I know, the only answer is both! But I'm curious to hear what you fellas think of this one.

I have a chance to pick up either a Winchester 70 push feed in 308 Win (looks like a pre XTR rifle) or a Zastava M98 in a hog's back stock in 7x57 or 6.5x55

I'm set up to reload the 308 and 7x57 as it is. Either would be nice. Right now the only things really holding me back on the Mauser are the pain in the ass nature of mounting a scope on it, and the somewhat bulky width/weight dimensions....although I've had worse! That said...its a great action. The simplicity of the Winchester trigger has a lot to offer too.

I dunno, what do y'all think and why?

I would get the 7x57.

How come, Ken? Because of the rifles themselves, or the 7x57 caliber?

Winchester.....every time.. Because you already named two quite important reasons: scope mounting and trigger..

IIRC the Zastava is the Interarms Mark X action just under a new name. Should not be to hard to mount a scope on it.

Yes, I like the 7x57 cartridge.

The two rifles would be a pickem based on which one you like the best.

Definitely the 7x57 over the 308.

Why is it hard to mount a scope on the Zastava? I have 2 scoped with no problems

Its a pain because they drill the holes so far out of whack, you need windage adjustable bases. And the rear of the action/front ring are of different heights than any Weaver bases seem to be able to equal, so the scopes taking a nose dive.

Basically have to use Leupold rings/bases.

I'll chime in since I have both (albeit both in 7x57).

I've had zero issues scoping the Zastava: Warne bases and Warne QD rings with a Burris scope. About the only thing I don't like about the rifle is the stock, and that's easily fixed by either a replacement or having someone put the one that's on it on a diet. One of the things you might want to consider is the fact that the barrel twist is 1:866" (1:220mm). If you like long bullets you'll like that twist, although my rifles with the standard 1:9.5" handle 175-grain bullets just fine.

As for the triggers, as long as they break cleanly and can be easily adjusted, I don't particularly care. But neither do I hunt where anything is likely to freeze, so that certainly plays into my comment. Mud, on the other hand, can be a potential problem, so if you're in a place where things can get sloppy the older Winchester trigger wins hands down. So far that hasn't been a problem for me either, but things happen.

In light of all of that, you answered your own question right at the beginning: do what I did and get both.

RM

The current production Zastava rifles that I've seen have all had very poor checkering, little more than shallow lines scratched into the wood, so I would probably avoid them unless the price was too low to pass on. When quality control is almost non-existent on one part of a unit, I have to wonder what other short cuts were taken during the production process.

I own several push-feed Winchester 70 and think that they are well made, well finished, rifles that exhibit fine quality control, so given those 2 choices, my choice would be the Winchester.

I currently have 9 rifles chambered in 7x57 and 14 chambered in 308, so I don't have any particular cartridge bias one way or the other. That said, my "if I ever get to Africa again" rifles are a matched pair of Interarms Mark X mannlichers in 7x57 and 9.3x62, so maybe I am a wee bit biased toward the 7x57 if it is chambered in the right rifle for me and my intended uses.

This picture shows how the hog's back stock is difficult to get a good cheek weld (the owner needed a higher comb" and why there's an "American" style stock.

Thanks for all the feedback, guys!

Dave in WV, there's a rifle in that picture? *grin* Nah I see what you mean. Coupling that with what RevMike and 260Remguy have said, the factory stock would probably go. Some of them have nice wood grain and look like they would really pop with some oil (as they come with nearly none it seems) but yeah. Checkering is dog poop and its kind of a club. Would ditch it for a synthetic as soon as.

I haven't had the same luck with scope mounting (had one where a Leupold ran out of adjustment and used a Bushnell instead) but if I end up with one again I'll give the Warne set a try.

ETA: RevMike, I'd hope to have the 7x57 shooting a 120gr TTSX most of the time.

As much as I like the 7x57, Winchester rifles are outstanding!

I've got a couple of Interarms Mark X rifles. Scope mounting was simple with Warne bases.

Shinbone, there was no massive windage correction for you?

