Thinking about going old school with a pre-64 (1950) 375 H&H. The rifle has been molested unfortunately. The barrel was magnaported by a previous owner and initials professionally stamped on the trigger guard. Rear sight removed and the mounts have been retapped with 8/32's. I would like to make it a user but don't want to even further erode the value. Any suggestions to alter or just use as is?

Thanks, Nelson

I would use it as is. The value has already been eroded from it.

Bingo, use it as an excuse to make it exactly the way you want.

That sounds like the perfect project rifle.

If it was mine I would cut the barrel to 22", install a banded front sight and a N.E.C.G. island rear sight.
An orange decelerator pad.

That is my idea of the perfect 375H&H

Hard to say what is the best course, but unless you do something really "out there", you probably won't lower the value any more. In fact, you might just help it.

Magnaport: If you don't want the Magnaport (I wouldn't, but that's me), you are going to have to cut it or rebarrel it. According to Rule, a 1950 .375 should have a 25" barrel. That is good in that you don't have to cut it terribly short to remove the porting. It is a shame you will lose the integral front sight base that was on those barrels until they began to sweat them on a few years later. Then again, were it sweated on, you might could shorten the barrel and reattach. But it is what it is. If you could find someone who WANTED a Magaported barrel, then rebarreling might be less expensive and more attractive.

Trigger guard: Not sure how ugly, large, or deep the stamping is, but perhaps grinding off or welding up, then reblue or Cerakote. If Cerakote, you may have more options for how to fill. Even good welding might take a reblue differently such that you don't get rid of the booger entirely.

6-48 to 8-32: Usually, people go to 8-40, but this is what it is. Probably not too big an issue as far as use, and appearance won't show if you mount a scope.

You didn't mention the stock. If I were going to scope it, I would get a stock more suitable to scope use, either a vintage M70 Monte Carlo or something in all the other choices you have in wood, laminate, or glass. The stock won't be "correct", but that is pretty much out the window already. If you want iron sights, you might consider an aperture receiver sight, and continue with the low comb stock.

Whatever you choose, at the end of the day you will likely end up with a nice rifle, and no one can reasonably take you task for buggering up a rifle you should have left alone.

I like that idea. The rifle sounds like it's been degraded in value and a modification like this would be better than the magnaporting...

While back I snagged BSA's McMillan stock for my 375, and I can say from expeiance it is defiantly one of the best designs for a pre64 375, if you go semi custom your will not be dissapointed. If you do decide to take the barrel off I'd be interested, the magna port makes no nevermind to me

From what I’ve read in this thread, joining others here with suggestion you appreciate what you do have in your yet very decent ‘Pre-M70 and move on! Such instead of conjecturing/postulating/lamenting elements of originality restorable. Enjoy the ‘possibilities’ to make it yours in ways that no collector could ever contemplate with a pristine safe queen. Yours a customization liberation from ‘original’ rifles not to be touched. And with that philosophizing aside, to encourage a ‘go for it’.
Were the rifle mine, I’d likely lose that short barrel. A nice tube worthy of 375 H&H potential without trying to be a brush gun, flame thrower, hearing hazard, etc. From there, to whatever sights best suit. Stocked… wood, fiber, etc., du jour. The trigger guard; if initials really bothers, simply replace it! (Unless you desire otherwise, be sure to get steel rather than alloy)
The bottom line as suggested. Once not original or reasonably restoreable, actually a liberation of sorts. A very nice rifle potentially awaits your tastes!
Just my take

Thanks for the input guys. I am going to use as is for now. If the magnaporting is just too much have the barrel cut and recrowned. It's old, it's used, but still a good rifle with lots of life left.

Nelson

Nelson, nothing wrong with that either. So, if you are going to use as is, what scope is on it, or what are you going to put on it?

Hold back the laughter. I just took a 4.5-14 Leupold VXIII off. I took it to E. Oregon and shot ground squirrels. Nothing more than off hand shooting practice. A bIt different recoil impulse than the 17 hmr. A solid hit with 270 grains sends things airborne. Lol. I have a 2,5-8 Leupold to go on it. I have a place in Alaska and the rifle will go there to live.

Nelson

I think a 2.5-8 is a great choice for a .375. I always pick my scopes based on the lowest power, not the highest. My reasoning? While "?" power might be sufficient for a given shot, one might prefer more. How much more? Hard to say, but in general one might take "even a bit more." But on the low end, one can clearly have too much for a quick shot. So I pick my scopes based on how low I want the low end. I carry the rifle with the scope turned down, and turn it up only when on stand or perhaps only before a shot. You seldom have time to turn it down for the quick shot, but almost always have time to turn in up for the long shot, so leave it turned down.

