Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Hello, everyone. Did not see a welcome or new member section, mods please move if necessary.
Have been collecting military Winchester’s for years but picked up a pre-64 model 70 FW recently and caught the bug. Really like model 54’s. Have been reading RR’s book and lurking here. So far, only have two but quickly learning original ones are tough to find.
Hi M54-
First, welcome to the forum!!! Roger’s book is the best place to start. So memorize everything in it… Beyond that, there are a few people with M54/70 interests who hang out here and will happily take a stab at any of your questions. If Steve (seewin) says it, then you can count on it!!! Justin (pre64win) is also a go-to person when it comes to originality.
In general M54s are tough since there weren’t very many, most have been altered over the years, and the bottom metal was prone to lose finish quickly. So gathering up correct high-end collectable M54s is a slow process at best. Worth the effort but you should be patient and choosy…
M70s, OTOH, are abundant… However most of what you see for sale on the internet these days will have some issue or other. If you want to post questions here before a purchase you will probably benefit on balance. Meaning I doubt too many readers of this site will “pounce” on your prospective treasure – if they’re serious collectors they’ve probably already seen it too.
Thanks for writing,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou, thanks for the welcome. Can’t imagine how hard it would be to learn about Model 70’s and 54’s without Rule’s book and sites like this. My copy of Rule’s book has become cluttered with sticky notes. Still trying to figure out all the configuration information.
Also appreciate the names of trusted posters here. Funny, most of my searches have led to those names and a few others.
Hopefully, I’m using the following terminology correctly, but one thing I’m learning about is drilling/tapping, scope mounts, their locations and factory vs. aftermarket. Very confusing. Most I’ve seen use the front and rear ring for scope blocks. Others are put directly into the barrel. I understand why some, like target models do this since there isn’t necessarily a ring. What’s confusing is why some are mounted in the barrel ignoring the privoded locations. Why not just use the ring? Is there some advantage to not using the ring for a scope mount? Perhaps a barrel mount provides a more stable scope mounting location for the higher power calibers?
Will post pics of my first purchase, a model 70 FW in .308 soon. It’s had a scope added, but is in nice, honest condition as the aluminum parts are in tact and in great condition. What I like about it is I can use the scope or the original sights. I’ve read that is something inherent in model 70’s that wasn’t always possible with model 54’s.
Am I able to upload pictures directly to this site? Hoping not to use a third party site since if it goes away or holds my pictures hostage, like PB, I’m screwed. If I need to upgrade my membership, let me know. Thanks.
Hi M54-
A few generalizations about factory D&T on M70s:
1. All M70s (1936-1963) had two 6-48 D&T holes on top of the receiver ring (front) and two D&T holes on the left rear below the bridge (rear) to mount a receiver (peep) sight.
2. Pre-war rifles (1936-1946) with cloverleaf tang and clip slot bridge with wavy roll marking, were not D&T on top of the bridge. Several manufacturers of scope mounts made bridge type mounts that used only the existing holes, among them Stith and Bausch and Lomb (shown below). Others, like the Redfield JR and Beuhler bases required a hole be D&T on top of the bridge.
3. Transition rifles (1946-1948) with cloverleaf tang, no clip slot, and smooth bridge, were D&T with two 6-48 holes (or not) depending on the style of rifle. Standard length transition receivers were D&T on top of the bridge and can take any standard scope mount base. The bridge of H&H Magnum length actions, on which part of the bridge was milled away to facilitate loading the long H&H cartridges, was NOT factory D&T during the transition era. Ditto actions intended for target rifles in 30-06, as these retained the clip slot that had been omitted from other standard length actions.
4. Later rifles (1948-1963) with oval tang and smooth bridge, were D&T on the bridge. This includes the H&H and target actions (with very few exceptions).
5. Regardless of era, the competition models (National Match, Target Rifle and Bull Gun) as well as the Varmint rifle that used the same medium heavy target barrel contour, all had two holes D&T on top of the barrel to accommodate a telescopic sight mounting block. The popular long tube, externally adjustable target scopes of the day, e.g. Lyman Super Targetspot and Unertl, required the long distance between mounts to support the tube and get the correct windage/elevation adjustment increments from their micrometer adjustable mounts. The typical installation used the blocks attached to the barrel and receiver (front) ring. Even after the factory started to routinely D&T the bridge, the factory provided target scope blocks used the barrel and receiver.