Joe, I love em too, have had pushfeeds, Classic CRF and a few of the newer ones....but also love Mausers. Its a hard life I tell ya

I'm the odd man out, as usual, but in my experience, the early post '64 push feeds had some crazy accurate hammer forged barrels (I've owned 4 of them in common cartridges) including a .308 that I used in NRA Sporting Rifle High Power, and managed to qualify 'expert'. If accuracy is your thing, be comfortable with the .308 M-70. For a pure hunting rifle, I'd take the Zastava in 6.5 Swede, the 6.5 only because I have around a half century of experience with it. The difference betwixt 6.5, 7x57 and .308 cannot be measured in practicality for hunting purposes, IMO.

I'm with you on no game animal ever really knowing the difference, flintlocke! And the powder charges and bullet weights that would be involved (for me) make them compare quite equally with each other.

What are the wear points to watch out for on the Win 70 push feed? Anything that tends to crap out before getting to high mileage use?

To me it would depend on if I wanted a project or I wanted a using gun with little or no work needed. As the basis for a slightly improved to a full blown custom the Zastava would get the nod. For a using unmodified rifle then the Winchester PF. Caliber I like them all but the 6.5x55, 7x57 and then 308 are my preference in that order. This could easily change if I had a stockpile of components for any of them, which I do for the 6.5x55 and .308 but not currently the 7x57.

Exactly... It's one of the main reasons I quit accepting M98s about a dozen+ years ago..


None really. They're mostly bullet proof..

A couple things to check if buying one used - first, the extractor. Remove it (paying attention to the plunger & spring so it doesn't go BOING, then remove those and clean the recess. Re-install and check for ease of movement. It's the most ignored piece on most PF rifles and if enough dirt/grit/etc gets in the grooves it can hinder ejection and/or insertion.

Only weak point on the push-feed I’m aware of is the bolt-handle attachment, the same as all the Classics. Not common apparently, but it happens. If I were getting one for hard use or dangerous game, I’d get it spot-welded. For general use, meh.

I’ll always take a commercial 98 over an M70, all other parts being equal, but the various Zastavas can be a crapshoot when it comes to finish; try before you buy. Never had a commercial, factory tapped 98 with crookedy holes, but some early FNs didn’t come drilled, and like sporterized ones, weren’t always worked on by the best smiths. I have a Heym with the lone rear hole just barely out of line, and rather than put a bunch of money into having it fixed, I’m using “alternative sights”. No way to tell if it’s a factory job or was done later as Heyms of that era are poorly documented.

I don’t obsess over cartridge choice, although naturally I prefer ones I’m already set up for. Both rounds in question are excellent.

Pick which ever cartridge you like both rifles will get it done. I have both so I know. For what it is worth a Mark X Interarms is a clone of the FN commercial action which evolved from the clunk M98. Don't call it a 98 it isn't one.

Magnum Bob,

Besides not having a thumb cut and the intermediate length, what's the difference?

Pappy,

Thanks for the info. I've heard of the bolt handle coming off as well, but it seems a lot less frequent than some others as a whole, doesn't it? And interesting about the Heym!

From what I gather, perhaps the Interarms Mark X actions/rifles had a bit more attention payed to them. The recent Zastavas seem to have weird hole alignment as a rule rather than an exception. They seem very solid but...not exactly a Husky 1600 are they.

Redneck,

Thank you very much for the firsthand info! I appreciate it. The exterior of the Win 70 looks very clean, but I'll take a look at the extractor if I pick it up.

Mark X is newer stuff not some battlefield relic being turned from a sow's ear to a silk purse it's a newer commercial quality steel. No thumb cut, no stripper ears, no mil trigger, no battle safety. They share some design features that' s all. Mb

I’ve been scolded for calling them Mausers before, but never 98s😜. My Heym is a true 98. Only departure is the bolt handle, which as far as I can tell, was manufactured bent for scoping. Floorplate has the hole for a bullet nose, there’s a clip guide, wing safety, thumb cut, and C-ring. Published info on Heym that I’ve found generally starts when they began making rifles for other companies, and then similar models sold by various department stores.

The one push feed M70 I owned was one of my most accurate rifles, .308 with a varmint barrel.

If the push feed Winchester was built in the 60’s, I’d stay away from it.
I’ve had a couple Model 70’s in 338 Win Mag. The first was a push feed. I’m not sure of the date of manufacture. The second was a controlled feed (Classic).
The push feed was much easier to get to shoot accurately.
I am guessing the Winchester might be higher quality, IDK compared to the Zastava.
I like the 7x57 and the 308.
I like the Winchester triggers. If they were at the same store, I’d look them over and compare.
Without seeing them, it would be a difficult decision, but I’m thinking the Winchester.

