Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I have included a picture of a post-64 1980’s 223 rem Featherweight M70 at the top, and a pre-64 (pre-war type 1) 30-06 standard M70 at the bottom. The left receiver on both are drilled and tapped for a peep sight, but the ones on the post-64 sit lower and cannot accept a Lyman 48 WJS.
I thought the locations of these drilled and tapped holes should be standard? When we buy a Lyman rear aperture sight these days isn’t the assumption that it will fit on all Model 70’s, as well as Savage 110’s and Remington 700’s?
Is it a more common scenario that we buy the sights first, and then had specific holes drilled afterwards, so that a given rear peep sight may only fit on certain pre-drilled receivers?
(Cross-posted on another website, THR, as I’m unsure where this question is more applicable).
Not only on post-64 Winchesters, but have also noticed that on other manufacturer’s guns, easy too see.
Maybe because the holes are never used?
Online
Tedk said
Maybe because the holes are never used?
That may have been the attitude of the company by the ’80s, that “of course” all new guns were going be scoped, but then why drill the holes at all if they are non-functional? Possibly other, newer, makes of rcvr. sights, like Williams, would fit without stock alteration, but that’s a poor excuse for not placing the holes to accommodate all M70 rcvr. sights.
I would think the drilled and tapped holes would have to be perpendicular to the bore.
If the peep sight does not fit, I would blame the stock maker.
More empty-headed than these misplaced screws on 70s was building the 52 Sporting repros with rcvr. sight mounting holes (no idea if they were properly placed) but no front sight or provisions for one, such as a dovetail in the brl!
Jerry Roitsch said
I would think the drilled and tapped holes would have to be perpendicular to the bore.If the peep sight does not fit, I would blame the stock maker.
Yes – this is very insightful and it led me to a discovery which I haven’t read about before. See picture below; I brought out a current production M70 (made in Portugal) that is unaltered, unfired. That rifle is the one at the bottom of the picture: the stock line at the receiver on this one is higher than the pre-war M70 (middle of picture). The post-64 (top of picture) has the same higher stock line than the Pre-64 at the receiver.
The Lyman 48 WJS is too big to fit on either the post-64 or current production. The receivers should be the same shape and size, and the holes same perpendicular location, it’s just the stock is fitted higher.
This means that current production Lyman 57 WJS sights, presumably fitted for current production M70’s and post-64’s, may not fit too well on pre-64 models! Anyone have experience on this?
Had no idea that the stock is higher on post-64 and modern M70’s. I guess this means that rear side-mounted sights from respective eras are not interchangeable.
I’m discovering the joys of collecting and vintage quality, which I’m learning includes shooting an old school steel aperture sight. There is just something “off” with newer production models (Winchester is better than most other brands – post 64’s and current productions, even wood stocked XPR’s, are better in my book than the ubiquitous Tikka T3X’s and Glocks). I can’t quite put my finger around it — quality is great in a vacuum, but little things like the inability to fit a Lyman 48 WJS are examples of is missing from many firearms today.
1 Guest(s)
