Hudson Sporting Goods M70 Carbine 270 Win|Winchester Rifles|Forum|Winchester Collector

clarence said

Blue Ridge Parson said

It is ads like that one, that make me want to get back to work on the “flux capacitor” and invent a time machine, so I could go back in time and buy those rare rifles at those prices. 

After you do that, adjust your machine for the 1930s & please pick up a case of Springfield Sporters, National Matches, & Model 1922s, for me; I’ll reimburse you handsomely for the trouble.

  

I’m sure an NIB Model 70 carbine in 35 Remington would bring a lot more than $1400 USD today, but that’s the present equivalent of $120  in August, 1954 American Dollars. 

Perhaps the better use of a time machine would be to send someone back to buy one and leave it for you under the 1954 Christmas tree.  That way. You’d have grown up knowing what a strange ranger a short barreled 35 Remington Model 70 really was and why it didn’t sell.  That realization would have kept you from spending your retirement and your kids’ college money on other high condition rifles that are rare because they didn’t sell either. 

Now,  a brand new Moder 53 in 25/20 for ninety bucks is another matter entirely….

Louis Luttrell said
Hi Zeb-

I’ll “debate” you a little on this one a little, just for fun…

While the records we know of say that only (404) M70s were made in 35 REM, we (I) have no idea how many were Standard Rifles, Super Grades, Carbines, or Target Models… 

What doesn’t make sense to me is a 20″ barreled 270 WCF or 30-06…  Lots of noise and muzzle flash in exchange for less ballistic performance (I think Winchester’s internal discussions of the time – as recorded in CFM documents – reflect this)…  Much like the Featherweight-Westerner, a 22″ barreled 264 WIN MAGNUM. Commonly called “The Flamethrower”…  Cut 4” off the barrel of a 264 WIN MAGNUM and what do you get?  A rifle that delivers 270 WIN performance with a lot louder “bang” and more wasted powder…

BUT… If Winchester wanted to try and market a M70 to woods hunters, why not a “Carbine” in 35 REM???  Smaller case, heavier/slower bullet, short barrel for maneuverability…  Obviously they didn’t win their bet b/c of all the lighter/shorter Remington pumps and 30 WCF Winchester M94s out there…

STILL.. I wonder if the M70 Carbine in 35 REM is as “rare” as we all think it is based on the ASSUMPTION that the proportion of M70 Carbines in 35 REM was the same as the proportion of M70 Carbines (compared to Standard rifles overall) in other calibers…  I’m not aware of any data that says (yes or no) that Winchester did/did not sell more Carbines in 35 REM than Standard Rifles.  

If anyone has any data PLEASE let me know (no need to quote Roger’s book to me – I’ve read that)…

I know you like a good argument…

Lou

  

Dr. Lou, your irrefutable logic has won the day.  I will concede a Model 70 carbine in 35 Remington makes sense. After looking over the cartridges for which the carbine was chambered, 35 Rem is actually the ONLY chambering that makes sense.

My conclusion is based on (very brief) ownership and personal experience with a full-stocked Ruger #1 .30/06 with a 20″ barrel. That thing would blow the reproductive equipment off a brass monkey and cause night blindness if shot later than 5pm.in Winter.

While we’re on the subject,  fill in a blank for me, please. 

I have always assumed the Model 70 “7mm” offered chambering meant the 7x57mm Mauser cartridge because it was the most commonly available.

However  I’ve never been sure which “9mm” Winchester meant, of the several European nines then extant. 

Louis Luttrell said
Counselor Shields-

I agree that 35 REM is the only M70 carbine chambering that makes sense (to me), although it would have been fun to have one in 22 HORNET to play with… 

The 9 M/M chambered by Winchester is the 9 x 57 Mauser (necked up 7.92 x 57 Mauser).  It was cataloged production in several Model 54 styles, but not continued in the Model 70.  Model 54s were made using 20″ and 24″ standard barrels in 9 M/M as well as the 24″ medium heavy contour.  The (very) few Model 70s assembled by the factory in that chambering were (almost???) all built using leftover M54 barrel blanks.  Most Model 70s you see these days in 9 M/M are fakes, i.e. built using non-factory reproduction barrels.

I think that Winchester only ever loaded 9 x 57 Mauser in the two-piece brown boxes.

Barrel specs for the 9 M/M in the M54 are in the attached table.

Best,

Lou

  

Lou. Thanks for the clarification. I hadn’t realized the Model 70 wasn’t chambered in 9×57.  

As for so.many of us who still own and want to use a 35 Remington gun, the brass shortage has been a trial, prompting the predictable question – can I covert another case?  Not really.

As you know, when Brownimg designed his long recoil automatic centerfire and Remington produced it as the Model 8, all the chamberings were rimless versions of the. 30 WCF – except the .35. As far as I can discover, nobody is sure but FN began making a contemporaneous rifle for what is now an obscure and obsolete 9mm rimless round, with a case similar but not identical to the .35 Rem.  It would not be a practical conversion because of its own scarcity

This subtopic clings to a thin reed to remain on a Winchester forum but still — this Remington cartrdge was a Model 70 chambering so the issue of its provenance seems justified. 

Now that the “new” Remington is again cranking out ammunition, including a thin trickle of .35 RR, the issue may be moot, at least for those prepared to pay scalper’s prices. I’d still be curious to know from whence came the design.

For those discouraged at not finding a nice Model 70 carbine to buy, let me quote the wisdom of one of the late author Dan Jenkins’ South Fort Worth characters, Tommy Earl Brunner. Responding to his drinking buddy’s remark that a certain woman was untouchably beautiful, Tommy Earl reminded him: “Yeah, but they’s always somebody out there tired of her.”

Later,

Bill

Did anyone else notice that a Model 53 was listed as a “bolt action” with a 24″ barrel?  Perhaps they meant “Model 43”  RDB

Louis Luttrell said
 

“That said, M70 carbines themselves are not “rare” in that over 7,000 were made.  High condition unaltered original specimens are kind of hard to find (which is true of pre-war M70s in general), but there’s still hope for any aspiring Winchester collector (who doesn’t value their hearing ) to find a good M70 carbine.”

  

Lou, once again you’ve demonstrated the lesson we all should have tattooed on our wallet-reaching hand: “it’s not the rarity of the Winchester. It’s the rarity of the CONDITION of the Winchester.”

Some of us – we who learned this the hard way – should place the situs of the tattoo on the lower dorsal trunk. 

clarence said

Louis Luttrell said

FWIW… Those Hudson ads ran in American Rifleman monthly from June through August 1954.  Only the August edition included the Model 53/43 reference.  Here are the (4) ads, in order.

Most interesting about these ads is Hudson’s promotion of the guns as “rare collector’s items” at a time when virtually nobody thought of 70s as a gun that anyone “collected”–they were the common hunting rifles for sale in every well-stocked gunshop.

  

In 1954 I was 10.years old and bought that year’s edition of Gun Digest with my lawn mowing money. While lacking in sophistication, I quickly grasped even then that, once a gun went out of production the price of the ones in good condition often went up. I think the subject at hand was the Winchester 73.

Nevertheless,  the 1954 collector fraternity was no less avaricious and interested in things LIKELY to become rare and desirable, than today’s are. The late John T. Amber being Exhibit A to this point.

I think Hudson’s understood their customer base quite well. “Get ’em while you still can, boys. Devil take the hindmost!”  Doesn’t that strike an eerily familiar chord?