Win 70 Design?

[Kobra]

In my weakness of Winchester rifle's knowledge I have a few questions.

I see in the local gun store that some 70's have a bolt design similar to a Remington 700 and others have one similar to a Ruger M77. What's up with the difference? I assume the one designed like the Ruger is controlled round feed. I just assumed they were all built like the Ruger design so by reading in an ad or something is there a way to tell them apart without actually seeing the rifle? Is that what Classic means?

Also what is the significance of 1964 in the design?

[ronin308]

Claw controlled feed is a mauser based action. It makes use of a large claw that guides the cartridge into the action and its also the extractor. A push feed does just that, the bolt just pushes the cartridge into the chamber. Extraction is by means of a small little plunger that pushes on the head of the cartridge. This system is generally considered less reliable than claw controlled feeding. The way to tell them apart is to look for that extra hunk of metal on the length of the bolt. On right hand rifles it will be on the right side of the bolt. That's the "claw". Winchester's Classic line is a series of claw controlled rifles. Their "Specialty Push Feed" line is made up obviously of push fed rifles. Pre-64 refers to Winchesters made before 1964. The quality of the rifles after this era were considered to be substandard to their pre-64 guns. I think this is when Winchester went to push feed too. Their quality today seems adequate enough to me. BTW, the Winchester was designed after the Mauser, and the Ruger designed off the Winchester.

Claw Controlled rifles: All mausers, Winchester classic and pre-64, Ruger 77, Kimber 84M, CZ 527 and 550

Push Feed- Remingtons, Winchester push feed, Sako 75, Tikkas, Weatherby, Browning A-Bolt, Steyr SBS and SSG, Savages, Sig SHR 970, Sauer 202

[RevNate]

You are on the right track. The "Classic" refers to the Mauser-type action (controlled feed, fixed ejector). The others- I think there is a Ranger, Black Shadow, etc.- are push-feed models.

As far as 1964, I'm unclear on it myself. I know that in 64 Winchester began making guns with less than desireable parts. I'm sure someone else would be able to give you more history on that point. I believe the winschester website may have some info on that. At any rate, Winchester no longer makes guns. Since 1981 guns bearing the Winchester name have been manufactured by U.S. Repeating Arms Company. I am very fond of the Winchester/USRAC 70 Classics, owning two of them myself.

Nate

[Kobra]

As an uncontrollable engineer, I have to constantly analyze everything mechanical so the "Mauser action" seems stronger thus more attractive to me. When I feel them, the bolt travel on the mauser-types feels much smoother. Also as another uncontrollable thing, wildcats interest me so I have a ton of ideas for different calibers and I am just not real fond of Remington's design. However I find used rifles all the time that could be acquired and turned into something great. So that's how I began to look closer at the Win 70's.

[ronin308]

Since you're an engineer I think its worthy to note that Rugers have cast receivers while the Winchester/USRAC rifles have forged ones. If you love engineering check out a Blaser 93 (drool!!!!) :)

Dan

[DAVID NANCARROW]

"Stronger" might be a subjective term, regarding the M70 Classic feed. There are those who feel that the controlled round feed is a definate plus where dangerous game is concerned, but take into account the fact that you must make a cut in the breech area in order to accomodate the extractor claw vs the "push feed" design where the case is surrounded completely by steel, where the extractor is stamped clip inside the bolt face. The pre 64 M70 simply refers to the time when all M70's were controlled round fed as opposed to the post-64's which were push fed. Adding insult to the change in the feed mechanism were the way Winchester fitted the actions to the stocks-not pretty in comparison, but a lot of this was overblown. The newer Winchesters were just as accurate if not more so than the pre-64. Also note that the target/varmint versions of the M70 these days are push feed. That should say something. Not so much that a controlled round feed cannot be accurate because they most certainly can be made that way, but it costs more to do this and there is no great advantage to do so.

[Art Eatman]

The '64 and later Model 70s had less polish and had rolled checkering instead of cut checkering. The interior quality was just as good, insofar as accuracy was concerned.

The push-feed action can accommodate higher chamber pressures than the claw-feed.

When Remington brought out their 721 push-feed, they publicized an "acid-test" in .30-'06. They loaded a full case of 4895 behind a 220-grain bullet, and tested a Springfield, a Model 70, an Enfield and a 721. The Springfield locked up solid.

They then put a second 220-grain bullet in the barrel ahead of the "regular" cartridge. That was it for the Model 70. Then, two bullets ahead of the cartridge, which finished the Enfield. They said the 721's bolt opened easily.

The final test was a total of four 220-grain bullets ahead of the caseful of powder. The 721 stayed in one piece, but IIRC, it was "locked up forever".

For loads around the normal max of some 53,000 psi, it doesn't make a nickel's worth of difference between claw-feed and push-feed. The only argument in favor of claw-feed is reliability of reloading against dangerous game, or if in some sorta-upside-down position.

Art

[tl]

I've nothing to add here except that this thread has helped answer a question I've had for awhile; thanks to those who've contributed.