Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors Win M70 1953 338 Win Mag?

OK. You guys are a tough crowd. Anal and knowledgeable. I love my Winchester's, but am an amateur compared to you guys. Sorry I haven't figured out how to feature the post. There is at Southwest Shooter Supply (google them) down here in Arizona that has a pre-64 338 win mag for sale. Looks OK in my AMATEUR eyes for $1395. Got an old scope, side mounts etc.. But, wasn't the 338 invented in 1958? Shouldn't these knuckle heads have full disclosure on a rebarrel/rechamber? And if you are bored check out their 257 Weatherby Magnum Pre war pre-64 that was a 257 Roberts. I think it has nice wood. I thank the gurus for educating me, elkhunternm,prewar375,Jim in Idaho,Fjold and others. Starman can get bent, don't want his input!

Yeah, the others will know better but the 338's we're 58 and later. I can't remember if mine is a 58 or 59 at this moment. I know mine does have a 458 recoil lug though. Pretty sure a lot of the 338's used 458 receivers.

A '53 .338 may be all Winchester parts, but it is a rebarrel. In addition, unless it is a magnum receiver for .300 H&H or .375 H&H, someone has probably worked on the action rails and bolt face because there were no "short" magnums (.458, .338, .300, and .264) in 1953.

As far as gurus, don't forget Poconojack, Balltownbob, and BobinNH (RIP). I'm sure I forgot someone, and besides, there are undoubtedly "levels" of Guru. Even the best never stop learning.

I do believe that all of the magnums, 458, 338, 300, etc, all were stamped 458.

The rifle at Southwest Shooter's Supply has numerous problems and is way overpriced at $1395. The problems include:

- Non-Winchester barrel
- Incorrect receiver (the ".458 short magnum" receiver did not begin production until the late 1950s - there are some with serial numbers dating to 1957, but certainly not 1953)
- The non magnum receiver likely means a non-magnum mag-box and follower
- Stock cut for a recoil pad and the barrel channel modified
- Incorrect swivels
- Receiver is drilled for the G&H side mount

Honestly, there's not much about this rifle to get excited about. I think they have it priced at around double what it is worth.

The pre-64 .338 WM is a unique rifle and is highly sought after by collectors, which may be what has confused this seller. As was mentioned above, the .338 cartridge was developed by Winchester in 1958 and was introduced for the model 70 in mid-1959. The .338 model 70 first appeared in the Winchester catalog in 1960 and was branded with the name "Alaskan", along with the .375 H&H. In 1963 the .300 WM was added to the Alaskan "family", completing a unique subset of model 70 rifles. There's a decent example of the .338 on our website with some further background on Winchester's introduction of this particular caliber .338 Win Mag "Alaskan"https://pre64win.com/collections/rifles

And I really gotta quit gawking at that 338 Alaskan you have for sale.

Zengela,a helpful word of advice,buy Roger C. Rule's book "The Rifleman's Rifle." It has all kinds of info for the novice and "expert" alike.
Don't know about everyone here,but would say most of us have a copy to use as a reference.

Amen to this ^^

Rule's book is not perfect, and a hardcopy version will set you back at least a couple hundred dollars, but if you are going to be a collector or enthusiast of the pre-64 model 70, it is worth every penny. It contains a wealth of information and is widely considered to be the authoritative word on the model 70 rifle.

FWIIW, I have had all three editions of Rule's book in front of me at the same time and was able to compare them. (The third edition is paperback.) The quality and clarity of the pictures is clearly different, the earlier the edition, the better the pictures. Sometimes it takes some magnification to see the difference, but then again sometimes magnification is used to pick out details of interest. I don't remember taking detailed notes, but if memory serves, the difference between editions 1 and 2 is not as pronounced as the difference between editions 2 and 3. Point is, if you are wondering if there is a reason to pay a premium for an earlier edition (apart from the collector value), if you care about the pictures the extra cost may be worth it to you. As far as I know, there was no revision of the text from edition to edition. My suggestion is to have a third edition (paperback) available to handle and read. These are available new for a bit less than $100. Then if you want, or if you happen upon a great deal, you can snag one of the first two.

Thanks guys. I thought something was just a bit too fishy with that rifle. You boys know your stuff. I learn from you everyday. Will get the book someday. As always $$$$ is tight.