One unfortunate thing about the M54s was that the shape of the bolt handle would not allow for convenient scope mounting even using one of the ‘no-drill’ mounts. Unfortunate since this has led, over the years, to most M54s being altered in ways that can’t be repaired.
Hope this helps,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
2. Pre-war rifles (1936-1946) with cloverleaf tang and clip slot bridge with wavy roll marking, were not D&T on top of the bridge. Several manufacturers of scope mounts made bridge type mounts that used only the existing holes, among them Stith and Bausch and Lomb (shown below). Others, like the Redfield JR and Beuhler bases required a hole be D&T on top of the bridge…
Considering that from the 1920s on, there were many hunting scopes (i.e., internally adjustable) on the market, have never understood why WRA (once in the scope business themselves) was so slow to recognize that the full potential of the “rifleman’s rifle” could only be realized with optics, and therefor, why there was no well thought out provision for mounting them without D&T. Employing the receiver sight mounting holes and rear sight slot for that purpose seems to me to fall into the category of “make-shift,” not “well thought out.”
The original two-piece Redfield mount was in production by the early ’30s and quickly became the most popular in the country, so it would have made much sense to provide even the first 70s with pre-drilled mounting holes to accept it.
Wow, great post! Very informative. Those are some nice model 70’s, especially like the stock carving and of course, the scopes.
Just so I understand, I have a 1953 FW. It has two small screws on the side of the receiver. It also has two small screws on top of the receiver to the rear (bridge) and to the front (ring). It has a scope on it, but the D&T would be correct for later rifles like mine, but not for pre-war and maybe for transitional.
At first, I didn’t understand why Winchester took so long to figure out scope mounting on 54’s but since they didn’t sell many and the Great Depression had just ended, maybe it wasn’t top priority at the time?
M54-
You are correct. The FWTs (introduced in ’52) were made with type III-2, III-3 and III-4 actions, all of which were factory D&T and will accept all the standard top mounts made for a post-war non-magnum M70.
I agree with Clarence that it’s funny it took the factory until 1946 to adapt the M70 action design (D&T bridge and modified bolt handle) to accept low/top mount scopes ‘out of the box’. When the M54 was introduced (1925) the few compact internally adjustable scopes available were expensive, not very moisture proof, and lacked constantly centered reticles. So many (if not all) hunters wanted to have metallic sights available for back-up when (not if) their scope failed. Hence the popularity of Griffin & Howe (and similar) side mounts. Scope was removable and in any event the iron sights could be viewed even when it was in place. But it required 3 large D&T holes be bored onto the left side of the receiver. 
The advantage of the Stith for the M70 was that it did not require modification of the rifle. Stith made a version of the mount pictured above called the “QED” (Quick Easy Detachable) that had two large coin slotted thumbscrews that could be loosened to remove the scope. Since the barrel dovetail and receiver sight holes were used for the scope mount, they offered an accessory “peep sight” that attached to the mount adapter once the scope was removed. A bit Rube Goldberg but there you go…
The advantage of the B&L style no-drill mount was that the adjustments were in the scope mount, not the scope. Before the advent of constantly centered reticles, this was a big advantage since the cross hairs were always centered directly on the optical axis where the view was clearest. B&L made an aperture sight attachment that could be clamped on to the mount when the scope was removed, but that had a very short sight radius and limited adjustment, so could at best be considered an emergency back-up.
