700's are what fellas bought back in the day when they were too cheap to buy 70's.
You got that backward, in a way.
The pre-'64 Model 70 essentially died even before the Remington 700 appeared in 1962. Why?
Winchester switched to the push-feed Model 70 in 1963--so there was almost no overlap in buying a pre-'64 Model 70 versus a 700. The push-feed M70 eventually turned into a pretty good rifle, but there were definitely growing pains.
In the meantime the pre-'64 faded because Winchester had never modernized the manufacturing process, whether machining the massive receiver, or making stocks or barrels. Consequently it was a LOT more expensive to produce, and since it required more hand-work to make, quality started declining in the 1950s--partly because Winchester's comprehension of what worked to make an accurate, out-f-the-box rifle also declined.
It improved at Remington, partly because the guy in charge, Mike Walker, was a benchrest shooter. Consequently the post-war, pre-'64 wasn't nearly as precisely made as the 700--which was the eventual refinement of the Model 721/722, which appeared in 1947. I know this partly from owning a bunch of pre-64's and 721/722/700 Remingtons.
Pre-'64s will usually shoot well--once the bedding and other factors are dinked with. But the Remingtons normally shot very well out of the box, which by the 1950s meant a LOT more to the average customer--more than sloppy hand-checkering, or the legendary pre-'64 trigger that could rarely be adjusted below a 4-pound pull--WHEN the average owner was competent enough to do so.
Probably one of the biggest reasons the pre--64 M70 lost out was the Featherweight model. It was great in most respects--but Winchester didn't comprehend free-floated barrels. The Featherweights barrels were supposedly free-floated, but in reality were slightly loose around the barrel. As a result most didn't shoot well at all, because the barrel banged around inside the barrel channel, unlike the barrels on the standard-weight, with their tighter bedding and forend screw. Again, I know this partly due to owning pre-'64 Featherweights that were all original--plus reading many of the reviews of Featherweights from the 1950s.
But if you believe the 700 won out back then ONLY because shooters were cheap, then you don't have any comprehension of what happened--and why.
