Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters pre 64' model 70 accuracy

Looking at pre 64's in general, I can sort of understand why the younger guys,or anyone exposed to maybe a "sample of one",asks..."What's so special about them?".....

They certainly aren't fancy...some of the stocks are unsuited to scope use (they were after all invented before scopes became widely popular).Gas handling could have been better,safer, I suppose. And better machining and manufacturing methods are available today....

I guess for me, it has been boiled down to the fact that they have always been very "reliable",dependable, predictable, and generally "user friendly".They have generally worked,fed,extracted, fired,and functioned as they should;no tweaking or pandering to make them function as they were designed to do,or deliver solid if not always fancy,accuracy.

They generally group well and consistently,wood stocks and all;and while they may not always deliver Internet quality groups, they always delivered as much accuracy as most folks are capable of using in the field.And IME if fed modern bullets and components,can group with some of the best custom hunting rifles made today.....I have fired enough bug hole groups with them to know this is true.I have had a Swift that put 3 shots into about 5/8's inch to 3/4's inch.....at 300 yards...and 3-4 300H&H's that stayed sub MOA and threw 10's at the 600 yard line.

You could mount a scope,take them to the range,obtain fine accuracy as they came from the factory,and go hunting.You could count on them to behave and function well,in the field.There were few after market parts required because there was litle else truly better out there to improve on a mostly sound design.

Lots (most)of them were tweaked by hand in some fashion or another because the manufacturing methods of the day required it.

I'm sure some lemons got out of the factory,but compared to some of the problems with some rifles of current manufacture that I hear of, read about,and have experienced myself.....you just NEVER heard these problems discussed or encountered with pre 64's.They were just non-issues IME and that is spread out over 40-50 of them...I've lost count...

I never heard of anyone sending one back to the factory because it didn't work, or function, or shoot....or silly talk about such absurd stuff as "manufactureres warranty"(a con job if ever I heard of one),because it simply wasn't needed....when you bought a pre 64, you didn't buy a warranty, you bought a rifle that worked and did what it was supposed to as it came from the factory, the first time...you didn't need any warranty.

The number of these old rifles stil providing dependable field performance,some of which were made 70+ years ago, is enough testimony to their durability and trustworthiness.

Rant over.....

Well said...BUT,we better stop this thread now or prices will go up again....

The action is pretty good too, even by today's target rifle standards.
John Whidden uses one to shoot long range NRA prone matches.

I have a 264 made in 1960, I have tried a lot of different weight bullets and brands. Best groups have been Nosler 140 partitions with 57.0 grains IMR 4350. Federal match primers It shot really well with 140 Bergers , but I don't like them on game. I like to shoulder shoot, so I don't have to wade through cactus to find animals. Bergers are not good for that.

Bonefish: I own and have owned more than a hundred pre-64 Winchester Model 70's and over the decades I have shot and still shoot probably 35 pre-64 Winchester Model 70's.
Including five or six of them in caliber 30/06.
I have as yet to encounter a pre-64 Winchester Model 70 that did not shoot at least fair.
In other words I have never personally shot one that shot poorly!
Including one Model 70 in 30/06 (manufactured in 1957) that was so dependable, so accurate, and with which I killed so much game from Bears to Elk and Mt Goats to Antelope and three kinds of Deer that I "retired" the Rifle several years ago.
These Rifles are extremely safe, extremely dependable, accurate, quality made (lasts!) and handsome - so much so that I recommend you buy the Rifle if for no other reason than for an investment and pride of ownership.
Best of luck to you if you decide to buy it.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

They suck... Must be hanco bringing up another farting dust and rolling over in it's grave thread... ... I'm waiting for him to bring up one from 1949...

Some old threads are very interesting and informative. It's not like it cost anything.

Thanks for resurrecting this thread. I have a 1951 30/06 that is a consistent 1/2" rifle @ 100 yards and love it.

I have recently found my Holy Grail though, a 1957 (my birth year) 270...waiting for it to be shipped today and I'm like a kid on Christmas Eve.

I have had numerous p64 M70s. Most shot well, some very well.

The one I have now could be described as the best of both worlds. It is a pre war gun, '38 receiver/'40 barrel IIRC. The rifle has family history. A family friend bought it new. Somewhere along the way, the original owner had the rear bridge D/T and a Redfield one piece base nicely fitted to the .270. With the stripper clip slot, that is the easy way.

When the original owner hung his guns up, Cousin bought his three M70s. Along about 63-65, Cousin loaned me the rifle for a couple of years. I could not afford a rifle at the time. I finally bought my own and returned the ..270 to cousin. About ten years ago, Cousin died in an accident. His daughter gifted the rifle to me in his memory. The only change I have made to the rifle is that I replaced the old Weaver with a 3.5-10 Leupold.

I have never shot the rifle for a five shot group ( in the 60's or recently) but once zeroed, I can't recall ever missing a deer, coyote, or rabbit with it. I suppose you could say that it is good enough.

The original owner was a hunter. He used the rifle, scoped it, and padded it. It is not a collector item. My oldest granddaughter, a tall young lady (5'6" at age eleven), will be the next custodian.

Best wishes,

Jack

PS: they are a bit heavy for old farts to pack very far. I suggest a featherweight.

I have only owned 1 pre-63 in my life so don't really know much about them.

I watched an old guy at the local range sit down with what he said was an unmodified or tinkered with 264 with what he said were factory 140 grain Winchester ammo and shoot a nice little round 5 shot group in what appeared to be in the .3's.


I am still impressed.

I can get 3/4 with mine, with Nosler partitions. Way good enough to shoot deer and piggies.

Mine really likes the 165 grand slam. Works a treat on cow elk too.

I have never had my 54 on paper.

My pre-64 shoots great.

I'm sure the 26" Krieger, glassed, pillared and floated in a Boyd Jon Sundra laminated sporter helps.

The Jewell and Z5 3.5-18x42 BT don't hurt.

DF

I'm glad you finally found that one. I was almost willing to give up my 270 fwt to you....

Damn...

Pre 64's do alright. I have not kept real good records over the years....too lazy and who ever thought anyone would GAS?

Here's a few:


264 Win Mag pre 64 M70. 300 yards. The dot is 3".






300 H&H. 2 180 Sierras and one 165 Bitterroot.






A few shots with a 30/06 FW





300 Win Mag pre 64 M70 (yes an original one.... 165 Bitterroot.

BTW these are not cherrie picked. I've thrown out dozens of targets like them fired with more pre 64 M70's than I recall.

In general they do pretty well.

They don't give a chit Bob. Some, in fact, seemed a little pizzed when you post a nice target.. . An old out dated rifle shouldn't shoot that good.

bsa: Well....someone asked.

I think it's just the bitterroot bullets Bob. If I had to shoot any of mine, I'd take my sweet time because they are damn expensive and hard to find...