Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

[boomfab]

I don't know if anyone reads it on here but there was a build article in this month's issue on a Win M70. The author went on and on about how much the M70 action sucked.

He proceeded to place a bet, hoping he could rebarrel it, true it up and bed it and "hope" to get 1/2" groups at 100 with it.

I know that he's probably a bench rest shooter used to a 40 lb gun...but dang he seems pretty biased.

I kinda want to write the magazine and send them all the 1/3" groups I've shot out of my stock barreled FN SPRs and PBR XPs.

 

[2Shots]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

I agree, my rebarreled SPR shoots awesome, and I dont have to worry about breaking off the little extractor embedded in the bolt face or brass shavings getting into the little ejector plunger and causing it to leave the spent case in the port like my remmingtons do!

 

[Cegorach]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

What did they say was lacking about it? I know of several smith's that frequent this website who have spoken highly of the M70 action. I am sure there are better short range bench rest actions out there, but at that point you are really splitting hairs.

I have nothing but good things to say about my re barreled SPR action, it shoots much better than I can. Also, I can't say I have heard anything bad about FN's factory guns either.

 

[Clay_James]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

A quality rifle based on the Mauser action simply can not suck.

 

[mq1kael]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Clay_James</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A quality rifle based on the Mauser action simply can not suck. </div></div>

This. As in most other things, if high quality makers of yesteryear chose this action, there was a reason. As far as I know it's the longest standing action around and with all the "better" actions out there, there's still many manufacturers and customs going with it for a reason.

It's the 1911 of the rifle world IMO.

 

[AF_TT]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

Ask the VC if they thought Gunnery Sergeant Hathcocks M70 was inacurate or a piece of junk.

 

[hgr2]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

The author might just be a remington barrel fitter and not a gunsmith. Heres to Hathcock!

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

Back in the days when HP Bolt gun shooters shot real bolt guns, the Model 70 was the go to action for across the course guns.

I've always like the flat action for building target guns. Seems to be more solid then a round action when bedded. Especally in magnum guns.

The short action Remington is suppose to have a faster lock time, but I've never been a good enough shooter to tell the difference, besides all my bolt action target guns are long actions for either the '06 or 300 WM.

I haven't read the article, but I'm a big fan of Winchester Model 70s for target rifles.

 

[19Scout77]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

Who gives a shit?

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

I read PS Mag for years. Most of the articles are so technical that you can use them as a sleep aid. They probably put that in just to gin up a little controversy so people will discuss PS. Honestly, this site is a serious group - how often do you hear about PS here? How many people over at Glocktalk or even at your corner gun shop even know it exists?


Good luck

 

[STR]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

I have not read the article either, but understand that magazines are businesses paid to print certain info. I know, I know, there are some that believe that because it was printed, it must be true. I believe in show me. I have a PBR, and it was my first rifle in the world of precision. It shoots a little over 1/2 MOA with match ammo. That's factory out of the box, pretty damn good as far as I'm concerned. I also have a stainless Rem 700 in 22-250 that according to the magazine article I read, was supposed to shoot better than 1/2 MOA. guess what, it sucked out of the box. I couldn't get better than 3/4 MOA, even with hand loads. Point is, don't bet your lunch money on what magazines print, that's their job, kind of like a politician.

 

[Diablo]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

Pay attention to 19Scout77 and Mo__Zam__Beek.

Precision Shooting is(was?) the IBS publication, in other words, not your typical magazine rack waste material, nor are they "on the take" to manufacturer marketing.

The member articles are just somebody's opinion so take or leave them as you see fit.

Remember that those folks are benchrest shooters......nuff said.

1/2 moa ain't nearly good enough in their world.

 

[LRCampos]

Re: Precision Shooting magazine article on Win M70...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Diablo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Remember that those folks are benchrest shooters......nuff said.

1/2 moa ain't nearly good enough in their world. </div></div>


I dont know how many benchrest shooters do you know. I know a lot of them, mostly the US shooters who do compete in National and International level. And they all know that a BR rifle is diferent enough of a hunting rifle, and even a Highpower rifle.

Thinking that they can not understand it and write in a way that are diferent purposes built rifles is a huge mystake.