Win XPR vs. 70

[tarosean]

What are the differences in the XPR vs. the Model 70?
Im guessing the XPR is the value line (?) but what does that entail?

 

[SCgman]

I have an SC FN model 70 but have only read ads about the XPR. The xpr is certainly cheaper $$'s. I doubt the xpr is CRF like the 70. I believe the xpr is detachable box Mag. I do not know if the xpr cylindrical action or flat bottomed like a 70; the pricing would suggest not.

Anyhow, I look forward to the ensuing discussion from the mod 70 diehards. A question like this generally yields a colorful conversation.

 

[Robert]

The XPR is the budget minded offering from Winchester. It lacks some of the features of the M70 like the three position safety, which was replaced with a sliding safety on the XPR. The detachable box mag on the XPR holds 3 rounds while the M70 holds five, for 30-06. The bolts are visually different and Winchester even states that the XPR is easier to machine. Read, not an M70 action. Winchester makes no mention, that I could find, to the XPR being either CRF or push feed. So I assume it is push. The price is about $400 less (MSRP) on the XPR compared to the M70 Sporter.

 

[jmr40]

The XPR is one of the new budget rifles very similar in quality to the Savage Axis, Ruger American, and the Remington 783. Most all of these rifles shoot very good, and will serve most casual shooters well. They certainly cut some corners on quality of finish, have cheap stocks and are not designed for long term hard use. I refer to all of them as disposable rifles. And I don't mean that in a bad way necessarily. I consider Glocks and other plastic pistols the same and I own and use Glocks as well as a couple of the "disposable" rifles.

What I mean by that is that they aren't meant to be a prized possession that will be passed down to the grandkids. But a functional "tool" that can be used for a lifetime for most shooters. When something breaks on most of them the cost to repair is often more than the value of the gun.

The Winchester 70 or Remington 700 and others are well made guns with more attention to detail, heavier duty parts, better finish, better quality stocks etc. that most of our heirs would love to own. But for the most part the cheaper guns shoot every bit as well. And for the guy who only shoots a box or 2 of ammo a year will last a lifetime.

The XPR is a Pushfeed design BTW. To be honest I do prefer Controlled Round Feeding, but concede that for 99% of shooters it is never going to be a factor. I just like having it and the harsher conditions you hunt in the greater the odds it'll be a factor.

 

[Gtscotty]

The safety on the XPR is similar in concept to the safeties on the X-Bolt and AB3. It has the simplicity of a two position safety with the bolt being locked when in safe, but it also has a separate tab that when depressed, unlocks the bolt while the rifle is still safe. While I like the M70 design better overall, the two position safety with an unlock tab is my favorite kind of safety for how I use my rifles.

 

[tarosean]

thanks for the info gentlemen.

 

[peacebutready]

The XPR is one of the new budget rifles very similar in quality to the Savage Axis, Ruger American, and the Remington 783. Most all of these rifles shoot very good, and will serve most casual shooters well. They certainly cut some corners on quality of finish, have cheap stocks and are not designed for long term hard use. I refer to all of them as disposable rifles. And I don't mean that in a bad way necessarily. I consider Glocks and other plastic pistols the same and I own and use Glocks as well as a couple of the "disposable" rifles.

The issue of durability is one I've wondered about for the so-called budget rifles. Anyone hear anything about budget rifles with high round counts or being hauled around a lot? What typically breaks on these rifles?