Just returned from a gunshow and I picked up a rifle that I wanted to get an opinion on. I ended up with it simply because it was too cheap to walk away from. Had to look at the tag three times to make sure I was reading it right.

The rifle is a 1958 model 70 featherweight chambered in 30-06. Obviously the rifle was or is somewhat of a parts gun. There are no numbers on the bottom of the bolt so I can't be sure that it is matching, however, it does headspace fine, and the brass looks good after firing. The gun does have a freshly re-blued floor plate and trigger guard, and it is steel so obviously not correct. The finish on the barrel and action appears correct, un-messed with, and very good. Unfortunately, there is a Griffin and Howe, side mount mounted to the action. The stock, although extremely good, has been cut down an inch so a pad will take it back out to the original LOP.

Now for the part I'm unsure about. I took the gun apart and noted that there did not appear to be a date stamp on the bottom, however, it is marked Super. What I am curious about is, is this barrel a featherweight Supergrade barrel? If that is the case, based on the rest of the rifle not being correct, would there be a decent market for that barrel if I was to take it off and sell it? I know that some guys try getting more money out of their pre 64 barrels than I think they should be worth, especially the common 06 and 270 barrels, however, this barrel, if it is a supergrade, even though it is in a common caliber, I believe the supergrade featherweights were somewhat uncommon, so I'm wondering if I should consider trying to find a market for it.

I simply bought it because I thought it was way too cheap, and I figured I could either use it for the basis of a semi custom, or just hunt it the way that it is with the pad. But I guess I would like to see if I can get a little input from those that may know more than I about them. Thanks for any and all info someone would like to contribute.

If you can find a copy of Roger Rules "Riflemans Rifle" you may find extensive information on the pre-64 model 70. I had a first addition and sold it to someone who wanted alot more than I did. Winchester did place the serial number, hand engraved, on all pre 64 bolts to ensure they correctly fit the receiver. Unfortunatley over time wear could take its toll. However, I would think there should be some remaining evidence if your bolt came with the receiver. In regards to the barrel, if Winchester
replaced the barrel on a rifle, they would often add an additional proof mark, sometimes an oval with only a P in the center, or some similar type mark. If it is an original Super Grade barrel it could be of higher value to someone trying to replace a buldged or otherwise damaged barrel for their Super Grade.

30WCF, thankyou for the input. That's kind of what I was thinking, and the rifle being what it is right now, I'm wondering if I shouldn't pull the barrel. I guess if someone needed it to make theirs correct, or mostly correct, I would rather do that. The proof mark appears to be correct with the PW in an oval to the left of center near the wood line. Receiver proof is in the same spot. I didn't see any other proofs on it, but will double check. I'll also try to upload some photo's later today of the markings.

I know that some of the numbers on the bolt could become very weak over time, but I can see nothing. I'll have to try and find a good light and magnifying glass and see if I can see anything.

Were the supergrade featherweights marked on the floor plate like the standards??? If they were, were they still an aluminum plate?? Thanks again.

The supergrade featherweights are quite scarce. I have not owned one and cannot recall the last time I saw one in person. I do believe they would have an aluminum magazine floorplate with the SUPERGRADE stamp. The lighter aluminum is part of what made them the featherweight. The barrel would be stamped with featherweight similiar to a non-supergrade featherweight. The Super marking you have found on the underside of the barrel lends some credibility of being a super grade barrel, as I have seen the date stamp before, but not Super. I could not say for certain how the Super Grade Featherweights were marked on the bottom of the barrel. The non-supergrade featherweight barrels had the dovetail cut for the rear sight right out of the barrel as opposed to the rear sight barrel ring which was on standard models. The featherweight also had a 22" bbl in .30-06 rather than the 24" in standard models.

Super Grade barrels could have "Super" marked underneath. Floor plates were aluminum and marked "Super Grade".

Thanks pal and 30wcf. I'll attach a few pics and see what you guys think. Just seems odd to me that there is no date stamp, but maybe they weren't. All the markings are crisp, so I'm relatively certain it hasn't been refinished. I did see some other featherweights that were stamped supergrade, and they appeared to be aluminum.

more pics

That is not a Super Grade stock.

PSH,

I am far from being a Winchester expert. However, I just purchased a Pre-64 Mod 70 Std Feather Weight barrel off GB for the sights. Just checked. This FW barrel does not have any stamps on the bottom...

Warren

No, I know that it isn't. Like I said, it appears that this gun was put together as a user. It does tick me off that they cut an inch off of the stock because it is very nice. A pad will take it back out to the original LOP though, so it can still be used. The floor plate is also not marked Super Grade, and it is steel instead of aluminum. Does that SUPER mark on the bottom of the barrel appear to be consistent with the Winchester super grade barrels? I guess the other thing that I don't know, was there any difference in the super grade barrels over the standard grades??

