I have a Winchester Model 70 Classic Super Grade in .30-06 that I just killed my first deer with. I'm very fond of this rifle, but have a couple of questions about it.

The first is when was this rifle made? The serial number is G158xxx. I've tried looking it up on a Winchester collectors' site, but it says that my serial number is invalid.

Next, I've heard that the extractor can break and I'm not overly fond of the two piece floor-plate/trigger guard assembly. There's a company (I think that it's Williams Firearms) that makes CNC machined replacements for both the extractor and bottom assembly.

How much would it hurt whatever collector value this rifle might have to do the slight inletting required for a replacement bottom assembly? I'd also like to replace the extractor and was wondering if anyone had any experience with this and how hard it is? I'd certainly keep the original parts with the rifle, but I'd really like to make it as close to my ideal as I can.

TIA

Cassady

Williams makes both parts. The extractor will take you about 15 seconds to replace, once you see how to do it. It is very easy.

The bottom metal will need quite a bit of inletting in order to fit. If you have not done it before, don't bugger up that Supergrade stock by making it your guinea pig.

Late production Winchesters don't have that much in the way of collector value anyhow, so you probably won't hurt it much, especially since you've already shot it and hunted with it.

There have been three generations of late model Supergrades. tHe first (1990-ish or so, I think) did not have an ebony tip and inletted swivels.

The second had an ebony tip, inletted swivels, two piece bottom metal (marked Super Grade), and a red pad. 1994 (I think)

The last generation had the ebony tip, inletted swivels, black pad, and one piece bottom metal. It was only offered for the last couple of years before the shut down.

Cassady, I can't help you with the date of the rifle, but I will offer some insight on the other questions that you asked. First off I look at rifles as tools. I have a few for hunting and a few more for shooting. I want all of my rifles to be as bulletproof as possible so collector value never plays a part in my thinking. Williams makes a great product and I would not hesitate to swap out the factory offerings for his wares.......Blake

Based on the serial number, I'm (roughly) guessing that the rifle was made around 1996-1997.

Is it stainless? Only the Stainless models had a serial no like that. G158XXX would have been made in 1997 (ish).

A serial number like what? Starting with a G and followed by 6 numbers? If so, I have more than a dozen late model blued actions in the safe right now that are so numbered.

Yup, both the stainless and blued Classic actions were produced with six-digit serial numbers until the late 1990's. USRAC changed to the seven-digit numbers about the same time that they changed the marking on the left side of the receiver to "Trademark Licensed to Olin Corp.", which I believe might have occurred when they moved production to S.C.

Brad, you might be confusing the Classic actions with the push-feeds; the latter always had seven digit serial numbers.

I know for a fact that my Supergrade was made in 2000. It has a 6-digit serial# and does not say "OLIN" on it anywhwere---2MG

I probably should have written "until roughly the late 1990's". I'm not exactly sure of the date that the changeover occurred, and there may be a bit of overlap, too. Winchester was never real predictable about their serial numbers and rifles often came out of the factory out of sequence. For example, I don't think there's a definite cutoff for the New Haven guns vs. the S.C. rifles. Also, the Custom Shop apparently would pull a bunch of receivers and then produce rifles at their leisure, but production rifle SN's also don't always make much sense either.

I know of a couple Stainless Synthetics with BOSS with SN's over G313,000, and they supposedly were only made until 1998. Yet, there was a Super Grade STW that was on the market that was made in 1999, and it had a much lower serial number (G166XXX). No rhyme or reason.

Does your Super Grade have the firing pin stop screw?

I'd leave the extractor alone. Can they break? Sure. But in more than 33 years of owning/shooting M70's I've never had an issue. Further, in the 8+ years since I started my gunsmith business I've had maybe, and I stress 'maybe', one extractor I've had to replace.

I"ve actually replaced more CRF extractors than the push-feed. Keep your firearm, and especially the chamber, clean and you will have near zero problems over a lifetime.

Congratulations on getting your first deer. You will always remember that.

The rifle is just fine as it is extractor wise. Don't fool with the magazine box. Just leave the rifle as it is as long as it shoot well.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Your Model 70 30-06 was built around 1998 or thereabouts. The 1990s and early 2000s were good years for M70 production.

I would certainly leave your 2-piece, factory-original bottommetal assembly in place. On the Super Grade, it's all-steel, and of sufficient quality. Contrary to popular opinion, the 2-piece system is absolutely superior to any one-piece setup. It allows the bottommetal to be perfectly tuned to fit the stock perfectly, plus it lends support to the action. Tom Burgess and Ted Blackburn make the very finest custom M70 bottommetal in the world, and they have always retained the 3-screw/2-piece system. In fact, the best makers of custom Model 70 rifles in the world, including David Miller & Curt Crum, D'Arcy Echols, and Gene Simillion all prefer the 2-piece system. That should tell you something........... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

The only thing I'd change about your rifle is the extractor. That's one part that I would absolutely NOT retain. USRAC supplied an MIM cast extractor as part of the M70 package purely for reasons of cost expediency. It was a dumb move to cut costs in that area, which demonstates that the New-Age cowboys who were running USRAC didn't know the fundamentals of the M70 design nearly as well as they thought, and they wouldn't listen to those who did.

