Winchester Model 70

Ok, so after some research, I think I want the old style claw extractor.
The SS looks like the ticket because when you are hiking a ridge at 8k ft elevation going up and down several hundred feet for several miles, every pound counts.
I still want the 30 06 though just because It is a nice tweener between my .308's and .300 win mag

at about 7.75 lbs loaded.... scope and rings will probably add about what....2.5 lbs? 3. So we are thinking 11 lbs?

I'll probably top it with one of my two Swarovski z3's...i have a 4x12x50 and a 2.5x10x44
 
Last edited:
That is called control feed. I agree. IMHO, no point at all in a Model 70 in a push feed. That is just my 2c.

The Leupold VXII 4-12 is 3/4 of a pound. I suggest you re-think 50mm anything.

https://www.leupold.com/hunting-shooting/scopes/vx-2-riflescopes/vx-2-4-12x40mm-adj-obj/

You should be able to find rings and bases of some sort for 1/4 pound. Dont be afraid of alumimum. Weaver bases are fine. Look at Talley, rings or the combo ring with built in base.

You got to be kidding about lugging an 11 pound rifle. Have you ever done that?

I put my M70 w/Leupold on the scale it is 9 pounds even. That is without ammo. I have very heavy one piece old style leupold base and steel rings. I could probably cover 3 rounds of ammo if I was weight conscious on the scope mounting.
 
Mississippi: All current production model 70's feature the CRF and claw extractor (classic) action. Unless of course you are looking at used rifles where push-feeders existed from 1964-2006 in New Haven rifles. And then sometime a few years before 2006 when the New Haven plant closed you could get a model 70 "Classic" that featured CRF/claw extractor as an upgrade over the standard push-feed model 70... I'm not 100% sure, but I want to say that most if not all model 70 variations from that time (Sporter, Featherweight, Supergrade, etc) were offered in the "Classic" config...

Don't ask me about the new XPR...never seen one in person, don't own one, don't intend to.
 
Well that's good to know Ride Red. I guess it's time now to start shopping price. What should i expect to spend. I don't have a budget, but obviously don't want to over pay. Seems $1,100 is in the ballpark. I believe I can put the package I want together for $2,000.
Like I said I'll probably put a Swarovski z3 2.5x10 on it
 
The model 70 is a great classic, but you wont find one any where near 6 pounds. They dont make a medium length action or reduced diameter action in a Model 70. I expect the current owners to stick with the nostalgia theme. I dont think there is even a stainless M70 any more.
Click to expand...

My Model 70 Ranger in .30-06 (essentially a featherweight with a cheaper birch stock) weighs in at right about 6 unloaded. Its light, has quality irons, a very good push feed action (only "drawback" I guess is the pushfeed), and the action is the same as every other Model 70 made in its time. It also has a 3 position safety and a hinged floor plate (my model seems to be in the minority, as most seem to have blind magazines, ymmv tho).

I would definitely consider a used "Ranger" due to how cheap they are to buy and how good the quality is. Mine shoots sub half-MOA with 168 SMKs and under an inch with cheap federal hunting rounds, and it's older than I am!
 
With that kind of budget you could get the Alaskan. It has iron sights, too. But the Sporter and the Featherweight are both very nice too. I think all the new ones have the M.O.A. trigger system. On that budget, you could also look at the pre-'64 rifles. I would.
O.K., here's my take on the push-feed vs CRF actions: My first model 70 was purchased brand new in 1973, a push-feed, it was a good rifle. Now, I have a mid-90's, Classic Sporter with controlled-round-feed, and yes, it's an even better rifle. But those push-feed versions were underrated, and because of that, they can often be found for under $400. And in my opinion, they are much better rifles than the Remington 700. Unlike the Remington, you still get a great trigger and safety. So the CRF feature is not the whole point in getting a model 70. But it is one of three major points. The push feed has two out of three, and as Meatloaf said, two out of three ain't bad. The Remington has none of the three.
 
My Model 70 Ranger in .30-06 (essentially a featherweight with a cheaper birch stock) weighs in at right about 6 unloaded. Its light, has quality irons, a very good push feed action (only "drawback" I guess is the pushfeed), and the action is the same as every other Model 70 made in its time. It also has a 3 position safety and a hinged floor plate (my model seems to be in the minority, as most seem to have blind magazines, ymmv tho).
Click to expand...

Even though the OP is satisfied with an 11 pound mountain rifle this shows the potential for a featherweight in a Kevlar stock. I dont believe 6 pounds though. That scale maybe a little off or Winchester did more than use birch. Aluminum or plastic parts? Or scale accuracy?

HEY!! LOOK at this : Model 70 Extreme Weather SS (Thank you Red Rider)

Stainless with a Bell and Carlson. I did not know about this one. The 30-06 is 7 pounds. That would put the gun with sensible scope and rings at 8 pounds.

http://www.winchesterguns.com/produ...t-production/model-70-extreme-weather-ss.html

Not for the OP perhaps, I would be tempted with this one.
 
Now for $200 more than the Model 70 Extreme Weather SS you could look at the Kimber Montana. The gun has 24" barrel, all stainless, carbon fiber stock and the 30-06 is 1.5 pounds lighter! An actual mountain rifle. You could be in field with scope and fully loaded, under 7 pounds.

Either of these two can be had in 270,7mm,300 mag, etc, etc. Even 338 win mag in either rifle. The 338 both weight about the same. Both are all stainless and premium stocks (not plastic/synthetic) but the good stuff.

I know the OP dont care, but; this is easy in his budget.

