Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters M-70 Why so few...

Same here actually, then again since I only own about a dozen, I'm unfamiliar....

Like both M70s and M700s and slew of others. I agree there are less options for M70s. I do not think it has anything to do with CRF, theoretical perfectness of design of M70 vs M700s. There is not a lot of mauser options for stocks out there either except cheap junk. I think the simple answer why is the trends over the last 30 years where hyper-optimization has become popular: light weight and super accuracy (whether tactical, LR, or beanfield, etc...). The M70 does not have the reputation as being tops for any of these. The 700 and savage 100 do. Look how popular Tikkas have become and I see lots of new after market stuff for them. I'm sure M70s do well in the super classic wood/blue custom rifles, but those are few compared to others.

Lou

Well thanks for your input, fellas. I thought some GUN WRIGHTER might just say something like
" With 55 bazillion 700s made to date and only a half bazillion M-70s... you should be well enough serviced with aftermarket parts and accessories...given so few were actually made..."

I had to cut,fit and glass in a pre'64 Brown Precision blank to that SS BOSS gun mentioned 13 pages back...

Good to know, but you missed a large part of my point, perhaps because I was unclear: Many factory 98 sporters have been produced with various safeties other than the military original--which, by the way, was not a POS as a safety for iron-sighted military rifles. It was good enough, in fact, to be one of the features of the 98 that the U.S. Army copied in the 1903 Springfield.

The switch to other factory-rifle 98 safeties occurred after WWII, when scopes became more the rule than the exception on hunting rifles. I only have nine custom 98s, but 5 of the actions they're built on came with non-military safeties, as Phil Shoemaker's famous .458 did.

Now I'm curious about the safeties on your custom 98s. Are they all M70-type?

Agreed , it was (is) a great safety for a military rifle, but that "over the top" motion on a hunting rifle is cumbersome , not to mention scope issues. I do have on MS (not a 98 obviously) but it does have a 98 style safety AND another on the side. My Sedgley (a Springfield, you know this I'm sure, but just in case) built on a Springfield action does have the 98 (military) type safety but that is an iron sighted rig. THe Rigby I had also the same. My Brownings all have the safety on the side, but the few sporterized 98s I had (have) had 70 type safeties. The CZs have the side safety as well. But you knew that. Lasthy and just to be clear, the "dozen" I own I include all of the above rifles. The custom 98s I had were all 1909 Argentines with combinations of all three safeties. Two were done by Mark Penrod and one Dwayne Wiebe.

The custom 98 I put together a few years ago wears a slightly reworked ( mildly reshaped and checkered) military safety because of the old Finn Aagaard article about his 458. I set it up to be used with aperture sights and liked the idea of the safety flag blocking the aperture when on safe. Not that I’m likely to be hunting dangerous game with it but I liked the article and the concept.

jorge,

Thanks for the details. Three of my 98 sporters have Gentry M70 type safeties, but they are all on commercial actions. By the way, the first of the four photos I posted is of the present .275 Rigby--which like the original uses a M98 barreled action made by Mauser. Apparently the present iterations of the Mauser and and Rigby companies have gotten the word about scope-friendly safeties!

Have had a couple of custom sporters made on 1909 Argentine actions, but at the moment my military-action 98 sporters have 1936 Mexican, G33/40 and German K98 actions.

Had a Sedgely myself once, but (as with many of the rifles I've written about) somebody else eventually wanted it more than I did. Right now my only two Springfields are an all-original Remington 1903A3, and a top-notch custom by Frank Pachmayr made in the 1930s--which also has the original military safety, though its been jewel polished. Its Lyman Alaskan scope is in a detachable Griffin & Howe side-mount--placed just far enough forward for the low scope to clear the bolt handle, and of course the safety. Have always been mildly fascinated by the various "solutions" used for scope-mounting before WWII.

Might also mention that the original Model 70 safety was kind of a POS. Just did an article partly about it, after acquiring a pre-'64 .257 Roberts made in 1936, as part of the build-up of inventory prior to the official announcement of the rifle on Jan. 1, 1937. My library contained a few reviews of the new rifle, including two from Elmer Keith and Townsend Whelen--who both firmly pointed out the safety wasn't suitable for use with a low-mounted scope, it's supposed purpose. To really be able to get at the safety, a scope had to be mounted almost as high as those that allowed the original 98 safety to be used.

Yep, I always found it interesting why Finn liked that safety on his .458. Of course, to block the sights the safety had to be in the middle position, which left the bolt unlocked--but it also allowed a sort, quick flip to take it off safe.

Excellent, gentlemen, we are all agreed then...the '98 Mauser continues to reign supreme (with the safety iteration you prefer, of course). The end.

[quote=jorgeI]

One of the strengths of the Walker trigger is that it's eminently adjustable. The downfall of the Walker trigger is that it's eminently adjustable by idjits. And it's also quite helpful to keep triggers clean, and with the M700's popularity there are plenty of owners out there who have never taken the stock off of their 50 year old M700 to clean it.

