I've beaten a badly stuck case out of a Model 7 by driving the open bolt handle down on a wood bench. Hard. I'm sure someone could calculate the force of driving a 7 lb rifle down over 12" at say... 10% force? Enough anyway that I was 100% sure I was going to shear the soldered on handle off. Case came free, and the rifle is still in use with no ill effects. I will confess I was surprised at how hard a beating a Rem 7/700 bolt handle and extractor can take.
Controlled round feed real life benefits
- Thread starter Freyr_255
- Start date
I've beaten a badly stuck case out of a Model 7 by driving the open bolt handle down on a wood bench. Hard. I'm sure someone could calculate the force of driving a 7 lb rifle down over 12" at say... 10% force? Enough anyway that I was 100% sure I was going to shear the soldered on handle off. Case came free, and the rifle is still in use with no ill effects. I will confess I was surprised at how hard a beating a Rem 7/700 bolt handle and extractor can take.
Jeez, it's pretty obvious that you guys didn't spend a few decades reading the gun rags when you were younger. If you had, you would all know that one of the primary advantages of CRF is the ability to feed cartridges from magazine to chamber flawlessly...while hanging upside down in a tree! This is an exceptionally vital capability that is sorely lacking in many hunting rifles today.
Yeah...those old gun writers would stretch mighty far to come up with some of their pronouncements...and when one of them produced a gem like this, all the rest of them piled on like flies on a fresh dog turd. It had to be true; after all, they were experts...
Yeah...those old gun writers would stretch mighty far to come up with some of their pronouncements...and when one of them produced a gem like this, all the rest of them piled on like flies on a fresh dog turd. It had to be true; after all, they were experts...
While I own several CRF rifles, the majority of my Centerfires are push feed.
In 60+ years of shooting and hunting, I have had exactly zero issues with
either design. I have a large number of 700 Remingtons. My 6.5x55 Classic
is on it's 3rd barrel, and still has the original extractor intact and working fine.
To me, it is a non-issue. If I like the rifle, then I buy it: PF or CRF. Dave.
In 60+ years of shooting and hunting, I have had exactly zero issues with
either design. I have a large number of 700 Remingtons. My 6.5x55 Classic
is on it's 3rd barrel, and still has the original extractor intact and working fine.
To me, it is a non-issue. If I like the rifle, then I buy it: PF or CRF. Dave.
Jeez, it's pretty obvious that you guys didn't spend a few decades reading the gun rags when you were younger. If you had, you would all know that one of the primary advantages of CRF is the ability to feed cartridges from magazine to chamber flawlessly...while hanging upside down in a tree! This is an exceptionally vital capability that is sorely lacking in many hunting rifles today.
Yeah...those old gun writers would stretch mighty far to come up with some of their pronouncements...and when one of them produced a gem like this, all the rest of them piled on like flies on a fresh dog turd. It had to be true; after all, they were experts...
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
In my 35 plus years of messing with guns I have only replaced one broken CRF extractor lots of push feed rem ,win,Sako .Never really kept track but may be 10 or so .The only reason for replacing the crf one was an over load welded the brass in the chamber and the owner tried to open the bolt with a 2x4.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
People make a joke of dangerous game hunting, and I say this next bit realizing that’s not what this thread is about. But this thread is about the real world, and for surprisingly many here, that very much has been real. The worst I’ve experienced is bluff charges by Grizzlies. Hunted lion and buffalo up close over there but had nothing more than welcome tension at close range. It’s a whole different game when the animal has the capacity to bite back, and you’re in his territory, nothing between you and him. It’s not a fair fight and purposely so, we come with the distinct advantage, but you take every advantage you can get and CRF undeniably is one in that game. That sort of reasoning tends to influence, but not dictate, your gun selections from then on whether you’re hunting dangerous game at that point or not. I’ve had good push feeds, but I’ll always choose a CRF when a good option exists for the same job. Fortunately it’s rare one doesn’t.
x2.
My cheap, reliable, short barrel medium bore CRF camp rifle for where the big bears roam. Scope in QDs of course.
Most of the time it is degreased.
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
Considering the mauser 98 was designed for war time use in dirt and grime in the trenches it was expected that the soldiers would use what ever they had to free the bolt from a jam up, maybe the but end of a rifle, the extractor needed to be tough.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Could certainly see the argument there Buck, lower recoil, faster, more follow ups. Probably more reliable than the human if we step back and remove the bias.
I’m a double guy personally. Not going to try and tell anyone it’s the best way, it is however the way I’m most confident in. Two shots, don’t mess them up, but they’re guaranteed to be there.
But, this is a bolt thread, and for bolts I’ve stated my bias.
I’m a double guy personally. Not going to try and tell anyone it’s the best way, it is however the way I’m most confident in. Two shots, don’t mess them up, but they’re guaranteed to be there.
But, this is a bolt thread, and for bolts I’ve stated my bias.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
Reminding myself to not buy a Model 7 from you!
You usually don't get much time for even a second shot when that happens.
In the case of the Remingtons, the design improvement was in the breeching safety. The Remington is probably the best mass produced design from the standpoint of protecting the shooter in the event of a destructive overload, catastrophic case failure, etc. The Remington extractor design resulted from the need to completely enclose the cartridge head.
In the 1890s, when the Mauser design evolved, trench warfare would not have been much of a factor. Overall safety, reliability and durability certainly were. Also, consider that the manufacture of high pressure, smokeless powder, rimless ammunition was still in its infancy. A bomb proof extraction system was really important.
Just about every aspect of the Model 1898 action is deliberate design. Even safety breeching was incorporated. Cartridge case protrusion is minimized; while the claw extractor does prevent complete enclosure of the casehead, the action is designed in such a manner that any escaping gas is channeled, and the shooter protected. Compare the M98 with the cone breeched Springfield or its offspring, the Model 70. Controlled feed, but the case head is hanging out in the open air.
blasted_saber
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- A blue part of Ontario
I've never had an issue with either
Falconflyer
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Years ago I had an M70 push feed fail to extract a case out of the chamber after taking a shot at an antelope, good thing I didn't need a second shot. The extractor spring just got weak and a new one fixed the problem. I've also had a Wby MkV try to feed two rounds at once resulting in a lost opportunity at a moose. On another occasion with a different MkV, the round popped out of the magazine as I pushed the bolt forward but turned sideways so it was stuck between the bolt and front receiver ring resulting in a lost white tail.
In 40 something years of shooting and hunting I've never had an issue with a CRF action. Just my experience with both types.
In 40 something years of shooting and hunting I've never had an issue with a CRF action. Just my experience with both types.
