Hello All !

Has anyone had any experience with the newer Win FWT compact in .308 ?

I was looking for how well it shot out of the box and how you felt regarding weight, slim stock profile and barrel length of 20".

Additionally, how the 13" LOP felt while shooting and was the recoil noticeably more than the standard profile rifles.

I'm getting a little older and lighter things to pack in the woods, including the rifle, seems like a good idea

I just purchased a FWT compact in .308, installed a nice 1/2" recoil pad spacer to get the 13.5" LOP I wanted. Now just a little range time !!

Any opinions on the compact would be appreciated,

Thanks

Sooner

Never had the pleasure of handling the newer Win FWT Compact Sooner...

But if : ("I just purchased a FWT compact in .308")...why don't you tell us !?

Shooter,

I sure wish I could but I haven't had the chance to get it to the range. I have the rifle cleaned and have mounted a DNZ one piece mount. My problem is, I'm waiting on my new scope to get back from Leupold (long story). I may just mount the Nikon Pro staff on it I got in a package deal from Savage last month on a 10XP TH 308 and go shoot next week. I'll log back on and give a range report whenever I get to the range,

take care !! Sooner

Looking forward to the range report Sooner...

The topic and posts by Sooner 44 are of great interest to me. I have a wood stocked Model 70 compact in .243 Winchester. The Model 70 FWT Compact is a great .308 rifle for field work for older hunters. I am over 70 years old and also own a .243 Ruger Hawkeye with a Black Laminate stock. The Ruger is a lovely little rifle. The 16.5 inch barrel though makes a flame thrower and the report is quite violent.

The .20 Compact Winchester is a MUCH better barrel length. Our research indicates that in the first foot of barrel much of the powder is burned especially in a round like the .308. However 16.5 is a little short. The short barrel might be fine in the woods but it is no plains rifle. I also have recently posted a Model 70 Ultimate Shadow SS (my Ruger is SS and has the black laminate stock with no checkpiece) and that is actually my preference in barrel length for Model 70s in the .222 Remington to 30-06 range.

The .308 compacts I have shot on the range for many rounds with from 20 inch barrels down to 16.5. I look forward to finding what YOUR results on the range and actual hunting. I have sold ALL of my 26 inch barrel rifles as the are too cumbersome for me or my son or grandsons.

Last comment is that the Model 70 FWT Compact is VERY hard to find at dealers. This to me is really BAD. Why? other brands are pumping out MANY lightweight and poorly decked out rifles that are to me almost trash compared to the Model 70 FWT Compact. I ask dealers their opinion. They think the new Model 70s are better than the competitors. They say Remington Model 700s are really slipping.

Just confirming this responds to a relatively recent post... This is no test! (An inside joke.)

First as to the current Thread commentary concerning barrel length… For me, generally, 20” is a ‘ sweet spot minimum’ and that excluding such as the traditionally dedicated long range chamberings where 26” is actually fine. Below 20” - the ‘short & handy’ category, only such as 30-30 Win/35 Rem genre and smaller cartridges. (I admit to having an H&R Shikari 45-70 which I capriciously cut the barrel from about its original 24” to 16.5”. In a single shot top break configuration, extremely compact! It breathes about a meter of fire beyond muzzle with discharge. Here in bone dry SoCal, likely a felony to shoot were the fact ever known!)

Now to discuss the several closely related Winchesters in the category of this Thread: the “Classic Compact”, the “Compact” and the “Featherweight Compact”; all are the reintroduced Controlled Round Feed genre with the original Classic Compact springing from the late nineties. A reference to the Winchester Website reflects listings for the latter two models. The original late nineties “Classic” perhaps being a bit too ‘classic’ to include; that even within the Winchester mantle of “Discontinued Models”. (So much for “Gone but not forgotten!”)

I believe the following generalizations apply to the Compact genre. The Classic Compact and the Compact share great similarities Including a slightly reduced stock dimensions reflecting an approximate 13 inch length of pull. My Classic wears steel bottom metal. Just a presumption the successor Compact likely also sports steel. The Featherweight Compact utilizes alloy; such per the Winchester Website describing the current production model of that name. (Which “Featherweight” designation would also parallel the pre 64 “Featherweight” version with its employment of such alloy bottom metal.) From experience I’m a fan of steel in terms of field use vis a vis susceptibility to scratching. Also whether the latter two models might incorporate the newer FN trigger system is unknown to me.

