The top one is not even close to $700 prettier than the Walnut. Plus the walnut is lighter, seems like a no-brainer to me.

Curly Maple done right….

Follow your Gut

Walnut 👌🏽

Sounds like your talking about the sub-par m70 that produced post 64. Unless you order a gun from the custom shop, new guns are mass produced with parts sourced from all over the world. Although the technology is absolutely better now its not being applied to production firearms. The pre 64s were hand fited and "built", which you can still get today but you'll pay a premium. Never heard of accuracy issues maybe operator error, load issue, or shot out? After all the pre 64 was Hathcocks weapon of choice and its impressive what they back then with terrible optics. So I guess as with anything else performance is only as good as the users abilities.

Snyde, your living in fantasy land. With proper machining hand fitting is not needed. Hand fitting is not as accurate as CNC. Not even close. It was the best they had in 1963 but this is 2022.

Both those guns are beautiful Bruce.Time to flip a coin!

I agree cnc is more accurate and technology has advanced. My opinion is the pre 64s are much higher quality than run of the mill mass produced modern firearms and the prices reflect that. Alot of hand fitting and machining is still done on custom high end firearms for accuracy. But at the end of the day it's up to the shooter, if you were closer we could have a friendly competition, my pre 64 vs your new m70.

A good buddy of mine, sadly now deceased, was a huge fan of pre-64 M70s and owned several of them. He brought a .300 H&H on an Idaho bear hunt a few years back. I handled it and, to my surprise given the reputation of the early M70s, I found it clunky and very heavy. I would not own one, at least not in that caliber, but then I am 5'8" and he was about 6'4". The weight didn't bother him at all and the rifle fit him much better.

I have read that the "rifleman's rifle" reputation of the pre-64s was based more on the functional reliability of the controlled feed action rather than accuracy, and that accuracy was mediocre at best in comparison with quality bolt guns of modern manufacture. This was some gun writer's opinion, not something that I have experience with, but I believe it to be true given the improvements made in recent decades. The new M70 also has the controlled feed action plus the advantage of recent improvements in accuracy.

Prices reflect collector value. Old newhouses are pricey too.

I like the walnut SG featherweight...in fact I bought one a few years back in 7x57 ...
I have older model 70 featherweight rifles , but never knew they made super grade featherweights ..
When I found one in a gun store , I traded in a ruger #1 to get it ...had to have it .. :-)
Very nice rifle ....great wood ..shot a buck with it last year ...

Lightweight in walnut would be my choice. Maple is pretty but I like darker wood and the cost difference nails it. Like them both though.

Bottom gun would be my choice.

This is how I see it

Don't worry they seem to gain a pound a year when you pass 70 been my experience.

Thanks.Plan on having a few thousand rounds.

Choices, choices

I have the same rifle and love it.

Danny I respectfully disagree. You speak of what you don’t know. If CNC is more accurate then why aren’t benchrest rifles built using this technology? They aren’t you know. They are built one at a time using a precision lathe that has been leveled and squared with a machinist level. The actions are built one at a time on precision milling machines one at a time using the same extremely accurate .0001” measuring instruments. All of this “hand “ fitting is the reason why a Stolle Panda benchrest action will cost twice as much as the complete m70 super grade. Given your position, ask yourself why CNC. mass production rifles are not used in the rarefied atmosphere of benchrest competition. Because they aren’t even close! Why are the best BR bbls “hand lapped “?