Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors 1954 Pre 64 30-06 Followed me home

This is a super grade 220 Swift that a LGS had on the rack for a really decent price. I thought I might flip it, but it really shoots well…

Shrap- Better keep that one. It would pile up a bunch of Norks in your bean field if we ever go Red Dawn under Brandon.

Nothing says Rifle Looney like sending hollow points with a rifle that looks good and shoots accurately as well.

Nice!

Need some more advice. I had some time this afternoon started pulling off the old scope and mounts getting ready to mount the matte leupold vx3. I was cleaning up the old k4 with goo gone and 000 steel wool and the ring marks came right off and this dang thing is starting to look like brand new and is crystal clear shocking how little difference it is between vx3. Granted it is broad daylight but was thinking this isn’t going to be a rainy day crawl up a mountain rifle. It looks way better on the rifle than the VX3. How much am I really giving up with the K4.

Next question if I keep it would like to use a classic good looking mount. Suggestions? I usually lean toward S&k but not sure they are right for this one.

Keep it simple man. Use the Weaver..

If you use the Weaver to look period correct, it will either mount nicely in vintage Weaver bases and rings, or if there is not enough fore and aft you should use vintage Redfield one piece base and rings.

I'd do as BSA suggested, use the Weaver setup, looks good the way it came.

Yep, the 270 I used to have came with a nice Weaver K4 and I used it for a while:


I had it mounted in DD's though.. I think your weaver mounts and rings look more fitting though..

Was getting to remount after I cleaned everything up. I noticed the weaver bases were 35 and 37. Everything I find online says to use 46 and 47. I bought a pair of 46 and 47 should I use those or is there a reason to use the 35 and 37? Biggest difference seems to be rear base the new one is quite a bit thicker than the old one.

Weird, I've always used 46/47. I have a bunch of those because of that. I wonder if Redneck or any of the other gunsmiths may know off the top of their head why the 35 and 37 was used on your rifle? Someone posted a link to weaver mounts about 4 months ago. Maybe that thread or link would be helpful??

Don't have specs on the #37 but this may, or may not help!

W.R. Weaver Company Mount Base Specifications
DETACHABLE MOUNT BASES
No. of Base Length Hole Spacing Diameter Thickness
11 .812 .504 1.290 .147
12 .812 .504 .925 .155
13 .812 .504 .730 .238
14 .812 .504 Tapered for Savage 99 only
15 .812 .504 .946 .195
16 .812 .504 .840 .205
17 .812 .504 .770 .219
18 .812 .504 1.050 .182
19 .812 .504 1.160 .125
20A 1.168 .860 1.360 .127
21 .812 .504 .710 .273
22 .812 .504 .700 .201
24 .812 .504 .900 .271
25 .812 .504 1.125 .248
27 .812 .504 .930 Tapered .161/.185
28 .812 .504 Flat .239
29 .812 .504 Flat .292
30 .812 .504 .845 Tapered .205/.230
31 .812 .504 Octag. .182
32 .812 .504 Octag. .357
35 1.168 .860 1.290 .147
36 1.401 .604 3.900 .272
39 .812 .504 Flat .165
40A 1.840 .860 1.290 .147
42 .812 .504 .730 .298
43 .812 .504 .840 .265
44 .812 .504 .770 .279
45 .812 .504 1.050 .396
46 1.168 .860 1.290 .222
47 1.168 .860 2.692 .368
48 .812 .504 1.290 .395
49A 1.058 Win. 70 in 375 H&H, 300 H&H only .368
50 4.500 .504 Flat-Tapered .200/.232
53 4.983 Win. 88, 100 1.290 .222
54 .812 .504 1.290 .222
55 .812 .504 1.050 .310
57 2.340 .960 1.220 .250
58 4.624 3.275 Flat .283
59 .812 One hole only Notched .366
60 4.500 Browning .22 Auto, H&R "Topper" .361
61 1.168 .860 Flat .360
62 4.430 Rem. 740, 760 1.290 .222
63A 6.125 Marlin 336 Flat .283
63B 5.450 Marlin 336 Flat .370
65 2.000 None Spec. * .322
66 2.650 None Spec. * .322
67 1.650 None Spec. * .332
68 .812 .504 .916 .399
70 5.900 Rem 600 1.290 .275
71 1.168 .748 1.180 .215
72 .812 .504 2.590 .376
74 5.723 Savage 24V 1.125 .275
75 1.168 .860 1.050 .310
76 .812 One hole only 1.050 .310
77 .812 .504 .700 Tapered .248/.267
78 .812 .504 .880 Tapered .171/.198
79 .912 .604 3.900 .272
80 6.125 .500 1.892 .147
81 6.000 H&R 360, 361 .946 Tapered .237/.252
82 6.000 H&R Topper 158C 1.050 .396
83 .812 .504 1.252 .250
84 1.168 .860 1.252 .250
85 1.168 .860 1.124 .275
86 .862 .555 .925 Tapered .366/.396
87 5.000 H&R 700 1.050 .400
88 5.900 Mossberg 500AS 1.500 .496
89 .862 .560 1.062 .347Fr/.301Rr
90 5.000 Marlin 39A .300Fr/.428Rr
91 1.400 .504 .946 .280
92 4.500 Thompson Contender Hand Gun .361
93 4.430 Rem 4/6/7400/7600 1.290 .222
94 .812 .500 1.124 .170
95 1.168 .860 1.124 .170
TO-9 4.750 Ruger 10/22 2.000 Tapered .155/.170
TO-10 5.00 Grooved for most 22's Spec. * .175

Simple math tells us the #37 probably has a thickness of .293". I believe I have some out in the shop. Those would be lower mounts than the 46/47 combo..

I just have to say that my most recent model purchase was a 1954 model 70 standard and it had Weaver 35 and 37 bases on it as well. It now wears 46 and 47. It had an old Weaver V-9 on it.

Mike, why did you change out the mounts? Seems they would be good for a lower scope mount.

It looks like to me the 47 is quite a bit thicker than the 37. The 35 and the 46 seem to be the same. I don’t think it would be lower it would be angled. I think the 47 more closely matches the difference in the bridge heights and would provide a better mount I would think the 35, 37 would give you problems on your elevation limits.

The 35,37 seems to mount scope pointing more away from the barrel and 46,47 is at a minimum level of that makes since.

I changed them out because I knew they were wrong and figured the previous owner made due with what he had.

Ah, I see. I don't have the specs on the 37. If it is not the thickness I said in an earlier post, I would not use it. It would be incorrect. A simple ring alignment tool would verify instantly. Again, people should not be putting on scope mounts and rings if they don not know how to PROPERLY do so. This stuff is definitely not rocket surgery. Especially scope mounting.

What is the consensus on the thumb screws left side or right side??

New 46 and 47 bases look great and work perfect.

I think it is personal preference anymore. It really only matters on guns that have something you need to actuate on this side or that, i.e. M98 Mauser , M1903 Springfield, 1917 Enfield conversions or commercials based on those designs. The bolt release levers generally cause you to want to put the thumb screws opposite. Some ejection ports may make you want to put them opposite as well. Neither of those are issues with Win 70's.