CRF vs Push Feed

I've got more than a few push-feeds and CRFs. When push comes to shove I prefer the CRF actions on serious and rough use hunting rifles where a spare isn't possible, and the push feeds seem to have taken over most of the varmint, target, close to home and long range spots.
 
Cleftwynd said:
That man was one dedicated dude, his determination and patience is legendary.
Click to expand...


Yes indeed. And it's funny how we obsess over tiny groups yet the best his rifle ever did was 2MOA at 100. It was shooting 24" at 1000 when it was brought back home, no doubt it was shot out. And he is making hits regularly at 500++++ yards!
 
medvedqc said:
if you have been in the Army or any kind of forces you will know that you just do not choose your tools: they re given to you and you adapt ...



it was already like that in the 80s, no doubt it didnt change ....

i do not see any defensive other than gunnutz over here ...

so using the sniper weapon as a reference ... in that case i will choose the dragunov ... ever shoot one?
Click to expand...

Yup and yup. Amazing how much guys can adapt when they have to. Love shooting the dragunov. Too bad we can't have em in this commie country.

The reason I mentioned the word "sniper" is because it seems when some think of precision rifle matches they usually think of bench rest. Yet, as I'm sure you know there are PRS matches that are more along the lines of a "sniper" down and dirty field match. Only reason I choose that word is to get across that type of match is totally opposite of bench rest .... yet both use basically the same type of rifles.

The bench guys often do single round feed (as someone else stated), I was clarifying however that the field guys are not. Same rifle, both push feed, one a "controlled environment", the other not at all .... yet it survives in both situations.

The Walberg reference was to make fun of the entire discussion.

If I need to explain it beyond that .......
 
Well...if you hang around this site long enough you will certainly be informed that every rifle you own is a 'POS' and ought to send to the junkyard before it 'puts your eye out!'
:) :) .... it is certainly confidence inspiring..sometimes I envy guys who don't have a computer..and just carry on getting their deer every year with their 303 sport enfield and iron sights. . Or the guys way up north that use their old. 222 rem Savage (with no bluing!) to knock down everything they hunt!
 
AP said:
Well...if you hang around this site long enough you will certainly be informed that every rifle you own is a 'POS' and ought to send to the junkyard before it 'puts your eye out!'
:) :) .... it is certainly confidence inspiring..sometimes I envy guys who don't have a computer..and just carry on getting their deer every year with their 303 sport enfield and iron sights. . Or the guys way up north that use their old. 222 rem Savage (with no bluing!) to knock down everything they hunt!
Click to expand...

HA.... no kidding.

If I were totally new to this and actually trying to learn from scratch I'd be convinced you couldn't possibly kill a deer with anything smaller than a .300 win mag, and anything larger you better start looking for a .50 BMG that weighs only 5 pounds.

Lots of GREAT advice on here but what you have to sift through to get to it ... I tell ya ..
 
Cleftwynd said:
Benchrest actions are typically single fed, basically for all intents and purposes single shot rifles. My point was using them as evidence for either push feed, or CRF being better than the other makes no sense. .
Click to expand...

Nobody said they were better. Or worse. Just that for the highest accuracy all choose push feeds. If that is better to you fine it isn't to me its just a trait. You could single feed a CRF or mag fee or belt feed or feed it however you want you still don't see them on target rifles. Capeesh?
 
I believe that earlier Sako's were all PF. However, in its ads, Sako says that the new model 85's are CRF.
(1) Is this really true? .. are the 85's really CRF?
(2) And even if so, wouldn't you rather have a PF model 75?

I've owned lots of Sakos, new and old .. NONE had a feeding issue, MOST had serious extraction issues though!
Also, Kimbers all have CRF .. and the Montana's are the ONLY rifles I've owned that had feeding issues, but (so far) NO extraction issues.

My PF Remy's, and CRF Winchester M70's, and CRF Ruger Hawkeye's all have had NO feeding or extraction issues.
But having said that, I haven't tried them "upside down". (but hey, my glasses would fall off and I wouldn't be able to see and issues anyway).

:)
 
Salty said:
Nobody said they were better. Or worse. Just that for the highest accuracy all choose push feeds. If that is better to you fine it isn't to me its just a trait. You could single feed a CRF or mag fee or belt feed or feed it however you want you still don't see them on target rifles. Capeesh?
Click to expand...


CRF is no less accurate than PF, PF is a convenience that lends itself to single feeding. Sure, you can modify a M98 extractor to snap over the rim of your brass, but even then sometimes it will fail even when done right because it wasn't designed for that. PF was, and IMHO failing to extract at the bench is far less important than on a big game hunt, let alone a dangerous game hunt. However as mentioned already, if you are hunting dangerous game with sketchy ammo/handloads, you deserve to become Leo's feces.