Re-read my original posting and see I wasn't clear on the stock. It is a standard grade stock, not a supergrade. I guess my biggest quandry is what to do now. If this rifle was originally a Super Grade that was cannibalized, for another one, I'm afraid finding original parts to put it back the way that it was, would be extremely expensive, and difficult to find. And the fact of the matter is, it's still going to have the side mount on it, which will detract some, but it is what they did in the day.

My original thought with the rifle was to use it for a custom, or send it off to JES reborring and have it made into a 35 Whelen, or 9.3x62, but bore condition appears to be too good for that. I also don't believe that I could live with myself simply, because there might be someone out there that would give decent money for a good barrel if they had a super grade that was bulged, etc.

Thanks Warren for checking yours.

That is not a factory "super" stamp. Not a super grade stock, and the side has been drilled out.

Yes, we've pretty much got the stock not being a supergrade, and the receiver drilled for the side mount covered. I am not, however, familiar with the supergrade barrel markings, and I guess that is what I'm asking about. What do the factory super grade barrel markings look like. I'm just not the proud owner of a super grade as of yet, so I have no idea.

It could be. They were hand stamped.

I had a '53 Supergrade in 257 Roberts and it was not stamped "SUPER" on the barrel.

Too bad the recevier has been drilled for a side mount.

That's a good Pre'64 to have in my opinion. You can use the heck out of it without worry of diminishing it's collector value....I have a '51 30-06 that's the same way...non-original barrel and sights and plenty of stock wear and tear. Use it.

Rembo, I would agree with you, and that is the biggest reason I bought it, at the very least it is a shooter grade, and very usable for someone wanting to hunt one. Up until this one came along, I didn't have a featherweight in an 06 and have always thought I should. I just wanted to find out about the barrel simply because it is a shooter grade, and the rifle isn't going to care if it's wearing this barrel or something different.

...During the course of collecting Pre '64 M-70's for more than 30 years, I've had two Fwt Super Grade rifles. One was a .270, the other a .243
The barrel stamps were: SUPER .270 56; SUPER .243 55
On both rifles, the barrel strike for the word SUPER was of a consistant nature. Viz; all the same size, and depth.
Based on the photos you've provided, IMO, the "SUPER" on your barrel was/is not factory struck.
Not down-playing the rifle, only adding a bit of info from personal experience. If the rifle shoots accurately, and you're pleased with it...keep it as it is, and enjoy.

I can't tell from the glare of the pic but is there a faint "S" stamped on the bottom of the recoil lug? My Super Grades are stamped "S" on recoil lug and "SUPER" with year under chamber. The stamping is usually closer to the action than yours looks. Possibly a featherweight supergrade someone restocked?

I was looking at that, and it does appear that there is a letter there, but I was unable to make it out. I'll have to take it apart again and take another look. I'm gonna have to get a magnifying glass I think. I suppose it could be possible that someone had a featherweight that they were swapping parts on to make a supergrade that was possibly not drilled on the side?? Don't know for sure, but could be a possibility.

Horseman, are your supergrades stamped with the date code as well?? That is the odd part to me on this one, I know most were, but I have seen one or two that did not have those markings.

TSI, thankyou for the input as that is why I started the thread, I was looking for opinions from those that would know better than I. I will say that all of the SUPER lettering does appear consistent in size and depth. However, I see no hint of caliber or date marking, and there is no indication that the metal has ever been messed with.

Thanks again for all of the input and if anyone has any other ideas please let me know. Regardless of what it is, I couldn't pass on it as a shooter.

Some were marked simply: "SUPER".

This thing is starting to make me curious.

There were usually no stampings for super grades, that's what makes them so popular to mock up. I have not owned a featherweight supergrade but have had many supergrades. None of them had the "s" that rule stated were put on some. The determining factors for the supergrade were the stock, the full blade brass front sight, and the floor plate.

Just my opinion but that stamping doesn't look factory to me.

I hear people talk about fake SG Featherweights all the time yet no one can tell me where they would get a SG Featherweight stock from? I've heard people say that they simply alter a standard SG stock. If you can't figure that one out in about 3 seconds then you have no business buying a collectable firearm!

If someone can alter a standard SG stock and pass it off as a FW they are the worlds best woodworker. Filling in the area for the barrel boss and not being able too tell would be artwork, and I'm guessing you could make more money doing something else, lol.

