Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors Rebuilding a pre 64

I have some pre 64 Winchester Model 70's and am thinking about using the action of one
of them for a rebarrel and put in an aftermarket stock I have.

Is there any magic in picking an action to use or just grab one of them and go?

Any other suggestions or comments would be welcome before I do this.

I've never had a problem with any pre 64 winchester model 70 rifle. As BobinNH used to say, they were coddled enough at the factory that they always functioned as they were designed. However, the rifles I've had were barely used and shot. Most like new. I've even seen some that were carried a lot and shot a lot that still functioned as designed. I'm not sure I'm completely understanding your question I guess????? I will say that I Prefer an H&H action for damn near any magnum (short or long) build. As per the .473 case rifles, I don't think it really matters. Some prefer the pre war rifles, but if you are going semi-custom that really doesn't matter either. I guess if you have a preference to the 3 position wing safety, you'll want a post war or maybe the transition rifle trips your trigger.... What are you wanting exactly??? Please let us know, this isn't a rhetorical question.... In all honesty, my favorite thing to do is take a good fwt and throw it into a good stock and you are DONE.... Easy and simple, the way I like it...:




It really doesn't get much better than this, for a hunting rifle.. Boy, I'm going to miss this one...

Pick one and go.

EXACTLY. My favorite actions. Very little is needed to make them perfect.

Per my post in the '54 .257 Roberts thread, I sure hate to see good, original rifles messed with. Of course, an aftermarket stock doesn't keep you from hanging onto an original stock, nor even a rebarrel prevent you from hanging onto the original barrel. All that so you can return the rifle back to original should you so desire. It is also true that the more original, the better condition, and the rarer the configuration/chambering, the greater the $ hit you may take by the work you plan. After all the money is spent, you may end up with a less valuable rifle, although it may be a more useful rifle to you. But you could have some parts to sell to offset the cost (insert image of me sobbing here.) Finally, all that is my opinion about your rifles, so that is the end of that conversation, and I will shut up.

From a purely technical standpoint, I assume you are rebarreling to a different chambering. (Unless the original barrel is shot out, you want stainless, or a different contour, a different chambering is usually the reason for a rebarrel.) You will have less trouble with the bolt face, feeding, and extraction issues if you start with an original case close to the configuration of the new case. If you want a magnum, it is easiest to start with a magnum bolt. Obviously, it is virtually impossible to go the other way, i.e. from magnum to non-magnum. It is probably also best if the cartridge lengths are similar. This gets into bolt stop, ejector, magazine follower, and magazine spacer issues. Pre '64's work well because Winchester did what was necessary to make it happen, so there are different parts out there. As someone mentioned on another recent thread, the action rails are cartridge specific on Pre '64's, while much of that is done with magazine box lips on later rifles, even the Classic controlled round feed guns. (I don't know for a fact if this true, but I suspect the person who posted it is correct, or they wouldn't have posted.) I don't have the knowledge and experience to truly get into the details, but I'm sure the information is out there. I suspect you can find a good bit in Rule regarding what parts came with what chambering. Craziest thing I can think of is turning a .22 Hornet into a .375 H&H. That'll keep your gunsmith busy!

As BSA alluded to, if you want really good advice you need to provide more information about what you want and what actions you have to work with.

Hope this helps.

Good post gundoc. I was holding out with a lot of information until we know exactly what he's asking for..... I also totally agree with you about tearing a good rifle apart. It makes me cringe. I know I post a pic of my favorite awesome shooting 338wm built on the H&H action here a lot. That rifle was purpose built by someone else. I don't know the history of the rifle, but I am glad it is what it is and is in my hands now. When I got the rifle, it was a sight for sore eyes. I more or less made it better. Take a look my friend:

Before pics:




After pics:



This 338 is a shooting machine too. Whoever did the work did a damn fine job mechanically, I just had to spruce it up the rest of the way and fine tune a few things. Including the glass bedding... .

Yes, much nicer looking after you spruced it up! And you didn't molest an original. As I mentioned elsewhere, there are already enough that have been messed with, so find one of those to scratch that itch. Again, my opinion only.

For instance, I was just gifted a '50 Standard Rifle, .30-06. I believe what is there to be original, although a pad has been installed, and the rear sight is long gone with a blank in the dovetail. I will drop it into an eBay-acquired original Monte Carlo stock for scope use (also came to me with pad installed), but I will retain and carefully label the original low comb stock, so that I don't mess with the rifle any more than has already occurred. In other words, I am willing to make reversible mods, as long as I maintain the capability to do the "reversing."

Is that a Brown Precision stock on the .338?

