Winchester 70's - Pre 64

[jdlii]

My first one was made in 1954, the year before I was born. It is a.30'06 and the stock had been sanded. A few years later, I decided that if I was going to hunt with it, which I have for years, a Bell & Carlson stock, glass bedded to the action was needed. This rifle shoot 1/2 MOA groups with my hand loads and loves 165 Nosler Partition bullets. It is my #1 deer rifle!

 

[glshuck]

Your 1952 Model 70 has a very early Monte Carlo stock. The correct rear site would be a Marbles 69. Should be a excellent shooter. All my Model 70s in .270 were.

It appears to be all correct from what I can tell. I finally got my hands on the Roger Rule book. I am highly impressed with the amount of detail he goes into.

From cross referencing the rule book, it does appear that this is a first year monte carlo stock gun & one of the few that would have recieved a non-drilled bolt handle beings as they were already doing some guns with drilled handles in 1952. Hoping it shoots as good as it looks.

Interestingly enough, I was surprised to see how low the production numbers on pre war guns chambered in .270 is. Seems like .270 didn't gain popularity until after the war, assumedly large in part because of Jack O' Connors testimony.

 

[Bo Rich]

They started drilling the bolt handle in late 1952. But, it took a while with this transition. You will see a lot of rifles made in 1953 with a solid bolt handle. Yes, Jack O'Connor sold a lot of .270s. It is the second most produced caliber produced in the Model 70. With the great .30'06 being first. It is a fact that over the years alot of Model 70s in .30'06 were sacrificed for rarer calibers. Now, a good honest clean Model 70 in .30'06 is becoming costly, and a bit harder to find.

 

[Fishinfool]

OP - Couple of nice rifles there. You asked about typical 1950's scope set ups for the pre-64 model 70. Pictured is mine, an early Featherweight in .308 Win. The scope is a Weaver 4x in "swing away" mounts that allow the quick use of the iron sights if needed. Off the top of my head, I believe it is Weaver also. It returns to within an inch of zero at 100 yards.

Larry

 

[smith17]

I hunt with a Featherweight from '55 in .243 and have 2 more .243s. A varmint from '61 and a target from '55. Those last 2 are heavy!
Just picked up a .270 FW from '54.
I initially thought it would be cool to put a period correct scope on the .243 FW. Found a Lyman from the 50s and it did look nice. Problem is, when it is 15 minutes before the end of shooting light, those old scopes are practically useless in the woods/shadows. They can't hold a candle to some of the less expensive glass marketed today, much less the better scopes.

 

[Bo Rich]

The .270 Feather weight was first cataloged in 1955. With the .243, .30'06, and the .358 the same year. It joined the .308 which came available in 1952. In 1962 the .264 Win Mag. became available in the Feather Weight. The above are the five cataloged calibers made in the Feather Weight. There are reports of non-cataloged chamberings. Such as the .22 Hornet, .220 Swift, and the .257 Roberts. These are extremely rare.

 

[Fishinfool]

I hunt with a Featherweight from '55 in .243 and have 2 more .243s. A varmint from '61 and a target from '55. Those last 2 are heavy!
Just picked up a .270 FW from '54.
I initially thought it would be cool to put a period correct scope on the .243 FW. Found a Lyman from the 50s and it did look nice. Problem is, when it is 15 minutes before the end of shooting light, those old scopes are practically useless in the woods/shadows. They can't hold a candle to some of the less expensive glass marketed today, much less the better scopes.

True that. As pretty as a low profile, 1 inch polished blued steel tube scope may look, even cheap modern optics are better. Etched reticles, better glass and coatings, lighter weight. That old Weaver K4 is still good to go in decent light.

Larry

 

[Legendarylawman]

I got my only '70 a couple years ago. It was a rifle that had been modified and rebored, etc., etc. It is a pre-war, 1937, pre-64. Pre-war are before WWII. Anyway it looked great in the pictures and was good enough in person for me to buy at a cheap price ($1400), LOL. Anyway, I figured it out that it had been a 220 swift in a previous life, so I sent it out west to pre64win.com to make it right. I found a prestine barrel and sent it with. Basically, the only major thing on the gun that was worth anything substantial was the the cut checkered stock. I bought a four digit reciever and other small parts from them and they assembled a great looking and functioning (I wanted a shooter) pre-war 220 Swift. I was very happy with thier work and have around 3K into it all said and done. And that is what a 220 pre-64 '70 would sell for. I added a Weaver KT16. Pictured with my BSA, which is a whole other story.

Carl

 

[glshuck]

I hunt with a Featherweight from '55 in .243 and have 2 more .243s. A varmint from '61 and a target from '55. Those last 2 are heavy!
Just picked up a .270 FW from '54.
I initially thought it would be cool to put a period correct scope on the .243 FW. Found a Lyman from the 50s and it did look nice. Problem is, when it is 15 minutes before the end of shooting light, those old scopes are practically useless in the woods/shadows. They can't hold a candle to some of the less expensive glass marketed today, much less the better scopes.

The chinese glass has certainly gotten good. No doubt a better picture than the old stuff. For $700, I could buy a ruger american and budget vortex and have a setup that would out perform my '52 m70 I put together here. I am knowingly sacrificing performance to have a vintage setup.

In context with this though, Vintage Gun Scopes in MT does offer service to re-glass a few old weaver models with modern glass. It isn't cheap, but may be worth it to some. In conversation with them, they mentioned they have future plans to expand this offering to redfield & some other manufacturers. Didn't have a super accurate timeline on when that would be, but if and when they do, they'll take some of my money.

 

[Hamden]

I am kind of a M70 nut myself. I have several shooters. All solid but some are restocked, one is nicely drilled for a side mount. One favorite Winchester is an excellent M54. Unmolested and has a proper peep sight. Even has the sling post loops for hook swivels. It's a 270

Some day I got to sell these because the kids don't want them.

 

[smith17]

Bo, you are correct, the .270 I just bought is a '56 gun.
Here is a pic of the first deer I shot after getting the varmint gun from '61.

 

[ruger 22]

The only minor detail I know of is that Pre 1964 M70s came with butt plates rather than rubber recoil pads. I once had a 270 and a 300H&H and both had steel butt plates. My brother had a 30-06 with butt plate also. Not sure what they put on the 375 H&H.

 

[Bo Rich]

The .264 Win. mag. Feather Weight, .300 Win. Mag., 338 Win.Mag., .375 H&H Mag., along with the .458 Win Mag. All had factory in stalled recoil pads. Interestingly the Standard .264 Win Mag. Westerner had a composite butt plate.