I find my Classic Compact (personal favorite 7mm 08 chambering), purchased used, a well-built quality rifle. The trigger is entirely acceptable with perhaps a five or six pound crisp break. This original model was allegedly introduced in the late nineties and the serial number of mine suggests such proximate vintage. (That though with any USRA ‘mix & match’ serial, such estimation a crap shoot.)

Below I’ve included several references perhaps of interest. The first two are within the Winchester Website. The first there with basic information concerning the discontinued “Compact”; the second with presumptively the current production model “Compact Featherweight”. The third reference, likely the most interesting and also from the Web, is of a “Gun Test” article from 2013; there comparing/evaluating the Compact Featherweight to 2 generally similar rifles. (A simple caveat here that this issue is ‘fronted’ on the Web by Winchester not GT magazine!)

My net, net is that I very much enjoy my little Classic Compact in a favorite 7mm08 chambering. Although at 6’2”, it’s a considerably short stock for me and prolonged shooting not a happy experience. Yet my willowy 5’ 10” wife finds it OK! (Familiarized with such as the Kalashnikov in H/S compulsory military training during the latter eighties, perhaps not entirely surprising!)

All said, with the disclaimer that I'm essentially a re 64 Model 70 'accumulator' and here another…
Just my take

http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/ ... mid=535017

http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/ ... mid=535201

http://www.winchesterguns.com/support/f ... e-only.pdf

OK then...

I would certainly agree with the take that 20" is a minimum barrel length for reducing flame out the barrel and excessive muzzle blast. To it is greatly influenced by the caliber and .308 is ideal for being able to use in a short barrel and the military use and others demonstrates this. A .264 Winchester would not work well with a 20" barrel. My youngest grandson is 6'2" and finds my Ruger Hawkeye compact laminate .243 and all other big guys express amazement at how well that 16.5 barrel rifle with a short length of pull stock fits them. It still is more of a girl's gun. I do think to the 20" barrel rifles are more of a 200 yard max rifle compared to say even a 22 inch rifle barrel. Jack O'Connor greatly believed this. Anyone who has closely read his books would agree with this. I have an autographed copy of his 1970 The Hunting Rifle.

Shooter 13s AR 15 in .223 Remington is another rifle that was set up by the military to work well with a short barrel. So is the almost now forgotten but GREAT .222 Remington (there is a post on this forum about that!

Good Day all !

Been some time now since my first post, but you know how it goes when you get old and busy

I have had the chance to get my Win 70 FW compact to the range several times since my post.
As stated I changed the LOP to 13.60, DMZ mounts and mounted a Luiepold VXII 3X9X40.

I have not shot any factory loads through the rifle to date, however I have put several hand loads through the rifle. When starting out I used Varget, 4064 & 4895. I tried the Hornady 165gr SST, Sierra 165 Game King BT, and several other bullets at mid-range powder charges and decided to stay with Varget until I maxed out on powder charge. Due to the 1/12 twist rate I dropped down to the 150gr bullet weight. I may try a flat base bullet, or one with more bearing surface in the future.
I will comment on the Varget loads, because I have had little time to work up loads for the other powders/bullet combinations.

All shots were fired off a bag at 100 yards

I started at 43gr Varget at COAL of 2.735 using Hornady 150gr SST, I was not impressed with the groups and moved on.
I went to 43.5 Varget at COAL of 2,783, groups tightened up a bit, but still not impressive. I worked up in .5 gr increments with the groups improving until I reached 45.0gr of Varget at the 2.783 COAL, still using the 150 SST Hornady bullet. 45gr loads averaged 2" groupings.

At 46.0gr of Varget the groups were consistent at an average of 1.3" when comparing 6, 3 shot strings. The worst group measured at 1.50 @ 100 yards.
I am at 46.5gr now, and will try to hit the range this weekend to see if this will be the magic load

The rifle handles well, recoil is not bad, but the lighter weight of the rifle is noticeable when trying to steady the rifle "off-hand". The action is very smooth, trigger is very nice with no creep and breaks likes glass. Trigger pull is at around 4 pounds (for hunting purposes) measured with a crude Zebco fishing scale. The pull is fine by me, I like it.

I have noticed improved accuracy with the higher powder charge, however breaking in the barrel may play a part in this as well. At this time I feel things are going my way and I just got to find the right load, which should happen within the next year at the speed I move. I really like the rifle, fit and finish of the rifle is excellent, and made in the USA quality is apparent.

Have a good day !

Welcome back Sooner.

I no longer field or range. Never loaded. Therefore, I enjoy related narratives. Thanks for doing this and sharing

Thanks for the great range report Sooner...very detailed !!

I have a newer Model 70 in 270win Its a FWT but not a compact and it is a real tack driver