Win model 70 difference

[zulu]

What is the difference?

[marksman]

What is the question?????
Marksman

[The Doc]

What is the question?????

Zulu means the difference between between a pre 64 Win. 70 and later.

[marksman]

Well, as I understand the pre 64 has a Mauser like extractor with a fixed Ejector that engages the shell towards the end of the bolt travel and the later models have short spring loaded claw on the face of the bolt rim and a Plunger to eject the shell as soon as it clears the inside of the front receiver ring.This was done basically to cut down production costs but of late they have re introduced the pre 70 type action at a premium, so I have heard.
Marksman.

[timmy]

I agree.

Yes, the Post-'64 action is a modern action, whereas the pre-'64 action is a modified 1903 Springfield action, which is, in turn, a modified M98 Mauser action.

The pre-'64 action has the non-rotating claw extractor and controlled feeding, like the M98 and 1903 Springfield. In this, the bolt, as it travels forward, strips a cartridge from the magazine. As the bolt moves forward, the rim of the cartridge head slips between the bolt face and the claw extractor, so that the feeding of the cartridge is always under control of the bolt.

For a military weapon, this was preferred to just simply pushing the cartridge into the chamber. If, in the heat of battle, a soldier chambered a round in a weapon with non-controlled feeding, but thru nervousness or other distractions, did not close the bolt so that the extractor snapped over the cartridge rim, the soldier might work the bolt and chamber another round, causing the pointed end of the 2nd round's bullet to strike the primer of the first round, which was not extracted because the extractor had not engaged the rim of the first cartridge.

For this reason, hunters of dangerous game often preferred M98 actions also.

The 1903 Springfield eliminated the internal ring of the M98 Mauser action. In the M98, this ring is flat on the side that abuts the barrel and is cone-shaped on the side that faces the bolt. The cone shape can help direct the tip of the bullet into the chamber in case it is not aligned by the cartridge being held by the claw extractor firmly against the bolt face.

This internal ring adds strength to the receiver ring of the M98, so that the M98 gets the majority of its action strength from the design and is not so dependent on the grade of steel used.

Also, the internal ring means that the barrel is simple and flat-faced on the breech end. Barrels can be headspaced rather simply in M98 actions, since headspace is largely controlled by the manufacturing tolerances. Only a quick touch with a finishing reamer is usually needed to adjust the final headspacing.

In the 1903 Springfield, there is no internal ring. The breech end of the barrel is shaped like a cone (serving the same function as the sloped side of the M98 internal ring) and the depth of the barrel engagement into the action is determined by the shoulder of the barrel against the receiver ring.

For this reason, the upper (left) locking lug of the bolt is angled at the front, in order to match the cone-shaped end of the barrel breech.

This cone breeching does not support a portion of the cartridge head and when the case fails, this unsupported area is generally the weak spot.

The pre-'64 Model 70 copies the Springfield cone breech system, but with one improvement: Rather than cutting the left (upper) bolt locking lug to allow the ejector to pass, the pre-'64 Model 70 makes a cut at about 45* to the ejector cut location in M98 and 1903 bolts, leaving the left (upper) locking lug solid (and a bit stronger).

The M70 has a great, simple, and adjustable trigger. It also does away with the clumsy safety locking lug of the 1903, using the bolt handle base as the safety lug.

Generally, 1903 Springfields are considered to be more inherently accurate than M98 Mausers, mostly because of their superior bedding. Along these lines, the M70 was an improvement over the 1903 and was/is a very inherently accurate action.

(Note that I'm leaving out de.scriptions of many other differences between these actions!)

When Winchester redesigned the M70 for the "post-'64" model, they eliminated the cone breech and the non-rotating Mauser claw extractor. Thus, they lost the controlled feeding feature.

The barrel was made with a flat breech, but without any internal ring. The bolt face was recessed, and the lower (right) locking lug carried an extractor that was recessed into the face of the lug. It snaps over the cartridge rim as it is chambered.

The trigger assembly was carried over from the previous M70.

I can't recall all the permutations that both M70 actions have gone thru. Sporting magazines touted the pre-'64 M70 as "The Rifleman's Rifle" and set up a howling when the new model was introduced.

