Win Model 70 vs. Rem 700

Status
Not open for further replies.
Folks,
Back online, but from Skyline instead of Aerie-8. Home machine has SW fully replaced, but now plagued with a recalcitrant MODEM. Will continue to diligently practice until I can correctly use the word "erudite" in at least six different contexts. Will contemplate the REM/WIN conundrum until such time as I can espouse an appropriate mantra.
 
I just have to add some fuel to this fire! I'm with Mad Dog on the superiority of the M70 type action vs the M700 when chasing dangerous game. I have guided many hunts in Alaska, including brown and black bear, and I cringe when a client brings a Remington actioned rifle on a bear hunt. Why? Because I have twice encountered extractor failures in Remingtons in the field; both were frozen and rendered inoperable. I have never seen nor heard of the same thing happening to a claw extractor. Luckily, the two failures have happened on a mt. goat and a moose hunt, not while poking holes in big bears.

BTW, I do not know a single Alaska hunting guide who uses a rifle with a model 700 action for his back-up. Winchester leads the pack by far in this area.

This is not to say Remingtons are bad rifles, they are just not my first choice for dangerous game. My first choice would be a fine double in .500 Nitro, and donations are gladly accepted.
 
4V50 Gary and MAD DOG:

Am I right in assuming that a 700 action would be more accurate than Model 70 action? If so, why?

Shutoku
 
Thanks, Ipecac.
I knew that there HAD to be at least one other experienced hunter out there that had seen the Remingtons screw the pooch in the field...
I also like the big bad double rifles, particularly the Krieghoffs.
They must be seen and fired to be truly appreciated, but at $10K a pop or more, I will have to stick with my bolt guns for a while longer.
After I finally get the new house built, the wife says that it is my turn to waste a bunch of money, so I have my eye on a trip to Africa.
I will drag along my son, and other suitable beasts of burden, and maybe a couple of buddies.
I intend to have a Krieghoff double in .470 Nitro or larger for the Buffs. The Dakota actioned .358 Norma Mag should suffice for nearly everything else. There will also be a Vintage 1903 Springfield 30-06 along for the ride and the view. It was built by Sukale back in the 1920s and has been to Africa before. I want to take it for old times sake, but more than anything, I feel that it will bring me luck.
 
Mad Dog,
You lucky dog! Africa, I'll get there in a couple of years. A .470'd probably be my first choice as well, but that .500 looks like fun; I haven't got the chance to handle the Krieghoff, however, I have got my hands on a Beretta, and it was choice.

One of the few single shot kills of a brown bear I've seen was a .416 Rem Mag from a Dakota rifle. Got to shoot that rifle, if'n it'd been a lefty action there would have been a fight.

A guide buddy of mine (he's been guiding in Alaska for over 20 years) uses the .358 Norma in a pre-64 as his backup rifle. He's also won several iron-sight shooting matches with it, so that M70 can shoot.

Glad to hear you're taking an '06 along, that's my do-everything-except-backup rifle. It's a M77 MKII wearing an MPI stock , and with handloads it'll shoot less than 1" @ 100yds, which ain't shabby. That rifle isn't pretty, but it works for me.



[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited April 07, 1999).]
 
Shutoku Shia,

I don't believe that one particular make of gun is absolutely more accurate than another. Remingtons have always shot great for me and I'm sure there are others who will say the same for Winchester, Sako or Savage. The heart of a rifle's accuracy begins with its barrel and absent a good barrel, everything else is just bells and whistles. A good scope, rings and base (or iron sights), set-trigger, glass (or steel) bedding, match chamber with handloaded ammunition is all for naught when the barrel is pure junk.

The issue then is which factory makes the better "factory" barrel. Better for what? A bullet for X grain and shape or Y grain and shape? Hunting or target? My point is that there are many things which the factory can't control. Type of ammunition (commercial and the quality or handload and the quality?), maintenance or care, one piece coated cleaing rod used, chamber guide for rod, jagged tip for patch or "two-way" patch holder, type and quality of brush all affect how long a barrel holds up. How about the quality of the shooter or even an Olympic grade shooter on a bad hair day? These are factors clearly outside of factory control which will affect the longevity and accuracy of a barrel. Factory barrels, like the features of an action, are designs which are influenced by the compromises the engineering, production and other departments have agreed upon and as you've guessed, some makers make better compromises than others.

