These Are The Good Old Days

[Swampman]

We are very lucky to live in an era where accuracy is almost taken for granted.........
"The new gun—O’Connor called this the No. 2 rifle--turned out to be very accurate (MOA or just under, which in 1959 was sensational), and so O’Connor took it to his favorite custom gunsmith, Al Biesen, of Spokane, to give it a level of elegance befitting its performance. Biesen completed the work in 1960. Biesen was not only a first-rate craftsman, but had a very good feel for ergonomics. All his stocks had a very slim pistol grip that belled toward the bottom, and they have a very distinctive feel. You can mount a Biesen rifle blindfolded and pick it out of a bunch of rifles."

[Brithunter]

Sorry but I have never come across an Al Biesen rifle rifle although I have seen them mentioned in some of the older books.


Personally I have never understood the need for thick club like wrists/pistol grips on rifles. Sadly though  they seem to be popular with "modern" production gunmakers. Like a fine SxS game gun the grip should be nicely oval and not too thick. Not so sure about the swelling of the grip at the base. To my mind it seem to push the  lower fingers forwards but I have never shot a rifle so equipped so perhaps??.


I do have to agree that the styling of the older rifles in a lot of cases stock wise is sleeker and more flowing unlike some of todays that rely upon angles and flat planes. They just look awful and those I have handled felt awkward too.

[Scibaer]

when i read the OP title, i thought this was going to be about gun right, or ammo availability .
then i read about MOA accuracy and stock design and shape.
well  styles and tastes change when it comes to what a 'popular' rifles look like. and overall accuracy is improving but there is a limit
mechanically because there is a built in limit, based on the physics in the materials and metals.
 

[Don Fischer]

I have an 03 Springfield built by Paul Jaeger in 1945. Slim grip and fore end. Best stosk I've ever had!

[Brithunter]

They did not get it all right, the old time makers of course, the BSA Model E I have well the cheek piece needs re-shaping but I have left it as is as there are not so many about now. Cutting a notch to clear the Redfield sight was as far as I would dare to go and only as it's in keeping with the rifle.


If I ever get the Model D back I can correct the cheek piece on the new stock for that one as it's a rebuild originality was lost decades back.


As for fore stock profiles  .................................................... well I am in two minds about those. I have slime schnable types and more rounded ones as well the the slightly angular styles as found on the old Remington ADL. I am not certain which is best for me. The BSA Monarch stock looks a lot like the Remington ADL one:-





Or don't you think the style is similar?

[Swampman]

Everyone missed the point.  It wasn't about style or taste.  It was about accuracy.

[Lloyd Smale]

yup its kind of why i allways smile at guys bragging on there pre64 winchesters. Most were 2moa guns on a good day. New ones are better fit and finished and shoot circles around the old ones. Today a guy is disapointed if his gun doesnt shoot moa with a box of factory ammo. 30 years ago he was jumping up and down if it did moa after a month of load workup.

[Swampman]

Jack's 270s were usually fitted with a 4X scope too.  He did pretty good with the setup he had.

[Scibaer]

it seems to me that the contruction of the stock and how its fits to the shooter is way more important to accuracy
then how the stock looks style wise.  i have rifles of different stock styles and they all can shoot darn good, but its up to me
to make that happen, regardless of stock styles.

[Brithunter]

yup its kind of why i allways smile at guys bragging on there pre64 winchesters. Most were 2moa guns on a good day. New ones are better fit and finished and shoot circles around the old ones. Today a guy is disapointed if his gun doesnt shoot moa with a box of factory ammo. 30 years ago he was jumping up and down if it did moa after a month of load workup.

Sorry Lloyd but I have to disagree on the fit and finish bit. As for precision in grouping well that's harder to say about as to really compare then one would need a stash of bullets from that period. One thing we  can say fairly safely is that bullets are generally better now than 50 years ago. No matter how fine a rifle if you put junk and poor quality bullets through it the precision in grouping will more than likely suffer.


  The last new rifles I looked at in the shop I am sad to say that the fit and finish was less than impressive however I cannot say that about the price tag  . Converted in USD the tag price would be just under 3K at $2887 USD so not exactly a budget model. The bolt felt rough when I worked the action the wood while quite nicely grained felt dry and seemed to lack the final coat of finish A helluva lot of modern guns have a bead basted finish tot he metal marketed as a desirable anti reflective finish .................... but what they really mean it's cheap and quick to do and hides blemishes in the metals surface so no polishing required.


Now while I cannot comment on the Pre 64 Winchesters never have shot one I can say that even though I am not a bench shooter and there are plenty of better shots out there than me getting MOA or there about's has not been a problem with most of my old BSA's. One has not been so accommodating, funnily enough the one shown in the photo, but as I don't know it's full history I will just, if I get the chance, keep working with it and see what is what. It's as it came from the factory in the mid 1960's and I have not checked the condition of the bedding. Just cleaned the rifle then tried it with a couple of loads I had on hand. It really needs a few more loads tried through it..

[size=78%] [/size]

[SHOOTALL]

I get it ! today we can get accurate rifles with out going the custom route !
But would add bullets have also improved ! 

[George Foster]

It has always been said that 90% of the accuracy of a rifle is in the bullet used.  I think this is a true statement, there is no question the bullets of today are better then they were 50yrs ago.

[Lloyd Smale]

All i can say is lay a new featherweight side by side with a pre 64 featherweight and look at the wood quality, fit and finish and the bluing quality and youll see that the finest model 70s ever build are being built today. No, there not cheap. But back in the day a pre 64 win was probably double the price of a new 722 rem too. they were considered a premium rifle back then and winchester is trying to recapture that market with the new ones. If you want cheap buy a savage or a base remington. the markets so flooded with cheap bolt guns that winchester decided to go more up scale with theres.

[George Foster]

I love the new Winchester featherweights and they are no more expensive then a Rem CDL which I also love.  In the 90's I worked up loads for a standard weight Mod70 270 which was a pre 64 with 130 and 150gr bullets using IMR4350 and the best loads for each bullet weight averaged 1/2" or better three shot groups.  That is as good as you can expect from any sporter weight rifle made today.  The pre 64 was unaltered in any manner so it didn't then and doesn't today have any warts on it.

[Brithunter]

All i can say is lay a new featherweight side by side with a pre 64 featherweight and look at the wood quality, fit and finish and the bluing quality and youll see that the finest model 70s ever build are being built today. No, there not cheap. But back in the day a pre 64 win was probably double the price of a new 722 rem too. they were considered a premium rifle back then and winchester is trying to recapture that market with the new ones. If you want cheap buy a savage or a base remington. the markets so flooded with cheap bolt guns that winchester decided to go more up scale with theres.

Lloyd,




     As already pointed out I have never seen a real pre 64 and I have not seen the new Winchesters either so I have to go by what i do have and the BSA Regent and Majestic certainly have superior fit and finish compared to the new rifles I see on the racks in the gunshop.