Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors Potential Builds Model 70

A friend was showing me a Pre-64 .30-06 yesterday. He mentioned casually that he wants to sell it.

The action 510xxx is sound except the safety WILL NOT engage. The stock is either an original that has been bubba-ed or poorly done aftermarket. Pachmayer white line shotgun pad, stock was checkered but has been sanded down at one point. Crappily installed “ebony” forend tip with a 1/8” thick white plastic spacer. Supergrade sling swivels, barrel is marked Featherweight. The front sight was ground off and then the barrel at the muzzle was sanded down. Ugh.

Thinking “okay, a project action” I asked him what he wanted for it. He hummed and hawed and said “I’d take $1200.” Barf, I bet you would.

At our local gunshow I can pick up basically unmolested (used/hunted guns) Pre-64’s for 12-1500 nearly any day of the week. Per my description this rifle is absolutely not a $1200 gun.

What, if anything, would you offer for this? Don’t want to break his balls but I was thinking $500, max.

I have never seen a pre 64 in this part of the country less than $750 as long as the action is unmolested and has most of its finish.

What’s the condition of the bottom metal?

If no major issues (side holes from g&h mount etc) and assuming something simple with the safety, an action with fw bottom metal in reasonable shape should bring $600-$700 even in this market.

I’d agree with AK, if it’s a standard action, 500-700 is where I wanna be for a builder.

Bottom metal was worn but in good shape. Only drilled and tapped on top of the receiver as far as I could tell but it has a huge annoying pic rail on top that might’ve been concealing additional holes or marks. I was concerned about the safety so looked into that and read that can be due to an improper trigger job (bubba strikes again?). The bluing on the action is much less worn than the barrel.

So even with everything there is wrong with it we are looking at a $700 gun?

If you’re buying it for a project 700 would be about my top end but it wouldn’t be bad at 700 though.

Yeah its a project at best.

I'd not consider it without seeing what's under that Rail. As in further molestation. The action in 500K SN is very late in production and as myself possessing one in 300 WM, not one I'd otherwise prefer. Entirely functional but a bit on the rough side in cycling. Were I the buyer, probably just skip it. What you can observe presents issues and what's unseen such as even action modifications of feed rails... The sort of possibilities not easily detected... until too late! The 'sweet spot for me are the late 1940ies era actions as D&T, later stock inletting configured and (if to keep the chambering) barrel with forged-integral sight ramp. Sometimes paying extra bucks can be written off as matter of "insurance"!
A "friend" offering a mixmaster and asking "such a deal" price... What more to say!
Just my take as pinging on the scenario described!
Good Luck!
John

That’s a good point. I just thought that as long as the action is sound I could get it cheap(er) and build a .270 mountain rifle or a .243 or .257 sporter for one of my kids.

...Save your money and find a M-70 that hasn't been molested. What you're looking at will cost you more than what the action is worth. IMO

That's the best piece of advice. I'd politely walk away from that one, then when my friend wasn't looking, I'd run FAST!!!

I am going to see about doing some swapping. The more I think about it, the more I want to try to turn this into a .270 mountain rifle. I think I can get him down to a reasonable price what with the condition of the gun and so forth. If so I will keep it and build a .270 featherweight or something along those lines with it.

Aside from the obvious would there be any reason to go with a 24" barrel instead of say a 22 or 23? Just thinking to shave some weight off it might be a good idea. Maybe do a shorter barrel but a #4 Douglas instead of a #3?

I have a Browning BBR .270 that shoots great with 130 grain Sierra Gamekings and H4831(or sc) but its rather heavy. Thinking this Model 70 should come in around 8# if I do everything right. I could do the full 24" barrel and get a McMillan instead of walnut too.

It's your rifle, but I'd keep it around 6.5-7 pounds personally. You don't need a heavy azzed barrel for it to shoot well. I'd run a fwt profile, and a lightweight stock. You are wanting to build a "mountain rifle", those are generally lightweight rifles, that are easier to pack way up in the mountains. Hence the name. A bone stock pre 64 model 70 fwt will weigh 6.5 pounds, maybe a little bit more, depending on the stock. I have a 338wm and 300WBY that weigh 7 pounds, so I for damn sure would not want an 8 pound "mountain rifle'. I would not go with a 24" barrel either. Is there a reason you think you need a longer barrel, when the featherweights used a 22" tube, and got by very decently?

It's your build, for sure, but there are some flaws in the logic..

I don’t like a rifle under 8 pounds. Too much muzzle wiggle, muzzle jump, and recoil for my taste. I prefer a better balanced heavier rifle.

