Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire List the reasons why a pre-64 winchester is better

The one I had did nothing better than any other rifle.

I crack up at the guys that praise the dependability but leave them home whenever the weather turns a little sour. A friend of the family is one of those that get wood if you even say the words "pre 64", but admits it's mostly a nostalgia thing.

What do YOU think ?

GTC

I think they must have but NO ONE ever details what they were.

This is easy, some guys can't cycle a bolt correctly, so the CRF helps prevent double feeds.

Despite all the posts...

In order to reduce manufacturing costs in the face of higher labour rates, rifles manufactured from 1964 to 1992 differed from early Model 70s in the following ways:

The bolt was changed significantly. The bolt face was enclosed so that it fully surrounded the cartridge rim, in a similar way to the Remington 700 bolt. While cheaper to manufacture than the undercut bolt face needed for controlled feed actions, it is also stronger, providing more support to the cartridge case head, and better contains escaping gases in the event of a case rupture. The new bolt also differed from the old in that it was manufactured in 2 pieces (bolt-handle/collar and the bolt body[7]) and then brazed together.

The Mauser-inspired, non-rotating claw extractor (incompatible with a fully enclosed bolt head) was eliminated, and replaced with a small wedge-shaped extractor located within a lug of the bolt head. This type of extractor does not engage the cartridge rim as it rises from the magazine into the action, but rather clips over the cartridge rim after the cartridge has been pushed into the chamber and the bolt handle is turned down. This system is more vulnerable than the old system to jamming or being inadvertently closed on an empty breech (i.e. failing to load a new round) if operated under duress, especially if the rifle is held upside down or on its side. In addition, the old extractor design served to stabilize the bolt while the action was open; without it, the new bolt did not have any such stabilization, and wobbled while fully open. This has since been fixed in later rifles, but it was nevertheless an obvious departure and certainly less elegant in function than the earlier models, which allowed the rifle to chamber cartidges smoothly from any position.

Barrels were now rifled by hammer forging, rather than the more costly process of being cut by hand.

The machined steel trigger guard and floor plate were replaced with parts stamped from an aluminium alloy to reduce weight using the assembly from the pre-1964 Featherweight version.
Some earlier models featured walnut stocks with checkering that was impressed onto the wood rather than cut into it as on the early Model 70s, further reducing manufacturing costs at the expense of a less positive grip on the rifle, particularly if the shooter is wearing gloves.

As I remember it from the time, it wasn't a matter of the earlier being somehow "better" than the later, but a matter of relative values to collectors.

Then shooters saw only that the earliers were being sought, and prices rising, and assumed that the issue was quality.

Fixed it for ya'

Nice goin', Ace.

GTC

It is excellent knockabout rifle. Very tough and reliable. Most Americans should stay away from them because they want tiny groups from rifles that don't weigh anything. My recommendation would be pile of hex screws and plastic called Tikka or if saving money is not important Sako. Nothing exemplifies modern quality like plastic stock held to action by hex screws with exception of phillips head screws.

Silicone vs real. First great bolt repeater.

GTC -

The one in material yet significant thing is that they wanted to save money to compete with Remington.. so the Quality investment in the manufacturing process definitely changed to easier methods and very, very likely lower quality.

So Merry Christmas... don't be such a grumpy old fart... pull my finger out...

The old M70's look and operate in a quality manner that's obvious.

I still use my M70 I bought new in 1957 and I have all of them I want.

Of late some of the Kimbers filled in for an lightweight SS Syn stocked rifle.

Here is the last 'pre-64' that I got. It's been restocked and rebarreled to 300 Win. Mag. It's accurate and the best part is that sweet action.

U suk uber

Havent reached those numbers..Took much less to figure out if I wanted CRF to cut to the chase and get a Mauser.If I'm going to perform trick moves (dont act like you dont), I may as well start with the superior action.

I've had a handful come and go,it was kinda like my AR's in 2008, cant believe fools would pay that much for them, and for what,honestly WHY? Cuz it was made in blah blah year, has this and that unchanged, yet you can get an FN or custom MRC for half the price and have more rifle. Nostalgia I suppose,and thats fine but they sure as chit aint better.

I'll keep my old mans pre-64 270. I've read so much about soul and "if they could talk"and such about these rifles, and I've sat quietly while reloading, with my dads rifle stood in the corner, I've never heard the damn thing make a peep.I have pictures of him with the game he's taken with it, but I've seen him hunt with a 700 and 721 just as much, he never claimed mystical powers of the M70..I guess thats why I dont either.

I'm sure i just dont get it tho..

one odd thought here.

Winchester simplifies there design to go cheaper.