I have found stock fit to be especially important for the quick shot. If the stock fits well, you will be surprised by how high the lowest power can be. As long as your target is in the field of view, you are good to go. In fact, if the target takes up a lot of the field, it is is easy to pick up with few distractions. However, if the target is not in the field when you mount the gun, then you will have trouble. Thus the importance of stock fit. Many say a big rifle should wear a 1-4, but most 1-4 are really 1.5 on the low end. I believe 2.5 is low enough, but some prefer lower.

One of the most famous rifles in the hunting world is the late Finn Aagaard's Pre '64 M70 .375. For most of the time he owned it, and I believe still today, it wore a Weaver
K2.5. I'm no authority, but most consider Finn to have been one.

On the other hand, the "biggest" scope I have on any hunting rifle is 3.5-10. I might go higher than 10x, but only if I can afford a scope with more than "3x range." So, were I willing to spend the money, a 2-12 might be a choice.

Of course, at some point, the scope just becomes physically too big and cumbersome.

Scope choice is purely a subjective matter. However, getting a short tubed 2.5-8x36mm leupold to fit in appropriate mounts would be my problem. You can easily do it with a redfield or leupold one piece, but then you also have the problem with the windage adjustable mounting system, which I've seen many failures with those. I personally like a 2 piece base and rings on my pre 64 model 70's and with the magnum action, good luck getting that 2.5-8 leupy to fit....The 3.5-10x40 is always the better choice when scoping these vintage rifles in proper rings and bases.. JMHO..

Many one piece Weaver/Picatinny bases are available for the M70, although some have so many slots as to look too "tactical" for my tastes. The old style Weaver bases and rings, while "pooh-phooed" by many, tend to work really well. Finn Aagaard did a lot of home gunsmithing to the previously mentioned .375, including fitting a Super Grade stock and putting real cross bolts into that stock. The rifle wore not only a Weaver scope, but Weaver rings, albeit I believe with two piece bases. (Finn wasn't working with a short tubed scope.) Given his ability, I suspect had Finn found either the scope or the mounting wanting, he had the skill to change either.

You may not like the looks, but those old Weaver designs work fine. They are light, strong, tend to line up well, and return to zero. You will find, however, that you might want to add a new cross slot or two to the Weaver one-piece base.

Having said all that, Leupold used to make a one piece QR base for the M70, and those had the rear ring far enough forward to mount most short tube scopes. I haven't looked for one lately, but I was able to find a few when I realized they went away.

BTW, my favorite scope for Pre '64's is Leupold 3-9 COMPACT. it is short, but the smaller diameter occular clears the bolt handle with even QR super low rings. However, one usually must file or mill some relief in the aforementioned one piece base to clear the turret "ring" when using super low rings.

Lots of choice with just a bit of fiddling. Much depends on where you like your scopes fore and aft as well how high you like them.

BSA is of course correct about "to each his own", but short tubes aren't that tough to work around.

My pre 64 &0 in 375 wears a Leupold 2.5X8 in two piece mounts with no problem.

Here's a Pre'64 Fwt in 270 with Dual Dovetails holding a 2.5-8 Leupold.

Please show a picture with the rear mount hanging over the ejection port.

That's not an H&H magnum action with the bigger ejection port. Nice try though. You also have no fore to aft adjustment with that set-up... Like I've said before, if it magically works for you, that is awesome. The eye relief with that scope is such that it would not work for me at all... This is also why I said it is purely "subjective".

Good post. Thanks..

Since scope choice is entirely subjective, here's how I've scoped my 375 H&H (pre 64 model 70):

Safari style: Good solid Leupold QRW's and leupold VX3 1.5-5x20:


This set-up works flawlessly on the 375H&H. Nothing interferes with the ejection/loading port.

I also ran a Zeiss conquest in QRW's for quick easy swapping for those longer shots. I later switched to the Leupold PRW rings and just kept the Zeiss conquest on there, as that scope offered everything I needed in an optic:



Like I said, it's purely subjective. One thing I will not have is something that might affect performance and inhibit the rifle from functioning at 100%. If a spent cartridge hangs up in the ejection port because it just bounced off your scope base, well then you might just have problems, depending on what it is you are hunting.... ... Another problem with mounting the wrong scope is if you can't adjust it fore to aft, you don't get the proper sight picture when you want/need it. If you are having to search for it, that second or 2 could diminish your shot opportunity... Sad but true.... My buddy found that out last year on an elk hunt when he was using his low comb 308 fwt....

Sounds like a good plan. Nice little upgrade w/o going too far from the original classic configuration.

I owe an apology. My pre64 375 has a Redfield one piece base. I thought the only M70 I had that used this type of mount was the 300 H&H. Just goes to show what relying on memory does:)