Unless you go to a custom gun maker, factory barrels will lean towards the maximum end of SAAMI specs (to ensure the safety of the shooter). Mind you, this doesn't make for the best match chamber. Also, the twist the factory puts on the barrel may not be the optimal for the type of bullet you want to shoot (OK, so this is putting the cart before the horse) and twists, in my opinon, are selected for a broad range of bullets the consumer will be putting through the barrel.

While I've enjoyed great shooting with my Remingtons with their factory barrels, this does not preclude Winchesters from delivering just as small of a group. Lest we forget, Carlos Hathcock used a Winchester M70 on his first tour (86 confirmed - though a few of these may have been with the 50 caliber Ma Deuce) and a Remington 700 on his second.

For further reading, I recommend Harold Vaughn's book, Rifle Accuracy Facts. It's great reading but for me, raises more issues than it resolves (which I hope will result in more research for a Vol II).

Gary
 
Thanks for the reply, 4V50 Gary. As usual, I find that there is "no single best" answer in life. It all depends on the individual circumstances --- how it will be used for what kind of purpose. Your explanation of limitations and considerations due to user factors (most common ammo and maximum, rather than minimum SAAMI specs) that must be taken by the factory manufacturers was most enlightening.

BTW, I've read an excellent review of Vaughn's "Rifle Accuracy Facts" in the IWBA Journal last night. I think I will have to get a copy in the near future. Thanks for pointing the way to more knowledge.

Thanks for the info to all who contributed. This was one of the more informative threads I've come across in TFL.

Shutoku Shia
shia@dataphysics.com

[This message has been edited by Shutoku Shia (edited April 08, 1999).]
 
Being seimiabsentminded, I neglected to mention one advantage with regards to bedding which a round cylindrical receiver enjoys over the flat receiver of the pre-64 Winchester M70 or the Marlin MR7. Clyindrical receivers have more underside surfaces which enjoy greater support from the stock.
 
AAACCKK. OOOGGH...EEEEK..

I just read 4V50Gary's last post to this, and about had a coniption.
Time for geometry 101, a la Mad Dog.
More surfaces with a round receiver???
How can this be?

Draw a 1.5" circle on a piece of paper. Erase the top half of the circle, and the remaining lower half is about what you have in contact with the stock (in cross section) with the tube receivered Remington. I count exactly ONE surface in contact with the stock here.

Now, to do a simplified representation of the Winchester et al, draw a box that is the same width, and about the same height as the previously drawn 1/2 circle. The lower THREE sides/surfaces of the box are in contact with the stock, and LO! They have more surface area to boot.



[This message has been edited by MAD DOG (edited March 11, 2000).]
 
My pown experience with both Model 70's and Remington 40X's (equivalent to the 700 series series actions) are a bit specialized, National Match Course Competition, however for what they are worth, here they are.

The 40x in .308 that I have was extremely accurate, out of the box, perhaps more accurate than any of the 3 model 70 Standard Target Rifles that I've had, all late post 64 vintage. The model 70's certainly could be made to shoot however.

As for operation of the rifle, I shot left handed, the Model 70 had it all over the Remington, and at the time, there was no such thing as a left hand 40x.

As for the extractor, I had to replace this part on the Remington, never had to do anything with the similar part on a Winchester.

Personally, for rapid fire use, it always struck me that the Model 70 was simply superior to the Remington. The rifles might have been similar in accuracy, but re operation of the action, reloading with chargers, and feeding, the Winchester had it, going away, or so it seemed to me.

These days, bolt guns in NMC, even 30 caliber rifles, seem to be things out of the past, perhaps sad, but that is the way the thing seems to have gone.
 
I have rifles built on both actions. To me, it's pretty much a toss-up. I'm not much on factory rifles any more, so all I have to compare is just the bare bones actions that I've built on.
 
