Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I’m not into center fire bolt action rifles so I don’t know the answer so thought I would ask it here.
When did Winchester begin drilling and tapping the front receiver bridge for scope mounting? I’m thinking the rear holes were tapped before the war.
Approx year and serial number?
Thanks very much.
Jolly
The front receiver ring was d/t’d from day 1. The rear bridge was d/t’d beginning around 60,000 s/n range when the smooth rear bridge was implemented on the “Transition” receivers. This was around 1947. This change was not implemented all at once. The H&H receivers were the last to receive this change.
Steve
Steve,
Thanks so much for your detailed response. I really appreciate that. Good info.
You have a great day and thanks again.
Jolly
November 5, 2014
Offline
Jolly-
As Steve says, from the beginning all M70 rifles were factory D&T on the top of the (front) receiver ring (to mount a telescopic sight mounting block) and the left rear of the receiver (to mount a Lyman or Redfield receiver sight). The top of the (rear) bridge of type I “pre-war” receivers, identified by a cloverleaf tang and roll marked top of the bridge, were never D&T as part of regular production. These go to about s/n 60500 for standard length actions and 63200 for H&H magnum actions (per Rule’s book), which goes into early 1947.
The type II “transition” rifles are characterized by a cloverleaf tang and SMOOTH top on the bridge. These go to about s/n 87700 (circa 1948) in standard length and around 121700 (circa 1949) in H&H magnum (although with the H&H magnums there is a lot of s/n overlap between the earliest type III (oval tang) rifles and the last of the type II cloverleaf tang rifles. The bridge of the standard length type II actions were D&T from the beginning (except for the 30-06 target models that retained the clip loading slot and were not D&T). The bridge of the H&H magnum length type II rifles were NOT routinely D&T, occasioned by a lack of standardization between the Winchester factory and the different manufacturers of mounting bases at the time.
So… as a general rule, a type II H&H magnum length action (or clip slotted target model in the same s/n range) should have a smooth UNDRILLED bridge, while a type II standard length action should have two D&T holes. It seems that the bridge of H&H magnum length actions were not regularly D&T until November 1950 (again according to Rule), which means many early type III actions were also not D&T. For example, Rule shows a photos of type III 375 magnum rifle 169441 that is not D&T, and I recall seeing one in the 165xxx range that was likewise not D&T. However, these are anomalies, as by this time most H& magnum length type III receivers were factory D&T.
Once the factory (finally) standardized the hole spacing, the smooth bridge top of all subsequent actions (standard, target and H&H magnum) were D&T.
Hope this is not excessive!!!
Best…
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
Jolly-So… as a general rule, a type II H&H magnum length action (or clip slotted target model in the same s/n range) should have a smooth UNDRILLED bridge, while a type II standard length action should have two D&T holes. It seems that the bridge of H&H magnum length actions were not regularly D&T until November 1950 (again according to Rule), which means many early type III actions were also not D&T. For example, Rule shows a photos of type III 375 magnum rifle 169441 that is not D&T, and I recall seeing one in the 165xxx range that was likewise not D&T. However, these are anomalies, as by this time most H& magnum length type III receivers were factory D&T.
Once the factory (finally) standardized the hole spacing, the smooth bridge top of all subsequent actions (standard, target and H&H magnum) were D&T.
Hope this is not excessive!!!
Best…
Louis,
Very complete but “not excessive”.
I will make a copy of this thread and use for future info and give a copy to a good friend who is looking at a 1949 vintage M70 Super Grade in 300H&H with a scope. I’ll let him decide.
All good stuff.
Thanks Steve and Louis.
Jolly
November 5, 2014
Offline
Jolly-
I light of the specific matter above… As long as you are saving posts, look at what Steve posted in the thread “Transition Model 70 300 Magnum Rear Bridge” a while ago. HUGE help as far as how to tell a factory D&T hole from a non-factory modification when you are looking at a rifle in that “overlap” zone…
Just click on “Seewin” to the left of his post above and then on “Topics Posted In” and you will find it. Steve has probably got the most complete set of information (factory drawings) on several Winchester models, and can he back up what he says!!! Bank on it…
Best of luck,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou,
I found it. Thanks for your excellent directions.
