on my Sako 75 is pulled when the bolt is in this position, the bolt will close and uncock without firing. However I have not conducted the same test with a Winchester model 70.

Note: when I first conducted this test with my Sako 75 I used a primed case without power.

Well, I understand what you're trying to do....but it still strikes me as less satisfactory than running hot in the final moments, and using the safety,which is a three position safety, and disengages the sear when in the full
"safe" position...there is no intentional "intermediate" position to the M70 cocking function.If you wind up with the bolt handle fully up,you are uncocked, and if fully down, you are in "fire" mode.....anything between is not part of the the way the rifle is designed,and you are slight downward movement of the bolt handle away from full fire mode,the force of the firing pin spring being the only thing seperating you from disaster.

The same forces which could move a safety off could also cause that bolt handle to move down far enough that you move to "full cock",and there is now sufficient force imparted by the firing pin spring to cause a discharge....the reason your Sako did not fire when you tried it.

This reminds me of a friend who, when I first hunted with him,noticed that he would chamber a round with his Rem 700,and then slowly lowered the bolt handle while holding the trigger back so that the firing pin was resting against a live round. His logic was that with a swift up/down movement of the bolt handle, the rifle was cocked and ready to fire....I asked him what happens if he drops or jars the rifle with the firing pin in that position...?

Slung is a no brainer and I can see simply closing the bolt over a full magazine,but empty chamber.

I certainly would not trust the tactic with a Sako, either....notwithstanding your "tests".

I hear these peculiar fears mentioned now and then about safeties being mysteriously moved off;generally it demonstrates that the user is not fully aware of the rifles status at all times,slung, hand held or whatever.These things should be automatically monitored.

I also hear about noisy rifle mechanisms scaring game, and we have round robbined about the issue here. I have no doubt it happens now and then,but I am not going to modify my use of the safety to accomodate the concern; if you are practiced enough, moving a M70 safety from fully engaged to fire mode is simple and so fast I don't give the matter a second thought even under the most extreme circumstances.

My last elk was approached from a distance, the rifle slung,empty.I chambered a round after dropping into a sit,engaged the safety immediately,with the herd moving up through a draw at 175 yards.Only when the targeted bull came into view did I disengage the safety and he was dead at the shot seconds later....nothing spooked......

In sharp contrast,last years mule deer buck required a long stalk thorugh broken country...as we approached where he'd been last seen,I stopped ,chambered up,fully engaged the safety and as we moved in slowly, he appeared at about 70 yards runnning in front of me; I had about 3-4 seconds to mount,aim and fire, as he ran past...I killed him first shot, the safety coming off as the rifle was mounted.

So you'll have to forgive me if I seem a bit incredulous at the question and the tecnique as I find it particularly unsound, and unsatisfactory. My suggestion is that a guy should practice with his rifle until he can manipulate the action and safety without giving the matter a second thought;this stuff should be so automatic in the presence of game, that you have no conscious memeory of having done it...it just "happens" through muscle memory resulting from repeated practice.

You can likely tell I don't like your idea,for which I apologize. But I really think it ain't so hot....

I find someone doing that and I'll be in the next county inside of ten seconds..

I assume you never hunted with that 'friend' again??

Redneck:He changed his ways pretty fast(like THAT day).....I edited my reprimand since this is a family thread...

I asked him "Are you [bleep] crazy?" Who the hell taught you to do that?

It was never repeated,even to this day. This was a long time ago..

BobinNH,

Thanks for your comprehensive comment.

I too know someone who had a practice of un-cocking a rifle on a chambered round. I don't advocate the practice, but for a different reason. Once the bolt is closed and uncocked, I don't view this as a highly dangerous state, because the rifle would need to be rammed muzzle first into the ground or some other solid object to fire a round. Instead, the reason I don't advocate that practice is because of detonation risk during bolt closure. If the trigger pressure is not kept firm during bolt closure the rifle might fire.

This relies on operator skill, so it would depend on how much you trust the skill of your hunting companion when it comes to determining the acceptability of practices like this.

That thought reminds me of a feature on the German designed Krico 902 bolt action rifles, which have a manual cocking device in place of a safety. In fact many older-style firearms have a manual cocking mechanism (revolvers etc). Are these unsafe?

