my buddy and i are at a dissagreement on what is the better action.i like the push feed 700 and he believes that the pre 64 action reins supreme.i have used a few of the control round feed guns and i had three jam up on me.he said that that was impossable.he also said that the 700 was ok at the range and that he saw two 700's that broke their extractors.if he was to go hunting in the mountains for a month,he would trust a control round feed with his life and leave his 700 at home. what do you think?
700 vs control round feed
- Thread starter grizzlyo
- Start date
I think your buddy is all hat and no cows. - dan
Too Funny!
I had a model 70 in 375H&H that jammed regularly and shot like crap....Sold!
The US military uses the Remington action as a base for many of their sniper rifles...Hunting....Pffft!
They tried the Model 70... Then selected the Remington 700.....Coincidence? Errr...No!
If you have to make the hunting shot of a lifetime make sure you take a Remington.
FWIW leave the Salvage at home too....How many countries use a Savage for a real sniper rifle?
None!
- Location
- Hillbilly shack in the boonies
Their both good , the crf is more of a mans rifle, ie. cycle the action , don't play with it.
The inclosed bolt face on the remmy , and older winchesters are also great , and some claim better accuracy from a stock gun, which ever way a fella goes , its a win win deal.
Levi
The inclosed bolt face on the remmy , and older winchesters are also great , and some claim better accuracy from a stock gun, which ever way a fella goes , its a win win deal.
Levi
I think your buddy is right, if you had to trust your life with it make it a CRF.
They are the more reliable action under field conditions. If you are punching paper, who cares? By the way the US used the M70 before the Rem.700's, but cost per rifle gave the edge to the rem in the later years. Just like the war on what is better the AK47 or the M16, we all know but the US and Canada for that matter still chose the M16 go figure!
bigbull
They are the more reliable action under field conditions. If you are punching paper, who cares? By the way the US used the M70 before the Rem.700's, but cost per rifle gave the edge to the rem in the later years. Just like the war on what is better the AK47 or the M16, we all know but the US and Canada for that matter still chose the M16 go figure!
bigbull
I like CRF rifles and push feeds. There was a time when I bought into the controlled feeding as being more reliable, but have changed my thinking somewhat. An individual rifle is either reliable or it isn't. No amount of theoretical reliability is going to change the one that "isn't", nor is any amount of theoretical design shortcoming going to change one that "is".
There are a few things that I like about the M70/ Mauser derivatives in a DGR. The safety locking the striker is an enormous comfort when carrying cocked and locked while being surrounded by 2 trackers, a PH and a game scout that all seem determined to get themselves shot. It would also be difficult to get a M70 so crudded up that you would need tools or parts to get it running again.
Having said that, I've carried a Remington .375 on buffalo and elephant tracks and never gave it a second thought. It passed the "it works" test.
There are a few things that I like about the M70/ Mauser derivatives in a DGR. The safety locking the striker is an enormous comfort when carrying cocked and locked while being surrounded by 2 trackers, a PH and a game scout that all seem determined to get themselves shot. It would also be difficult to get a M70 so crudded up that you would need tools or parts to get it running again.
Having said that, I've carried a Remington .375 on buffalo and elephant tracks and never gave it a second thought. It passed the "it works" test.
Now that's something you don't hear about very often , a CRF owner who went the push feed route!
