Why Are "Pre 64" Winchesters Desirable?

[DeathGrip]

I looked at a couple of '68 model '94s and the finish (I'm not shure if it was real bluing)sucked.The receivers looked like they were made from cast something,I'm not sure.Not like the old ones.They lost some finish around the contact places by the wood and looked more like corrosion than rust.(kinda white)Speeking of wood,not so good.One was even called a "Clasic" and looked like garbage to me.I'll take the pre64 or another brand.Just my opinion.

Merry Christmas,D.G.

 

[pownal55]

if you read "the riflemans rifle" by roger rule in will get the full story, at least on the pre 64 model 70's. in a nutshell they were produced on outdated equipment that required hundreds of hand operations resulting in a gun that was basically hand made. if you own one you know what i mean. winchester claims they lost money producing them.

 

[rburg]

Dick, the serial My buddy, a big student of firearms kind of thought the barrel might have been a blank off a model 54?,

That's my understanding, too. The M54 was also a great bolt gun. No poor quality parts on either one. The M70 was an upgrade in engineering, but they both were great guns, built during the heyday of the bolt guns.

 

[WaterburyBob]

Didn't Winchester also switch from a controlled feed to a push feed with the post '64 Model 70's?

 

[gregintenn]

In 1964, Winchester went from building Ferraris to building Yugos.

 

[2152hq]

... My buddy, a big student of firearms kind of thought the barrel might have been a blank off a model 54?, as the rifle probley is one of the 1st made in hornet..

I've seen a few M70 22Hornet rifles were you could still see very faint remnants of the original M54 barrel roll die address in the steel. Polished, re-roll marked for the M70 Hornet and reblued by the factory. I can't recall if they were early production rifles or not.

I had one gent tell me that 'all' M70 .22 Hornet rifles were barreled with M54 hornet tubes.
I'll leave that and all the rest of the collectors info for others to sort out!

They certainly are beautiful rifles,,no doubt about it.

 

[feralmerril]

Thanks guys. My old friend will be glad to know others agree with his theory. Its been a long time, but I am pretty sure it was date stamped 1935 under the barrel. Since they claim the rifle wasnt made until 1937, I think its kind of obvious.

 

[armadillo]

As to the bluing on pre-64 M-94s - you are right - they will not take standard bluing. However, I believe the newer ones (like sn-4,000,000+) can be reblued.

There is no comparison of the "feel" of a pre-64 M-70 to a later one. But, I have tried a couple of post-64s and they shot surprisingly well.

IMO the best piece of work Winchester ever did was the M-1886 and the later M-71.

 

[mac2]

good OP; used to buy Guns & Ammo from time to time and they would go on about the pre-64 model 70, but would never actually say why it was better than those that came after it. Then again, found out some not too flattering things about G&A afterwards...

 

[Marksman]

Seeing the picture of the M/88 brings back memories, that was my first deer rifle and the rifle with which I harvested the biggest buck of my hunting career. I've owned several .308 M/88's and one .358, foolishly I've traded all the M/88's away over the years. My deer rifles now are both M/70's, a pre-war .257 Roberts and a 50's vintage standard grade that I've had rebored to .35 Whelen. When I was younger a .338 Magnum was my Colorado elk rifle. I have two M/63's also, a pre-war that is my shooter and an ultra rare Deluxe Model Carbine circa 1937. Most collectors have never seen a M/63 Deluxe as Winchester never cataloged them. I cherish all of these old guns, they're fine examples of the golden age of American firearm manufacturing. A time when craftsmen took pride in their work, well shaped and finished American walnut and deeply blued, expertly polished steel. An American tradition from another time and place. Just holding a finely crafted Winchester in your hands it is easy to wax nostalgic, nothing beats spending a crisp fall day afield with one of my Winchesters. Squirrel hunting with my M/52 Sporter with Lyman Alaskan in G&H Mount is about as good as it gets.

 

[feralmerril]

Here is another winchester 1890 that is a somewhat mistry to me. I bought it close to 30 years ago. It was in .22WRF. You cant see it well, but the stock has very fine wood, checkering and a cheek piece.
I assumed the gun was refitted with custom wood and from a straight grip to the pistol grip. That was because the main tang screw goes right through the numbers on the bottom tang. It probley was customised but I wouldnt bet my life on it. It was a very fine job. This rifle also has a longer stock than others and fits me and balances better than any I have ever owned.
Thinking that, I had the rifle rechambered to .22 WMRF. The gun dates 1920. I still have the receipt for $206.70.

 

[reddogge]

Another class of Winchesters is pre war which generally bring bigger money than pre 64.

Yes, the post 64 Model 70s are push feed. I own a Featherweight in .270 and it is a fine rifle and very accurate. I don't plan on chambering a round upside down though.

If you ever have handled a Model 94 from the later years it just rattles and seems so loosey goosey compared to pre 64 94s.

