That's a beauty. The pre-war models are my favorite. According to the "Rule" book (think SCSW for Winchester) that one was produced in April, 1937. The stock looks refinished but not terribly. Looks like an oil finish, better than 6 coats of shiny polyurethane! Somebody tried to learn how to checker a stock on this one but that would not deter me at the right price. The metal looks great, just some honest wear. The pre-war models were slow rust blued, beautiful. A pre-war with an undrilled receiver bridge and nice finish is getting harder and harder to find. Can you post a pic of the top and of the bottom?
Winchester 70's - Pre 64
- Thread starter glshuck
- Start date
OP
Bo Rich
Member
Did you check the barrel date that is found marked on the under barrel just in front of the receiver? Early guns will have a rust blued barrel finish. twenty lines per inch checkering, which yours appears to have. I notice that the front sight hood is missing. There is not a retaining pin on the safety body which is correct for your rifle. The rear sight looks correct the front site should be a Lyman 31w with a bronze bead. I would need to have your rifle in hand to make a final determination. I will say from the pictures you have it appears to be original. I also like your dog. What breed is it?
Looks Great! I would be very Happy to add one like that to my collection. You did Good!
OP
I have not pulled the stock off it yet. Plan to do it this evening when I have time to be a little more thorough. I believe the rollmark is correct to the era of the gun though. Front sight is definitely a bead sight.
She is a Doberman. European red to be specific. She is my home office buddy, and is great with my kids.
OP
Anybody know anything about the sling? I noticed pre64win.com shows a very similar sling on their slings page. I am wondering if its some sort of original accessory.
OP
No surprises inside, just some old grease. Barrel is stamped '37.
Bo Rich
Member
Standard rifles were not cataloged with a sling. Super Grades, and the target Models did include a sling from the factory.
Looks great from every side. Most of the pre-war rifles I come across have extra holes in the rear bridge, you got a good one. Agree with remchester, don't do anything but clean it!
I have a Jan 1936 rifle I bought used for $400 (the shop owner was a high $ shotgun guy and knew little about rifles) - someone had tried to replace the safety but I was able to find an origininal from Nurmich. Shoots great!
I also have an orginal Model 54 Carbine (also in "30Govt06") made in 1927 - it too is unmodified and shoots great!
I forget my next one but I think it was a 1950something .338 Win Mag, and still later I bought a 1951 (the year I was "minted") in .375 H&H got it for a decent price from Cabelas Gun Library because someone had mounted a Paul Jager scope mount on it (not scope or rings) - to do that they had to drill it and tap it - which reduced the value consicerably.
Fortunately I was able to buy two sets of Jager rings - one the original 7/8" and the other 1" SO I put a 7/8" Leupold 2-7 on it and set the 1" rings back.
Still later I bought a 1961 .220 Swift and lucked out it shoots 1/2 MOA with factory ammo!
Somewhere in there I bought a 1958 Featherweight 30-06 but the son stole it for deer hunting.
I have other M-70s that I love but they are post 64 - a favorite is a Classic I bought used nicely done, in .416 Taylor, the other is also custom, it came as a Classic featherweight in .280 but someone copied the FW barrel and installed it in .35 Whelen but when I bought the gun he gave me the original barrel and I made it a switch barrel (I just use my barrel vise and reciver wrench though I've thought about making a set screw arrangement.
Oh yeah, I have a cuple more. I bought a Post 64 push feed in .223 - it had a heavy varmint barrel. Bought it used hoping it had the new 1 in 8 twist - wrong it had 1 in 12 and would not shoot the heavy bullets I wanted so I had a friend fit a 20" McCormick barrel in 1 in 8 and thread it for a surppressor - shoots great! I bought a synthetic stock off of J&G and now it weighs what a .223 should weigh.
Just Rambln'
Riposte
I also have an orginal Model 54 Carbine (also in "30Govt06") made in 1927 - it too is unmodified and shoots great!
I forget my next one but I think it was a 1950something .338 Win Mag, and still later I bought a 1951 (the year I was "minted") in .375 H&H got it for a decent price from Cabelas Gun Library because someone had mounted a Paul Jager scope mount on it (not scope or rings) - to do that they had to drill it and tap it - which reduced the value consicerably.
Fortunately I was able to buy two sets of Jager rings - one the original 7/8" and the other 1" SO I put a 7/8" Leupold 2-7 on it and set the 1" rings back.
Still later I bought a 1961 .220 Swift and lucked out it shoots 1/2 MOA with factory ammo!
Somewhere in there I bought a 1958 Featherweight 30-06 but the son stole it for deer hunting.
I have other M-70s that I love but they are post 64 - a favorite is a Classic I bought used nicely done, in .416 Taylor, the other is also custom, it came as a Classic featherweight in .280 but someone copied the FW barrel and installed it in .35 Whelen but when I bought the gun he gave me the original barrel and I made it a switch barrel (I just use my barrel vise and reciver wrench though I've thought about making a set screw arrangement.
