My thinking for a first hunting rifle

[Mr.Rigpig]

I'd consider covering more of the rim a plus, no matter how hard or easy the extraction, wouldn't you? The design of the full length extractor isn't going to want to spring out away from the rim during extraction, particularly if it doesn't spring over while attempting to load it.

Have heard of rims getting ripped off. In these cases did it actually extract?

I suppose anything can fail, though I recall more problems with push feed, and never hear about full length claw extractor problems.

Was wondering about the Zastava CRF rifles, and seriously thinking of getting one in .375 H&H for a few years now. Did you end up with a good one when it was all said and done?



Nope. As I believe I've said, I prefer the simplicity because of less chance of failure, not because I hear of a lot.


Is it worse? Less safe? Why?

There's a lot to like about Ruger M77. I appreciate that they went to a 3 position wing type safety. A superior design, like Winchester's. Are they actually a CRF now? I have a tang safety model, and it wasn't until I played with it a little that I realized it wasn't grabbing the rim right out of the magazine.

I don't know that they are any better than a 98, or other versions. They are priced pretty high, but there are probably many guns built as well that go cheaper.


You are right, that much of it is personal taste.



Funny you should mention the 700. Seems to me, that a few years back it got popular modifying 700's to take a Sako, or Sako style extractor, which was viewed as better. I read one account of the modification being problematic, and the guy had more problems than before..which if I remember right, were none.

When it's all said and done, a lot of it comes down to individual guns. Across the board, broad brush there are few fewer problems with full length extractors.

It's somewhat common to buy or even have extra extractors on hand for some guns. Lots of rimfires failures, AR and some semi auto guns seem to need them from time to time, and even my beloved Marlins have an extractor option that is supposed to be "better". The aftermarket or parts market is a good indicator of how many people are replacing extractors because of failures.

With regards to the marlins, is there an extractor upgrade? Or just ejector? I have installed "bear proof" one piece ejectors, but never come across an "upgraded" extractor for them.

 

[tactical lever]

LMFFAO ! Pretty funny post there “ tactical lever “ Your Probaly a Nice Guy so I will just leave it Be . RJ

Was that ammo on the shelf of a store or was it in a catalogue?
Also, bullet technology has advantage greatly in the past 20 years or so, and there is little need to shoot a heavy cup and core bullet unless a person really want to.
Cat

I haven't seen selection of anything like that in stores. Even the most popular, hottest current cartridges, and there hasn't been a lot, in these lean years. But I do see 6.5x55 regularly. It's not rare.

I don't shoot monolithic copper bullets for a few reasons. They're very expensive, they are long for their weight, hard and can't reach the speed of a similar weight of cup and core for the light bullets, and they don't have the range and momentum of heavier bullets. They must be driven very fast to perform, but the faster the very light bullets start out, the quicker they lose speed as the air resistance is squared by speed, and they are very low sectional density.

They have their place, though. If I was shooting an extremely overbore cartridge for big game, and needed a bullet that wouldn't blow up at 3400 fps impact speed, I'd use one for sure.

 

[tactical lever]

With regards to the marlins, is there an extractor upgrade? Or just ejector? I have installed "bear proof" one piece ejectors, but never come across an "upgraded" extractor for them.

Whoops, my bad. It's the 2 piece ejector that people upgrade, not the extractor. Been meaning to do that to some of mine.

 

[iron cat]

Tactical lever, one does not need to shoot a monometal to get excellent bullets these days, but I do know many hunters that do. I also know many that shoot cup and core and bonded bullets in factory ammo out of 6.5 Creedmoor chambered rifles and they are all bought from the local Canadian Tire Store.
The 6.5x55 ammo most times has only one or two selections whereas the 6.5 Creedmoor has at least 6 different brands and selections.
Be that as it may, both cartridges are excellent, it all depends on what a person wants to shoot.
I personally have never shot any factory Creedmoor ammo except to get a basel9be gor my had loading, same as my various 6.5x55's I have owned over the years.
Cat

 

[Joel]

There are monos that don't need to be driven super fast to perform

The Barnes 127gr LRX, 100gr TTSX and 30 cal 130gr TTSX really don't seem to need much help opening up at all, much below 3400 fps. The 7mm 120gr TTSX and 139gr LRX have quite a following even at 7mm-08 speeds.

Unless you're shooting past 400 yards, any of those are just fine. Probably lots of others too. The monos are often built around specific cartridges, like how well the 110gr Tac-Tx expands at 300 Blackout speeds, the .311 150gr in 303 Brit, .310 123gr in 7.62x39 etc.