The M70 Classic extractor system is the same basic, fundamental design as the one Paul Mauser perfected when he introduced the timeless Model 98 action at the turn of the 20th century. In order for it to work properly, the extractor must retain proper pressure against the cartridge case, and because of that, it MUST be carefully and properly machined from real SPRING STEEL, and not from some sort of cast potmetal that is incapable of carrying out it's function as-pre the original design principles.

The original pre-64 Model 70 extractor was also constructed with an extractor that was beautifully machined from high-quality spring steel, and it worked perfectly.

When USRAC brought out the redesigned M70 Classic, they veered off the straight & narrow patch, decided to get cheap in the wrong place, and went with this junk MIM extractor. If you remove one of these MIM units from the bolt, chuck it in a vice, and bend it, it'll STAY bent, because it's NOT a real spring-steel part. ALL of the top M70 riflesmiths that I know of always replace the MIM extractor on the M70 Classic with an aftermarket machined, spring-steel extractor from either Williams of Wisner's.

I just bought one of these from Wisner's of Adna, WA (360) 748-4590 for about $55, and it's a beautifully machined and crafted part. You may well need to have a good riflemsith fit, gap, and otherwise adjust it properly for you, but that work isn't expensive, either.

I hope this helps.......... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

AD

Damn, I guess that Ted Blackburn sent me a bunch of junk off the reject, scrap pile. What will I ever do with this garbage one piece bottom metal from Ted? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />




I need to cancel my next order with him. No way thta I woudl want to use this sub-par, inferior trash.

Who mentioned anything about changing the magazine box?

Oh, you might just consider using it anyway! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

AD

I had about an hour long discussion with Pat Madis on the very subject a couple months ago. About confusing serial numbers, and descriptions not matching. A big portion of what is out there being claimed as customs are what George described as "Lunch Box Specials". Appearently Winchester had a big problem with employees taking parts home and building there own customs, not that that is a bad thing. But it sure helps to make things confusing.

Phil

Thanks for all of the good advice. I'll be ordering a Williams extractor as soon as I finish posting this word of thanks.

Cassady

Where exactly is the two-piece design absolutely superior in every way to the one-piece design????

It doesn't allow the bottom metal to be "perfectly tuned" to your stock......it forces it, which in most cases is far from perfect.
In a One-Piece design the relationship between the trigger guard and floorplate where they meet will never change, regardless of how many times the rifle is dissembled, or how good or bad the inletting is......It always works because is doesn't rely on the inletting to mate two precision parts together.

The other big advantage that puts the one-piece over the top is the elimination of the 3rd screw, which serves only one function.......and that's to hold the front of the trigger guard of the old 2-piece style in place.....nothing more or less. Any added strength that would be achieved from screwing in a screw into a receiver that should be left loose in the first place in order for the gun to shoot, would be only a figment of your imagination.

If the middle or 3rd screw is overtightened, you'll be placing excessive pressure on the magazine box, which in turn will cause grouping to go to hell in a handbasket.

If you can't make your rifle accurate and reliable with a one-piece bottom metal from any manufacturer, you're sure as hell not going to accomplish it with a two-piece.

We've made both the floorplate and hinge assembly to be mated with a standard trigger guard and the one-piece assembly for many years. We've always outlined the advantages and disadvantages of both.
The biggest advantage of our two-piece system is the fact that it replaces the factory aluminum with steel and does not require inletting into a factory stock.
The one-pieces only disadvantage is the fact that it requires inletting into a factory stock in most cases.....This is true for every manufacturer of bottom metal for the Winchesters.

Good post, right on.... I have several of your items on various custom rifles I've built for myself and others over the last 8 years and have found your company's products to be excellent.

Very best to you and your company Matt.

Matt, I know you have a vested interest in the one-piece design, so I'm sure I'm wasting my time with this post.

However..........

This is most expecially true with the pre-64 Model 70, but on many Model 70s, including the 'Classic' the guard-screw hole spacing is never the same, and it can vary by as much as .030" in any one hole position, and the holes are sometimes crooked.

The two-piece/three-screw allows you to pick up any discrepancy in the length of the floorplate itself. In other words, the length of the floorplate can be adjusted to fit and make up these variances, and when it's all properly done, the fit is absolutely perfect.

THAT'S why Winchester came up with the three-screw design in the first place, and it's the reason Tom Bugress still makes the three-screw design to this day, and that's why David Miller and D'Arcy Echols use the three-screw design in the form of custom bottommetal to this day.

So give Tom Burgess or D'Arcy a call and talk to either one of them about this concept. You just might just come away with a new perspective............ <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

AD

Allen,

I might could buy the argument about adjusting for the hole spacing, but the argument that 2 piece bottom metal is stronger, and that it "lends support to the action" is just absolute hogwash.

Try this: Take just the action, so stock or barrel needed. Instal two piece bottom metal, and then explain to me how it "lends support to the action", when if the floorplate is not closed, and latched tightly over the mag box, the whole thing flops around and falls apart. Do you think that would happen with a 1 piece unit?