I couldn't imagine what swayed you.Theories about shortcomings or what is or isn't mean little in real life about how things are designed to operate, If you take two properly functioning actions, one CRF and the other a push feed they do not operate the same way, there are mechanical advantages to the CRF action....the fact of the matter is you cannot make a CRF rifle do certain things in real life no matter how much you tried because the system is designed to avoid them, one is double feeding, this is not the case with push feeds, that is real world performance that is solely based on the basic operating principles of a CRF action, weather Mauser, Winchester, Ruger, Sako 85, etc. etc. It's funny how in the last few years more and more companies are switching to the CRF action for all types of rifles, eg. Winchester went from CRF to push feed and now back to CRF again, Ruger began life as a push feed and now after so many years has gone to a CRF with the MKII actions, Sako went to the 85 which is CRF, Savage is now dabbling with CRF,McMillan now has a CRF action that is also available on the Tactical rifles, these are all major players in the firearms bussiness, clearly the shift is the other way, the market is shifting away from push feeds, too bad Remington is stuck with their three rings of steel! Their thinking for a lower cost alternative was great at a time when Winchester was pricing themselves out of the market with the Pre64 but not today, the 700 BDL Remmies are popping out at $900 and the Win. M70 Classic FTW is going for $800, there is something wrong with that picture!
IMHO
bigbull
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I like CRF actions in the field, but prefer a 700 Remington on the range. When I load my ammo too long for the magazine a CRF action is a hinderance. I never do that with a hunting rifle, and more often than not my hunting ammo is seated to the cannelure and crimped. My match ammo does not include bullets with cannelures, and more often than not those bullets are seated so as not to extend into the powder capacity of the cartridge. There is something very handy about dropping a round on top of the follower and closing the bolt, and while one hears that can be done with the newer CRF actions, the feel tells you its not a great idea.
Those who champion the push feed actions, particularly the 700 Remington will probably point to the strength of the action and it's ability to deflect gas away from the shooter if and when something goes wrong. There is no question the 700 is a strong and safe action, but by innuendo it suggests that the CRF aren't (as) safe and this is not true. Some years ago I was shooting cast bullets in my Remington manufactured .30/06 M-17 Enfield, which was a Century Arms sporter featuring a B&C stock, a trimmed down action, and GI barrel with the flaming bomb insignia. The load was 25 grs of SR 4759, and the bullet was the Lyman 311284 that sized and lubed weighed 210 grs. Well, during the loading process I must of been distracted or interrupted because I double charged a round. I was shooting over a chrony, and it went: Bang-1815, Bang-1857, Bang-1832, BOOM-2850!! Perhaps someone with a Quick Load program can tell us what the chamber pressure might of been with 50 grs of SR-4759 behind a 210 gr cast bullet in Remington .30/06 brass.
The old fellow I was shooting with was apparently asking as to the state of my health, (I was able to figure that out once my hearing returned) to which I answered that other than ringing ears I seemed to be fine. You lucky SOB! Not wanting to push that luck I have since been anally careful when loading fast burning powder in large cases, but I continue to load light loads in the .30/06, .308, 7X57, and various .375s (Ultra, Ruger & H&H) mostly with Unique and SR-4759.
No gas came back at me, and there was no apparent damage to the rifle, a rifle I continued to use for years afterward until a house fire required that I re-arm. I would of thought that the gas might have blown out the magazine, but the magazine was untouched. The only change to the rifle was that the head stamp of the cartridge was permanently stamped into the face of the bolt. The cartridge case was recovered only after I beat the action open with a 2X4. As I recall, the flash hole open up to the diameter of the primer pocket, and the primer pocket opened to the edge of the lettering on the cartridge head. A 700 action might have stood the mistreatment as well, but I doubt it would have stood it any better.
I concur with the sentiment that any rifle that has been proven reliable in the field is reliable enough for big game hunting. That being said, I have had issues with 3 M-700 extractors on 3 different rifles. After enough use it seems that they will skip past the cartridge rim, requiring that one lower the bolt handle and try again. This is not a quality I want in a dangerous game rifle, or for that matter a deer rifle. What about all the M-700 based sniper rifles that have seen years of service and hundreds of thousands of rounds? The military has armorers in the field, this is an an advantage not available to most big game hunters.
Anyway, this is the "Precision Rifle" section, not the hunting section, and you just don't come across many CRF precision rifles. I had a .308 target rifle built on a 98 Mauser, and it shot well enough, but I experienced no joy of ownership with it, and suffered no pangs of regret when I sold it. The most accurate rifles I've owned have been built on 700 Remingtons and a couple of Sakos, but they could have as easily been built on a Savage action. Either way the push feed I believe remains the best choice on the target range.
