Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Switching Out a .280 M70 for a 7x57 M70 (PHOTO Heavy)

Just a little over a month ago I got a wild idea. And I posted that idea in the �Free Classified� section of this forum. The idea was that I needed to somehow exchange my perfectly fine Winchester M70 Featherweight chambered in .280 Remington for the exact same rifle chambered in 7x57 Mauser.

Why?

Well, that�s not easy to explain. The .280 Remington is one of my favorite cartridges. It�s superb for deer and antelope and it works well for elk. In my post-64 Model 70 Featherweight, the .280 chambering seemed just about perfect and the setup had performed very well for me in the field.



But I wanted a 7x57 Mauser. And I wanted it in that same rifle. It�s odd, funny and more than just a bit crazy how gun nuts change directions.

The main obstacle in my scheme was that Winchester offered it classy modern-era M70 Featherweight in 7x57 Mauser only from 1981 to 1985. Still, the 7x57 Mauser is often referred to as one of the best balanced cartridges ever designed, balancing powder consumed with real world stopping power. In other words, to exceed its performance you have to burn a lot more powder and suffer significantly for recoil to achieve relatively small increases in actual killing power. The 7x57�s reputation, particularly in places like Africa, is that of a light-recoiling round that kills medium-sized game with surprising dispatch. I�d had several 7x57s, for some reason had traded them away, and I now wanted another.

Of course the craziest part of the idea was that to justify the new 7x57 Winchester M70 Featherweight, I�d sell my old .280-chambered Winchester M70 Featherweight. The expected blow would be softened by the fact that I do have another superb hunting rifle chambered in .280 Remington � a wonderfully svelte Remington M700 Alaskan Ti.

Anyway, this turned into quite possibly the fastest gun switch I�ve ever made.

On Saturday April 3rd I posted, �Wanted Win 70 Featherweight in 7x57� in the Classifieds section of this forum. In that post I explained what I was looking for and I also detailed and showed my .280 M70 Featherweight.

The very next day, Sunday, I sold my .280 Featherweight on the strength of that post to a gentleman in Washington State. Step one of the switch was complete. No turning back now!

Fortunately, on Monday morning (before reservations over selling the .280 set in) I was contacted by the Fire�s own Campfire Kahuna Redneck with news that he had the exact 7x57 Winchester M70 Featherweight I was looking for and would sell it. After a quick exchange of questions and answers and a review of his clear and detailed photographs of the rifle, I committed to buy Redneck�s 7x57. That same afternoon I gathered up the necessary FFL paperwork, a money order and FedExed everything to Redneck in his beloved taxhellWisconsin. That was late in the day on Monday.

On Friday (!) the rifle arrived at my FFL agent in Colorado. Kudos to Redneck for a silky smooth transaction that included great communication, superb photos, fast-as-the-wind shipping and a received rifle that was precisely as described.

Things happened so fast that I actually received the 7x57 Featherweight before I shipped out the .280 Featherweight. In fact, here are the two rifles just minutes before I packed up the .280. The .280 is on the left, the 7x57 on the right.



I always find it interesting how rifles of the same basic model can vary, particularly if they are stocked in wood and separated by about ten years in manufacture date.

The 7x57 Featherweight was made in the early-1980s. The .280 Featherweight dates from the early 1990s. Both have identical 22-inch tapered barrels. The 1990s rifle featured controlled-round-feed (CRF). The 1980s model has a push feed (PF) bolt. Both feed and eject their respective cartridges flawlessly. The 1990s .280 sports a much glossier stock finish than the earlier 7x57. The finish on the 7x57�s stock feels and looks almost like an oil finish.

Maybe the biggest difference between the two rifles is weight. The early-1990s .280 Featherweight weighed 7 pounds 3 ounces (rifle alone). The early-1980s 7x57 Featherweight weighs just 6 pounds 13 ounces (rifle alone). Equipped with Talley Lightweight Mounts and a Leupold VX-III 2.5-8 scope, the 7x57 setup ended up weighing 7 pounds 10 ounces, clearly putting the �feather� in Featherweight. That�s wonderfully light for a Winchester Model 70 with a factory wood stock.

Bolt weight accounts for some of the weight difference between the two rifles. The bolt of the CRF .280 weighs 14.8 ounces. The bolt of the PF 7x57 weighs 13.6 ounces. Note the sleek push-feed nature of the bolt on the 7x57.