Yep, that is a Brown PoundR stock. I really like it. Excellent ergo's and light weight. Seems to be very stiff too....

I should have been clearer with my original post. I am going to take an existing 30-06 standard model and rebarrel it
with a Kreiger and put it in an aftermarket stock. Probably a McMillan. I plan to use the original bottom metal and the
original trigger. My plan is to start with a 24 inch barrel and, if I don't like it for some reason, cut it to 22 inches. I have
not put any thought into the crown and will probably leave that up to the discretion of my gunsmith. I will probably use
the Kreiger # 3 countour which is their medium sporter. I am looking for enough weight to help me with my accuracy
and still not be overweight.

I have several factory long actions I could use which is why I asked the question. I was trying to find out if there was
anything in particular that would make one action better than the other. The featherweight 243 was not under consideration
for this build.

I think you can still maintain a certain amount of accuracy with a #2 (or less) contour, unless you are looking for gilt edged varmint rifle accuracy. Check out the picture of how my 338wm shoots and I believe it's a #2 contour or there abouts. She drives tacks... The original FWT barrels were good shooters too.. This would keep your weight down and make it a more enjoyable carrying rifle.. You'd be damn surprised to see how my 30-06 fwt, 270 fwt and my buddies 308 fwt shoots. It's an eye opener...

Same here. My 7mm Mashburn Super is a #2 Krieger profile. I can't imagine needing more than that. It seems to be very good so far with just FF loads. I'd probably use the same profile for a 338 if I wanted to rebarrel.

I have a pre'64 that the previous owner rebareled in .257 Roberts by Douglass in an original featherweight profile. It shoots just as well as my original .30-06 Featherweight.

That says a lot for how well the original barrels shoot. My 06 is a damn tack driver too..

Rebuild, vs. restore.

This 6.5-284 was originally a pre-64. 243 that had been cut down, barrel and stock. Bought it for $400. A donor, not a collector.

After converting SA to LA, adding a Krieger barrel, Jon Sundra Boyd sporter plus some sweat equity, it's a tack driver.

Rebuilt, not restored.

This one ended up with Borden's Bumps, not usually associated with pre-64's...

Definitely not OEM, just a rebuild, not a restoration...

DF

Nice, looks similar to a JRS stock. Oops, that's right in your description/post... Shoots great too. I love seeing these great shooting old rifles in action..

Questions and comments:
So, you are going to rebarrel in the same chambering, i.e. .30-06?
Assuming so, is the original barrel not sufficiently accurate?, or not for a long string of shots?, or do you want a stainless barrel, or what? Just trying to understand.
I have always thought Standard Pre '64 M70's in chamberings like .30-06 and .270 were a bit heavier than they needed to be, but that's just my opinion. I don't need my .270 to weigh as much as my .300 Win. Mag.
If I had an accurate M70, I wanted to restock, and I wanted more weight for some reason, say to help with "the wobbles" when shooting offhand, I might consider sticking with the original barrel putting some weight in the fore end. That is an unconventional approach for sure, but it would get the job done for less money.

Again, maybe more advice than you wanted, and if so, I apologize. To answer your question, all else being equal, and for the reasons already listed in an earlier post, I would pick the action originally chambered for whatever is closest to the new chambering.

I see from the safety that is a pretty early M70? $400 sounds good to me, even if all you really got from the deal was a clean, solid action.

That is a nice looking laminated stock. A bit too shiny for me, but I love the shape and the color. On my monitor, the color is what I call "Winchester Red." Checkering is very nice as well. I wish Boyds still made the Sundra stock. I am trying to get them to sell me a Platinum model unfinished for a 9.3x62 FN Mauser-actioned project. Long story, but they seem to be having trouble letting me order what I want.

What is the trigger? Interesting trigger bow shape.

I plead ignorance. What are "Borden's Bumps"?

I like your rifle BSA!

Borden's Bumps are bolt sleeves fitted fore and aft on the bolt body, slightly oblong such that the longest measurement runs up and down the action race ways. When the bolt is closed, longest parts of the sleeves are now up and down in the action, fitted for minimal bolt movement. This is more bench rest than hunting rifle technology. But, it doesn't seem to affect field functioning and the gun shoots very tight groups. Recesses were milled into the bolt body, SS barrel cut off pieces were halved, milled to fit the recesses, JB welded in place, milled to spec.

The JRS stock was finished by me using Custom Pro Oil, a tung oil/urethane product from Brownells. The color, Fiebings dark brown leather dye, was applied to the finish NOT the wood. Learned that trick from a master stockmaker. Checkering was done by Errol Case in MO, using a classic Winchester pattern. The stock is pillared, glassed and free floated, Jewell trigger.