Oh yeah, I have a cuple more. I bought a Post 64 push feed in .223 - it had a heavy varmint barrel. Bought it used hoping it had the new 1 in 8 twist - wrong it had 1 in 12 and would not shoot the heavy bullets I wanted so I had a friend fit a 20" McCormick barrel in 1 in 8 and thread it for a surppressor - shoots great! I bought a synthetic stock off of J&G and now it weighs what a .223 should weigh.
Just Rambln'
Riposte
OP
A good cleaning and oiling and then the plan is to leave this one just as it sits. Cool to own #6542 in my opinion. It's got enough wear that I won't feel bad taking it out when I feel like it.
Will probably try to chase down a post war model that was factory drilled and tapped to have as a hunting rifle. Anybody have scope reccomendations that would be era correct to a 50's gun?
Will probably try to chase down a post war model that was factory drilled and tapped to have as a hunting rifle. Anybody have scope reccomendations that would be era correct to a 50's gun?
Do not take this post wrong as I like model 70 Winchesters and have owned the pre-64 and the post-64.
I think the "post 64" often gets a bad rap but the 1968 model corrected the shortcomings of the 1965 model because the 1968 model had a bolt head guide slot that made it a way smoother action than any Pre-64 Winchester ever made but unfortunately for decades the Post 64 was a push feed which is not the best gun for dangerous game shooting as you can easily short stroke the bolt and get a horrific jam. I know I have done it.
Having said all that I think the Pre-64 workmanship was way overrated. As time went on the workmanship rapidly deteriorated. I have one of the last pre-64 Winchesters made and there are file markes on the underside of the bolt handle and the bolt is sticky in operation. The only first class pre-64 I have ever owned was a 1938 model with the reverse safety but again its workmanship did not come close to matching my Belgium and German made Mauser 98 rifles. But the Mauser 98 does not have a smooth an action as either the Pre or Post Model 70 Winchester because the Mauser 98 has the bolt guide rib on the bolt which often results in a somewhat sticky operation if you do not pull the bolt straight back while operating the action.
I think that for serious big game shooting you will not go wrong with the Pre-64 Winchester or a Belgian or German M98 Mauser rifle.
Because of the Winchesters speed-lock ignition system you can get a tad better accuracy than with the M98 but the M98 has a more positive ignition system under harsh conditions because of its 1/2 inch firing pin fall. It will fire in the extreme cold or under dusty conditions.
As far as collection there were so many variation of the M70 you can collect them over a lifetime. I personally never did like the barrel tension screw but that was done away with on later pre-64 models.
Remember that any alteration of the Pre-64 M70 by its former owners surley does reduce its value such as putting in an aftermarket trigger or re-barrling it with a custom barrel or even restocking it if it was not done by an old time well known stockmaker. All this is irrelevant if you are buying it to hunt with and not to collect but a pre-64 in first class original condition is getting too expensive to take out and hunt with.
I like Pre-64 Winchesters and would never turn down even an altered one if the price was right but I will still stick to the old adage that when the chips are down "Make Mine Mauser" because even after 127 years the M98 is still the standard by which all other serious hunting rifles are judged.
I might also state I should never have sold my then new "Post 64" 1968 Model 70 Winchester in .270. Its "factory" extra stiff barrel made it one of the most accurate .270 rifles I ever owned. I was nuts for ever selling it. Increasing the accuracy of the 1968 M70 was done on purpose with an extra stiff barrel along with a bright gloss blued receiver and barrel and an added anti-bind slotted bolt was all done to correct the shortcomings of the 1965 model.
I think the "post 64" often gets a bad rap but the 1968 model corrected the shortcomings of the 1965 model because the 1968 model had a bolt head guide slot that made it a way smoother action than any Pre-64 Winchester ever made but unfortunately for decades the Post 64 was a push feed which is not the best gun for dangerous game shooting as you can easily short stroke the bolt and get a horrific jam. I know I have done it.
Having said all that I think the Pre-64 workmanship was way overrated. As time went on the workmanship rapidly deteriorated. I have one of the last pre-64 Winchesters made and there are file markes on the underside of the bolt handle and the bolt is sticky in operation. The only first class pre-64 I have ever owned was a 1938 model with the reverse safety but again its workmanship did not come close to matching my Belgium and German made Mauser 98 rifles. But the Mauser 98 does not have a smooth an action as either the Pre or Post Model 70 Winchester because the Mauser 98 has the bolt guide rib on the bolt which often results in a somewhat sticky operation if you do not pull the bolt straight back while operating the action.
I think that for serious big game shooting you will not go wrong with the Pre-64 Winchester or a Belgian or German M98 Mauser rifle.
Because of the Winchesters speed-lock ignition system you can get a tad better accuracy than with the M98 but the M98 has a more positive ignition system under harsh conditions because of its 1/2 inch firing pin fall. It will fire in the extreme cold or under dusty conditions.
As far as collection there were so many variation of the M70 you can collect them over a lifetime. I personally never did like the barrel tension screw but that was done away with on later pre-64 models.
