Raquel Welch and Hillary Clinton are both "women";they have the same anatomical parts, all located in the same places,so they are very much the "same" in that regard....but once Raquel Welch is "gone",they will not be making another....
Similarly, the problem we encounter is that the pre 64 M70 is gone;it is not made any more and never will be,becausethe world has changed.Only through the devious manipulations of marketing have we been led to believe that the M70 Classic and the new FN rifles,despite their virtues, should be compared to a pre 64 M70.....they shouldn't.Because they are not,in the true sense, a pre 64 M70.
They are different rifles,made very differently, and even though they may share certain characteristics like Raquel and Hillary,one cannot possibly be mistaken for the other.
So when someone like the OP says the new ones do not compare, I happen to agree with him.Because they are not the same rifle,and to manufacture a rifle today the same way the pre 64 was made would cost several thousand dollars;any one doubting this should get a copy of Robert Rule's book on the M70 and read it.....then he should use a pre 64 for awhile,or several over a lifetime....he will see and feel a difference alright.
Each M70 variation should be viewed to stand on its own two feet;for every person who says new ones are more accurate,I can produce a pre 64 that says it isn't so; I have owned enough of all to know....
The pre 64 was a semi-custom rifle;put a modern stock on the barreled action,and you have a rifle fully equal in quality to about anything out there today.
The Classic? Basically good, but lacking in consistency and QC.It can be great but it takes a thorough rebuild by someone like Mark Penrod, Gene Simillion, David Miller, etc to get it here.Once one of these guys get done with a full rework,it acts,looks, and feels "different"....more like e Dakota or pre 64.If you want to know how much it would cost to make a pre 64,have one of these guys give a Classic the full treatment that a pre 64 got.
The FN? MUCH better in terms of consistency, but they should never have changed te trigger....bad move IMHO.Otherwise a really nice rifle
for the money .But it is not a pre 64;again, it is a very good rifle for the money.
Looking at a pre 64 at a store,and comparing it to a newer version and declaring the new version "better", is like doing a drive-by appraisal....utterly meaningless and unless a guy has spent considerable time with a pre 64, with all due respect, he does know what he's talking about in comparing them.