The remaining weight difference seems to rest in the actions and stocks of the rifles. The wood on the 7x57 Featherweight (below) is straighter grained and not as highly figured as on the .280 Featherweight.


The next step in my .280-for-7x57 switcharoo was to head to the range to figure out what bullets and loads the 7x57 preferred.

When I actually did strike out for the range, there were four rifles in my truck. Here�s a photo of those four rifles. Left to right are a classy Kimber .22 rifle with a new scope that needed sighting-in, a vintage Savage 99 in .300 Savage that I simply wanted to shoot some more, a new Remington 700 Alaskan Ti in .280 Remington that needed its barrel broken-in and the recently acquired early-1980s Winchester M70 Featherweight in 7x57 Mauser that was crying to be tested with a variety of ammunition. Tough, dirty, dangerous work! But someone had to do it. I volunteered.



The .22 sight-in proved routine, although an ideal way to start the day. Ping-pong-ball-sized groups at 50 yards were the result. But maybe even more important was getting the feel of slow and steady trigger work without the distraction of recoil, which is exactly what a good .22 rifle does so well.

Next up was my Savage 99. This particular gun left the Savage factory in 1949. What a great hunting rifle, classy and classic all at the same time.. If you happen to be a student of the history of hunting rifles, as I am, that old Savage conjures up visions of red-plaid wool shirts and ramshackle hunting camps east and west. Thirty or forty enjoyable rounds later I�d gotten my vintage fix, and punched the center out of several targets from 50 to 100 yards. This classic 61-year-old hunting rifle handles and shoots remarkably well.

Now for the main event � testing the Winchester Featherweight 7x57 and breaking in the barrel on the new Remington Alaskan Ti.

There is much debate over both the procedure for and the necessity of breaking in a barrel on a new hunting rifle. Some riflemen swear by it. Others swear at it. Some claim proper and thorough barrel break-in improves accuracy and helps reduce fowling. Other says it�s a complete waste of time. Me, I tend to tip toward the side that feels it may help somewhat, and so I generally do it with any new rifle that I believe holds special promise. At the very least, I feel it does contribute to reduced barrel fowling down the road.

My barrel break-in procedure is nothing new nor is it magic. I simply and very slowly shoot twenty shots through the new barrel, carefully cleaning the barrel between each shot. For that cleaning, I use Shooters Choice Firearms Bore Cleaner. My cleaning routine begins with three wet patches pushed through the just-fired barrel with a coated Dewey cleaning rod. I then let the barrel sit for several minutes, followed by 10 scrubbing passes with a proper bronze brush. Then three more wet patches followed by a dry patch. I�ll be the first to admit that the procedure is both monotonous and time consuming, easily soaking up nearly three hours if done right.



To relieve that monotony, I�ve come to prefer to break-in a new barrel while working with a second rifle at the same time. On this day I would break-in the barrel on the new Remington Alaskan Ti while testing ammo in the early-1980s Winchester Featherweight.

By mid-morning I�d fallen into a routine. I�d fire a shot with the .280 Remington and start its cleaning process. That rifle was set up on one shooting bench. Then I�d jump to the neighboring bench where I had things hopping for the Winchester Featherweight 7x57. Since both rifles sported a 7mm bore diameter, I was able to use the same cleaning-rod jag, 7mm brush and patches. That helped.

By mid-afternoon I was still happily at it. Slow and steady, enjoying each shot, taking notes on ammo selection for the 7x57, swabbing the barrels on both guns, squeezing triggers and thoroughly enjoying my day at the range.

The most fun and the most questions came from the Winchester Model 70 Featherweight. It is always something of a crap shoot when one acquires any new or used rifle. Big questions loom. How will the rifle feel in your hands and at your shoulder? What will the trigger be like? Will the rifle feed its cartridges properly? What sort of recoil will it deliver? And the biggest question of all, how accurately will the new rifle shoot?

While I broke-in the barrel of the Remington, I worked on all of those questions with the Winchester.

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/TimberlineX/DayattheRange-April2010013.jpg[/img]

The Winchester M70 Featherweights have always looked and felt good to me. This used 7x57 was no exception.

However, the trigger - as the rifle came to me - was something of a surprise. Vintage factory Winchester M70 triggers, in my experience, are often far from ideal. Too often they are heavy as sin and gritty. And adjusting an old Winchester trigger, even with the right tools, is troublesome and time consuming. Someone, somewhere along the line, though, had worked on this trigger and they had clearly known what they were doing. It broke at exactly 3 pounds, crisp and clean, which is perfect to my way of thinking. No adjustment needed.

