Building a Mod 70 Accurate Hunting Rifle

[statjunk]

Hey guys,

Got a question on building a rifle. I want a Mod 70 action and I'm building to a hunting rig. So something in the 7.5lb range. I've chosen to build it on the .308 Win.

I want to be able to load to the lands and still be able to put the cartridge in the magazine.

How dangerous is this?

What are the pros and cons?

I'm in between a bunch of things right now. I'm looking hard and long a the Winchester M70 made by FN. Specifically the Extreme weather model.

The stocks aren't very stiff and if I grab the barrel and the stock and squeeze I can make them touch at the the tip. how bad is that? I'm thinking if I used a bipod it would move the barrel. or if I lay it on something it would do the same.

I'm also wondering if a 22" barrel is going to be the ticket.

Sorry for the rambling. Looking to get some thoughts and opinions.

Thanks

Tom

[Clark]

Jammed into the lands acts like 1.5 gr extra powder.

It takes 5 more grains in 308 to make the primer fall out of a case.

I built a pre 64 M70 with a Pac Nor 270 barrel and Borden Rimrock stock.
With a bi pod , Leupold 2x7 scope, and Leica range finder I shot 3 mule deer in Nov 2008 at 400+, 400+, and 500+ yards.

[statjunk]

I'm not trying to load the rifle to the point where it will jam though I know it's a risk. Just trying to load to the lands and fit the bullet in the magazine. I'm wondering if a suggestion I was given to go with a long action and then rebarrel to a .308 is the ticket for me. That way I will be able to load to the lands and still get good case capacity.

Thoughts?

Anyone?

Thanks

Tom

[BountyHunter]

You really need to talk to your smith and discuss a couple options with your action.

To the lands depends solely on the reamer used and how much freebore it cuts and has nothing to do with long or short actions.

the reamer can be ordered to fit a certain bullet and seating depth. Dave Kiff at Pacific Tool and guage does this all the time with his reamers.

Look at the extended mag boxes available for the M70 such as Wyatts and see which one will give you the longest box for what I assume is a short action M70.

That will tell you what your max COAL will be for your gun, not out of the book factory specs.

Then decide on what weight bullets, load up a dummy cartridge for each type/brand bullet that is loaded to the ogive and measure the COAL. that will tell you which combo can fit in the mag and touch the lands.

Kiff can build your reamer to fit a certain bullet and seating depth for your COAL.

Now if you are taking an off the shelf gun, you simply work backwards from its max COAL after you put the longest box in it. Measure where you lands are and that will tell you what bullets will fit in your existing setup, be close to the lands and still fit in the mag.

There is a growing knowledge that many times bullets shoot much better jumped much further (as far as .120 off the lands) than we originally thought. Berger has published some info on this and many of the Barnes are made to shoot well of the lands.


As for the stocks, too many good stocks to take a "tupperware one" IMO. You want a stock that allows a good pillar bedding and is solid in the action area and no flex in the foreend.


BH

[statjunk]

Thanks for the long post. I appreciate everyone for taking the time to help me.

What would be a good option for a sythetic black stock that doesn't flex at the foreend and is still pretty light?

Money is also an issue of course.

The Winchester M70 Extreme Weather comes with a Bell and Carlson but it flexes at the tip. I figured it'd be nicer that.

As for the other advice you gave not sure what to think. I'm really between so many options right now. Not really sure what to do. Trying to stay on a budget. Even if it means it might take me a while.

Here is a scenario. Please tell me if this seems reasonable.

If I buy a Winchester M70 Extreme Weather in .30-06. Shoot it for a while and over time replace the stock and the barrel to a .308Win. Wouldn't this allow me to load a standard reamed barrel to the lands and still fit in the magazine?

What would be the cons to this approach other than weight (4oz)?

Tom