What do you guys think of the Parker Hale rifles built on Santa Barbara actions?

I've seen another poster here with a lot of experience with them saying they are good to go except the trigger housing is made of some pretty cheap pot metal. Ever own/make any impressions on them?

Well, I've owned two Zastavas, Mark Xs to be exact. One in .375 H&H and the other a .300 Win. Mag. Both rifles were decently accurate but the one in .375 H&H had a serious flaw IMHO. The top of the feed ramp was as jagged as the teeth in a Great White Shark and gouged the brass with very deep grooves. I didn't keep it very long, but did look for another. Every one I found had the same problem, some worse and some not to worse. The .300 was a nice rifle and I would probably still have but a guy at the range saw it and made me an offer I couldn't refuse. I'm still sorry I sold it.

I have a few M70s, one post 64 push feeder, the other post 68. A .243 and .338 Win. Mag. They shoot decently and it wasn't hard to find loads they liked. The rest are a .308 Youth Ranger I won in a raffle which I restocked to fit me, and two XTRs, a .257 Bob and 7x57 Mauser in the Featherweight configuration. The only other M70 I have is a New haver Stainless Classic in .338 Win. Mag. that I will probably either rebarrel to something else or maybe even sell off as I do not like it as is. Damn thing beats me to death.

As to which one would I choose of the OP's choices. Knowing the way I think I'd find a way to get both. But that's me. Lately however, I've been playing with the 7x57 which would incline towards the one chambered to that round. I have three as it is, the M70 mentioned, a Ruger #1A and a custom built on a J.C. Higgins M50 Mauser. The more I play with the cartridge, the more I'm getting to like it. As I'm quite fond of the 98 Mauser action, I probably would go for the 7x57 as that's my current labor of love.
Paul B.

Haven’t owned one, but the guy who owns the main LGS in this area has had one for decades, and he can, as you’d imagine, pick and choose. I’d have to look one over for myself.

I’ve owned a couple of 70s Zastavas, J.C. Higgins M50s and some regular FNs. The FNs remain my favorite, and since prices on all of them are pretty close these days, that’s what I look at. The two FN .270s I have now will probably do me, along with the Heym .308. One of the .270s is a Frankenrifle that came with a blocky left-handed stock of nice walnut, which I replaced with a B&C. The other is a very nice old custom by Paul Morton of San Antonio, that I picked up for a relative song. It has all the goodies; Fisher bottom metal, Mashburn trigger, and an M70-type safety in a “distinctive” stock of French with a checkered schnabel, lots of fine checkering elsewhere too.

They are just okay, 2nd and 3rd tier rifles IMO. They make great truck guns or loaners for your clumsey friends.

I have one in a .25/06 varmint model. My impression of it is simple I LIKE IT!

Thats a very nice rifle, Ken! Or should I stick with "Elkhunter"?

Seems it gets chances to do its job too!

Thanks for all the feedback and thoughts, everyone. In the end I went with the Winchester, and if I am lucky enough to be here at the farm instead of out in the big city when it arrives I'll post some pictures.

But knowing me, I'll have both eventually.

Igloo, Ken will do just fine.

Congrats on buying the Winchester!

I had one push feed M70 in .243 and it was fine. You will crap out before the rifle.

Since a 98 Mauser is my favorite action and the 7X57 is my favorite cartridge, the choice for me is simple.

Well, look what pulled in today!

Overall, pretty nice. Looks used but not abused. Bore and crown seem very nice. Bit of schmoo on the receiver from the see-through mounts and old loctite in the holes that needs cleaning. Triggers quite nice to me as is.

May just drop it into a synthetic, put a Bushnell Elite of some type on it in Weaver QDs and call it good.

Knowing me though? Probably be a Mark X next to it some day. What can I say, I have a problem.

Thanks again all

Very nice!

Yes...very nice looking rifle. If you're happy, we are happy.:)

Our happiness is so genuine and yet so fleeting when there are always new guns to have and hunt with next season!

Thanks all!

Will get some groups up once I have the rifle scoped and ready to go, and start working up loads.