I don't know if cheaper bullets outperform them at all but in my sub 200 yard hunting they do just great. Slightly more than a buck a pull to reload. My last boxes of Barnes LRX 6.5 CM 127gr were $65 I think.


The thing about sectional density is it might start off low for a mono but unless petals blow off it doesn't change. What's the SD of a heavier bullet once it loses 30% of its weight?

Say, when a 180gr 30 cal bullet loses 30% of its weight relative to a copper bullet thats 130gr and stays 130gr? Your final SD is not your initial SD and most of that weight loss happens within the first few inches of wounding.

Edit: Hornady's 140gr ECX seems to be expanding well at 2000-2100 fps but I've only shot test media so far, no animals yet.

 

[tactical lever]

Up to a point, beyond which you have to admit you can't prove more is better lol. I mean obviously more than 1 mm of coverage would be good but I bet diminishing returns are reached at some point before the full size claw.

Proof to the contrary is conspicuously absent.



I'm told in Jim Carmichael's "Book of the Rifle" that is exactly what happens in his head to head test of the two systems. A properly installed Rem 700 action tears through the case rim. The Mauser claw slips off of the case rim.

They can snap over the rim of a case you load into the barrel, you just have to push on the side of it. Apparently if you apply enough force, they slip back off too. Mind you I haven't read the book personally. It just mirrors what I have seen in the AR.



Nope but I'd say its applying a lot more force than most people think such an extractor can lol.

Now how many of the Rem 700 extractors are properly made and installed is a whole other story lol



Yeah, the 375 was a solid rifle! have had 7x57s and 6.5x55s and a stainless 9.3x62 as well. They were all accurate. Great blueing, great barrels. Expect little quality control defects. You'll probably need windage adjustable mounts or a scope with lots of adjustment range cause the rear and front scope base holes are always cattywampus to each other. Sometimes they feed rough.

Given the price difference I like a Winchester 70...if theres even a price difference if you're buying the Winchester used But if you don't mind the chance you're gonna tinker, they're cool.



n=1 but its still interesting that the poor guy spent the money and the time on what became a downgrade lol. Poor dude. Bet it compromised the "three rings of steel" of the Rem 700 action too

I'll wait to hear how often some of the more reliable push feeds that I've named need new extractors but yeah I can agree, across the board the Mauser claw is more reliable.

With MIM #### like a Ruger American able to go 10,000 rounds before failure I'm really not sweating a Tikka, Sako etc. At all.

My old 96 which isn't a factory sporter won't jump the rim. Might be possible to make it, but I've never pushed hard enough to do it.

I could probably find some failures of push feed actions and you could relay some failures of CRF, but you'd say you can't accept the anecdotal evidence. And because you've seen a push feed rip part of a rim off doesn't prove that they're more or less likely to do the same across the board...

Ultimate tensile strength of the extractor wasn't really my point, but the straightforward action with less separate parts is less likely to fail, and at least on that we can agree.

Many people buy 70's and there is no need to tinker. Maybe if you're chasing sub 1/2 MOA, in which case you'll likely work on tuning nearly any gun regardless of brand. Read one article by a fella that hunted foxes quite a bit. And he used 20 or 20 plus rifles as his fox guns, of several brands. He liked to get them under 3/4 of an inch at 100 yards, and he tended to favor the Winchester as he figured they were easier to get there.

If you are speaking of the extractor only of an American being inferior MIM, well you are right. Though maybe it is not inferior, given some of the particle super steels being made, but I suspect it is just cheaper. That trait has been around for some time as the extractor in the M77 are also MIM.

 

[tactical lever]

Tactical lever, one does not need to shoot a monometal to get excellent bullets these days, but I do know many hunters that do. I also know many that shoot cup and core and bonded bullets in factory ammo out of 6.5 Creedmoor chambered rifles and they are all bought from the local Canadian Tire Store.
The 6.5x55 ammo most times has only one or two selections whereas the 6.5 Creedmoor has at least 6 different brands and selections.
Be that as it may, both cartridges are excellent, it all depends on what a person wants to shoot.
I personally have never shot any factory Creedmoor ammo except to get a basel9be gor my had loading, same as my various 6.5x55's I have owned over the years.
Cat

That's not what I was trying to convey at all with monolithic bullets. I prefer cup and core and will continue to use them. If I was shooting a cup and core much above 3000 fps with the heaviest selection at that point I would consider a lighter monometal and even higher speed just to ensure that it had enough residual speed to open at longer range.