Bolt handles are prone to come off when beat on to open the action--again, because of it's popularity, there probably have been more overloads shot in M700's than there are M70's, period.

Of the 10's of thousands of rounds I have shot through M700's I've never had an extractor break, nor bolt handle come off, and the two used M700's that would follow down upon closing the bolt, both triggers had been messed with--in particular the sear engagement. One of those rifles I bought here on the 'fire. Needless to say I immediately adjusted the sear engagements back to factory specs.


[quote=jorgeI]


This is the best reply regarding the 700's! I'd like to see someone tell me to my face that they didn't beat the bolt handle open on a 700 when the handle came off.

I prefer that the safety does not lock the bolt. I still have a few that do. But mostly I've changed out the trigger on those that have the lock. I have to say, I never have had a 700 bolt open up unintentionally. The reason I like to be able to open the bolt with the safety on is clearing the chamber - while the safety is on; it just seems safer that way.

I have Mausers, Marlins, Brownings (none right now), Winchesters, Springfields, Garands, Mossbergs, Savages, Rugers, CZ's, SMLE's, Krags, and Remingtons besides a few off-brands . But most of my center fire rifles are 700's.

The only Mauser I have that has the 'swing over the top' safety is my iron sighted 375 Whelen AI. I'm toying with the idea of mounting a scope and if I do, The safety will likely be modified with a Buehler type safety handle.

I might add that if idiots were to adjust any trigger down to ounces (using any means possible to them i.e. file and/or light springs etc.) and neglected to keep them clean, they are likely to have problems.

Having said that I like the pre-64 Winchester trigger. But the Winchester has detractions too - therefore most of my Winchesters are lever action..

My most used hunting rifle is an old M70. It has the safety that swings back from the left side to fire.

Never had an issue with it. Granted, it's a bit awkward under the scope, which is mounted quite low for its 42mm objective, but has never been close to an issue.

All the talk of rifle safety familiarity is kinda lost on me. Maybe one day Ill be stymied by a safety, besides a malfunctioning 700, it just hasnt happened yet.

Seems this thread had badly drifted from the original question. So I thought I'd try to give a direct answer.


"Why so few aftermarket parts for a M-70"

For the same reason few aftermarket parts are offered for a '53 Plymouth?
Few are driving them these days.


I have my flame suit on, you cretins

MadMooner,

I've also rarely had any difficulty with any safety, I'd guess due to shooting a LOT of shotguns and rifles over the decades. In fact, don't have any trouble with "backward" safeties like those on some CZ rifles--I would guess because my first repeating rifle was a Marlin Model 81 .22 rimfire, which has safety that needed to be pulled back to fire. It felt a lot like the hammer on my father's Marlin .30-30--which I used to killed my first deer with a very quick shot at around 40 feet a LONG time ago.

My comments on the early M70 safety were a consensus from the noted firearms writers of the era. But also would like to ask about your typical hunting situation.

There are plenty of aftermarket parts available. You need to look around at times but they are there.

Have the same early Model 70, 17xxx, with what I think is that same safety. It now has irons, but with Leupold 4x scopes never had a problem getting it off quickly on Whitetails here in Pa.

In fact it seems to slide over on its own without conscious thought. Actually, I kind of like it tucked in there low and way to the left, instead of out more where it has a greater chance to catch on brush. However, same with the Ruger tang or shotgun trigger buttons. Or Nula 700 side type. They just get pulled, pushed or pressed without thinking about it.

Addition: Did have one incident with that rifle. Sitting in front of a house sized rock, heard crunch, crunch in the snow. Thinking a hunter was about to show up I turned to watch and a few seconds later a Black Bear came into view at about 15 yards. Put the dot on his shoulder and squeezed. Nothing happened, looked and bolt was raised. Dropped it, and squeezed again.

My typical deer hunting with that rifle has been spot and stalk, still hunting cover, or finding a vantage to sit and glass from, mostly in E WA.

You mentioned shotguns.
It seems many folks bird hunt with different style of shotguns. Pumps, doubles, autos... and rarely do you hear the complaints about safeties or familiarity with such.
While I understand some folks track and "jump shoot" big game, I can't see it being anymore pressing than a covey flush or ruff grouse blowing out. THAT is some fast shooting!

Just my opinion, but it seems like folks make a big to do out of rifle safeties. I just don't share the feeling.

I'm sure one day Ill flubb it, but it just hasn't been an issue.

As I said before. A big rocker safety like on the CZ is my preference. Some are more aesthetically pleasing than others.

A note in the same vein- I just picked up a newer Win 1885. Slipping my thumb under the scope to pull the hammer from half clock is pretty tight! We'll see if I screw that up!

Wow! A hell of a thought on safeties.

Rare a rifle shot ever happens as fast as a shotgun shot. Yet we manage.

I have been told by my hunting buddies to stop saying that we "skid and shoot", but instead we are going to say "spot and stalk".

Hah! That’s the truth.

I don’t think I fully understood road hunting until I moved out here. It’s a religion.