Winchester Model 70 - Old vs New

[BattleRifleG3]

Ok, so I see many things advertising "pre-64" Winchester action. And I hear people saying Winchester just ain't what it used to be, mainly referring to the Model 70. So what's really the difference between pre-64, now, and everything in between? All I know is that they're currently owned by FN, along with Browning. FN advertises shotguns and such which are the same as Winchester's line.

Only two Win M70s are attractive to me, the Stainless Classic in 375 H&H, the only stainless bolt gun I've seen with iron sites, and the Shadow model in 325 WSM.

Is the action not as strong, something that would rule out any magnums for me? Is it less reliable? Are certain features less desireable?

Thanks all!

[poncaguy]

I have never owned  a model 70 until I bought a Winchester Model 70 Super Shadow in 270 WSM. Excellant rifle, very accurate and not very heavy. Have owned Remington 700's , Ruger 77's and Savages. Next bolt action will be another Model 70.....or the Savage because of the new accu trigger.

[jvs]

Pre 64 Winchesters aren't much different than any other gun made before that time period.  Like anything else, the ones most sought after are in NIB condition.  There isn't as many stamped metal parts or plastic parts in any older firearm.  Plus a majority of those older rifles were made in the good old USA.  Not any more I suppose.  

One thing about the most pre-64's is they appreciated in value.  Few others can hold a price like a pre-64.  A used one in good condition will cost about the same as a new Winchester, but most of the time it has a scope or sling or both mounted on it, so in the long run a pre 64 costs less.  Most other makes from that time period also went up in price but not like a Winchester in a desirable caliber and condition.  If I had a choice between a new Winchester or a nice pre-64 on the rack, I'd take the pre-64.

It is my understanding that U.S. Repeating Arms -(Winchester)- moved a major portion of the parts acquisition and manufacturing overseas in the mid to late 80's.  I havent heard of them moving back.

[Ramrod]

BattleRifleG3, It would take darn near a whole book to properly answer your question, but here is the short version. In 1964 Winchester completely redesigned the model 70 action to cut manufacturing costs. It went from a controlled feed with a Mauser style claw extractor to a push feed Remington style bolt. The fit and finish of the post 64 guns was also terrible. The company has finally seen the error of it's ways, and is offering Controlled feed rifles again, along with the "modern" pushfeeds. My Safari Grade feeds and ejects just as slick as any pre-64 I have handled.
And by the way, they are still being produced in New Haven, Connecticut.

[jvs]

And by the way, they are still being produced in New Haven, Connecticut.

I believe the correct word would be "Assembled" in New Haven Connecticut.  

I may be wrong but my understanding is that there is alot of Asian parts assembled in modern firearms.

[Ramrod]

half_inch_group, I believe you have no idea what you are talking about.
The I.A.M. logo on the box of every new Winchester stands for International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, (of which I am a member), not International Association of Assemblers!

[razmuz]

Is the light weight Winchester less accurate than the standard size?  I know my compact Ruger won't shoot beans.  My CZ is great, just to heavy.   I may have to go Sako or Tika for 6.5X55 light weight.

[jvs]

half_inch_group, I believe you have no idea what you are talking about.
The I.A.M. logo on the box of every new Winchester stands for International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, (of which I am a member), not International Association of Assemblers!

The original post want to know what difference there was between pre-64 and newer Winchesters.  I told him stamped metal  and plastic parts.

I also stated that Winchester has, in the past, had parts made overseas for assembly in the USA.

If you or anyone else wants to believe that Winchester doesn't go beyond the boundries for parts, so be it.   Even Union members know that out-sourcing is a problem.  Of course, maybe Winchester is unique....or somebody is blind.

I will not get into a p*ssin contest over foreign parts in modern firearms.  They all do it.

[Ramrod]

razmuz, the featherweights can be just as accurate as the standard models, but they do tend to heat up a little faster. No problem on a big game gun, usually the weight-vs.-accuraccy tradeoff is well worth it.

half_inch_group, there can't be a p*ssin contest. You don't appear to know anything about Model 70's.