 

[tactical lever]

There are monos that don't need to be driven super fast to perform

The Barnes 127gr LRX, 100gr TTSX and 30 cal 130gr TTSX really don't seem to need much help opening up at all, much below 3400 fps. The 7mm 120gr TTSX and 139gr LRX have quite a following even at 7mm-08 speeds.

Unless you're shooting past 400 yards, any of those are just fine. Probably lots of others too. The monos are often built around specific cartridges, like how well the 110gr Tac-Tx expands at 300 Blackout speeds, the .311 150gr in 303 Brit, .310 123gr in 7.62x39 etc.

I don't know if cheaper bullets outperform them at all but in my sub 200 yard hunting they do just great. Slightly more than a buck a pull to reload. My last boxes of Barnes LRX 6.5 CM 127gr were $65 I think.


The thing about sectional density is it might start off low for a mono but unless petals blow off it doesn't change. What's the SD of a heavier bullet once it loses 30% of its weight?

Say, when a 180gr 30 cal bullet loses 30% of its weight relative to a copper bullet thats 130gr and stays 130gr? Your final SD is not your initial SD and most of that weight loss happens within the first few inches of wounding.

Edit: Hornady's 140gr ECX seems to be expanding well at 2000-2100 fps but I've only shot test media so far, no animals yet.

I was not really talking about how much weight the bullet loses or doesn't upon impact, but yes that's a factor. The SD of the bullet affects it across it's whole flight path. I guess my question is, why shoot a light 30 cal bullet when it turns your .300 WM into 7.62x39? Yes a 130 gr. at 3500 fps is impressive, but the 200 gr. starting out at 2800 works better at all ranges? Or at least moderate and long range where the monometal is left in the dust.

It's very apparent comparing them where the velocity path meets that a 200 gr Accubond has over 50 percent more energy, momentum and sectional density than a 130 gr Triple Shock. That's around 600 yards for illustration, but there's a significant gap before that as well.

This huge velocity drop is problematic for bullet performance also. It's relatively easy to design a bullet to perform at a given velocity. Many hunters want a "magnum" for rare 500 yard shot. The 200 has lost about 700 fps putting it in a good velocity range. The 130 however has lost about 1300 fps and likely not performed as hoped. Looking at the velocity table I'd probably want to be around 250 yards to get that bullet to perform.

 

[iron cat]

Tactical Lever, I can see your point to a certain extent , but both my friend and I shoot completely different cartridges but both in 150 grain weights- he shoot TTSX and I shot TSX. Both are going well under 3,000FPS and both rifles have taken animals out past 350 yards.
That is not really magnum territory, and within 375 yard both of these rifles together are right around 70 animals so far.
Before I switched to Barnes I was using cup and core bullets of various brands and sizes also with excellent success , but was not happy with the amount of bullet fragments I was getting in the meat.
Neither if us has had that issue since we switched to monometal bullets.
Cat

 

[tactical lever]

Tactical Lever, I can see your point to a certain extent , but both my friend and I shoot completely different cartridges but both in 150 grain weights- he shoot TTSX and I shot TSX. Both are going well under 3,000FPS and both rifles have taken animals out past 350 yards.
That is not really magnum territory, and within 375 yard both of these rifles together are right around 70 animals so far.
Before I switched to Barnes I was using cup and core bullets of various brands and sizes also with excellent success , but was not happy with the amount of bullet fragments I was getting in the meat.
Neither if us has had that issue since we switched to monometal bullets.
Cat

What cartridges are you fellas shooting? MV is well under 3000? What do you estimate your impact speed is at your farthest shots on game? I haven't seen the latest on impact velocity range on these bullets, but it used to be somewhat high. Just saw on a long range hunting forum that one guy didn't figure there was much expansion below 2500 fps.

For sure cup and core bullets will have some fragmentation. One of my friends favors those softer bullets as he claims very little tracking, while I like having a good exit hole. Either way, I don't eat the bullet hole, so it doesn't really affect me.

 

[iron cat]

What cartridges are you fellas shooting? MV is well under 3000? What do you estimate your impact speed is at your farthest shots on game? I haven't seen the latest on impact velocity range on these bullets, but it used to be somewhat high. Just saw on a long range hunting forum that one guy didn't figure there was much expansion below 2500 fps.

For sure cup and core bullets will have some fragmentation. One of my friends favors those softer bullets as he claims very little tracking, while I like having a good exit hole. Either way, I don't eat the bullet hole, so it doesn't really affect me.

