Here is a nice rifle. A little rich for me, but hey, it gets the gears turning and it looks well put together.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =302982033
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =302982033
Pre 64 Model 70 9.3x62
- Thread starter SJB358
- Start date
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
Fascinating find, Scotty. I agree that it is a tad rich for what one would be getting. However, the cartridge is a great one that seems to be increasingly common in these parts. It surely does a number on moose and elk.
duckcreekdick
Beginner
- Jul 26, 2012
- 93
- 0
Tastefully done and a fine caliber. The "Guns" writer, John Barsness has many good things to say about the 9.3X62. A couple years back I picked up an early Husqvarna in 9.3X57. A little chambering work and it now is a 9.3X62. With reloads and the 286 gr. Prvi Partizan factory ammo, it thumps on both ends.
- Thread starter
- #5
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
Dan, you walked into that one. Consequently, I sold several LH Winchesters a few years ago. There are a surprising number available here in Canada.
nvbroncrider
Handloader
- Aug 20, 2011
- 3,085
- 4
That's what he should build his 280AI on.
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
+1
Are you listening, Dan?
Wow!!! That is a really nice rig! I like the caliber too, powerhouse and enough rifle so that it won't thump as much as some. Out of the budget though. I love Pre64s, I don't mind conversions if they are done right and this one looks like it is well worth it.
For LHs I saw a really large number of LH M70s yesterday at the Amon Carter Gun Show in Ft Worth. It was the best show I have been to in years. Got there at 0930 at still had two rows of tables left that I didn't get to go through when it shut down at 1700.
Jimmy
For LHs I saw a really large number of LH M70s yesterday at the Amon Carter Gun Show in Ft Worth. It was the best show I have been to in years. Got there at 0930 at still had two rows of tables left that I didn't get to go through when it shut down at 1700.
Jimmy
- Nov 4, 2004
- 24,927
- 7,829
DrMike":1062mqm5 said:
Mike,
Is your 9.3x62mm going to get the nod for elk this year?
JD338
Guy Miner
Master Loader
- Apr 6, 2006
- 17,664
- 5,453
Interesting - never saw a front sight like that...
Never shot a 9.3x62, but it's real close to a .375 H&H for ballistics... I think I'd want a recoil pad on that rifle!
Is $2k out of line? Seems high to me, but I'm not that much of a Winchester 70 nut... I like 'em but don't think they're the ultimate rifle.
Guy
Never shot a 9.3x62, but it's real close to a .375 H&H for ballistics... I think I'd want a recoil pad on that rifle!
Is $2k out of line? Seems high to me, but I'm not that much of a Winchester 70 nut... I like 'em but don't think they're the ultimate rifle.
Guy
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
I loaded up two sets of loads for the 9.3X64 (250 grain AccuBonds and 286 grain Partitions) yesterday and will shoot them this week. If it pans out as I hope, it will accompany me afield on Saturday next to see if I can smack an elk. I'm anticipating good things.
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
Guy,
I believe the asking price is rather optimistic.
I believe the asking price is rather optimistic.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 24,927
- 7,829
DrMike":cahjgb67 said:
Oh yeah, that will work well putting the smack on a bull elk.
Looking forward to your range report Mike.
JD338
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
I plan on shooting early in the week (d.v.). I'm loading up some 338 Federal and 280 Ross as well (Hey, deer opens before long).
DrMike":2gvjp3ib said:
I don't know Mike, looking at the components whoever did it didn't go the cheap route. It is definately a "Classic" Dangerous Game Rifle.
I'd say it was a Featherweight, at one point it had a larger reciever sight by the look of the clean and rounded stock cut out. I like the fact they kept the factory buttplate and the finish and checkering on the original M70 stock look very good. It being a Featherweight most custom riflesmiths switch out the factory aluminum bottom metal with something like a Sunny Hill. The H&H style front sight is a very unigue touch, and I think that the scope and rings were very well selected.
With all that being said if it is as good as it looks it should bring it, myself though I would have to see it in person to check the fit and finish.