Link, FWIW:
http://www.kimberamerica.com/montana
 
Even though the OP is satisfied with an 11 pound mountain rifle this shows the potential for a featherweight in a Kevlar stock. I dont believe 6 pounds though. That scale maybe a little off or Winchester did more than use birch. Aluminum or plastic parts? Or scale accuracy?
Click to expand...

Scale is accurate as far as I know. Only aluminum part is the trigger guard. Floorplate is steel, the follower is plastic, though that wouldn't make too much difference. It's quite light and handy. The stock isn't very "beefy" but is more than sufficient for accurate shooting, which may account for how light it is.

OP, I would balance the quality of rifle with the quality of scope. A super great rifle that takes up most of your budget is going to shoot like garbage with a crappy scope. The same way a bad rifle will shoot bad regardless of glass quality.

I would get something like a Model 70 or Remington 700, most 700s seem to be pretty decent rifles for the money. I would take a look at Savage, also.
 
Only aluminum part is the trigger guard. Floorplate is steel, the follower is plastic, though that wouldn't make too much difference. It's quite light and handy. The stock isn't very "beefy" but is more than sufficient for accurate shooting, which may account for how light it is.

A super great rifle that takes up most of your budget is going to shoot like garbage with a crappy scope.
Click to expand...

My fancy grade M70 featherweight, trigger guard, follower and pistol grip cap are all steel. Walnut is heavier than birch. I guess it all adds up.

I agree about a good scope or better yet, I would use the words 'appropriate' scope.

I dont consider a Stainless Bell & Carlson M70 or Kimber Montana in the same class as a any current Remington or Savage. The OP's budget is $2000 he can step up to M70 or Kimber and have more than enough left for an excellent leupold scope and still have change. Or use the spare scope he already has on hand.
 
Last edited:
The point of this purchase, and my original suggestion of an M70 for myself was not want a high end hunting rifle. By high end I mean in performance and construction. So I thought the M70 was in that class. Like I said I don't really have a budget, I could blow 5k if I wanted but I don't believe you can get $5k worth of performance value out of a hunting rifle. Beyond the M70 Extreme or kimber Montana it seems you begin paying for engraving, craftsmanship of the furniture, silver/gold inlays etc.

But like I said, it isn't a bench gun or wall hanger. I hunt 3rd season elk often and that means cold, damp, and I have to climb at times banging it off rocks, trees etc.
 
Mississippi said:
The point of this purchase, and my original suggestion of an M70 for myself was not want a high end hunting rifle. By high end I mean in performance and construction. So I thought the M70 was in that class. Like I said I don't really have a budget, I could blow 5k if I wanted but I don't believe you can get $5k worth of performance value out of a hunting rifle. Beyond the M70 Extreme or kimber Montana it seems you begin paying for engraving, craftsmanship of the furniture, silver/gold inlays etc.

But like I said, it isn't a bench gun or wall hanger. I hunt 3rd season elk often and that means cold, damp, and I have to climb at times banging it off rocks, trees etc.
Click to expand...
I've heard a lot of stories about Kimber Montanas that guys have a hard time getting to shoot. I've seen a FN M70 Extreme Weather shoot real well but I can't say all of them do.

I don't think you can get a better hunting rifle than that M70 EW

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Well, I still need to do a little research, but looks like my collection will be adding a FN Model 70 EW 30 06. Won't be using it this year no matter how soon I get it as I need time to get familiar, settle on a scope, and develop a hand load but I'm looking forward to it.

Thanks
 
Mosin- Marauder

In reference to mod 70 actions being all the same lengths ( pre 64)? I have a 1940 Roberts and the follower seems short as there is a home made block behind it. The ejection port appears correct as an 06 cartridge is too long. Is there a metal factory block missing? It feeds .257 fine but something is amiss .New to 70 models
 
Hello,

Sorry for not responding sooner,

My Model 70 is not a Pre-64, so I'm not sure if this will be of much help, but mine in 06 has no sort of block in the magazine or on the follower, and the follow fills up the entirety of the mag well. Sorry if this doesn't help.
 
kraigwy said:
I'm a huge Winchester fan, I have pre-64s, post 64s and the newer FN Model 70s.

One I don't have is the USRA Model 70.

I believe the new FNs to be the best of the lot.

But you wont go wrong with any Model 70 Win.

Its hard to beat my pre-64 in '06 spouting an old El Paso 4X Weaver for pure class.

Contrary what have been said since 1965 there is nothing at all wrong with the post '64s.

You wont be disappointed in the New Model 70.
Click to expand...

I too have an old El Paso Weaver K4 but nothing to put it on right now. Ny 30-06 is a custom 1903 built by Paul Jaeger in 1945. The scope on it is an old Denver Redfield 2 3/4x I bought brand new many years ago. Also have a mod 70, a feather weight in 6.5x55. Really really a nice rifle. Got it about 2004?
 
Just though of a couple more thing's. I have never understood the term push feed, they all push feed, all of them. Used to refer to them as controlled round feed.

A though on the 30-06 I've had a few but have never hunted one time with one. That changes elk season this wear. I have a very nice load worked up using a 180 gr Hornady interlock. Was looking at them last night while loading some 243's up. Wow, never really realized just how big that case is. Set it next to a 308 case and it's huge. Need to set in next to a 25-06 case, bet it's still huge!
 
I actually wound up getting a model 70 Super Grade .300 win mag rather than the.30-06. I'm going elk hunting this year in December in eastern Utah.

My load I developed is a 200 grain accubond and H1000 powder at 2975 fps. It is brutal on the shoulder, but shoots an easy half minute.

I topped it with a Swarovski Z3 4x12x50.

If I ever miss with this rifle, I will have to point the thumb and not the finger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top