He shoots a M70 in 708, I shoot a Ruger in 303 British.
as far as tracking goes, only two, had to be tracked more than a few yards due to less than optimal hits.
my 370 yard + yard white only went about 15 yards with a blood trail Steve Wonder could have followed.
I have only recovered one bullet, my friend has abut 4 I think.
Cat

 

[Joel]

What cartridges are you fellas shooting? MV is well under 3000? What do you estimate your impact speed is at your farthest shots on game? I haven't seen the latest on impact velocity range on these bullets, but it used to be somewhat high. Just saw on a long range hunting forum that one guy didn't figure there was much expansion below 2500 fps.

For sure cup and core bullets will have some fragmentation. One of my friends favors those softer bullets as he claims very little tracking, while I like having a good exit hole. Either way, I don't eat the bullet hole, so it doesn't really affect me.

They're all different. Theres no "across the board" minimum for a Barnes bullet as they are kind of tuned for different cartridges.

The 168 30 cal expands at lower speeds than the 150 and 165 for example.

Sectional density, again, changes when you hit animal. I don't really care what it is in flight so much.

Energy as a killing factor is kinda overrated. 223s with heavier bullets dump big game very well. Arrows dump big game very well. Wide, hard cast bullets with fat meplats you can see flying through the air dump big game very well. As far as "works better"....I dunno. Wide expansion at a high speed of opening, holes through vitals and deep penetration kill.

If you think a 130gr Barnes turns a 300 WM (or a 308 Win or a 30-06) into a 7.62x39 you haven't shot it or killed anything with it lol. That's absolutely certain. Not really concerned with much besides 300 yards and in, as thats the hunting over here, and usually considerably in. And no use for a magnum. Moose die just fine without them from the 30-06 and 308. But if someone did want to hunt big game with a magnum at 600 yards, why use the light bullet inded? Move up to something like a 175 LRX and I bet the Partition isn't doing anything it can't, at all. Even a 145gr LRX from a 7mm magnum, etc.

Take the 308 with a 130gr at 3150 fps. You have a point and click system to 300 yards, still has 2360 fps and over 1600 ft/lbs if someone is an energy guy. More than enough speed for that bullet to open very, very well and the hallowed (and useless) magical number of foot pounds of energy for big game lol. All with way less recoil. And a bullet that is going to hold together. Ask Blakeyboy about seeing that bullet from a 308 dump elk at 400 yards. Or ask Ardent what a light Barnes bullet in 270 Win can do.

The 100gr 6.5mm TTSX has accounted for some moose on the board here as well at non-magnum speed and seeing what I am on deer, I ain't going to hesitate to use it. On the other hand, the 140gr Hornady ECX opens up very well at slower velocities, which it is made to.

A 180 cup and core finishes at 130 anyway Dunno how heavier bullets are supposed to work better exactly.

 

[iron cat]

What cartridges are you fellas shooting? MV is well under 3000? What do you estimate your impact speed is at your farthest shots on game? I haven't seen the latest on impact velocity range on these bullets, but it used to be somewhat high. Just saw on a long range hunting forum that one guy didn't figure there was much expansion below 2500 fps.

.

I used my quickload program to estimate the impact velocity along with my labradar , but as soon as it warms up I can go out to the range and shoot some over our Shotmarker targets at 400, that gives the impact velocity right at the target.
The quickload corresponded with my trajectory drops however, and so i was happy with that.
Cat

 

[tactical lever]

They're all different. Theres no "across the board" minimum for a Barnes bullet as they are kind of tuned for different cartridges.

The 168 30 cal expands at lower speeds than the 150 and 165 for example.

Sectional density, again, changes when you hit animal. I don't really care what it is in flight so much.

Energy as a killing factor is kinda overrated. 223s with heavier bullets dump big game very well. Arrows dump big game very well. Wide, hard cast bullets with fat meplats you can see flying through the air dump big game very well. As far as "works better"....I dunno. Wide expansion at a high speed of opening, holes through vitals and deep penetration kill.

If you think a 130gr Barnes turns a 300 WM (or a 308 Win or a 30-06) into a 7.62x39 you haven't shot it or killed anything with it lol. That's absolutely certain. Not really concerned with much besides 300 yards and in, as thats the hunting over here, and usually considerably in. And no use for a magnum. Moose die just fine without them from the 30-06 and 308. But if someone did want to hunt big game with a magnum at 600 yards, why use the light bullet inded? Move up to something like a 175 LRX and I bet the Partition isn't doing anything it can't, at all. Even a 145gr LRX from a 7mm magnum, etc.