Just my opinions,
Jimmy
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,186
- 5,656
Jimmy,
I will agree that the workmanship looks good, and there is value in what is offered. I suppose mine is a personal valuation. I'm not so enamoured of the pre-64 actions, primarily because I believe there is value and quality in the current actions offered currently under the Winchester aegis. I turned down a beautiful 358 Norma built on a pre-64 action primarily because I believed I could build the same rifle with present production components at a lower price. Had I bought that particular rifle, I would not have been ripped off and I would have had a quality rifle. However, I preferred to build one myself. Your point is well taken and worthy of consideration.
I will agree that the workmanship looks good, and there is value in what is offered. I suppose mine is a personal valuation. I'm not so enamoured of the pre-64 actions, primarily because I believe there is value and quality in the current actions offered currently under the Winchester aegis. I turned down a beautiful 358 Norma built on a pre-64 action primarily because I believed I could build the same rifle with present production components at a lower price. Had I bought that particular rifle, I would not have been ripped off and I would have had a quality rifle. However, I preferred to build one myself. Your point is well taken and worthy of consideration.
Thanks Mike,
I have always like the Pre64 actions. The quality of workmanship that was put into them is very high even by todays standards. Nowadays people talk about floating barrels but if you look at a Pre64 M70 Standard with the barrel lug that has the tension screw going into the base of it that is completely out of todays school of accuracy thoughts. However that rifle was made for that screw to be tweaked for accuracy and many of those factory non-freefloated barrels are capable of sub-moa accuracy. That is excellent workmanship unlike a brand new 700 AAC in 308 that I helped a new shooter with at the range yesterday (He was shooting a few boxes of LC91 M852 Match 168 SMK and getting 3 to 4 INCH groups at 100)
We each have our own action preferences, otherwise we would all be shooting the same thing. Though it would be accurate it wouldn't be all that interesting.
I would have passed on the 358 Norma too. Its a great round and no doubt it was a well put together M70 brass can be a little hard to come by.
I have always like the Pre64 actions. The quality of workmanship that was put into them is very high even by todays standards. Nowadays people talk about floating barrels but if you look at a Pre64 M70 Standard with the barrel lug that has the tension screw going into the base of it that is completely out of todays school of accuracy thoughts. However that rifle was made for that screw to be tweaked for accuracy and many of those factory non-freefloated barrels are capable of sub-moa accuracy. That is excellent workmanship unlike a brand new 700 AAC in 308 that I helped a new shooter with at the range yesterday (He was shooting a few boxes of LC91 M852 Match 168 SMK and getting 3 to 4 INCH groups at 100)
We each have our own action preferences, otherwise we would all be shooting the same thing. Though it would be accurate it wouldn't be all that interesting.
I would have passed on the 358 Norma too. Its a great round and no doubt it was a well put together M70 brass can be a little hard to come by.
Oldtrader3
Ammo Smith
- Nov 6, 2009
- 8,406
- 5
This rifle appears to me to be possibly a put together Model 70? The stock is not the rifle stock from the 1950's or it would have a comb riser on the buttstock. Even my 1949 Model 70 stock had this feature. The buttplate and bottom metal appear to be steel and are therefore standard rifle parts, not Featherweight parts which are aluminum. The stock straight comb with no riser appears to be Featherweight stock but the pictures do not show enough stock detail to ascertain if this is a rifle with sight boss inletting or Featherweight stock but the hardware (I believe) is steel rifle hardware. The action serial number is on the cusp of starting the Featherweight series (1952). I wonder if the action, floorplate and stock dates and numbers match?
I think that this or any Pre 64 rifle that looks somewhat as though it is mix and match rifle. This needs to be evaluated in person prior to paying this much money for one? The addition of only a 9.3x62 aftermarket barrel does not make this rifle "custom" enough to justify the price, IMHO. Plus, it has been reblued. I have been down this road with enough Pre 64 Model 70's which makes me pretty conservative about buying one sight unseen that does not match features from a dealer that I do not know. Just my conservative $.02 worth.
I think that this or any Pre 64 rifle that looks somewhat as though it is mix and match rifle. This needs to be evaluated in person prior to paying this much money for one? The addition of only a 9.3x62 aftermarket barrel does not make this rifle "custom" enough to justify the price, IMHO. Plus, it has been reblued. I have been down this road with enough Pre 64 Model 70's which makes me pretty conservative about buying one sight unseen that does not match features from a dealer that I do not know. Just my conservative $.02 worth.