Remember that any alteration of the Pre-64 M70 by its former owners surley does reduce its value such as putting in an aftermarket trigger or re-barrling it with a custom barrel or even restocking it if it was not done by an old time well known stockmaker. All this is irrelevant if you are buying it to hunt with and not to collect but a pre-64 in first class original condition is getting too expensive to take out and hunt with.
I like Pre-64 Winchesters and would never turn down even an altered one if the price was right but I will still stick to the old adage that when the chips are down "Make Mine Mauser" because even after 127 years the M98 is still the standard by which all other serious hunting rifles are judged.
I might also state I should never have sold my then new "Post 64" 1968 Model 70 Winchester in .270. Its "factory" extra stiff barrel made it one of the most accurate .270 rifles I ever owned. I was nuts for ever selling it. Increasing the accuracy of the 1968 M70 was done on purpose with an extra stiff barrel along with a bright gloss blued receiver and barrel and an added anti-bind slotted bolt was all done to correct the shortcomings of the 1965 model.
One thing I forgot to mention is that the Pre-64 being a controlled feed had a beveled extractor so that you could throw a round directly into the chamber without feeding it from the magazine. The problem with doing this was that the long claw extractor would often crack and break and happened of course mostly on the target guns that saw a lot of use. I bought a pre-64 , pre-war, made in 1938 and the hairline crack in the extractor was not noticeable until I actually used the gun. You will see a lot of these guns with replacement extractors and often they are "not" Winchester extractors. Since I could not find an original extractor I did the same thing and altered an extractor out of 1917 Enfield. Unless you look close you might miss the fact that it does look different than the original extractor. And yes it does work just fine if you know exactly how to alter this extractor so it does work. Its not a job for the non-professional.
I am not convinced that the stock is refinished. I have fondled and handled many early Winchester that the stock had most of the finish worn off and "hand oil" left from years of use has left that kind of sheen. The great thing is the stock is still proud, so it was not sanded, and the bridge has not been drilled.
Bo Rich
Member
For 1950 guns Baush and Lomb Balvar scopes with exterior adjustments would be correct. For guns made after 1955 the Weaver 4k 60b scope will be period.
OP
I optomistically tend to agree. The dark spots are exactly where hand oil would be from use. I don't know enough to be sure of it, but I dont see any "smoking gun" signs of a refin. I'll just have to do my best to get it in the hands of trained eyes. My best guess is that is a gun that saw light to medium use, but was well maintained. There aren't any serious gouges or serious signs of mis-use. The condition of the bore leads me to believe that the gun was cleaned after use.
@bph9 I can't say I disagree with the sentiment of what you're saying. My old man was lucky enough to to stumble his way into a clean registered magnum that I have had the pleasure of handling. The quality of craftsmanship on those guns is not overstated. On the other hand, here we have a supposed golden era pre war model 70 that looks like someone learned how to checker a stock for the first time on. Maybe it's not a fair comparison beings as a reg mag was a premium product, and a model 70 was a utilitarian item.
I won't knock the push feed model 70s. After all, this is a smith and wesson forum & Harry Callahan's .458 was a push feed. That said, maybe he'd have got that darned Scorpio with it had it been a controlled round feed gun.
Last edited:
LVSteve
Member
So is the general advice to not mount a scope on these rifles, or is there some cunning trick I'm missing.
OP
I am no expert but I do know that pre-war guns are not drilled and tapped on the rear strap of the reciever. It is a big hit to the collector value of a prewar gun if it has been drilled and tapped. I want to say Bausch and Lomb or sombody made a mount that used the factory front reciever holes and the holes on the side of the reciever without drilling anything, but I am not sure. They started drilling and tapping them after the war, so no issues scoping a post war gun if you do it without adding holes.
Stith brand scope mounts use the 2 left side receiver sight holes to mount the rear scope mount and the 2 front bridge holes to mount the front scope base.. The only thing is the scope have to be mounted fairly high to clear the safety. If you want to mount the scope lower, the safety can be changed out for a different safety made by a company called Tilden. By changing the safety, nothing permanent has been done as to old safety can be re-installed with no damage. Of course Tilden safeties and Stith mounts have not been produced for years and have to be found on sites like EBAY. I have one set of Stith bases left that I have squirreled away for my next prewar.
HuntFish918
Member
I use Ultimate CLP by CorrosionX on both metal and wood for cleaning and protecting.
Shoot that baby and show us some groups!
Congrats!
If you decide you JUST HAVE TO mount a scope, your intact rear bridge can be preserved by using a Stith mount.
It takes advantage of the front bridge pre-drilled and threaded holes and the receiver sight holes, leaving the rear untouched.
Shoot that baby and show us some groups!
Congrats!
If you decide you JUST HAVE TO mount a scope, your intact rear bridge can be preserved by using a Stith mount.
It takes advantage of the front bridge pre-drilled and threaded holes and the receiver sight holes, leaving the rear untouched.
Similar threads
- Locked