Regarding the use of a safeties, I would not use the mid position on the model 70 safety because it is more vulnerable to being knocked off. In contrast the rearward position is quite secure.

I can see that you don�t like my �fire control� technique, but so far I�m unconvinced that it is a dangerous practice when compared to the risks associated with using a safety. I�m very practiced at this technique � it�s like second nature to me. I guess I like to have control of my firing pin, rather than letting the safety have control of my firing pin.

But I can accept than my technique might not be the best option for beginners, because safety with this technique relies more on the skill of the shooter and less on the design and build quality of a firearm.

Unbelievable... Please let me know when you're hunting in this area so I can be somewhere (anywhere) else..

As to this part: "my technique might not be the best option for beginners," - it should never, EVER, even BE an option...

And this: "...because the rifle would need to be rammed muzzle first into the ground or some other solid object to fire a round.." is so uninformed that it's shocking..


I'm sure I'll be flamed - and I couldn't care less..

There are several things wrong with your comments. Your idea that a rifle would need to be jammed barrel first to fire in that position is absolutely false. a simple drop on the butt from only a couple feet can easily fire off the round. With the firing pin resting against the primer there are a multitude of ways for the round to go off. Manufacturer's do multiple drop tests with the rifle in safe position and also with the firing pin resting on a live round to test just that scenario. I have witnessed some of these tests first hand and if you were to see just how easy they can fire in many different ways in that scenario you would count yourself one lucky individual that you had not had a serious accident yet.

The mid position on a M70, or a mauser for that matter, is not meant to be a "safety". The middle position locks the firing pin for easily dis-assembly of the bolt for maintainence.

Your practice of how you carry is EXTREMELY unsafe and dangerous. Even if you do not realize it you are carrying a rifle in full battery without the bolt being fully closed and lugs seated the way you operate. Your chance of a negligent discharge is exponentially higher than by using a safety. And you not only risk damage to your self and others but could easily ruin a great rifle if a round goes off without the bolt fully locked.

A Winchester safety can easily be controlled and rotated slowly to the fire position with almost zero sound. You can slowly rotate it quietly compared to flicking it forward and making a sound.

You need to learn and master safe gun handling techniques. If yo are so worried about the possibility of the tiny sound a safety makes that you put others at risk you have issues. There is no game animal worth poor safety habits.

I agree completely with Redneck and M1 Tanker. I tried to respond to your second post but it is so flawed on so many levels I simply don't know where to start.

All I can say is if I were a companion of yours,I'd leave the scene immediately;and if a professional guide I'd return your money and put you on the next plane home....

If you like the way a Krico functions then you should buy one,and not expect a M70 to function in a manner for which it was not intended.

You say you don't "trust" a M70 safety because you are concerned it will be bumped off....yet you "trust" yourself with a hot rifle, fully cocked,a short bolt handle movement from full battery with no safety ?

Let me get this straight....and to repeat..... you can keep track of a fully cocked, hot rifle, with safety disengaged, while moving through heavy cover or making a stalk, but you cannot keep track of a safety to prevent it being accidentally bumped off?

And you lack the presence of mind and dexterity to quickly and quietly disengage a safety in the presence of game with seconds on the clock?

This is so contradictory on so many levels...I'm afraid I simply do not understand.....

I don't "trust" any safety, but I know what you're saying. A safety is a mechanical device, and we all know the second part of that sentence, right?

Of course.. ..

I was refering to the operator's ability to keep track,and know the status, of his weapon at all times.

I don't believe in safeties coming off "by accident"..

.....after kicking his azz all the way 'round the camp first...

Glad I'm not the only one who finds his policy dangerous and frightening to the max..

One of the few times that words fail me.. It's best to just leave it at that...

M1Tanker, thanks for your informative comment. Particularly the bit about the mid position of the model 70 safety for disassembly, and the butt drop test with firing pin resting on primer. Previously i had heard about drop tests with rifle cocked and without safety on (to test trigger resistence) but not with firing pin resting on primer. Makes me wonder about the safetiness of the Krico 902. But like I said earlier, I don't advocate (or use) that practice - instead i was trying to access risk on facts known to me. You have increased my understanding - thank you!