Interestingly, the M54 could be scoped using a G&H side mount since scopes of the day, e.g. the Lyman Alaskan, generally had longish eye relief and the side mount allows the ocular bell of the scope to be placed far enough forward that the bolt can open without hitting it. The Stith and B&L no-drill mounts do not allow the scope to come far enough forward for that to work. About the only way to get a scope on a M54 without modifying the rifle is like this:
BTW… The carved rifle I used to illustrate the no-drill B&L system is S/N 87160 (pictured in Rule’s book photos 8-67 and 8-68). That is a Leroy Merz photo (in case you cannot tell from the green rug background). I do own that rifle, but have not as yet photographed it.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou, haven’t even been to the back of the book yet. What a beaut.
re: model 54 target rifles:
Your picture shows a scope block installed into the dove tail to raise the height. How would one raise the height on a 54 target rifle? If one has to change the factory blocks to raise the height for bolt clearance, that really makes no sense. Were there different sets of blocks for 54 target rifles like a SM, TM and NM?
Hi M54-
Not quite sure of your question.
The photo in my last post is a M54 first standard rifle. The cross dovetail block in the barrel sight dovetail is a Lyman ‘BK’ and the one on the receiver ring is a ‘U’ block. The scope is an early Unertl 6X small game/gallery scope. Together the U and BK blocks place the scope tube high enough to clear the M54 bolt handle. Same would be true using the factory-installed blocks on a M54 target rifle.
Of course with all the drop in that early M54 standard stock one should really add a lace-on cheek rest to raise the shooter’s line of sight a bit.
The M54 and M70 Target Rifles used the same medium heavy straight taper barrel contour, the only difference being that the M54 target barrels had an integral front sight ramp. The M54 and M70 National Match rifles likewise used the same standard weight barrel contour. The M54 Sniper’s Match rifle and M70 Bull Gun used the same extra heavy “bull” barrel contour, only difference being the M54 barrel was 26″ long and the M70 barrel was 28″.
Since the barrels differed in diameter, the height of the barrel mounted scope block differed: 0.417″ tall for M54/70 National Match; 0.360″ for M54/70 Target rifle; 0.262″ for Bull Gun. All used the same 0.185″ tall receiver sight block.
Hope that helps,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
The advantage of the Stith for the M70 was that it did not require modification of the rifle. Stith made a version of the mount pictured above called the “QED” (Quick Easy Detachable) that had two large coin slotted thumbscrews that could be loosened to remove the scope.
Also Redfield’s claim to fame–QD and (most importantly) return to zero when replaced. Earliest Rifleman ad I’ve seen was Oct. ’28, when it was called Western Gun Sight Co.
Mounting the scope ahead of bolt handle was taken to an extreme with Jeff Cooper’s “Scout Rifle” design–supposedly very fast target acquisition but pretty strange looking.
Just trying to figure out why a Lyman scope will mount on a model 54, but the bolt won’t clear. The rear receiver block measures approximately .185 and the front is about .360. Both blocks have notches in them. Not sure the purpose of the notches, but the rear has one and the front has two. The scope doesn’t appear to have any adjustments up or down, just forward or backward. It’s a SM BTW.
Hi M54-
A Winchester A5, Lyman 5A (same scope different manufacturer), Lyman Targetspot (or STS – although the M54 predates the STS), Unertl, Litschert or similar 3/4″ tube target scope with about a 7/8″ ocular bell should clear the bolt handle of a M54 when installed in the factory height blocks. The rig I showed above on a standard M54 clears and has a 0.185″ tall rear block. The BK front block is a relatively low height (the progression – low to high – was AK, BK, KK) but produces about the same height above the bore as a 0.360″ tall block on a MH target weight barrel.
If you have these parts and are trying to see if they work, first make sure that the rear micrometer (external) adjustments on the scope are centered such that the scope tube is in the middle of its adjustment range, not pushed all the way down. Photos of the project might help… Please note that to post photos directly on the this site (without using a third party service) you have to be a WACA member. But IMHO the membership is well worth the money since (if nothing else) it gives you access to the electronic version of all previous WACA magazines. In the back issues there’s an excellent article by Lloyd Thomsen on “The Forgotten 54” that might interest you…
The two “Unertl cresents” on the front block allowed the user to select either of two spacings between front and rear attachment points for the scope mounts. If I recall (seewin can correct me) using the front position gave you 1/4 minute/click adjustment using Lyman/Unertl/Litschert mounts, while the rear position gave you 1/3 minute clicks.