You read the safety right, it's a late '40's, early '50's gun, IIRC.

The finish is pretty shiny, but really tough. It wears well. Gun has been hunted a good bit, still looks like it did when completed.

DF

Dirtfarmer,

I was PM'ing you while you were replying.

Did the action come to you with the Borden's Bumps, or did you elect to add them?

It was just a std. pre-64 M-70.

The smith who fitted the barrel did the Borden's Bumps, trued the action.. He was into benchrest and LR target guns, offered to do the work and I let him. I don't know how much, if any, difference it makes on a hunting rifle, but thought it was sorta cool...

DF

Thanks model 70 man. Sadly, it is going to a new home here in Oregon. The new owner said he wanted it because it was made on his birth year (1957). I'm going to miss this rifle, as it's truly been a damn good rifle. Probably one of the best I've had: Smooth, reliable, good looks and accurate. I was just playing around with some RL26 loads last month too and having fun with it. It's a great rifle and going to a good home...

You're smith's interest explain the trigger. I have met Arnold Jewell, and his passion is benchrest as well.

Actually the trigger was my doing. I ordered it from Brownells, fitted it myself before the action went to the smith.

But, you're right, he likes the Jewell, too.

The photo with Borden's Bumps was taken by him. That target is one he had, not one shot by this gun.

It will shoot half MOA out to 600 yds. Never shot it beyond 600. The Z5 scope helps.

DF

My ideal is for my rebuild to shoot as well as your 338 WM shoots in that picture.

While there is not much difference, would the recommendation be for a number 2
contour over a number 3?

If I am using a very lightweight stock the number 2 would certainly be more in line
but the extra weight carried in the barrel might help me with a steadier hold.

Like the others have said, a #2 contour is likely a better choice. Any accuracy advantage of a #3 would be negated by a gun that is just too heavy to enjoy.

I went with a number 3 contour on my build, wish I would have went lighter.....

I think that is how we learn, or we can learn from others mistakes. I know BobinNH used to run skinny tubes and be perfectly content with them. I don't buy into the barrel heavy aspect of things, as I've shot a whole hell of a lot of offhand and don't prefer a long heavy barrel for this position or any other field position, unless the rifle is being supported by a good rest. For a packing around and using rifle, the rifle needs to be balanced and feel right in the hands, not trying to weigh me down as I pull the trigger....

Where I like the fulcrum is right at the front action screw:

Nice shop; I like it..

You have that scope mounted in a really forward position. Do you stock crawl, have a long neck, etc.?

Nice rifle, too...

DF

Be careful as not all companies follow the hard and fast contour numbers. A Bartlein #2 is much heavier than a Krieger so you may want to measure the muzzle diameter just to make sure you're getting what you want.

BSA, I CANNOT believe you are getting rid of that 270.... Son of a gun that's a great rifle.

I agree with BSA

For years I read that you need a muzzle heavy gun to shoot well off hand. Well I found I shoot my 6.25lb M700Ti much better off hand than my muzzle heavy guns.
Seems as though holding up the muzzle heavy guns causes muscles to fatigue and begin to quiver.

So I wrote that off as just more old gun lore that gets repeated over and over again.

And BSA I cant believe you are parting with that 270 either. Have you lost your mind?

Oh, and BSA a clean shop is a sign of a sick mind or something like that? Ha Ha

You are making me laugh my friend. I agree with you on all accounts. .. By the way, my shop is even more spruced up now. ... Just don't tell anyone..

Thanks buddy.. Right on all accounts..

You will be hard pressed to built another rifle that improves on that fwt 270.

The new owner really wants it because it was made the same year he was born. I think it will be going to just the right person. We have a deal made to meet this wednesday at a local gunshop. He's also a member here. Seems to be a good guy. What I keep telling myself is I still have a great fwt 30-06...

How about a twist to this conversation?

I really hate to disassemble a pre 64 even though I think it would give me a very accurate rifle rebuilt
the way I want to do it and incorporating some ideas expressed above.

I also have a Winchester Extreme Weather that is a BACO rifle. I think it was made in 2011. What
would the opinion be on taking that action, re-barreling it with a Kreiger either #2 or #3 contour and
putting it in a McMillan stock?

Great actions to build off. The few I've seen built (264 WSM, 6.5-06, 30-06) were all very nice. I doubt you'd hate it.

+1

You'd never hate that decision...

I'd go #2 Krieger.

After all, it's not a collector grade Pre-64.

DF

Where's redneck when you need him to come to the MOA trigger conversation side of things. I liked my 30-06 EW, but didn't love it like I love my 30-06 fwt made in 1956, if that tells you anything...