Those who champion the push feed actions, particularly the 700 Remington will probably point to the strength of the action and it's ability to deflect gas away from the shooter if and when something goes wrong. There is no question the 700 is a strong and safe action, but by innuendo it suggests that the CRF aren't (as) safe and this is not true. Some years ago I was shooting cast bullets in my Remington manufactured .30/06 M-17 Enfield, which was a Century Arms sporter featuring a B&C stock, a trimmed down action, and GI barrel with the flaming bomb insignia. The load was 25 grs of SR 4759, and the bullet was the Lyman 311284 that sized and lubed weighed 210 grs. Well, during the loading process I must of been distracted or interrupted because I double charged a round. I was shooting over a chrony, and it went: Bang-1815, Bang-1857, Bang-1832, BOOM-2850!! Perhaps someone with a Quick Load program can tell us what the chamber pressure might of been with 50 grs of SR-4759 behind a 210 gr cast bullet in Remington .30/06 brass.
The old fellow I was shooting with was apparently asking as to the state of my health, (I was able to figure that out once my hearing returned) to which I answered that other than ringing ears I seemed to be fine. You lucky SOB! Not wanting to push that luck I have since been anally careful when loading fast burning powder in large cases, but I continue to load light loads in the .30/06, .308, 7X57, and various .375s (Ultra, Ruger & H&H) mostly with Unique and SR-4759.
No gas came back at me, and there was no apparent damage to the rifle, a rifle I continued to use for years afterward until a house fire required that I re-arm. I would of thought that the gas might have blown out the magazine, but the magazine was untouched. The only change to the rifle was that the head stamp of the cartridge was permanently stamped into the face of the bolt. The cartridge case was recovered only after I beat the action open with a 2X4. As I recall, the flash hole open up to the diameter of the primer pocket, and the primer pocket opened to the edge of the lettering on the cartridge head. A 700 action might have stood the mistreatment as well, but I doubt it would have stood it any better.
I concur with the sentiment that any rifle that has been proven reliable in the field is reliable enough for big game hunting. That being said, I have had issues with 3 M-700 extractors on 3 different rifles. After enough use it seems that they will skip past the cartridge rim, requiring that one lower the bolt handle and try again. This is not a quality I want in a dangerous game rifle, or for that matter a deer rifle. What about all the M-700 based sniper rifles that have seen years of service and hundreds of thousands of rounds? The military has armorers in the field, this is an an advantage not available to most big game hunters.
Anyway, this is the "Precision Rifle" section, not the hunting section, and you just don't come across many CRF precision rifles. I had a .308 target rifle built on a 98 Mauser, and it shot well enough, but I experienced no joy of ownership with it, and suffered no pangs of regret when I sold it. The most accurate rifles I've owned have been built on 700 Remingtons and a couple of Sakos, but they could have as easily been built on a Savage action. Either way the push feed I believe remains the best choice on the target range.
What it boils down to is the simple fact that you can have controlled round feed rifles that malfunction as well as push feed that malfunction. If there is something wrong with either rifle, it should be repaired. I have seen more feeding problems with poorly altered Mauser 98's than I have seen with push feed actions... so the thought that CRF is automatically the better way to go is flawed. A pre 64 Model 70 is excellent and many shooters like it. The same goes for the Model 700 except it is considerably more popular than the Winchester and has consistently outsold and out performed other rifles since it was introduced.
I think the idea that 700 extractors have a large failure rate is flawed too. They have made over 8 million of them, it is an extremely successful design with and excellent reliability rate. There is no bolt action made that is as strong and safe.
Regardless of which method of feeding you chose, you should become familiar with your rifle and ammunition and test it thoroughly so operator error is not to blame for what someone may perceive as a design fault. If there is something wrong with your rifle (both methods of feeding can have a problem) get it fixed.
