Winchester Model 70

[okie john]

I inherited a pre-64 Model 70 Featherweight in .30-06. I am tempted to chop the barrel down to 18 inches or so to make it more carbine-like. Is this a reasonable idea or am I just going to wind up with a horribly blasty abomination?

There will be blast, and the balance will move far enough to the rear to wreck how it handles.

Why not carry it on a couple of hunts and then decide? I hunt in very thick brush, and after trying 20" lever guns, Scout rifles, and bolt-action carbines, I now use a 22" bolt gun for everything. In the brush, any long gun is a pain to manage, and the 22" M-70 is no slower or more difficult to handle than anything else.


Okie John

[David S.]

I am 6-1 with 35 inch sleeves, and prefer a shorter LOP for optimal manipulation of the bolt.

I'm 6-9ish.

George, so has your perception softened WRT the FN 70's? You seemed pretty unimpressed by them in threads from couple years ago.

[JM Campbell]

It's a 308 but might fit your agenda.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?t=14785

If not excuse this interruption in the discussion.

[David S.]

Very tempting, but I'm guessing that's a relatively heavy rifle that doesn't fit the GP/hunting mission.

[HCM]

Very tempting, but I'm guessing that's a relatively heavy rifle that doesn't fit the GP/hunting mission.

You are correct.

[GJM]

George, so has your perception softened WRT the FN 70's? You seemed pretty unimpressed by them in threads from couple years ago.

Need to put this in perspective and perhaps shed some light for those not so familiar with the model 70. Growing up not too far from the Winchester plant, a real pre 64 model 70 was pretty common, as was universal disdain for the post 64 model 70 rifles for many years. When the "classic" controlled feed models were reintroduced, it was great news. Especially attractive was the short action model, since the original model 70 didn't have a short action model, meaning if you wanted .308, it was in an .06 length action. Jim Brockman started building on them for me and a few friends, and a few issues surfaced. One, the triggers were not as good as the pre 64 actions, and, two, the feed rails were not integral on the newer actions, making feeding problematic with calibers in different shapes than .270/.30-06. This caused me to go back to building on pre-64 actions and rifles.

Some time in there, there was a labor dispute, and the model 70 line in New Haven got shut down and relocated south. I became vaguely aware of some FN actions and guns. I never built on them, but they seemed heavy, which may just have been their configuration.

In the last few years, I got three exposures to the newer FN model 70 rifles. SLG reported good things to me, I handled one extensively a few times in stores, and a buddy brought one deer hunting with me on a trip to Kodiak. THe rifle seemed very nice, and a good value compared to building a custom. Much better than, for example, a Kimber which seemed fragile by comparison.

I have enough real pre 64 based rifles and stockpiled pre 64 actions to build whatever I am realistically going to want. However, if I wanted to walk into a store, and buy a rifle, it likely would be a stainless synthetic FN model 70.

Hope this helps.

[David S.]

Very much so. Thanks for everyone's time.

[Crews]

Awesome info. Just scored a FN TSR, and love it. Wish I had found it sooner. Subscribed!

[LittleLebowski]

Need to put this in perspective and perhaps shed some light for those not so familiar with the model 70. Growing up not too far from the Winchester plant, a real pre 64 model 70 was pretty common, as was universal disdain for the post 64 model 70 rifles for many years. When the "classic" controlled feed models were reintroduced, it was great news. Especially attractive was the short action model, since the original model 70 didn't have a short action model, meaning if you wanted .308, it was in an .06 length action. Jim Brockman started building on them for me and a few friends, and a few issues surfaced. One, the triggers were not as good as the pre 64 actions, and, two, the feed rails were not integral on the newer actions, making feeding problematic with calibers in different shapes than .270/.30-06. This caused me to go back to building on pre-64 actions and rifles.

Some time in there, there was a labor dispute, and the model 70 line in New Haven got shut down and relocated south. I became vaguely aware of some FN actions and guns. I never built on them, but they seemed heavy, which may just have been their configuration.

In the last few years, I got three exposures to the newer FN model 70 rifles. SLG reported good things to me, I handled one extensively a few times in stores, and a buddy brought one deer hunting with me on a trip to Kodiak. THe rifle seemed very nice, and a good value compared to building a custom. Much better than, for example, a Kimber which seemed fragile by comparison.

I have enough real pre 64 based rifles and stockpiled pre 64 actions to build whatever I am realistically going to want. However, if I wanted to walk into a store, and buy a rifle, it likely would be a stainless synthetic FN model 70.

Hope this helps.

My brother the Marine Scout Sniper has done at least three builds on FN Model 70 actions and is very impressed with them.

[David S.]

oooh, shiny!!

M70 Extreme Weather SS

"Bell & Carlson stock. . . aluminum bedding block designs (for a total lock from action to stock), you get superb accuracy, ideal balance and strength....."

Real deal or marketing BS?