The Mod 70 was a spin off of the Mod 54 which was a civilian modle of the 03 Springfield. It become an instant favorite if the high power shooters due to it's ease of opening and closing of the bolt. It had a very week firing spring which made it easier to cock and it got half its closing action from cams in the receiver and the other half from cams on the bolt lugs. The action was never a favorite with bench resters because you can't get bench rest accuracy with them . The reason for this is the erratic ignition due to light spring and small diameter firing pin. It is a very week action and when you see one that has blown up it always blows the thin area of the receiver ring at the extractor out and the bolt pivots and come out the side.. It doesn't take much of an over charge to blow a pre 64. The post 64 actions is a stiffer and stronger action and with the illumination of the claw extractor there was an increase in potential accuracy. The public never realized this so the pre 64 was the favored action and as a marketing ploy they brought out the pre64 to some extent. They didn't improve the short comings and in fact the new claw extractor actions are worst by far.. My authority for this is for a few years we built the heavy barrel sniper/varmint rifles for them and you can't realize how hard it was to make them shoot. We finally declined the contract because the hours we put into them made it a money loosing proposition.. I take a lot of flame from the high power community about these facts but all you have to do is watch what action the military uses for their snipers. What actions are the choice of B/R shooters, What company hasn't gone bankrupt twice and you have to come up with the 700 Rem. As for the 3 position safty, There has been more insurance claims due to accidental discharge when taking it off safty This should be varifieable through the NRA. It happened to me when I was squated down with the butt resting in my groin. As the deer started into the clearing I started take the safty off it went off and the recoil of that 270 sitting on the famliy jewells made me beleave I would never have kids.
 
i have always shot remington 700's since i could shoot a highpower.i have calibers from 223 to 458 win.i have shot 1000's of rounds of factory ammo and 1000's rounds of handloads over the years and have never had the first problem with the extractors on any of them.one time i had a case rupture with a peice of weak brass that locked up the entire action.i had to pound the bolt off.guess what>. the extractor sheered the case head right off and is still working today.i think maybe some of mad dogs problems with the rem action is from clients short stoking the long actions on their 700's.if you short stroke a 700 because of it pushfeed design the ejector not the extractor will not release the brass and therefore try to load a fresh round when the bolt is shoved foward.this will cause a malfuntion that is enduced by the operator and not the gun.i discovered this while watching a cleint using one of my pet 700's on a hunt one time.we were doing our usual midday shooting and he would continually bind up the action causing a failure just as i have described.after carefully watching him work the bolt i did discover the problem.i have no beef with the winchesters of mausers only to say i like the remington triggers and saftys better.if winchester would build there actions with a remington safty and remington style trigger i would have to have one.the closest i have found is the zzk action.i just bought one and intend to put it through its paces this fall .i will let yall know what the outcome is regards ed.
 
As I stated previously, one of my biggest pet peeves with the 700 is the EJECTOR, which I have personally seen to freeze into the bolt face in cold/wet weather, deform permanently into the bolt face with standard factory REMINGTON loads, and generally fail due to dirt, crap and crud problems.
If the weapon will extract but not eject, you still have a problem on your hands.

The fact that it lacks controlled feed is also an issue, but the failures to eject really bug me the most.
After that we have the el cheapo recoil lugs washers; the round receiver that has a noted tendency to twist in the stock under the forces of transitional recoil; the multi piece bolt, which has been seen to fail by breaking under work conditions during classes at Gunsite and elsewhere; etc.

Other than that, they are fine rifles, and certainly worthy of your consideration for benchrest shooting and NON dangerous game hunting, assuming that there is absolutely NO possibility of running across dangerous game emergencies in the area where you are hunting.
As also stated previously, I own some of them now, and have owned other 700 types and Sakos in the past.
I simply use them for what they are best designed and suited for, rather than as a panacea to all shooting issues.

Having beat this about to death now, I am satisfied that all of my most salient points have been made, so I will just shut up now.
 