Take the 308 with a 130gr at 3150 fps. You have a point and click system to 300 yards, still has 2360 fps and over 1600 ft/lbs if someone is an energy guy. More than enough speed for that bullet to open very, very well and the hallowed (and useless) magical number of foot pounds of energy for big game lol. All with way less recoil. And a bullet that is going to hold together. Ask Blakeyboy about seeing that bullet from a 308 dump elk at 400 yards. Or ask Ardent what a light Barnes bullet in 270 Win can do.

The 100gr 6.5mm TTSX has accounted for some moose on the board here as well at non-magnum speed and seeing what I am on deer, I ain't going to hesitate to use it. On the other hand, the 140gr Hornady ECX opens up very well at slower velocities, which it is made to.

A 180 cup and core finishes at 130 anyway Dunno how heavier bullets are supposed to work better exactly.

I agree that energy (and speed) is overestimated for killing power. I just used it as a comparison. As well as momentum which I indicated would also either at 2/3, or 1.5 times the value depending on which way you're looking at it.

The .223 can kill deer fine as you say. Of course that was pioneered using heavy cup and core, not the lightweight monos... But maybe people are using monos for that now also?? Killed a coastal blacktail years ago with a Hornet. Was ignorant of bullet construction when I did it.

180 could finish as a 130, or it could finish as a 60, or a 175 too. Depends on how hard it's pushed, construction, what it's hitting and range. Conversely a 130 will never get heavier. I used to recall the big complaint of Nosler Partitions "failing" when driven and hitting hard it wasn't uncommon to shed the front core. Of course it was designed like that, with a soft nose that even at very long range, the front would open up and expand.

Of course turning a .300 mag into the Russian was exaggeration. But that is what it's doing...

 

[tactical lever]

I also maintain that cast is the original monometal, and there is no equal for bullets pushed at lower velocities...

 

[Joel]

Of course turning a .300 mag into the Russian was exaggeration. But that is what it's doing...

Never saw a 7.62x39 shoot 400 yards flat like a laser, buck the wind, or hammer big game lol. The advantages that the lighter mono is supposedly losing are just not manifest in the real world when applied to game at most ranges.

And a 130 mono doesn't need to get heavier to kill well.

 

[tactical lever]

He shoots a M70 in 708, I shoot a Ruger in 303 British.
as far as tracking goes, only two, had to be tracked more than a few yards due to less than optimal hits.
my 370 yard + yard white only went about 15 yards with a blood trail Steve Wonder could have followed.
I have only recovered one bullet, my friend has abut 4 I think.
Cat

Good choices in guns. I may revise my opinion on monometal copper for expanding bullets yet. Though the price is fairly prohibitive for shooting them very much.

 

[Joel]

He shoots a M70 in 708, I shoot a Ruger in 303 British.
as far as tracking goes, only two, had to be tracked more than a few yards due to less than optimal hits.
my 370 yard + yard white only went about 15 yards with a blood trail Steve Wonder could have followed.
I have only recovered one bullet, my friend has abut 4 I think.
Cat

John Barsness has documented the results of hundreds of kills with cup and core and monos. He said the longer tracking jobs with monos are on average like 10-15 yards longer than the jacketed lead bullets.

Definitely seems to matter way more where you hit them with it here. Can definitely get behind that.

Haven't caught a mono yet...in an animal anyway. On the other hand, my last deer kill with a jacketed bullet, a deer spine stopped a 180gr round nose soft point from a 30-06 lol. Have a couple pics of it around here somewhere. Pretty cool to see. Never weighed it. Guess it didn't hear about all that momentum and extra weight compared to my 100gr TTSX bullets....but it sure did kill

 

[iron cat]

Good choices in guns. I may revise my opinion on monometal copper for expanding bullets yet. Though the price is fairly prohibitive for shooting them very much.

One does not have to shoot them for practise, using cheaper bullets works great then rezeroing with hunting ammo.After all, one is practicing to make themselves better, not the rifle .
Cat

 

[tactical lever]

Never saw a 7.62x39 shoot 400 yards flat like a laser, buck the wind, or hammer big game lol. The advantages that the lighter mono is supposedly losing are just not manifest in the real world when applied to game at most ranges.

And a 130 mono doesn't need to get heavier to kill well.

No I never did see that either, lol!

Comparing a .264 WM shooting a 100 gr at 3499, and a 6.5x55 shooting a 155 gr at 2559 already has a 20% momentum advantage for the smaller gun at 100 yards! So tell the advantage of burning the extra powder, muzzle blast and expense? Do you see many cup and core failures at 2400 fps?