The older Winchesters, like old Colts, are normally beautifully finished, compared to what is available today. The pre-'64 M70 was no exception. Based on this alone, like many other things, what used to be normal is now considered a premium product because of the extra hand finishing required to achieve that level of appearance.

My hands-on familiarity with the pre-'64 M70 comes from experience with my brother's M70 Featherweight in .308 (7.62x51). "common" rifles today do not have the fit and finish of weapons like this. You have to go to a premium product to get the bluing, polishing, wood-to-metal fit, and quality of wood.

There have been a number of companies who have made pre-'64 M70 copies, and I think that there is someone who is doing it today, perhaps under the Winchester name.

The post-'64 M70 was made or at least sold my Marlin for awhile -- I have an old sales brochure listing it.

[TwoRivers]

Timmy: That Marlin catalog I'd have to see. Marlin made the MR7 for a brief period, combining Winchester M70 and Remington M700 features, with a magazine copied from the Browning bolt action rifle. And yes, FN, the owners of the Winchester brand name for many a year; after closing the old plant, are again producing the M70 with the long extractor, similar to the model produced before the plant closed, albeit with a new trigger, shared with the Browning X-Bolt.

[timmy]

Two Rivers:

I see your point - -my catalog doesn't show the Remington-style C-clip extractor, nor do I recall the magazine at all. However, this link has pictures of the features I could pick out:

http://membres.lycos.fr/shooter/divers/st63.htm

You'll note the bolt (other than the bolt face), striker, bolt sleeve, and safety do look quite a bit like the post-'64 M70, along with the distinctive M70 trigger. The catalog has a picture in which the action is depicted from the side, cut away longitudally, giving the appearance of an M70.

As I recall, the Marlin even has the bolt guide slot on the right (lower) locking lug, like the modified post-'64 M70.

Anyway, sorry for the inaccuracy regarding the extractor.

[zulu]

thanks.

[MoA]

I have a Win 70 and have never been able to figure out peoples obession with it.
It's a decent rifle, but not one that excites the day lights out of me. In fact I think I might even get rid of it.

[TwoRivers]

Well, while it is a matter of perspective and opinions, "some like apples, some like inions"; it would probably depend on which vintage you have, if it's 1964-68, it has very little to recommend it over others, except the safety and trigger. To the hunter, the pre-'64 and later Classic has utter reliability. And by hunter I mean the fellow who is out by himself, miles from home, for days and weeks at a time, in all kinds of weather. You can disassemble the bolt without tools, the safety and trigger are utterly reliable, it won't leave a case stuck in the chamber. Something I can't say for "Big Green", which I'd only take out if I had nothing else, as it won't stand up under rough usage. As an utterly reliable working/hunting rifle the M70 has few peers; but if your gig is punching holes in paper, not having to rely on the rifle for your life, then it's another matter entirely. Cheers

[The Doc]

In fact I think I might even get rid of it.

Which caliber is it ? In case you decide to sell it , kindly let me know.

cheers,

RP.

[MoA]

Two Rivers: Ultimate reliability... get an AK. But yes the Mod 70 is a good hunting rifle. I dont hunt, primarily a target shooter.

Doc: .222 Remington Magnum. However am not based in India.

[TwoRivers]

True, MoA, but to me "ulimate reliability" also means hitting what I'm aiming at, and stopping a bear, if required. Not just spraying bullets into the air, or making the bear even madder. And no selfloader can match the right bolt action for reliable extraction. Different perspective. You won't be in need of a team of good surgeons, or an undertaker, if you miss a paper target. Cheers.

[MoA]

The 7.62 will stop a bear ... yes even the Kodiak or Polar Bear. And an AK is not a spray and pray weapon, and nor is it a sub MoA gun.
Then again that is a different conversation.

[TwoRivers]

MoA: The 7.62 will stop a bear? Eventually, yes. After he has made a mess of you. Kill, yes. But so will a .22 RF Short, if slipped into the right place, and given enough time. If you can count on putting the bullet exactly where it has to go, which exact spot you are unlikely to know, and the bear stands perfectly still and poses for you as long as you need, and you are calm as ice and using a benchrest; then you are unquestionably right. However, if someone went bear hunting with a 7.62x39, I'd lay ten to one odds that someone would be telling their widow that she, unfortunately, had married an idjit. Cheers.