pre-64 winchester
I know this has probably been asked and answered many times, but being new to this forum, I thought I would chance it. My brother has an old Winchester lever action that is mechanically good, but has had some neglect and is sporting some rust and needs a blue job bad. He told me it was mine for the asking. I would be more inclined to spend $125 on a blue job if it were a pre-64. Question: Is there an easy way to tell the date or approximate date of manufacture?
0
-
What is the difference between pre-64 and post-64? 0 -
A BUNCH, POST '64 WAS RE-ENGINIERED FOR CHEAPER PRODUCTION, MOST NOTABLE WAS THE LACK OF THE 'CLAW' TYPE EXTRACTOR. 0 -
Any thing Post-63' was engineered by the bean counter's, not the engineer's. A big emphasis was put on cost and quality reduction, and nevermind quality materials, or workmanship.
This was not just in their Model 70's, but in all of their product lines.
Best0 -
the best lesson is learned from looking. pre 64 winchester firearms were fine examples of American hands-on craftsmanship. Post 64 are examples of mass production and cost cutting. the model 70 is a good display. hold a pre 64 in one hand and a post 64 in the other and you have answered your own question. 0 -
Bob and Bert can best address this, but the main changes were to ease (read: cheapen) production. The control feed long extractor system was dropped, the cut checkering on the wood was replaced with pressed checkering, the metalurgy on some parts was changed, relatively little hand work was needed on the new guns when compared to the pre-64s. 0 -
Short answer: Around 700 to $1,000! 0 -
The correct terminology is "pre-64" or "post-63".
In the Spring of 1963, Winchester shutdown their old production lines, retooled, and in early 1964 resumed production using stamped and cast parts (for the Model 94). The number of required milling operations was significantly reduced, and the fit tolerances were opened up. Many older models were dropped from production in late 1963, and new (cheaper to produce) models were introduced.0 -
If you look at the post'63 model 70, you see it is a big step toward a Remington 700. Which, everybody has touted as the most accurate rifle off the shelf for the longest time. IMO, the Win 70 is a better rifle than the 700 simply because for accuracy it sits on a square base, not a round one. And for extraction it still has a better system than the piss-poor one Remington first installed in their 721/722 models. Barrels went to being hammer forged instead of cut rifled. According to Winchester, this cost more for the initial purchase of the machines, but gives better accuracy. I beg to differ with their thoughts on that as all the records are owned by cut-rifled barrels. However, in their defense, it is easier to make more consistently accurate barrels in mass production, using hammer forged instead of cut rifled barrels.
For all that is said against them, and as much as I prefer the Mauser style claw, the post '63 model 70 is a good rifle.
I didn't know it until recently, but the most and WORST changes were made to the Model 94. Quality suffered badly with this rifle line. Along with processes being reduced significantly.
But, while it is nice to have a very tight fitting gun, the inherent design of the rifle (including chamberings) really kind of limited it out to 200 yards. With the new processes in place, the model 94 truly was only a 200 yd. rifle. Unlike the model 70 which, with it's changes, was still a 1000+ yd. gun.
The whole thing is kind of tough to say, really. Bean counters may have saved the company or they may possibly could have cost it millions of dollars in not only revenue but interest in stock in the company. Needless to say it was a huge change throughout the company. Every single gun line or area of interest was changed from a hand made (with notable quality) to a streamlined part stamped economic version of what it once was.
As a testament to the marketability Winchester enjoyed, look at how much a pre'64 brings vs. a post '63 or any other firearm of that era in valuation.[;)]
Edit:
quote:Originally posted by Hangfire
The post 63 Winchesters were an insult to Winchester enthusiasts.. The shop I worked in never stocked a new Winchester from that point on.. The Remington rep that came to the store was ecstatic.. He actually carried the new Winchesters on his route, in case anyone needed a reminder of the garbage..
They were insulted by Winchester?, Who still fielded a better product than Remington. But, Remington's were better how?
There are three ways a company markets a product. Price based, Quality based or Service based. Winchester initially made their money on Quality based. Remington gave that up 20 years earlier when they last produced the model 720. According to my wife, and the theory of quality basing your product (line), then changing to a price based product will leave you screwed for a while. Winchester was screwed for a while as every gun rag in the country vilified them for doing it. Funny though how gun rags don't pay the bills, yet they ALWAYS have a better idea of what to offer to the paying customer. It's about like opening a Tiffany's in Kansas City. You may or may not make a go of it. But, if that's not the way the market is where you're at, quit wasting your time and money and situate yourself to what is going to best make you the money. That is what Winchester did and they have never been forgiven for it by the media (circus). Apparently, it worked though because they remained in business and even remained at a higher price than Remington.
And, as I said before, with a better product, IMO.0 -
The post 63 Winchesters were an insult to Winchester enthusiasts.. The shop I worked in never stocked a new Winchester from that point on.. The Remington rep that came to the store was ecstatic.. He actually carried the new Winchesters on his route, in case anyone needed a reminder of the garbage..
Well, sandwarrior, if you feel Winchester fielded a better product line, and marketing strategy than Remington did, in 1964, so be it.. I really have no comment, other than that wasn't my experience..0 -
Winchester started going downhill in about 1961(stamped checkering). Fell off the cliff in 64. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by cartod
Winchester started going downhill in about 1961. Fell off the cliff in 64.
But they are still here...and even eventually returned to manufacturing the pre'64 style action.
Hangfire,
No question, it was a sad day when Winchester quit making the Mauser style action. It was a great action and well made. By what I've been able to ascertain, it was a needed, but hated thing. As I stated in my first post though, I do prefer pre'64's. But, I also understand why they made the move. Remington was more fortunate in that they made their move under the cover of darkness so to speak. The 720 ceased manufacture before the end of WWII. When the war ended and Remington had to tool back up to sell to the public, they came up with the 721/722 idea and it took off. But, if you compare manufacturing process to manufacturing process and bells and whistles to bells and whistles, Winchester was still the better rifle.
The problem here was the branding. Winchester went with a quality based product vs. Remington's price based and a whole generation got to enjoy it in the good years. When it went away people were pissed. But what could they say. They, the consumer, were the ones not buying enough of Winchester's product. From what I understand financially (as I wasn't there either, I was born that year), they had to make the changes. The buying populace expected hunting rifles for cheap. When they expect cheap...they get 'cheap'. In short, it's like Winchester was producing Cadillacs and Lincolns. They then went to making....jeeps. Which one are you going to need for hunting???0 -
I say there must be substancial differenc in quality if a 1963 production is worth so much more than a 1965 model as determined the free market. I thinking I have 1000's of rounds out of Remington 700/721/722 in the last 45 years. Only one 721 in a 270W would fail to extract a loaded round, however it would extract a fired round. I was 10 and it was the first time I ever loaded my own big game ammo. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by sandwarrior
quote:Originally posted by cartod
Winchester started going downhill in about 1961. Fell off the cliff in 64.
But they are still here...and even eventually returned to manufacturing the pre'64 style action.
That is where you are wrong... Winchester is not "still here". "Winchester" got out of the gun making business in late 1980. It was the U.S. Repeating Arms Co. (U.S.R.A.Co.) that began fixing what was wrong with the "Winchester" name (even though they only leased the trademarked name). Today it is FN (Belgians) that manufacture the Model 70 in South Carolina. And it is the Japanese (under FN guidance) that is making the new Model 94. "Winchester" died a slow and painful death as a gunmaking entity in late 1980 as a result of the post-1963 debacle.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
13 comments