[Mauser]

I've looked at pre '64s and current CRF M70s side by side.  Over the years I've shot both.  I just can't tell that much difference, but then I'm no gunsmith either.  Maybe an expert can see the difference.  I've got a 3 year old M70 in 30/06 and it has (so far) been reliable.  It is a good-looking rifle if one likes a classic look and appears to me to be well-made.

It is my understanding, that the real nice M70s were made prior to WWII.   Apparently, after that, Winchester started to skimp to compete with Remington, etc.  The post '64 massacre was really the final nail in the coffin.

I suppose that in 30 years these new M70s will be the trusted, smooth cycling rifles that the old ones are now.

[while99]

Get a copy of Roger Rule's book called "The Rifleman's Rifle".  If shows the progression of the Model 70 from it's beginning.  The book was out of print years ago but a second printing was recently authorized and you can find them at gun shows.  I paid $80 dollars for my copy about two years ago.
The pre-war guns had finer checkering.  Over the years the checkering got coarser (fewer lines per inch) and the checkering panels got smaller.  Winchester started to substitute plastic for steel on the butt plates and the featherweights had some aluminum parts.  Overall though, it is tough to beat a pre-64 Model 70 Winchester as a sporting rifle.

[BattleRifleG3]

Well I'm a pretty modern-friendly guy, so I can take plastic stocks and plates.  The two Winchesters I'd consider would be the Stainless Classic in 375 H&H or the Shadow in 325 WSM (more likely the former.)

So regarding durability and reliability, would this be back to what it used to be, or would Winchester's current flaws warrant a Savage, Remington, or other rifle in the same price range?

[Ramrod]

BattleRifleG3, I don't know what you mean by Winchester's current flaws, they corrected them when they started making the pre-64 type actons again. Regarding durability and reliability, the new guns might even be better than the old. Just not nearly as well finished. The Stainless Classic is a CRF, like the pre-64.  In .375 H&H you will love it as long as you don't shoot it. At a bit over 7 pounds, it is too light for the recoil produced by this round.

[Arizona Jake]

Guys:

This may come as a shock, but MECHANICALLY, the post-64 Winchester ACTION is of much stronger and better design that the pre-64.

The pre-64 action's bolt was prone to binding during fast cycling. This was eliminated in the pst-64 action. The old action did not have the solid lock-up of the post-64. Also the post-64 rifles are inhenrently more precise than the pre-64's.

Yes, Winchester got sloppy with the cosmetics.

As Comupter-Numerically Controlled (CNC) machinery became available, manufacturing costs were reduced and Winchester was able to design a NEW action, incorporating the best of the pre-64 and post-64 designs, which could sell at a competitive price.

The most precise rifle I have ever owned was a post-64 .243 Varmint Model 70 that would shoot dime-sized groups at 200 meters all day long.

My hunting rifles are all of the newer controlled-feed with claw extractor design, while my "2-legged varmint" long range rifle is built on a post-64 action.

[magnum308]

I've always been a fan of the pre 64 M70 rifles and actions. They have been much sought after in the past for the basis of expensive custom rifles and more so than most other actions with the possible exception of the M98.

I have a nice .308 Win in a featherweight in original condition that I have owned for 20 + years and I've done quite a bit of hunting with it. It is one of the nicest rifles I have. It's action is super smoothe and I cannot ever imagine it binding even in the fastest action. The feed from the magazine is flawless. Such to the extent that I am currently importing (from the US) a pre 64 M70 fwt in .270 Win.

Cheers,
Magnum308

[CB900F]

Fella's;

I've had several years experience with both the pre-64 and the newer classic model 70.  Same caliber also in most of the shooting.  The single large difference has been the BOSS device available on the new classic model 70's for some few years.

As far as field function & accuracy goes, it's a toss-up in my book.  However, upon reciept of a new Winchester, I'd suggest a detailed tear-down inspection & cleaning.  I have seen some very sloppy machining on the newer guns.  That being said, the factory took care of the situation with absolutely no problems whatsoever.  

Always detail clean a new gun.  It's entirely common for machining grit, curls, & other crud to be found in the lockwork & other sensitive places.  I don't believe any current high production manufacturer is 'clean' in this respect.  If you don't feel that you can do this yourself, it's worth it to have a competent smith do it for you.

900F