My main "beef" with safety users is that they often load and cock a rifle and engage the safety, and then carry the rifle slung on their shoulder for an hour or more. In comparison to this practice, the half-cock techique, employed only a minute or so before firing, doesn't seem so unreasonable - with the condition that during the last minute or so before firing, the hunter moves very slowly and with great care.

Not to mention that some hunters would disengage a safety a minute or more before firing - with bolt fully closed.

Yes a model 70 safety is safer than the half-cock approach, to differing degrees depending on the scenario, but at the same time I believe a loaded rifle should never be slung over the shoulder, even with safety engaged. Does anyone disagree with the latter?

Do not disagree; I don't sling with a loaded rifle.

For still hunting/ tracking/poking in cover, alone,I am hot, safety engaged.Opinions vary on this,but I have done it this way for years.

On a long spot stalk,I am empty and do not chamber until things appear imminent and I am close;safety is fully engaged.

I have had guys explain they become nervous nellies when game is close,and they are afraid the safety will not come off in time so the safety is disngaged as they anticipate a shot;not good IMHO....I say spend more time in dry fire practice and drill with your rifle,until mounting and disengaging the safety become instinctive.

I am aware there are some rifles (Heym?)where the safety IS the cocking piece;their double rifle and some bolt actions come this way IIRC and the rifle is not cocked until the safety is engaged.....

This is really like driving a car,applying brakes and steering as situation dictates,always with an eye toward not crashing into things or jeopordizing yourself or anyone else in the process,with safety the major concern. A blown opportunity is not earth shattering....there will be more animals later.

One thing you need to realize is that using your "half cock" method you are carrying a gun that may or may not have the sears fully engaged with the locking lugs not fully rotated and seated. In that situation the odds for a negligent discharge are exponentially higher than by having it go off when the safety is moved. I asked a buddy of mine who is in research and development at one of the main gun manufacturers and his comment was that it would be thousands of negligent misfires using your scenario compared to having one with a safety being disengaged.

Sounds like buck fever! Truth be known a lot of beginners forgot to take the safety off. These shooters would be better served by the half-cock method than by the practice your describe above. But yes learning to release the safety would serve them best.


My reading of this is that the safety automatically engages when the rifle is cocked, therefore the shooter must release the safety before the rifle can be fired. Maybe this is how the Krico 902 works. I wonder if some revolvers or other exposed-hammer firearms operate in this fashion. This would mitigate the drop-test concerns associated with having a firing pin resting on a primer. While it's a little inconvenient, such a design really is very safe.


If rifle manufacturers know or believe that it really is that dangerous, I'm surprised they haven't moved to address (remove) the half-cock position - because I suspect the practice I describe is not that uncommon. I inspected a bunch of rifles recently, and the only one I found that doesn't have such a position is the Krico model 600.

Note that the Remington 700 "notch" is much less pronounced than the Winchester 70, and the Remington varies a little from one rifle to the next (some hold in the notch better than others while others do not hold in the notch at all).

My gunsmith tells me the underside of the cocking piece on a model 700 can be ground back to remove the notch altogether - something he does when building competition rifles. As such it would be easy enough for Remington to change the profile of the underside of the cocking piece.

You are way off base. The reason being is: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A HALF COCK POSITION ON BOLT ACTIONS.

The so called half cock you are feeling is the combination of the sears engaging and the locking lugs beginning to cam into position. Your practice puts a live round in the chamber without the bolt being locked in battery and the sear surfaces not being fully engaged. When you drop or jar a gun without a fully engaged sear you exponentially increase the risk of a negligent discharge. This has zero to do with the manufacturer but simply unsafe handling practices on the part of the operator.

For the record - I have hunted with a LOT of different people over the years and never once seen, heard, or met anyone who carries like you do. If so they would have received a reaming on the spot from everyone present and the last time they would have ever hunted around me.

Maybe you should take notice that EVERYONE who has responded to your post has condemned your practice. Sometimes it is better to admit that you are wrong, correct your mistake and learn from it. Rather than pursuing a practice that is condemned from every hunter on the ground to the companies who build the rifles.

Wow...just wow!

To your original question. They don't click into any intermediate position. They can be made to stop at some intermediate position because of friction, but you are the one making it happen. You can do the same with a light switch, that doesn't mean that is how it is meant to function.

As far as the safety and how it operates quit trying to be a genius and listen to experience. There are only 3 positions to that safety. Each has a purpose. If you can't let one of quietly and quickly then experience is what you need.