FWIW the Unertl scope on my rifle above is S/N 1870 which dates to about 1938. The scope is in Lyman mounts which is probably correct as Unertl did not make their own mounts initially, instead using either Lyman or Litschert mounts. The rifle itself is S/N 34770A which is about ’32.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou,
I have a Lyman Alaskan on my Model 54 (Standard Rifle, 30-06, serial number 13678), and it works perfectly with no interference.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Guys. I am a member, just joined with an Internet membership, but do not see the link for adding attachments in the editor. I have pictures of the SM and will take pictures of the scope, box. Will also include pics of the scope mounted on the rifle. If I can’t figure out how to post pictures internally, I figure out something third party.
mfivefour said
Guys. I am a member, just joined with an Internet membership, but do not see the link for adding attachments in the editor. I have pictures of the SM and will take pictures of the scope, box. Will also include pics of the scope mounted on the rifle. If I can’t figure out how to post pictures internally, I figure out something third party.
Your membership needs to be processed, which will include updating your User privileges. Give it at least 24-hours.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Hi Bert-
Very interesting… Will you post a pic of the rig or send me a photo?
The only way I’ve seen to install an Alaskan on a M54 with unaltered bolt handle is to mount it such that the ocular bell is forward of the bolt handle, which requires a G&H (or related) side mount. I once saw where somebody modified a Stith mount to achieve that on an unaltered M54, but that required a very short scope, one pf pre-war European manufacture (do not recall off-hand). The Alaskan or Weaver G330 are too long to work with the front part of the Stith mount even if the back end was altered.
I’d love to see your solution, as I have a M54 30 WCF carbine that I’d love to shoot if I cold get it scoped (my eyes are no longer able to do much with the metallic sights). Been trying to figure this out for a while.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou,
I will see what I can come up with.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Hi M54-
WOW!!! From what I can see that looks like an exceptionally nice M54. Congrats!!! Any of those in unaltered condition are VERY hard to come by. What’s the chambering, if I may ask? What is the barrel length and the diameter of the barrel at the muzzle? What’s the S/N, if I may ask?
I’m sure you know, but if desired you can remove the entire adjustable portion of the Lyman 48W receiver sight by backing out the knurled screw at the rear of the block, pushing it in and then pulling up on the cross bar assembly. Lyman made a series of blanks that fit into the block attached to the receiver that protected everything when the dovetailed cross bar assembly was removed. They’re not super easy to come by but show up on Ebay from time to time if you need one. Does the bolt operate cleanly (not hit the scope) with it set up the way you have it now?
The Lyman STS is a bit too late for a M54 target so if you want to be a period correct stickler find a good Lyman Targetspot (don’t mind me I’m just a Nerd)…
Best,
Lou
FWIW, here is a poor quality pic of a couple of pre-war M70 targets, both in 257 ROBERTS. The one in the back (S/N 3339) is one of those 1st variation (ramped) target rifles Rule talks about in his book. They’re not easy to find either… If you’ve got one you want to part with send me a PM… 
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
It’s is just a .30-06. The inside diameter is .300, just like an M1 Carbine (lol!). Barrel is 26 inches. The SN is 486XXA. Very heavy. Can’t imagine shooting it while standing thought I’ve read it wasn’t meant for that kind of stuff.
I’ve thought about taking the rear sight off on this one and others, but don’t want to mar up the screws. Going to meet with a friend at an upcoming show for some lessons on how to disassemble in exchange for M1 Carbine lessons. Want to get a look inside and see what is stamped on the metal, document etc.
I, too, a stickler for details and will look for a period correct scope. What the time frame on the pictured scope? Also, will the TS scope mount on it without having to remove anything and will the bolt clear?
Don’t think the previous owner shot it much. Wish I could have met the previous owner(s) as I have an appreciation for those who take care and preserve things. Trying to resist the temptation to shoot it but hopefully that will pass.
Those are some nice target rifles! Have been looking at other Target 54’s. Really like the marksman stock, especially when scoped. Are there any other scopes that would be period correct for a SM? The longer the scope the better. Like the Winchester scope (A5?, looks like just a long tube).
Learning more first is probably the best way forward though. Even window shopping can be fun.
1 Guest(s)