Likewise, cartridges fed with the rifle�s trim push-feed action with a well-timed, almost boring slickness. Just for kicks, I turned the rifle completely upside down and tried cycling the bolt that way. Not surprisingly, the cartridges still feed and ejected flawlessly, one after another until the magazine ran dry. This used rifle, with but the right ammunition, was ready to go hunting. Grab a good backpack and head out!

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/TimberlineX/WinFwt7x57A027.jpg[/img]

One of the real advantages on the 7x57 Mauser cartridge is that the recoil it generates is relatively mild for the power it delivers. Even with its 22-inch, tapered featherweight barrel my newly acquired 7x57 proved a pussycat in the recoil department. What a treat compared to the fire-breathing magnums I so often shoot and use for hunting.

And right from the get-go, the rifle�s accuracy proved first-rate. Whew! Big sigh of relief there.

I�d come equipped to the range with a range bag full of 7x57 factory ammunition from the likes of Federal, Remington, Winchester and Hornady. The task of the day would be to very carefully shoot each factory load to get a feel for what this rifle liked.

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/TimberlineX/DayattheRange-April2010060.jpg[/img]

By the end of the afternoon, when the dusted had settled and all the targets had been measured, I�d come up with the following results on average group size per load. Each average is derived from a series of four to five strings of three shots fired at 100 yards from the bench. I settled on three-shot groups as I felt that number more closely approximated hunting situations, my test-ammo supply was limited and the relatively thin barrel on the Featherweight tends to heat up substantially after about three reasonably quick shots. Here�s how things worked out for this rifle on this day:

Hornady Light Magnum 139-grain SST ���...2.6-inch average group at 100 yards.
Winchester 140-grain Power-Point�����....1.9 inch average group at 100 yards
Federal 140-grain Speer Hot Core������.1.5-inch average group at 100 yards
Federal 175-grain Soft Point��������..1.3-inch average group at 100 yards
Remington 140-grain Core-Lokt�������1.2-inch average group at 100 yards
Federal 140-grain Nolser Partition������.1.1-inch average group at 100 yards

The most startling group of all was the very first one I shot with the Federal 140-grain Nolser Partitions. Those three miraculous shots found the orange aiming spot 100 yards away with a group that measured just one-half inch!

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/TimberlineX/DayattheRange-April2010049.jpg[/img]

I wish I could do that all the time. I must admit that I was tempted to call it quits right there, appoint the Partitions as the perfect load and call this a half-inch rifle! Some might have done that, I suppose. But that group was a gift. I never could quite manage it again, no matter how carefully I tried. Something just over an inch seemed more like this round�s true potential when I did everything right (and threw out that lone, heavenly half-inch group).

Still, groups that ran from about 1 inch to 1.5 inches or so at 100 yards with factory ammo was almost more than I could have hoped for with a 30-year-old, wood-stocked rifle with a lightweight barrel. Thanks Redneck for the superb rifle! The deer and antelope better watch out. Elk too.

Before leaving the range at the end of the day, I cleaned all four rifles thoroughly and policed the grounds.

Days spent hunting are very near of top of the time pyramid for me. Good days just shooting at the range or in the mountains rank up there as well. I imagine you feel much the same way.

Comments or thoughts on my craziness?

very nice post !
you should try your hand at writing for magazines.
nice rifles as well.

............So, you're a Leupold fan!

Excellent post and great rifles all.

Love the 7x57 too!!!

Looks to me like you need to do some load workup with the 140 partitions...Even if around 1 inch is the best that rifle will do, it is still a classy hunting rifle. I have always liked that schnabled FW stock pattern.

Thanks for the thorough write up. Its good when a plan comes together, even when it is born of loonyism!

Great read and great colection of irons you got there.

Nice writeup and nice rifles. I really like the overall package that those fwts are. I would have been hardpressed to sell that 280 though! (trust me, I've done way worse!)

Well done. I would be curious as to the differences in velocity that you saw between the 280 and the 7x57.

Nice rifles & Nice buck!

Nice write up, nice rifles. I can understand it but can't explain it. Sold my 280, found a 7x57 I love and haven't looked back.