Maddog I just scanned my ffl logs and see in the neighborhood of 4 thousand 721 , 722 ,and 700 actions that have had rifles built on them. I can say that in all those years, with the few new actions which broke the extractor during test fire due to bad heat treat I hve never had any trouble with the extractors. I have never in 50 years seen a bolt break except when some idiot locked one up with too much pressure and then beat the bolt handle off trying to get it open. You can have your likes and dislikes as that's your privilege but picking a weak action that doesn't handle gas well and will not generate accuracy That's carrying product loyalty a little far.-. I challenge you to a test. You take your Mod.70 and I will take a 700 and we will over charge them the same and take the cases and put them in the lathe and cut a groove at the web to ensure that the case head fails and see which handles the gas the best. I can assure you that you will get the surprise of your life. In the old days at Camp Parry every year you would see a bucket full of them blown up by people trying to get mag. Velocity out of 06s
 
Great thread, very informative. I've shot both, and like 'em both. My wife has a Mod 70 featherwieght in .308 and it's an "honest to God" 1 incher with good ammo.

My 700 (left hand) sniper rifle was built by Mr. McMillan himself back in '87. Basically a LH M40A1. This rifle has been so incredibly consistant as to zero over the years, and I think that is a priority, as is reliability and accuracy. It originally shot regular 1/4" groups with Fed match, and even after 13 years, over 10K rounds fired and my aging eyesight, it'll still turn in regular 1/2"ers now (off a Parker-Hale bipod). I had the trigger pull set by Mr. McMillan at 3.5 lbs, and it is still in that range, crisp and consistant, shot to shot.

This was my first centerfire rifle, and 90% of what I know about shooting came from this gun, so I realize I'm spoiled in the extreme. I would love, though, a Mod 70 LH with an octagonal bbl in one of the .338 calibers!! for hunting.

I did break the 700's extractor during a practice session, after many thousands of rounds through the gun, so theoretically, for hunting dangerous game, the Winchester may be more reliable. I do think the chances are greater for the operator to malfunction the gun by short stroking (or missing the shot) than by the gun itself failing.

In short, both are great, get one of each.
 
thanks dave for noticing the part about the people short stroking there 700"s i sincerly think that alot of what maddog is seeing from his clients is bad maitnance and bad bolt technique.hey maddog, the next time you have a cleint have a 700 that ejector fails ,ck it out yourself to see if the client is short stroking the action or if he has allowed dirt and gunk to build up internally.that is something that would even mess up a winchester action.i agree with gale that the 700 is a stronger action and in regards to twisting in the stock that may be a problem for a cheapo stock but not for the high quilaty stocks like gale sells and definatly not when they are bedded properly.please dont take this personally mad dog but i am just playing the devils advocate,i love ya like a brother and have a healty respect for you.i just have to agree to disagree with you on this subject.
 
Gale,
I will never intentionally overcharge a weapon. Doom on those who do, for any reason.
Anyone stupid enough to try to get .300 Win Mag performance out of a 30-06 deserves what they get when they pull the trigger.
I have never claimed that the model 70 was stonger than the Remington, nor that it was vastly superior in all aspects. I simply stated some facts as I have actually seen them happen to myself and others.
We both have some experience with the rifles in question, and yours have clearly differed from mine in some respects. I have every confidence that the rifles that you have built are the best of their breed, bar none.
Perhaps it is just my karma to have ejector (and other) failures with Remingtons.
In the meantime, I will load my ammunition carefully as always, and trust in positive feed and ejection while hunting dangerous game.
I will continue to use the Remington actions for benchrest and varmint shooting.
I will no longer use Sako actions for anything, as they really pi$$ed me off.
Durned furiners...

Gunmart,
As I stated previously, the last time I saw a Remington ejector fail was on a BRAND NEW weapon. It was a .416 that was removed from it's factory box, cleaned, and shot immediately with Remington factory ammo. The pressure/recoil caused the ejector to deform into the bolt face, and it WOULD NOT EJECT.
The cartridge would have spent the rest of eternity securely gripped in the bolt face by that marvelous Remington extractor had we not pried it out with a knife.
Clearly, this was not caused by poor maintenance, dirt or crud. It was caused by a crummy ejector. Remington agreed and replaced it.
Disagree with that?
 
no disagreement here.even cheverlot puts out a bad truck everynow and then but thats a hole new forum.heheh see ya ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top