More good stuff from you and Steve/Seewin.
Yep, I got it copied.
Thanks you guys.
Jolly
Let’s open this up for civil arguments:
Were any factory receivers drilled and tapped on the rear bridge with only one hole. Rule book says yes. What say you?
Vic
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Vic-
I have not encountered a transition H&H magnum action with believable documentation for either one OR two holes in the bridge. I simply assume that any transition long action bridge that is drilled at all was done outside the factory. Two holes for Weaver, one hole for Redfield!!! Certainly accounts for the vast majority of them.
As you well know, s/n 87160 is not drilled and wears those B&L bases that attach via the factory receiver sight holes on the left side. I also have a type II-1 SG 300 Magnum s/n 76789, your 375 Magnum standard rifle s/n 77043, and a type II-1 300 Magnum Bull Gun s/n 77144 (not your pre-war – this one came from Bedlan’s decades ago). None of them have holes in the bridge. That’s it for my collection…
A year or so ago I saw a nice looking type II-2 Super Grade 300 Magnum listed for sale on Guns International that had a sightless barrel and one hole in the bridge. Certainly, IF a rifle were ordered with a sightless barrel it would only make sense for it to be factory drilled. On the other hand, the whole thing was probably a fake!!!
At least looking for a correct counter bore, blued threads, and absence of heat discoloration would identify the majority of non-factory work. If holes meet all those criteria, they MIGHT be real, but still not proof…
Best, Lou 
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
November 5, 2014
Offline
Vic-
I’ll put this another way (since I really have nothing concrete to contribute)… If we’re talking about MY money, I would not add a transition H&H Magnum rifle that had holes in the bridge.
On the flip side, I would not condemn SOMEONE ELSE’S rifle if it had D&T holes that met the criteria above. Just would not buy it myself… I don’t think that Winchester in 1947-49 was opposed to telescopic sights on Magnum length rifles (they had already made the modification to standard length actions). The thing was that the major manufacturers of top mounted ‘scope mounts (I’m thinking Redfield, Weaver, and Beuhler – since Stith and B&L offered no-drill options at the time), all used different hole spacing for the bridge. As an unrelated example, my brother has a NIB Beuhler mount for a M43 Winchester made before the factory drilled them, which uses a hole spacing that will not work with the holes the factory eventually decided to drill.
So if I’m WINCHESTER, I need to get everybody into a room and agree to a standard hole spacing that will accommodate pretty much any customer. That apparently did not happen for the M70 until sometime in 1950. Before that, the factory did not drill holes so that the buyer could have holes placed to accommodate the after market mounts of their choice.
On the other hand, if I am a CONSUMER who plans to mount a scope, ordering the hole(s) from the factory makes as much sense as getting an undrilled gun and handing it over to my local gunsmith. So… Did the factory provide one (or two) D&T holes in those bridges on order. I suspect YES… The challenge for today’s collector is to decide where to put their money…
Best as always, Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
It might just be me, but if the fact that there was no standard, and I go to my local sporting goods shop and pick out a magnum 70 and have my smithy set it up for a scope…..did I ruin the future value of a perfectly wonderful firearm? I don’t think so. If the factory didn’t offer it and it was nessersary what was the option?
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
Vince said
It might just be me, but if the fact that there was no standard, and I go to my local sporting goods shop and pick out a magnum 70 and have my smithy set it up for a scope…..did I ruin the future value of a perfectly wonderful firearm? I don’t think so. If the factory didn’t offer it and it was nessersary what was the option?
In the eyes of many the gun would now be a ‘shooter’. Future value of the gun would not be ruined, but significantly reduced and would be of little or no interest to either collectors or those who prefer original M70’s. A perfectly viable option would be the use of a Stith mount that uses the factory d&t holes on the rear, left side of the receiver and the rear sight dovetail to mount a telescopic sight….
