Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors The history and design of the push feed 70?

I have an early 1980s 70 xtr featherweight in .308 and I was wondering what’s the history of this pushfeed design? Was it an original design or borrowed from another action?

boxerdog, the "history and design of the pushfeed model 70", as you refer to it in title to your thread, is explained in the book, "The Rifleman's Rifle"..

The pushfeed was a direct result of cost cutting by Winchester. The pre 64 was just too expensive for them to produce at the time. Their engineering department designed the pushfeed model 70 to compete with other manufactures, and to reach that price point. Which mainly included the Remington 700, that came out in 1962.

There were many design changes to the new pushfeed rifle. Those that included, flat breeching system, hook extractor, and plunger ejector, as well as a different approach to how they machined the chambers and rifling. However, since they were essentially cutting corners to reduce costs, their attention to detail was lacking. The post 64 stocks are a great representation of that.

The post 64 pushfeed rifle was kind of under revision as soon as it came out. Winchester tried to improve the design through the mid to late 60's. After around 1968, they had finally worked all (most of) the bugs out of the design. 1968 was the year they brought out the anti bind device. Without that little aide, their bolt throw was sloppy and not very smooth. The pre 64 didn't have that issue, because the big claw extractor and bolt guide lug ran on the rails and race way very smoothly.

If you read the section in Rules book that explains the "successor" to the pre 64, you'll get an idea of what Winchester did to develop and design the pushfeed rifle. There was a lot of cheapening that went on. Their manufacturing processes were drastically changed. Some things really affected other things, like poor finish on the receivers causing stock breakage. One thing led to another and they had to rectify some things.

Your rifle, the XTR FWT was a big hit for Winchester, as they have very nice lines, beautiful stocks with the fleur de lis checkering and schnable forend tip. It was the first featherweight (XTR FWT) since 1963. That is a 17 year period where Winchester did not manufacture a featherweight rifle!!!!! Seems downright ludicrous to me that one of their best rifles sat in limbo for that many years (1964-1981).

However, if your rifle was made before 1984, it is a long action. Something Winchester did to improve the model 70, was to add a true short action receiver after 1984.

That is only a little bit of history on the post 64 pushfeed rifle, that I can explain. There is much more to it, if you want to read the book I suggested. Somone else can fill you in on the rest of the story as well.

Very well said.

Not at all to contradict BSA's words but just to remark that the "Push Feed" action type is generic of a number of successful brands. It was indeed for Winchester a cost accommodation to the Controlled Round Feed action of "Pre '64" fame. The very term "controlled round" as the cartridge feeding process from magazine containment to fully inserted into barrel chamber "Battery" positioning, a greater degree of control parameters as cartridges move between those two poles of round "readiness". The push feeds became prevalent as such matters of reliability of ammunition itself made misfires or cartridge various weaknesses a thing of the past. The big beefy controlled round extractor became less "necessary" and moved more to "optional insurance" of reliable feeding and such as extractor failures far less common. Parachutes less common as safety measures in aircraft as more airworthy than a century ago too. Today, my belief it's highly unusual of a quality push feed rifle extractor to fail or of such to reliably feed. And if/when such, perhaps to look to ammo, especially reloads of suspicion first. Sako in its era high of early sixties intro'd models set something of a high water mark in reputation for reliable extractors of which others to emulate and custom modifications of such as the Remington 721 & 722 to be retrofitted.
I think of the "Mauser pattern - including the Winchester Model 70 genre - as yet the "suspenders & belt" rifles of most rugged bolt action reliability. The Model 70 pre '64 excels due to a young Dupont of the nineteen thirties era as allegedly dictated not the most cost effective prospective Model 70 forthcoming, but of greatest quality. The so-called "Chrome-Moly" steel as he dictated for the barrel already in use in such as the Model 94 barrel, referenced as "Winchester Proof Steel", but also of receiver and bolt assemblies. A sportsman himself, he deferred "cost effective" even in Depression era lingering, to best quality available. That's where Winchester overtly beat competition. Others were good as balanced with "cost effective". Winchester in a class alone arisen above.

I don't know what the 1964+ genre of Model 70 rifles used for receiver & bolt steels. I'd suggest quite likely a USRA, 1982+ era Model 70 abandoned such Chrome Moly aka 4100 Series Steels and that Winchesters since have likely used it only in barrel mfg contexts. The 1991 revival of the CRF Winchester I understand to be principally attributable to CNC machining capabilities returning "cost effective manufacture" as also adopting BSA's noted rail guide.

I appreciate both pre '64 and '91+ Model 70 CRF editions!

Another 'wordy' Post as... Just my take!
Best!
John

Imagine the disappointment of being a 16 year old kid who had earned $125.00 to buy his first deer rifle and he bought a 1965 push feed .30-06 M70. I'd read Guns & Ammo magazine since I was old enough to read and Elmer wrote that the new M70 was better than the pre-64 M70's! I lost all respect for Mr. Keith after that and realized that he'd caved in to the advertisers. Insult to injury my older neighbor Frank was a gun guy who had aged past his deer hunting days and he offered me his mint condition pre-war .30 Gov't 06 M70 for that same $125.00 that I was going to spend for that post 64. That pos rifle did handle just like a post to my young self. I haven't bought a Winchester anything since.

Those post 64's while boxy and heavy and ugly were good shooters for the most part. The new ones are not bad either if you fix the trigger.