But didn't Ruger start up right after that, and make the same claw extractor configuration that Winchester just dropped.

My Old Man had a Winchester and I wanted one too. Hunting is a pretty nostalgic past time and I think a lot of us look at old rifles like pre-64's or pre-Garcia's or pre-war (or whatever) and remember a better time.

I still don't understand why guys will hate on a Winny and brag on a Rem 700. And I don't get why anyone would pose that question in this section either.

Cuz these are the good old days for us?

Better in terms of what?

There are more Whitetails,more elk,sheep,goat..pretty much everything is more plentiful NOW besides Mule Deer.

Granted Leasing land has shut out most of us from good private, but thats hardly a rifle issue.

I found myself in possession of a nice win classic action and I thought what should I build on such a nice classic action. So spun a stainless 338/06 AI barrel on it, cerakoated it all black and dropped it in McMillan WinLite stock that I spraypainted brown. Looks about right now.

We live in the golden age for firearms, I'll never get the fascination for some classic firearms..

rosco I like Mausers , too....press me hard enough, I'll tell you they are a better CRF than a pre 64.

Yes I do trick moves to a pre 64 M70....two....that's all. I replace the stock,mostly with a good synthetic. I have the trigger tuned....That's it. Cause that's all they need

Should add that I have not seen a factory stock on anything, in 40+ years I thought was worth spit,except a Kimber and a Rem 700 MR. If I plan to keep rifle,it gets restocked.

But I have hunted them with the original stocks,too...mostly the FW's but standards in 300,338, and 375,the weights of which are pretty much in line with what's made today in those cartridges.

Then I hunt and shoot with them until the barrel pukes, and put on another one. Or I get bored.

It's the M70's made after 1964 that require most of the trick moves.

It isn't about nostalgia at all for me...I'm not that sentimental. It's pure utilitarian. Every one I have picked up, bought,shot, hunted with,has worked exactly the way it is suppose to....every one,every time, no exceptions. I can't say that about many other rifles.

The rifle is more than the sum of its parts because it got that "Final 10%" that Phil Shoemaker wrote about. Someone tweaked every one to be sure it worked right before it left the factory.All the parts work in sync and were tuned that way.No factory rifle I know of in the same category got as much hands on treatment as the pre 64....which is why many of todays rifles frequently don't work as they should,and guys complain.

Have to disagree with anyone who says they aren't as accurate as others, don't shoot.It isn't true. They are fully as accurate, on average, as most anything made today. Bed them properly, the barrels will shoot...but bedding is something we do with all rifles. When folks say "I owned one of this or that and it didn't shoot"....sorry I don't call that experience.

Yes they are more expensive than they were...people collect them. If you sold a pre 64 FW for a grand,and snickered, bought a Ruger or Remington,thinking you are ahead, you got snookered....the Ruger/Remington is worth shidt,and the pre 64 is now worth $1500-$1800..and the action alone is worth more than the Ruger/Remington. Congratulations? Don't trade stock or real estate.



The OP wants to read about this stuff,so suggest he get a copy of Robert Rule's book to get a feel for how they were made. He covers the post 64 as well,and what the differences were.

He also might do a search on here, and elsewhere,about problems with pre 64's. What he won't find, except only rarely if at all, are threads about failure to feed fire, extract,and cycle,bolt handles that fall off, safeties that stop working, accidental discharges when the safeties are released, broken clip extractors,jammed plunger ejectors, firing pins that back out from slipped set screws,triggers that quit from ice and debris,barrels that don't shoot, empty cases that get ejected into scopes and bounce back into loading ports,connector triggers,extractors that don't extract,MIM parts that break, barrels installed crooked, bulged chambers,and a host of other maladies too numerous to mention.

What he will read about, are guys like Harry Manners and Fin Aggard, Pinnel& Talifson,and Ralph Young who lived entire careers among dangerous game with pre 64's pretty much the way they came...likely because the rifles worked right all the time. It isn't sentiment or nostalgia...it's function.

The other thing he won't see, is concerns about "warranties" because,mostly, they were not needed. Pre 64 users regard them as a curious necessity of a generation raised on stuff that is gonna break. Generally there are no warranties needed on almost anything New Haven built before 1964.

He might read about durability,like with my match shooting pal who fired close to 200,000 rounds through a pre 64 M70 match rifle in practice and competition, that wore several barrels...original trigger and extractor. Never a bauble.


They ain't perfect ( never said they were) but they were good. There are a lot of good rifles out there today. But they have not made anything truly "better" since in a hunting rifle Depending of course, on what you call "hunting".

Pre-'64's were hand fitted.

So were Model A Fords, but I ain't driving across country with one.