If you can’t convince them, confuse them
November 5, 2014
Offline
Vince-
From the collector’s perspective it’s like drilling the left side of a lever action receiver to mount a Lyman peep sight. Enhances the utility of the firearm but is nonetheless a “non-factory” modification that many collectors would consider undesirable.
I agree with you that if I had bought a M70 300 Magnum new back in ’49 I would likely have done exactly what you say. Pick up a Buehler one piece base and have my gunsmith add a single hole to the bridge to secure it. I’d end up with an elk rifle deluxe and wouldn’t be thinking about what some collector might think 70 years later.
As TedK points out, there were several no-drill scope mounts (designed for the pre-war action) on the market at the time that would work on a long magnum M70 action using the factory receiver sight holes, e.g. the Stith Install-It-Yourself, Stith Q.E.D. (Quick Easy Detachable), Stith Master Mount, and Bausch & Lomb. The picture below (borrowed from Leroy Merz) is of the above mentioned SN 87160, a well known factory custom M70 made for Dr. Russell C. Smith, that was factory scoped using a B&L mount. As Vicvanb can attest, the bridge of this rifle is not drilled.
Best, Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
The issue of reduced value for D&T Model 70s raises the issue of how much reduction in price is appropriate? And as fully original M70s become more and more rare, will collectors become more accepting of minor non-original features?
Some points to consider:
I surely would not turn down a high-condition 300 Savage, 35 Remington, 250 Savage, etc., M70 with an extra hole, and I’d pay pretty close to full value for it. I realize others might shun it completely or expect to pay way less than for a rifle with no extra holes..
A couple of years ago at Rock Island Auction there was a Super Grade 220 Swift with a scope block on the barrel. I examined it prior to the auction. It was a 99% rifle with no other alterations. It sold for about $10,000. The buyer didn’t know or didn’t care about the scope block.
Over time, collectors have become more accepting of certain non-original features for rare Winchesters. At one point years ago, refinished Model 21 Shotguns were priced well below originals, but now, there is little or no difference in price.
Also, all extra holes are not equal. Certainly, several holes for a sidemount are more detracting than two extra holes on the top of the bridge on a magnum receiver–and should result in reduced value. And the large, angled, “east-west” holes on the side of the bridge for the old Redfield base are worse than two “north-south” on the top center.
I guess Lou is right–we each must decide what we are willing to accept and how much we’re willing to pay.
So if you have a 98% 9MM with D&T holes, contact me, please.
November 5, 2014
Offline
I agree with Vic, TedK, and probably a majority of the collectors who frequent this site… The highest value will always go to surviving examples that are in high original condition and unaltered. With any collectable Winchester, those guns get harder to find (and more expensive) every day.
So… The ‘purist’ will simply forgo anything that does not meet their high standards (originality + condition). Others (myself included) have chosen to build collections around some scheme that includes the ‘best available’ examples of certain models/features (kind of like coin or stamp collectors). Fill in all the ‘blank spots’, then try to ‘upgrade’ as opportunities present themselves. For us, patience is the #1 virtue, but compromise frequently comes into play when dealing with rare chamberings, models, or production variations… They just don’t ‘come along’ very often.
At the end of the day, how one chooses to ‘compromise’ is an individual decision (if spending one’s own money). Does one accept non-factory modifications (D&T), professionally restored (refinished) guns, or original examples in lesser condition? Purely an individual decision… All have some value, none are as valuable as the ‘real thing’… The second category being the dangerous ones, as many ‘restored’ guns are represented to prospective buyers as originals (and priced accordingly). Caveat emptor…
My personal bias is to compromise more on condition rather than originality, hence my remarks above.
So… If anyone has an 85% condition (but all original) pre-war M70 in 9M/M or 7.65M/M, contact me if Vic doesn’t want it.
Cheers, Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
1 Guest(s)