Horseman, what is the year of manufacture on your SG's? I see I asked if they were stamped with the date code, what I meant to ask is if they were marked as to the caliber?

The date code and other markings on the bottom of my FW barrel are almost completely polished out. The stampings above the wood look normal and the bluing looks factory and I have no reason to believe the barrel was refinished. I suppose it's possible the date code was polished out on yours.

LOL, this rifle is bugging me more than anything. Marc, the thought that the other markings could've been polished crossed my mind as well, but there are no indications that this is the case on this one. I can detect no signs of polishing on the bottom of this barrel, and there are no signs of waviness. I have seen some faint stampings before, but not polished unless the metal had been refinished, and then there are typically other indicators of refinishing as well.

There was a point about whether or not the lettering was the same size and depth, and I have pulled it apart and looked at it again. Using a caliper, it appears that maybe the S is a touch smaller than the rest of the letters, but if it is, it is minimal. The spacing between the letters is virtually exact.

The markings that were pointed out on the bottom of the lug almost appears to be the back side of a 2. Using a light to create a shadowing effect in this area, it appears that there is possibly the faint front portion of a 2. Like the stamp was struck at an angle marking the backside well, and leaving the front virtually unmarked.

I should probably buy a Winchester reference book anyway, and I know Roger Rule's book was mentioned. Is there much difference between Rule's book and the Madis book? Anyone recommend one over the other. Thanks again for the input and ideas.

Rules book is the most informative IMO. The other way to learn is buy them (M70's) and take them apart. I did both.

If you want THE M70 reference book get Rule's book. If you start collectin M70's then you will also need to get Whitaker's book as well. It's not as accurate or as detailed but it's rarer and worth more!

Well, I guess some would say that I do collect them, but I guess I've always felt that I was more of a shooter than a collector. I guess this would be the 3rd 06 I have, two 270's, 308, 243, 257, 264, 220, 300 H&H, 338, 358, and a hornet. Course the 358 is a 308 that I took on trade and it had a bulged barrel. It was sent off to JES and rebored and chambered. Mainly because I figured I'd either never be able to afford the original, or would never want to afford it, lol.

Regardless, I shoot them all, and most I've gotten at prices that I wasn't afraid that I wouldn't see my money back. I've just never taken the time to really study them in depth, but looking at what I have, maybe I should've started with a good book sooner, lol.

PSH, Considering you can pick up a paper back edition of Rule's book for under $100 now I would consider it a must have for someone with the M70's you have. Other than just an intersting book picking up one little tid bit of information from it could save you way more than the $100 it costs.

LOL, yeah, I would say that I would have to agree with you reelman. I do find them interesting, and am always on the look out for them. Some of the ones that I have may have a little thing wrong here or there, but for the most part I knew that before I bought them, and paid accordingly. Others are correct, but shooters, which is what I wanted to begin with. Probably the nicest one that I have is the 338, but I still want to hunt it.

I do appreciate the opinions and suggestions on this one. I've not owned a supergrade yet, but I'd like too one day.

PSH, yes all mine have the date stamped after SUPER but anything is possible with Win's of that era. Especially since Supergrade FW's weren't high production. If that is an "S" on the bottom of your recoil lug it would lead me to believe it's a Supergrade FW that's been restocked and bottom metal replaced.

wow. Seems like I read recently that hard copies of Rule's book are going for $700ish? What are Whitaker's worth now? thanks

Maybe the books were a better investment than the rifles

Just another example of "supply and demand". There is a soft cover version of the book out now, in somewhat limited supply.
Don't quote me, but under $100 I believe.

Amazon's got 'em for $82.

Ok, I left it all apart last night and took another look this morning with the help of a large magnifying glass. In looking at the area behind the "SUPER" it does almost appear that there is the faintest of stampings there that could possibly be a two digit number. I can't make it out, but I'm going to assume that this is most likely a date stamp. The barrel still does not appear to have been refinished, lettering catches my fingernail and is very crisp and clear, but if it has been, they did a very nice job. I have seen some faint year and caliber stampings before just due to not being struck well, but never this faint.

The other thought I had as I'm looking at it, the "SUPER" stamping does not have bluing down inside the lettering, like most stampings that you see. I suppose it could be possible that they were putting an SG rifle together at the factory and this happened to be the barrel they grabbed for it, so they stamped the "SUPER" on after the bluing had been applied, but I would say it could be just as likely that the "SUPER" was applied sometime after the rifle was sold, for whatever reason.

