Browning FN Mauser or Winchester 70 Pre 64 ?

[DoctorDeath]

I would like your opinion on which of these two rifles would be more desirable ....a Browning Safari FN Mauser made in 1967 in a 270 cal and about 90% ...or a Winchester model 70 pre 64 made in 1963 in a 243 cal and about 95% ....I ask because I have an opportunity of owning either but not sure which would be a better investment.
[/align]dd[/align]

[RLoving1]

That is a tough call there! The Winchester is after all a pre 64,and you don't see many Safari grades around either...maybe get a good package deal on the pair? If the Mdl 70 was in 250-3000 caliber I would say that one,the 243's are more common.The Safari might get the edge here though...too bad it's not a belted caliber... go with the 270.Is the pre 64 a feather weight or standard weigh?

[thndrchiken]

DD what will you be using it for. Either way you go you are getting an excellent platform to build upon. I have an Interarms MK X made by FN and love it. Then again I do have a preference for the mauser action. What are your intentions in buying, just another gun or to have an action to customize?

[DoctorDeath]

Heck guy's I will just be using it to deer hunt with here in west Kentucky ...I went ahead and traded for the Winchester model 70 ...I most like got took but I do not plan on selling this one anyway ...Ive never hunted with a 243 but have read a lot of good things about that cal. and deer hunting ...I do need to get a different butt pad for it any idea where I can order one...heres a few pics ..

dd

[oldelkhunter]

DD there is a gunshop around the corner that has had the same safari grade FN browning in 270 for years on consignment. He is asking 1300 for it and it looks like the day it left the factory. There isn't a worker in a gun factory nowadays that even knows how to put one of these babies together and takes pride in the workmanship like the guy did that built this one. I am sure it will go to a good home one of these days just not not mine. I think it would be a tossup between the 70 and the FN myself.

[SwampCollie]

DD I think you made the right move.

I am probably mistaking, but for some odd reason 1967 sticks out in my mind as the year that Browning used those damn salt treated stocks. Might have been 1973... I don't know, I wasn't alive. But I have seen a few examples of otherwise lovely Brownings that have taken a fair amount of rust from those salt enfused stocks.

[oldelkhunter]

I think it was a few years they did that treatment and the early 70's sticks out. Some of those guns were worst then others but if it was a bad one................

[CalHunter]

I'd buy both if you can afford it. You won't regret it and could always get your money back if you needed to.

[eldeguello]

ORIGINAL: DoctorDeath

I would like your opinion on which of these two rifles would be more desirable ....a Browning Safari FN Mauser made in 1967 in a 270 cal and about 90% ...or a Winchester model 70 pre 64 made in 1963 in a 243 cal and about 95% ....I ask because I have an opportunity of owning either but not sure which would be a better investment.

[/align]dd
[/align]

Browning Safari - for one reason. Although there is certainly nothing wrong with the pre-64 M70, it is a modified M98 Mauser design. Nothing that has been done to the basic M98 Mauser configuration thus far hasbeen an improvement. Granted, the M98 bolt handle and safety had to be changed somewhat to accomodatea scope, the Browning incorporates those slight changes. In all other respects, it is still Paul Mauser's perfect bolt-action rifle.....pure and simple!

In addition, pre-64's are way overpriced these days!

[Doe Dumper]

WoW!! Are those old Brownings nice guns! I dunno that I could hunt with one.... If you are gonna hunt with it I like the 70 but if its a cabinet queen Id take the Browning....of course if I could Id get both