I am not saying one is better than the other either, I am simply saying using the custom benchrest actions as an argument for PF in hunting rifles makes no sense. Heck, some of them don't even have ejectors....
 
-Savage- said:
I believe that earlier Sako's were all PF. However, in its ads, Sako says that the new model 85's are CRF.
(1) Is this really true? .. are the 85's really CRF?
(2) And even if so, wouldn't you rather have a PF model 75?

I've owned lots of Sakos, new and old .. NONE had a feeding issue, MOST had serious extraction issues though!
Also, Kimbers all have CRF .. and the Montana's are the ONLY rifles I've owned that had feeding issues, but (so far) NO extraction issues.

My PF Remy's, and CRF Winchester M70's, and CRF Ruger Hawkeye's all have had NO feeding or extraction issues.
But having said that, I haven't tried them "upside down". (but hey, my glasses would fall off and I wouldn't be able to see and issues anyway).
Go for laser surgery, then you can shoot upside down and see clearly CRF is better.
Click to expand...
 
Ultimately. to me it's very simple ....

If I really like the rifle enough to purchase it I've never cared whether it's PF or CRF.

I'd take it either way.
 
I've had both and like both. I prefer the rem style action so I own more PF than CRF, but I have still seen the various conditions and causes of failures in both systems.

It's a moot point to me, go with the action style that feels right to you.
 
AP said:
sometimes I envy guys who don't have a computer..and just carry on getting their deer every year with their 303 sport enfield and iron sights. . Or the guys way up north that use their old. 222 rem Savage (with no bluing!) to knock down everything they hunt!
Click to expand...
I do not, or I would still have no idea better rifles exist (ones that suit my needs better at least) Many gun stores do not carry premium stuff and it has to be ordered.

Unfortunately, many on this site are quick to turn their nose at any rifle with a substantial price tag without ever using one in the field or even handling one, Ignorance is bliss I guess.
 
madashell said:
Yup and yup. Amazing how much guys can adapt when they have to. Love shooting the dragunov. Too bad we can't have em in this commie country.

The reason I mentioned the word "sniper" is because it seems when some think of precision rifle matches they usually think of bench rest. Yet, as I'm sure you know there are PRS matches that are more along the lines of a "sniper" down and dirty field match. Only reason I choose that word is to get across that type of match is totally opposite of bench rest .... yet both use basically the same type of rifles.

The bench guys often do single round feed (as someone else stated), I was clarifying however that the field guys are not. Same rifle, both push feed, one a "controlled environment", the other not at all .... yet it survives in both situations.

The Walberg reference was to make fun of the entire discussion.

If I need to explain it beyond that .......
Click to expand...

i didnt knew about PRS thank you very much. starting to read and seems very interesting ...
 
medvedqc said:
i didnt knew about PRS thank you very much. starting to read and seems very interesting ...
Click to expand...


You're quite welcome.

Oh yeah medvedqc, those type of comps are pretty hardcore and interesting. Extreme field shooting positions, changing locations, difficult scenarios. The idea is closer to real life situations (not for the average guy but you know what I mean). Maybe field vs bench is a better way to describe it.

Most of the guys are using we'll say GA Precision type rifles just like the bench rest PRS guys and almost all push feed. These dudes often get pretty down and dirty yet their rifles get through it. It's difficult and fun. To me the "field" type comps have more akin to real life hunter application than bench comps.

This brings up a good question ...

Which feed type is better in the field to clear when you DO have a problem ?

Most are citing CRF for double feed issues but what if you get your action full of mud or sand or snow? Which is better ? I don't know the answer to that one either but I've dealt with both and survived .

I'm guessing most hunters haven't flushed out their $2000 Winchester CRF or their $2500 custom 700 PF action with a canteen of water or a thing of lighter fluid to keep it going. Been there. I cringed at the thought too but it happens ! Had an M14 action completely filled with gravel once .... I mean completely filled ... you either go home and pull out the cleaning kit or dump a full canteen of water in the thing and keep going ....
 
Not a canteen of water but a creek. M70 bolt is easy to disassemble so pull it out, pop open the floor plate and rinse in the creek. Make sure chamber and barrel are cleaned out, do the same for the bolt. Reassemble the bolt, put it back in and you are in business.
 
Better to be able to wash out the garbage with water than to have your hunt shut down because your rifle and bolt don't disassemble in the field.
 
I'll chime in and say that I love both. My PF Tikka's work great...almost too great as they sling those spent cases hard into the side of my receiver. My CRF Mauser 98's have all been faultless. In the end, potato-potatoe. I would trust either with my life, but the latter are the first to come out of a burning house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom