Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Winchester Model 70 Pre-64 & Model 70 Classic

Not entirely!

It keeps the empty brass better under control until I reach in with my fingers and pluck it out and put it in my pocket.

No spring loaded ejector.

Jeez let's see: who would I trust more, your claim minus evidence or Mauser's design 125 years on? Tough one.

Why is that?

Obviously because personal preference is of more importance than reality.

I prefer the pre-64 for 30/06 length cartridges. The classic for H&H length cartridges and a Mauser 98 for a serious , rough use, hunting rifle.
I prefer the pre-64 over the classic, except for longer cartridges (including the 300 Win Mag).
I have seen some rifles which were well used, rugged hunting rifles and which impressed me at the time. All were Model 98's. The first belonged to Val Geist. It was a 7x57, pretty plain, which was built by Al Beisen. That rifle had probably shot more sheep than I have seen. It was pretty scarred up but still shot and functioned perfectly.
Another, also a Beisen, belonged to an Alberta guide. It was a 308 Norma and nearly a twin to the 7x57 belonging to Dr. Geist.
A third Mauser was a Holland&Holland in 458 Winchester. Again a plain, no nonsense rifle. By the way, all three of these rifles retained the original 2 stage trigger, The two Beisens used Beuhler safeties while the H&H used the Mauser safety.
The prettiest, smoothest, American classic rifles I have seen were built on Winchester Model 70 actions. The term, "American Classic" pretty well describes the Model 70, now that I think about it.
The model 70's are not with out their flaws and they usually need some work, but that's why we gunsmith, right? GD

I'm asking because I don't know all the differences. Why do you prefer the Pre-64 over the Classic (CRF manufactured in the 90s) for the shorter cartridges? Are they a more reliable/better design in some way? What are the differences between the two (from a design point)?

If a man is a hunter rather than a bench shooter/rifleman, I see no reason to demand better than 1 moa of your rifle choice. Giving a few minutes for the howls of dissent die down...then a hunter should consider his familiarity with Murphy's Law, those intimately acquainted with Murphy will look no further than classic 1898 Mauser...with the least amount of gunsmith aftermarket "improvements" as possible.
Keep in mind the court awards for patent infringements from the previous century, Winchester, the US 1903, the Enfield 1914 (saved by the outbreak of WW1). Keep in mind the selected preference of basic barreled actions, Mauser and Mannlicher, by the finest gunmakers in the world, the British houses.
Just one man's opinion.

This is where I ended up, basically. I found a nice enough p64 in .270, put it in a McMillan I had on hand, put a z3 on it and I'm about done. Glass bedding and I will be all done. My LGS builds some amazing custom rifles but after looking at the options I just couldn't see the advantage for me. YMMV

There are a couple of differences which cause me to favor the pre-64. The first is that the feed rails are milled into the receiver. They feed better without alteration and respond well to polishing. In older models, the bolt stop is designed to transfer impact to the receiver rather than just to the pin. I prefer the little coil spring to actuate the bolt stop. In truth, I much prefer the Mauser bolt stop.
The pre-64 trigger parts usually fit a lot better.
The extraction cam on the pre-64 provides more primary extraction. This has little to do with the design, it's just better executed.
The pre-64 has a full thread for the barrel attachment. The classic is interrupted. This does not apply to the newest Model 70's in which the thread diameter and pitch was changed to eliminate the issues cause by the interrupted thread in the WSM chamberings.
For the longer cartridges, the classic is better simply because it is longer. GD

Ha! I sold Val Geist a bunch of 7x57 brass to feed that rifle. I wonder where that rifle ended up?

For years the high end gunbuilders insisted that the pre64 M70 and 98’s were the finest actions on which to build a serious hunting rifle. This started just after WW2 when those were the only choices. Both were CRF and builders insisted that you would get killed by bears lions etc if you used anything else. Remember there were no other alternatives.

These standards were set by Jack O’Connor, Elmer Keith and their favorite gunbuilders Biesen Fisher Burgess Goens Henriksen etc. Also the British insisted that a Mauser was the only bolt that was “proper”. Ruark and Hemingway wrote about Selby and other old time PH’s who used actions of their era.

As a young “gun nut” I ordered my first fine custom at age 20 and got a 98 based on the reading I consumed. Thereafter I got a few more. I did this for years and years. Then something happened.

I wanted a really light rifle for sheep hunting and bought the first two M700 Ti’s that showed up at my local Sportsmans WH. Previously I looked down at any serious rifleman who would consider owning such a thing. Oh course I had zero experience upon which to base that conclusion.

For brevity I will state what I have concluded. The 700 clones are just as reliable as any CRF in terms of functionality. Mechanically they are simpler. Because of the rear tang angle they are not as svelte as a M70. But for a DG rifle they can be just as reliable. Warren Page built his favorite DG rifle on a M721. Mine is built on a PF M70. Generally the 700 type are more accurate and precise.

I don’t have a limit on what I will spend on my hunting rifles. Before any of you accuse me of being a rich snob you must know that I don’t own a bunch of rifles I don’t use. Actually I limit myself to 3 but currently own 2. I still use one of those first Ti’s and my 375 PF M70. I have owned an Echols Legend, multiple Biesen, Fisher, and Milliron 98’s with Burgess metal.

(snicker).... Teehee...

Enjoy..

Hopefully, someone is still packing it in the mountains. GD

A well done 98 or M70 is very very good. No question. The pre 64 M70’s reworked by GREYDOG are superb. They are the product of skilled craftsmanship. They have soul.

The good rifles built on 700 clones usually don’t exhibit that level of craftsmanship. Rather they are the product precision manufacturing and cnc barrel fitting and epoxy. But they do work. Of course an incompetent builder can screw up anything.

I laugh at the idea that a bolt 375 needs four in the magazine rather than three in order to be a proper DG rifle. With three down and one in the chamber there are a total of four available. The same characters will tell you the ultimate DG outfit is a double which, at last count, gives the intrepid user two shots.

My experience is that a hunter who needs one up plus four in the magazine to get the job done actually needs to work on his marksmanship. The guy who doesn’t know how to load a PF magazine doesn’t know how to load a CRF magazine either.

These discussions never talk about the guy holding the rifle. For example a knucklehead can and will short stroke anything.

I found it! The current owner says it is Earl Milliron stocked. Interesting.

That's the explanation for why CRF is needed....because some old guy said so.

Its a non-factor concerning reliability in modern bolt actions

So can we agree that a CRF rifle can be every bit as reliable as a PF?

They have soul.

This sums it all up....

I like them both. Both have the best hunting trigger designed. 3 position safety is a thing of beauty. I have more experience with the Classics myself. I just got my first Pre-64 this spring. I think that the part selection is a little bit better with the Classics. Classics come in true short action lengths and also come in stainless, which aren't available in the Pre-64. I think the Pre-64 makes a nicer true custom on a woodstock build. Stainless Classic is a great choice for a synthetic and coated all weather build.

Don't overlook the Kimber Montana 84M for a short action build if you don't mind a blind magazine and want a light weight CRF rifle. Take a M70 and scale it down, then you've got the 84M. Awesome little rifles.

So we can agree that PF is every bit as reliable as CRF? Which makes it pointless