I guess regardless, it is kind of fun to wonder about the story behind it, and I did call the Cody Museum just to see if they could or would possibly tell me anything about it, but I have not received a call back. As it stands right now, I believe that I'm going to have to go with the thinking that it probably is not a factory SG featherweight barrel. I won't say that my mind couldn't be changed on that, however, based on what I'm seeing right now, and input from others, I'm guessing it's more likely than not, not an SG barrel.

Just to be on the safe side, I don't believe I will be having this one re-bored, lol. It can stay the way that it is. I'll add a pad too it and take it back out to the standard LOP, the trigger was adjusted this morning before being placed back into the stock. Now all that it needs is a scope and I can go see what it'll do. Just wish it had the rings with it so I didn't have to take the side mount off and be plugging holes. Maybe I can get some standard rings and bases on it without removing the side mount, but it's gonna be stupid looking, lol.

I'm am still interested in hearing other thoughts if anyone has some on it.

I've heard those large $ numbers for the books also but when I look at them on sale on Ebay I don't see anyone getting big bucks for any of them. Maybe $200 for a hard cover Rule book and I've seen a Whitaker book for sale for around $400 for the last couple months with no takers. If you're going to get $700 for a Rule book it would have to be the first edition leather bound version with the slip cover. I have all 3 (Rule hard cover, Rule 1st edition, and Whitaker) and tried to sell the 1st and Whitaker a while back and got no interest in them.

well, dang...thought I was rich for a few minutes...

thanks for the info

What I meant was mine looks like the date code was stamped before the barrel was polished for bluing in the factory. The polishing marks on the bottom match the top and the caliber stamping is normal. I don't think the barrel was refinished.

Marc, I'm guessing that is the case. It seems odd to me that they would've polished this one of mine so much that the date code is as obscured as it is, but it certainly could be the case as well.

I guess as far as the books go, I'm not a collector of those, so I'd probably try to find one mainly for the content, not the value of the book itself, lol. I guess kinda like the 70's I have acquired, lol.

I got $425 for the last rule (1st edition) I sold. I have seen them go for $500, but not for a few years. I think the paperback edition brought the price down.

I am getting in on this discussion pretty late, but here is my take on the barrel.
I believe it is most likely a Super Grade barrel that slipped through the cracks, and was installed on a standard rifle. The "SUPER" stamp look's correct to me for a late S/G rifle. That said, all S/G Fwts barrels were rust blued, which this one does not appear to be. The only reason they were stamped SUPER was to earmark them for rust bluing. There is no other difference between the 2 barrels other than the finish. The date stamp is not a big deal in that Winchester quit stamping dates in 1956. Since the Fwt S/G was released in '55, there were not many with date stamps, if any at all. I have one of mine that is in the 1955 production, and it is stamped with a "55". My othr 3 are later guns made after 55 and none have a date code. I do not recall reading in the post what the s/n was or manuf date, but bet it was 56 or later. In conclusion I believe the barrel was originally earmarked for the Super Grade, but received a conventional Dulite blue and was installed on the standard Fwt rifle. The proofmarks line up very well, also indicating to me it is the original barrel installed at factory.
Just my thoughts.
Steve

No doubt that the paperback brought the price down but the internet did more to lower the price IMHO. It used to be that if you wanted a leather bound version of Rule's book you bought it when you found it regardless of price (withint reason) now you can sit in your underwear and find everyone for sale at 3 AM! It used to be normal to pay $100-$200 for a 1940's Winchester catalog because you couldn't find one. Now you seach Ebay and there are 10-20 of them for sale at $19.99!

The $425 was that for a normal 1st addition or the limited edition leather bound one with the sleeve?

The normal one.

Steve, thanks for the input. I thought I had put the year in the original post, but may have forgotten to do that. I've got it as a 58 manufacture so your bet would be correct. That was one of the other things that I noticed as I was looking at the markings this AM, the bluing does not appear to be a rust blue. Proof marks are right on the money as well.

Your take on the markings could answer that question, but it then opens up another one for me, why replace the floor plate with a steel one???

Really have no idea about the floorplate. However I have seen alumimum fwt floorplates used on standard and Varmint rifles. I do not recall reading, but is the trigger guard aluminum? The aluminum floorplates did not hold the finish very well and were prone to denting fairly easily. Perhaps it was replaced after the fact? It's anybodies guess!
Steve

Nope, trigger guard appears to be steel as well. The entire bottom metal has been re-blued, and you can see some pitting under the bluing.

Appears to be? It just isn't that hard to check it with a magnet. If it's steel, the magnet will stick. If it's aluminum, it won't.

Yes, that is true, but I wasn't looking closely at the trigger guard simply because I wasn't too concerned with it. Coloring on the trigger guard is exactly the same as the floor plate on it and I know the floor plate is steel due to the pitting.