accuracy potential of Win 70 with controlled round feeder

[labrador]

Hey guys

I have learned that few custom rifles are build on ruger M 77 Mk II because of its rather low accuracy potential. This should primarily be because of the controlled round feeding. But then what about the "new" winchester Model 70 that also has a controlled round feeding system? Is the accuracy potential of the winchester 70 with the controlled round feeder comparable to ruger M 77 mk II? or is it better?

Hopefully you can help me on this.

Labrador

[Centre Punch]

Hi Lab,
I had a Winchester Stealth in a format that was only sold in Europe, 24" very heavy barrel and full controlled round feeding( not the new controlled round push feed) chambered in 300WSM.

With 155 and 185 Lapua Scenars it was incredibly accurate for a factory gun, grouping in the .500" most of the time and often into the .300" @ 100yds

Ian.

"I meant to shoot the pike but the duck got in the way"

[Ian M]

Labrador,
Ruger M77's are not as popular as Rem. M-700's and Win. M-70's because one of the stock-bolts sits at an angle instead of vertically making bedding more complicated. Nothing to do with controled round feed. Some of the finest custom rifles are built on CRF actions, the Dakota 76 is an example.

Rugers can be the basis of great shooting rifles, just more work for the smith. They do not have the aftermarket parts support that the Rem. action does either such as triggers and a wide choice of stocks.

[Bart B]

Labrador, I don't think there's a better box magazine action that Winchester's Model 70. Both the pre '64 (controlled feed) style and post '64 push feed are equal in the accuracy department. They are almost 3 times stiffer than a Remington 7XX action (at least 4 times stiffer than a Ruger 77), don't twist a bit loose in epoxy bedding like the round Remingtons do with heavy bullets, feed more reliably in rapid fire, have a more reliable extractor and their bolt is easier to use. There's other shortcommings of the Remington actions but I won't go into them now.

Too bad the Winchester factory barrels left something to be desired in the accuracy department, but such is life.

[mudstud]

Bart,

Please "go into it now" about other shortcomings of 700's! I've shot 3 M70 Classics quite a bit, and am working on a 4th, and am overall amazed, or even shocked, at the level of accuracy these rifles are capable of. As a long-time 700 shooter, my experience to date is that the M70 Classics's, on average, are more accurate than 700's! I've certainly had my share of 700's that were dogs, but to date 2 of the M70's will shoot 1/2" 3-shots at 100 yds. The third is a 300 Weatherby, which approaches 1/2" really close. The 4th, which is a 7mmWSM, shows signs of really wanting to shoot (it puts the first shots from a cold, clean barrel into nice little cloverleafs), but then starts to walk to the right. So, I think this rifle has some bedding issues, which will be addressed. The other rifles are bone stock, except for the mandatory trigger job, of course.

[sambo3006]

I'm glad to hear about the accuracy potential of this action. I've got one in 338wm that I'm going to rebarrel-- leaning towards fiftydriver's 270AX in a #5 taper. The 338 didn't shoot worth a darn, but I attribute this to the fact that it bounces almost a foot off the bench with each shot. Lousy rubber butt pad! Who in their peapickin' mind at winchester said "hey! let's NOT put a recoil pad on a 338!" I now have a 338RUM that is ported and it kicks like a 270. Sorry for rambling. Sam

[Ian M]

Ian,
I have been patiently waiting for you to send that rifle over to me - what seems to be the delay [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Now we have missed Christmas...

Seriously, I wish we could buy that model over here, would have one for sure. You got a good one, congratulations.
ian