For sure BSA. I use Classics or P64's, but honestly if a guy likes it they can be tweaked to be pretty good. We are snobs though, so that makes a difference to us, some guys don't care or know the difference so they live in bliss.. They are solid actions and the few smiths I have spoken to said they didn't need to do much machining at all to make them square. Don't know if that was an anomaly or just the way it is, but the ones I have shot were literally shooters, as good or better than my stuff.

I presume you are talking about using the Winchester Extreme action over the pre 64 with this comment.



bsa are you saying the pre 64 action would be a better choice than the Winchester Extreme?

I'd take a Pre-64 over a Classic, NH or SC, any day.

Not to say they aren't good actions, they are.

But, they're no Pre-64...

DF

Sorry, I've been out buddy. Been busy as hell. To answer your question, yes and that is what I did. However, this was after shooting them side by side and doing extensive testing with them. It's hard to imagine that the old rifle would be better, but to my own personal tastes it was and I ended up sending the EW down the road. I do know that these rifles were not set-up exactly the same way though and the pre 64 fwt was bone stock, except for the optics and my usual glass bedding and trigger work. I know I've posted pics of my rifles a thousand times and some get tired of it, but here goes again. The rifles I had compared side by side. Disclaimer, please do not take offense if you are stuck on newer rifles and won't accept the fact that the old rifles were just as good, and better in some ways:

Early (2008) 30-06 EW in Mcmillan hunters compact edge stock:


This rifle is a true blue campfire style rifle in every sense of the word: Leupold scope, talley lightweights, Mcmillan edge stock, yad yada yada...


Old 1956 30-06 fwt. Original stock, glass bedded by yours truly, trigger adjusted to 2.5 pounds:



This rifle is set-up to my own personal tastes: Burris FFII 3-9x40 with ballistic plex reticle, Leupold dual dovetail mounts and rings (lows). Not trying to go with the flow of the fire with this rifle, just set up exactly how I like them....


The best rendition of the EW I have now is my 270 fwt and I prefer it over the EW as well. I'll be honest, I'm not a huge fan of the edge filled stock. I much prefer the standard fill hunters compact over the edge fill. My 270 fwt has the same stock as the EW, but is the standard fill.

Also, please bear with me and keep in mind that when I say I did a side by side comparison, it was at the range, off the bench and in field positions. If there's a quirk in the rifle, I'm going to find it there first before it even goes to the hunting field. With this being said, the EW did have a bobble with the extractor. I had to replace the original one and was quite displeased with that. However, I've had to replace exactly 1 Pre 64 extractor too, when I found a problem with weak ejection (yes extractor was faulty, even though it was having hiccups with ejection). I get that a 60 year old rifle (this year) would have a worn extractor, but not a 3 year old rifle that was barely shot: Just sayin... However, I've heard of some instances where BACO has put on a wrong extractor too. This kind of stuff never left the factory back when the pre's were being built/"coddled at the factory" (old saying BobinNH used to use)... I too agree with dirtfarmer, the classics and Baco's are good rifles, but are not a pre 64...... Take that anyway you want....

I'm no expert, but here is my take.

First, I would much rather see someone take apart a modern M70 than a Pre '64. I don't even get tearing up non collector rifles that have been D&T for side mounts. Yah, it ruins collector value, but it takes nothing away from the RIFLE, especially if it is sound and accurate otherwise. Shot out barrels and badly butchered stocks are "fair game." But all that is just me, my opinion, and not my property.

I have lost track of the "generations" of modern M70's. It seems there are early and late New Haven Classics, the Carolina guns with the new triggers, and now the Portugal made ones with new triggers, correct? I have also lost track of where the Pre '64's are clearly better than the various modern guns, but I believe they are mostly about the bolt handle, extractor, and trigger. I believe there is also the difference of the feed rails being part of the receiver or the magazine. Depending on how "critical" the use, a fair question might be how important these various things are? For example, there are very few acceptable compromises on a dangerous game rifle or one that will be used on high dollar, "far away" hunts. (Although I believe Finn Aagaard's .458 was a push feed rifle, which goes against what many of us hold "sacred.") Finally, how hard are these issues are to correct and how expensive compared to taking apart a nice Pre '64? At the end of the day, it seems to me one can build a nice hunting rifle on a modern M70 action. How much better a rifle built on a Pre '64 truly is might be hard to prove by any objective measure.

D'Arcy Echols builds rifles on both, but I don't know his opinion on which is better or which modern M70 actions are acceptable.

Finally, as BSA said, what does Redneck have to say?

Sadly Redneck has not voiced any opinion on this thread.