Edit - I’d happily carry my 8.2 pound .30-06 or 9.3x62 after any animals worth shooting. If a pound of rifle makes a difference to how far you can carry it, maybe lift some weights and do some cardio? The only reason I would go with less than a 22” barrel is if I was putting on a suppressor. It can get a bit awkward having a hunting rifle with a 34-36” barrel.

The whole idea of a "mountain rifle", is to keep it light and handy. Maybe the OP should refrain from using that term? Because what he's wanting is not a "mountain" rifle..

Here's a good example:


Bone stock 1956 featherweight. With its 13oz 3-9x40 rifle scope, it tips the scale at a little under 7.5 pounds. It's not a fly weight, by todays standards, but it's closer to something like JOC would have used for his "mountain" or sheep rifles.

Do the fwt's shoot good? That one shoots well enough out to 500 yards, that I'd have no issues with it as a "mountain rifle". To each their own though..

This may also not need to be mentioned, but I've seen plenty of guys build heavy azzed rifles, then later ask, "wtf was I thinking??".. They are also harder to sell, because the trend is for lighter weight rifles.

Furthermore: The rifle in the OP sounds like a problem child, and definitely not worth the asking price. I recently sold a 270 to a good guy here. It for damn sure was not $1,200.00, and it also came with a nice (like new) Leupold Vari-x IIc, which is quite a desirable scope. Still demanding $350.00, on places like ebay:


I'm sorry, but I'd be looking for a good rifle, if I were the OP. There are plenty out there, that are great rifles, and don't have issues, for less money.

Does that rifle I sold shoot?


That's 5 shots at 100 yards^^^^^^. You tell me..

BSA -

I think you're right, I probably will go with the 22" barrel just to keep weight down. I long ago found that I preferred the 130 grain bullets in a .270 for 9 out of 10 things so that probably what it will shoot. And let's face it, a 130 grain bullet going 3000+ fps out of a .270 is plenty of bullet and velocity for most anything I will see around here. A 22" barrel will easily accomplish that speed.

Like I said, my Browning BBR in .270 is already much too heavy for what I consider a mountain rifle.

Thanks for the advice, your knowledge (and the collective knowledge here) regarding rifles is the reason I am a member. I'm not inept nor inexperienced, I just like bouncing my ideas out-loud off of an adequate sounding board.

Per the rifle in my OP, I got it for a lot less than the owner was asking after we had a good visit about it. I showed him examples of $800 Pre-64's and then showed him why his would be less as it was not nearly the condition of the price he was asking at $1200. Its a sound action, perfect for a build so stay tuned, my .270 mountain rifle idea is just getting started.

Sounds like you got some great advice for a build. Might be worth looking or asking for a WTB 270 Featherweight barrel to screw on your receiver and toss it into the stock of your choice. The M70 FWT is tough to beat in my opinion for shoot ability and all around usefulness.

It sure will. And then if you want to experiment a little, a lot of us have tried RL26 and 150's. I was getting close to 3,000 fps and excellent accuracy with the 150gr Nosler partition and the 270 winchester. That was a 22" featherweight rifle. I look forward to hearing how your project goes. Good luck with it, I'm hoping the safety issue was resolved, or can easily be resolved. When I look at a used rifle, that is one of the things I always check. I also like beretz's idea about finding a factory 270 fwt barrel. Those dang factory barrels are shooters. The only real problem there, is the 270fwt was not as common. That doesn't mean I have not seen a couple for sale on ebay though.

I have one 270 fwt I'm hanging on to, as I was a dummy and sold my first one!!! Here's how that one looked, since you were talking about a Mcmillan stock:


That may give you some ideas. beretzs has some real beauties as well. Good luck with your build..

Sounds to me like you all have managed to navigate around the apple cart back to a basic reinvent a an entirely common '06 chambering pre '64 Win Fwt SOP format as managing to spend extra $$$ - or nowadays more likely $$$$ - in the process! I'd seek such fwt with some minor factor taking it out of hallowed "collector status", eg, "aftermarket pad, and work from there. Especially if aplastic stock in its future! "The simplest answer IS often the best!"
The side note that to me, a 9.3x62 and 36-06 really not in the same class to my mind in either 'best application', common ammo availability or 'felt recoil', oh my! Just a point seeming worthwhile mentioning!

Just my take!
Best!
John

My 270 FWT is one of the last I’d get rid of when times get tough. Lotsa great options for a mountain rifle. A 0 or 1 contour at 22” in a stock of your choice would make a pretty easy shooting rifle. The standard FWT barrels aren’t bad at all in a light stock either.