Very nice on all counts. It's always nice when something like this works out. BTW I had a FWT in 7x57 and it's accuracy was horrendous. I worked with that rifle until I had three hairs left on my pate and had to sell it to preserve the remaining crop. Took quite a while for me to come to that realization--saw it at a local shop about 9 months later. Apparently the second user felt the same way.

Not an indictment of Winchester at all, it was just not a good one. Got a bunch of them now, wish one was a 7mm Mouser.

Thank you for the fine post - but how did the Ti shoot?

Timberline, your posts are always a pleasure to read and this was no exception.

I still remember your write-up for the Ruger #1 in 9.3x74R and the hunt it accompanied you on. Another fine article. Even though you sold that rifle too.

"Comments or thoughts on my craziness?"

Well, I'd have kept the .280 and bought the 7x57 too.
Seriously, I curently have three rifle in 7x57 including the Winchester featherweight. One is a J.C. Higgins M50 FN Mauser rebarreled to 7x57, the next a Ruger #1A that I had to send back to Ruger because of a very bad barrel. They did fix it though. Then there is the featherweight.
Well, the Ruger with the new barrel is one I haven't done much with other that test fire it. Accuracy was in the 1.25" ramge with Winchester 145 gr. Power Points. I reserve that ammo for testing a new rifle or for the mauser which is a .75" gun with that ammo. It's even better with my handloads, but since I got the Featherweight, well the other two seem to be in semi-retirement. There is something about that rifle that that is almost like a marriage between man and rifle. When I got it, it didn't shoot worth a damn regardles of what I ran through it. The barrel fouled badly which didn't help. After spending the money for a professional glass bedding and trigger job it still shot lousy. About the only thing I hadnt tried was changing the scope. After all, brand new scopes should work, right? Well, this one didn't as I found out after changing it to another. I sent it back to leupold and it was replaced within a week. Damn fine service.
Well, now with the test ammo, the 145 gr. Power points, groups ran right at one inch. That was more like it. I worked up a fairly stiff load with 140 gr. Nosler Ballistic Tips that consistantly shoot into .75" when I do my part. The long discontinued Sierra 170 gr. round nose bullets were the eal surprise. I was getting goups in the .375" to .50" range. I sure wish Sierra would at least make a few more. I'd buy at least 500 for myself. I recently made a buy of 160 gr. Speer Grand Slams to try in the rifle but haven't gotten around to loading any yet. The only bullet that has not shot worth a damn in the Featherweight, or the other two rifles plus my .280 Rem. are some 150 gr. Winchester Power Point bulk bullets I bought. There is such a radical difference in weight from bullet to bullet that I can't see accuracy ever being decent with them. The variation is something like plus or minus 1.5 gr. from the nominal value.
So what do I think of the Featherweight? Well, I bought another one in .257 Roberts that is a decent shooter and I picked up a long action Featherweight stock that I mounted a 1968 era M70 in .243 Win. that gives that rifle a whole new feel. It shows promise but I do belive it's going to need a bit a bedding work before it shoots to it's full potential.
Now if I can find one in .280 Rem.????????????????
Paul B.

you write very well! another vote to write for one of the rags. pics are good also.

I've made so many moves like this that I would be the last to criticize it....it sounds like you are delighted with the swap and the desire for a new rifle to play with is irresistible sometimes...and I'm happy the deal worked out for you and Redneck...enjoy your 7x57!

That said,for a variety of reasons,I would not have done it....IIRC 45-47 gr 4064 gives a 140 gr bullet about 2700-2800 from a 280,which by any definition is a 7x57 in every essential way...second, the 280 was a proven field performer,not to be trifled with...

Here's a quote I frequently remember when I am overcome by fits of "Rifle Tradeitis".....in speaking of the 270,280,7x57,and 284 a wise gunwriter from another generation said....."if a man owns one of these rifles-any one of them-I certainly don't recommend he spend a plugged nickel getting one of the other calibers.....the differences are infintesimal.....".Further,he states you could use these 4 the rest of your life,and .."have the devils own time telling the difference".Bob Chatfield -Taylor; "Reflections on the 7mm Calibers";Handloader's Digest.

I agree!

But enjoy the 7x57

That right there gives me chills. Sacrilege my friend, sacrilege.

Very enjoyable, Thanks.

Timberline,

Very nice post. It would not surprise me in the least to find out that Redneck worked the kinks out of the trigger before selling it to you...

Now please try loading up some 120 grain Nosler Ballistic Tips or some 120 TSX's and see if that classic rifle will shoot itty bitty groups with one of those!