Saving my breath....he still doesn't get it.......wow is right.

I think he's trolling...no one can be this irrational.

I'm still at a loss for words - and it's best it continues re: this thread..

'Irrational'??

You're too kind...

If he is not trolling, then he makes a strong case for the European position on stringent qualification in order to acquire a hunting license.

Shaking my head..........he needs some help

This in particular is disturbing!

Apparently a protruding firing pin resting directly on a charged and primed case is preferable to using a safety which acts directly on the FP!

Take a look at this. Looks like I'm not the only person to have used the "notch" as a half cock.

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1301045304

No I don't live in New Zealand...

Some quotes from Wikipedia:

"...some early types of repeating lever-action cartridge rifles, such as the Winchester Model 94 rifle, had a half-cock position that was intended to serve as a safety mechanism, to keep the hammer away from the firing pin while holding the rifle when a round was chambered, such as when in a blind awaiting game to appear. Although the practice is today deprecated, the half-cock notch position on such rifles was formerly used by many hunters as a safety when carrying the loaded rifle with a round chambered while hunting. The half-cock position of the hammer did not serve a purpose while loading such firearms."

and

"The mid 1990s brought a change from the long-used half-cock notch safety to a cross-bolt safety like the aforementioned Marlins. Many longtime users, however, prefer the original half-cock notch safety design over the newer cross-bolt "lawyer" safety. The last Winchester 94s to leave the New Haven factory before production ceased in 2006 had tang-mounted safeties."

While those quotes concern lever actions, the first quote sure does make the Model 70 notch smell like a half cock. It also makes me wonder what the designers of the Winchester model 70 though about the notch in their design during a time when a half cock position was still considered a legitimate fire control technique by many.

I accept that my half-cock fire control technique was either never legitimate, or has long since been deprecated as a fire control technique, but I'm left wondering. Jack O'Connor would have known...

Remchester,
I read the link you sent then called my buddy who works in research and development for one of the major gun companies and had him read your link. He is familiar with the mentioned conversions. There is a major difference between your practice and the conversion. The rifles mentioned in the post have had a modification done that keeps the bolt fully forward but the bolt is NOT cammed closed in any way - it is simply held forward so the bolt handle can be closed easily.

And you can not compare a hammer on a lever action to a firing pin on a bolt rifle - they do not work the same in any way. The hammer has a half cock notch that is designed with the sole purpose to keep the hammer off the firing pin and to also serve as a safety.

What you are failing to grasp is that a bolt action in no way has any type of half cock. What you are thinking of as half cock is simply the engaging of the sears and camming of the locking lugs.

Even your posting you listed condemns the half closed bolt practice - read reply #19. And this from a guy who uses the half cock conversion.

As for the guy with the bolt half closed, talking in the clearing. What an idiot

You are right about Jack Connor knowing - he would have immediately kicked you out of camp for your practice.

Give Winchester a call and then you will know also.

M1, you have to understand you're trying to make a cement block understand quantum physics..

Ain't gonna happen..

He's a troll.

"because it makes a noise when released that can spook game "

BTDT biggest reason why I got rid of mine spooked to much game with that safety. As soon as I would flip it off they would look right at me . Takes 2 fingers to do it quietly, then you have to much hand movement. Nothing wrong with them at all I just didn't like them for that reason.

Ruger #1 would solve his problems..

Bull shidt....

Still don't like the ergos of the M70 safety as much as I like ergos of the three position tang safety of the lowly Savage 110 but I'm trying to get used to it.

As to the sound it makes, that is inconsequential to me because a very loud noise is very near at hand when the safety goes off.

That's bull [bleep] +P ! ! !

RD: Never read such nonsense in my life...

Proves the old adage of not believing everything you read or hear.

Between safety lever spooking game mod 70's and Remmy's unprovoked discharges.........well I just don't know what to buy anymore.

Me neither....nothin' works.

??? If you're standing that close to your target, all you'd need is a baseball bat or a Bowie knife.. I can hear ANY safety being let off - and I'm half deaf compared to wild game.. If you have one that's that audible, a decent smith can quiet it down for ya for about $20..


Most shots on deer in WI are at ranges from 50-150 yards.. I've not yet, in over 30 years of hunting, had a deer spooked by me letting off the safety on any of my M70s...