 

[PALADIN85020]

The quality of the pre-'64 Winchesters is unequalled today. The Model 70 was almost completely hand-fitted and tuned. Even the .22s cannot be made today the same way because of the cost of hand labor.

Here are two of the finest rifles Winchester ever made. At the top, a .22 LR Model 75 sporter, made in 1956. This little lightweight rifle is a target rifle in disguise. It uses the action, chambering and rifling of the Model 75 Target Model. The trigger pull is crisp and light. It's an absolute tackdriver; anything within 100 yards can be nailed without question.

At the bottom is my pride and joy - I looked a long time for this one. It's a Model 70 chambered in .30-06, made in 1949. Just handling this work of art is enough to give you goosebumps. As I mentioned, it's hand-fitted, and everything works smoothly and purposefully. It will give you 1" groups at 100 yards and is absolutely reliable. It's been known as the "Rifleman's rifle." You could not ask for a better hunting rifle, and our famed sniper in Vietnam, Carlos Hathcock, used one for many of his exploits.

They don't make them like this any more.

 

[bmcgilvray]

Classic Winchesters are a separate affliction I bear apart from my love for classic Smith & Wesson revolvers. Love pre-64 Winchesters and love to use them regularly. With attentive care and feeding they make great lifetime companions.

My favorite hunting rifle is a 1953 vintage Model 70 in .30-06. My favorite .22 is a 1924 vintage Model 90 in .22 Long Rifle. My favorite shotgun is a 1941 vintage Model 12 Skeet Grade.

There's other Model 70s and lever guns around here and all exhibit excellent design and careful workmanship. In use they still give deeper satisfaction than do more modern arms.

 

[keith44spl]

S&W .357 Mag. and Winchester 300 Win. Mag

Well...

The Handgunners Revolver and The Riflemans Rifle...Two old friends, .357 Magnum from the '50s and a '63 M70 chambered in .300 Win. Magnum. ( The rifle shot well enough to get a new 'stick of wood' back in the early '80s )

Su Amigo,
Dave

 

[ElToro]

i have a pre 64 30-06 that si really nice and i got for a good deal. i also have a 2000's "classic" super grade in 25-06. the classic is very very nice but the trigger is gritty.

the pre 64 is a base for many a nice custom rifle.

 

[feralmerril]

Dave, that stock is some of the prettiest wood I have seen in a long time.

 

[BobK]

Winchester 94

I don't know, guys, my 1976 Win. 94 looks and shoots pretty darned good for me. I've never really looked close at a "pre 64" M-94....they're too expensive for me. Though not super accurate, it'll group about 2" for me at 100 yds., which is pretty typical for an iron sighted rifle, and any
M-94. So, it can't be that much different. (Except in the minds of collecters.....that is.)

Sure, my Sears-Roebuck Mauser .30-06 will shoot clover leafs at 100 yds., but it also has a 2.5X scope on it. That alone, better sights, makes any rifle more accurate. It was built in 1950, on a Mauser '98 action, with a Hi-Standard barrel. The "pre 64" M-70 was based, pretty much, on a copied '98 Mauser action, but Winchester probably made the barrel and the furniture (stock). They look real pretty....but that don't bring home the venison any better than the old Mauser. Again, the collecters shower praise about how great they were.......just like S&W enthusiasts swear by the old guns.

Let's face it....we all like to think that all of the old guns were great, and we resist any change. But, without change........we'd still be hauling around rifles and shotguns weighing 10 lbs.! We'd still be driving cars with 100 hp max, weighing 2 tons, getting 10 mpg, and with engines that were worn out at 50K miles. Think about it. The old ideas and craftmanship were better, but, I like my 6 or 8 lb. shotguns and rifles. If they were still handmade.......they'd cost about 4 times more, and you'd be getting an "old school" rifle or shotgun. (Sorry Giz.....but you're a collecter of fine old arms.....that the rest of us can't afford. Plus, you got that 18th century thing goin' on!)

I like old guns too. My "newest" Smith is my 1986 M-17 that wears a Bushnell Trophy Red Dot. The better sights allow me to hit the side of a barn! So, I guess, I'm a little bit country.......and a little bit rock & roll!!!! Bob (can't remember who said that......some red neck comedian!!!)

 

[bmcgilvray]

"The "pre 64" M-70 was based, pretty much, on a copied '98 Mauser action, but Winchester probably made the barrel and the furniture (stock)."

"Probably" did, along with the rest of the rifle.

I still think the old guns are great. I even like heavy rifles best. Of course I'd rather drive old cars with 400 HP, weighing 2 tons, getting 8 MPG, while paying 28.9 for ethyl.

I hate change.

 

[BobK]

I know where you're comin' from!!!! Never thought I'd own a 4 cylinder truck (125 hp) that couldn't get out of it's own way........but, there you go!!!! My latest Ranger has the 150 hp V6, which is a little better......
Got to go with the flow....my friend! Been swimmin' up stream for too long. In my older age, I've changed directions. Ha ha..... Bob