Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Question about pre-64 Model 70's

I wonder why they cost so much nowadays?

-jeff

supply and demand, like anything else.

personally, I think the shooter grade ones are an absolute bargain at the $550-900 they go for around here, in comparison the selling prices of most current production rifles.

Bob,
I had pretty much the same experience with the pre-64's I had. One was a 1954 vintage .30/06 with a 4X Redfield that placed 20 Western loaded 180 grain match bullets in a 1" hole at a 100 yards. They all tended to group well. I wonder if it had something to do with the "goose egg"on the barrel and the foreend screw that was threaded to it?
Anyway I found them kind of heavy and a bit awkward.
John

free miner, I agree... I was making a (bad) joke because you guys sure have the DEMAND part of it goin' on in this thread!

Lotta love for the M70 here. Which is great, don't get me wrong, but it's easy to see why they are skyrocketing...

-jeff

I been buying them for almost 30 years now and still hunt with them.Compare them to a Dakota,they're still under-priced...

I have a M700, and I have owned Rugers and other rifles. The Remington is okay, but it is just a hunting tool. A very reliable and smooth operating tool, but still a tool. So are the others.

But, a pre 64 M70 is a work of art. It is also a tool, but what a tool! Nothing else compares.

Well, I do have a custom rifle on a commercial FN Mauser action with a Douglas barrel. It might get a few glances if mixed in with a M70 display. It rates pretty high, in my opinion.

For a dangerous game rifle I demand a control feed and that being a Mod-70 or better yet a custom Mauser..All my big game rifles are Mausers or M-70 pre 64s.

For varmints I don't mind the Rem 700, they are accurate rifles for sure and only on rare ocassions have I suffered a varmint charge or one that could bite through my boot!

The Ruger 77s are a fine rifle and they have the control feed feature..The safari model is a fine rifle IMO, a lot of gun for the money...

There's a huuuuge gap between "varmints" and "dangerous game" that includes just about all the critters most people hunt... my M700's do me just fine on the big game species I hunt with them.

Not a knock on the M70 at all, just a reaction to how Mr. Atkinson phrased it above. And not a knock at you either, Ray.

-jeff

Left Hand pre-64 models...700
If they would have made a LH pre-64 I wouldn't own a Remmy.

What can I say that the others haven't? It's the rifle by which all others are judged. When is the last time you heard someone compare the workmanship of a rifle to a 700 or a Ruger 77? I have lots of guns including some pretty nice custom jobs but none rate against my Pre '64 FTW. When you pull one out of the case you automaticly get peoples attention. It's kind of like pulling up in a 1969 Plymouth Hemi Superbird.

Exactly my feelings and sentiments, as well as usage. My lone model 700 is a 22-250AI. Great for its intended purposes, but the 25 cal and up stuff is all model 70, custom mauser or customized and smoothed up CZ's.

Now that right there is really a FUNNY question.

Rock on !!

MM

Yea, the short answer is that 700s and 77s don't stack up.

No Remingtons and Rugers don't stack up,but I will say I have found the Ruger to be a great travel rifle.If and when the airline loses it,it's replaceable.I don't fly overseas anymore with my pre-64's,they're not.
A Ruger 77,triggered,bedded and the rings lapped have made a good hunting tool.I only have one Remington,an LV for shooting 'grass Rats'.My Ruger DG gun is a RSM .458 Lott and it shoots well.I tried Dakotas,overpriced,Kimbers too many small things broke.
My small collection of Winchesters range almost thru the whole production time,pre-war to 1963 and I have found nothing to match them.I have a few Mausers from the same time period,but while nice handwork,just don't fit the same. another 2 cents...

"rifle" hit the nail on the head in comparing them to a Dakota.Look at the price of those and you can understand why a pre64 is still a good value in the overall scheme of things. Or compare a Kimber Caprivi at $3000+. At that price point I'll find a pre64 375 instead(don't have to, I already own two).The Ruger is my preference among stuff currently made in that price category.

I agree with Ray Atkinson when it comes to hunting rifles and will add that my deer hunts ARE important to me so I make no distinction and use a pre 64 for about everything these days.I'd use a Mauser as quick if I had one right now(in process).

.....I was "charged" by a woodchuck once....and several times by cattle as I passed through their pastures,so you never know when your varmint rifle may have to become a "dangerous game rifle"...

I think a lot of people have been charged by Groundhogs..some will admit it, some don't...I think it has to do with a Witness.

rifle: He may have just been trying to get away for all I know... I may have been in the way....

Great fun with a rifle tho...

Anyway I found them kind of heavy and a bit awkward.
John[/quote]


RX for that would be to find an M70 Featherweight with monte carlo stock.

YMMV.

Bob

John: I remember your 30/06. That was a nice rifle.Yes, they can be heavy, but mostly I use the FW's with/without a new synthetic stock.Even the standards with a synthetic lighten up OK. In some calibers, like the 300's 338 and 375, I will tolerate a bit more weight to cut the recoil