In conclusion, a 2 piece unit is a compromise, required only with an out of spec receiver. Me, I'd much rather pick a true receiver and run the superior one piece bottom metal.

Oh, and not that Matt needs my defending, but he makes BOTH the one piece and two piece designs, so he has a vested interest in BOTH designs.

I would never hesitate to change out the Winchester MIM extractor to one of Matt Williams' spring steel units, which is exactly what I did and I never looked back. Took less than five minutes to install and works perfectly. I also changed out a pot metal trigger guard for one of his steel trigger guards and it is beautiful. To my way of thinking, it enhances the rifle's value. Thanks...Bill.

CAS, just about all Model 70 receivers are off just a little bit, and to me it's simply incomprehensible that a one-piece bottommetal unit is going to match-up perfectly by any means other than sheer, blind, random, pot-luck. And I owned one extreme example that had screw holes that were drilled so crooked that it was unusable altogether.

I don't believe in the "one-size-fits-all" bottommetal any more than I believe in "drop-in" replacement extractors or triggers that are supposed to unfailingly work perfectly without any adjustment. Bolt and cartridge case dimensions vary a lot as well........... as do sear and cocking-piece dimensions, etc.

The middle guard screw CAN be used as a solid anchoring point in the three-screw design. Miller adds a massive middle pillar on his rifles that is machined perfectly after installation, in conjuntion with the front and rear pillars, and his instruction is to tighten all three screws the same. It's stress-free, and it absolutely lends great support and rigidity to the receiver.

I've seen one-piece setups that were not perfect in form and function, either. Unless the inletting is carried out perfectly, the frame will stick out below the stockline, look ugly, etc.

At the end of the day, and I think this is a fair statement, the experience, intelligence, and skill of the individual gunsmith and his ability to properly evaluate, then modify and finish a specific reciever, counts for more than anything else...........

AD

Allen, I'd say you have had some of the worst luck of anyone I've ever seen on guard screw holes being out of position. Scope bases holes....yes, but I've yet to see them get there guard screws out enough to cause a failure on installing a one-piece bottom metal.

Truth is, we manufactured at one time, nearly 10,000 one-piece bottom metals a year for USRAC. Do you want to know how many didn't fit their rifles????? NONE.

If I was in a position that I couldn't do my own inletting, or didn't have the money to pay someone to do it for me, but wanted good quality steel, I'd opt for a floorplate and hinge assembly coupled with a steel trigger guard.

The two-piece system is a compromise, but one that many people who are trying to save money or lack the expertise to inlet their stock are willing to use.....that's really it's market, not for an upgrade over a one-piece design.

I've had many conversations with D'arcy Echols and yes he prefers the two-piece design for the reasons that you mentioned here. His reasons or opinions, as they are, are simply that.....opinions of what he prefers. No doubt he builds some nice rifles and I'm surely not going to tell him that he can't buy anymore trigger guards from us because he's not using a one-piece design.

It would do you well to analyze the engineering end of the problem at hand and draw your own conclusions, rather than taking a builders word as gospel on the subject.

RE: Williams products.
I recently acquired two USRAC M 70's I put a Williams steel trigger guard on .30-06 FWT and it fits better than the original. Holds the floorplate more secure, no slop, no binding.
Great product.
Mike Fletcher

Did you have to do any trimming? I've been thinking about replacing the bottom metal on my M70 but was worried about ahving to trim the stock.

Absolutely no fitting needed. Opened the floor plate. Removed the two trigger guard screws. swapped trigger guards and replaced screws. Took less time than typing this!
Mike Fletcher

PS Based on this I am going to get the new Williams bottom metal for a couple three short action Remington 700's!

Thanks for the info, i'll be swapping both my M70's by years end!

so, is there a link to win serial numbers, and dates of manufacture?

Only one I know of is this one. http://oldguns.net/sn_php/winmods.htm

Nothing personal, but I'm not buying it.

I cannot afford rich rifles, but, my issue M40 is probably worth six grand or so civilian retail. If I took the above statement to the shop at Quantico and tried to get the bottom metal changed out for a 2pc "improvement", I'd be laughed at. A 2pc system would degrade the M40.

I agree that M70 QC went down the tubes and I've been the owner of a Supergrade '06 that had about everything out of square. But, saying the 2pc-system is superior as it better accomodates slop doesn't cut it. To me that's like saying a 2pc scope mounting system w/ windage is superior to a one piece solid system because it better fits a receiver w/ off axis mount holes.

As far as guild smiths and their prefered systems go. Many of their specialized systems may be superior for them and there customers, but it certainly doesn't make them universally superior across the board. As example; I'm no Phil Shoemaker but I've followed up on a few bears and had my share of experiences. I for one prefer my bear rifle to have a field removeable scope to access fixed sights. I find this superior to permanent mounts. There are famous guild smiths who refuse to use such mounts and claim their systems are superior. But to me their systems are worthless. This also applies to the bottom metal.

GVA