The "hand movement" gets me....what about the movement raising the rifle?

Releasing the safety and raising the rifle should be done in one smooth motion....if you are coordinated(not a klutz),the safety can be flicked off with a single motion of the thumb;all this movement is followed by a loud "boom",and if game is close and the boom comes more than a nanosecond later,see my comments about klutzes above.

If you are paranoid about noise and have not spent the $20 bucks Redneck mentions above,exert downward pressure with the thumb and eeze the safety forward;this frequently will soften the dreaded "click" that spooks all those animals into missile launch mode,and hopefully you will be able to move the rifle into position with no motion whatsoever so you can shoot.

This stuff ranks right there with "...my bullet was going so fast it whistled through and forgot to expand.." on the Hunters Myth scale.

The rifle has been around since 1937;in the hands of capable hunters it has taken every BG animal on the planet a zillion times over...you might prefer something else,but if you have a problem with it, you don't know how to operate it.

NO, no, it's the NOISE that spooks his game - not the frantic raising of the rifle or jumping up and down whilst waving the arms violently..

Now there's the best statement of the day.. By miles..

Thanks Bob..

Redneck, will the safety modification (to quieten operation) increase the chance of the safety being bumped off? In other words is less force required to operate it after the mod is done?

M1Tanker, thanks for taking time to investigate the link. The half-cock spoken about is consistent with the practice I describe, and there are comments both for and against the practice, which vary according to how it�s used as distinct from if it�s used.

However the key point you touch is that some half cocks (or part cocks or bolt holds or whatever) result in firing pin uncocking and closing when trigger is pulled, while others neither uncock nor close when trigger is pulled. I'll refer to the first as type 1 and the latter as type 2. The modification your friend described would fall into my type 2 classification I believe.

Clearly type 2 is safer - or less dangerous - than type 1 - but I myself condemn the use of either except during the final moments before taking a shot - while slowly traversing only a few yards - when many other hunters would have already disengaged their safety lever.

After testing a new unmodified Rem 700 today (one that notches better than my Rem 700) I found that the bolt does not uncock or close upon pulling the trigger. So I think it fair to say that some Rem 700 rifles come from the factory with a type 2 half cock, while others miss out by a whisker.

What I don't know is if a type 1 half cock modification can be made to the Rem 700. But based on this discussion it's safe to say that it's a bad idea anyway.

Now I'm wondering how my Krico 600 manages to have no notch whatsoever. And it has a super slick bolt - which makes it a safety lever only proposition when the magazine it empty - because the bolt slides open real easy. Maybe I should sell my other rifles to force myself into submission...

Just from noise, no.. There are many things to note/look at re: the M70 safety.. As far as 'bumping off' goes, that can apply to every safety mechanism built into every rifle, handgun and shotgun.. It's up to the operator to ensure he/she knows the correct operation and position of any safety mechanism..

The 'noise' you refer to, specifically to the M70, can originate from two distinct areas - both of which I look at and address if one or both is causing it.. As to any firearm safety engagement/disengagement, again they ALL can be heard...

I must say that it would be mighty hard to "bump off" the safety on a Savage 110.

Pretty darn silent too.

Heck we have some guys here who can cycle a bolt (cold chamber) w/o spooking game so flicking a safety lever should be a breeze.

Wow.

This whole thread is half cocked. Need to go into full cock mode and add some more reedikulus comments. Wow is right.

If alive, John Browning still wouldn't have any competition.

I'm confused - you chamber a round minutes before taking the shot. How much ground do you cover in those last few minutes? You'd have to know you're close to your intended game as otherwise, why chamber the round? That means you'd also have to be far enough away that the game can't hear you chamber the round but close enought that in a minute or 2 you're close enough that the "snick" of the safety sends them into the next county?

This safety noise scaring game is getting out of hand.

They should have an entry into the record books for any who can take BG with a flintlock or percussion muzzle-loader. At least a patch to be worn on you coat to honor such an impossible accomplishment.

Looks like I'm missing a phun one here....

Win M 70 safety levers spooking game.... Glad I didnt know about THAT for the last 30 years.....

You're missing a fun one for sure. Go back and read the first post

I know, I habitually keep getting away with the same mistake. Then again, I've always been fairly lucky.