Glock4ever
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
This argument is beat to death in numerous magazines/articles/forums/etc and there is no definitive answer one way or the other. I personally believe that a well executed CRF rifle is superior to a 700 style action mainly because there is more craftsmanship required. While both styles have successfully gone to war; there is a certain elegance with the CRF action that I really like. I have numerous 700 style rifles and I firmly believe that the action/extractor system is proven. Too many whine about the extractor as being weak/flawed. I have only ever seen 1x bolt action fail on a hunt (CZ 527 .223 American CRF) - the extractor retaining collar caught on the top of the action and the claw extractor was seized in the action. It took about 15 mins of monkeying around and I was able to use a multi-tool to remove the extractor and reinstall it on the bolt. The collar was machined too large/loose and though it lasted the rest of the hunt, I had to get another collar. So I am not naive enough to believe that a CRF is the best in the West.
The main beef I have with Remington style rifles is that their actions need to scaled properly for the various rounds available. In the Fireball class of rounds, Remington 700 small actions are total ####e. Remington needs to produce a proper micro action - I have seen numerous 700 actions chambered in the fireball class rounds and if you dont work the bolt quickly, the spent casing will fall half the time back into the action because the barrel shank/lug raceway is too long for the spent case. Personally, I think the 700 Series is dead reliable with the .308 class family in the short action and the .30-06 class in the long action when you get to the ultra small cases (.221 Fireball) and the ultra large cases (.338 LM and larger) they are iffy.
So what is my opinion? I think that Remingtons are great actions and frequently are more accurate from the factory for standard calibers (.308 Win, .270, .30-06) but if you want reliable feeding in the ultra small or ultra large you may need to look elsewhere (CRF/Push Feed Custom). I happen to like CRF because manufacturers like CZ are taking them and properly sizing them to the various chamberings out there and not taking the lazy way out like Remington and building only two sizes but offering every chambering under the sun. Sako as a pushfeed used to be the cat's ass (Five action sizes was perfect) but now they are starting to cut back on the number of options too and the newer Tikka's I won't even buy on principle (one size fits all??? WTF?) as I don't need all the plastic/.30-06 size action for .308 Win/.223 Rem.
The main beef I have with Remington style rifles is that their actions need to scaled properly for the various rounds available. In the Fireball class of rounds, Remington 700 small actions are total ####e. Remington needs to produce a proper micro action - I have seen numerous 700 actions chambered in the fireball class rounds and if you dont work the bolt quickly, the spent casing will fall half the time back into the action because the barrel shank/lug raceway is too long for the spent case. Personally, I think the 700 Series is dead reliable with the .308 class family in the short action and the .30-06 class in the long action when you get to the ultra small cases (.221 Fireball) and the ultra large cases (.338 LM and larger) they are iffy.
So what is my opinion? I think that Remingtons are great actions and frequently are more accurate from the factory for standard calibers (.308 Win, .270, .30-06) but if you want reliable feeding in the ultra small or ultra large you may need to look elsewhere (CRF/Push Feed Custom). I happen to like CRF because manufacturers like CZ are taking them and properly sizing them to the various chamberings out there and not taking the lazy way out like Remington and building only two sizes but offering every chambering under the sun. Sako as a pushfeed used to be the cat's ass (Five action sizes was perfect) but now they are starting to cut back on the number of options too and the newer Tikka's I won't even buy on principle (one size fits all??? WTF?) as I don't need all the plastic/.30-06 size action for .308 Win/.223 Rem.
Now that's something you don't hear about very often , a CRF owner who went the push feed route!
Theories about shortcomings or what is or isn't mean little in real life about how things are designed to operate, If you take two properly functioning actions, one CRF and the other a push feed they do not operate the same way, there are mechanical advantages to the CRF action....the fact of the matter is you cannot make a CRF rifle do certain things in real life no matter how much you tried because the system is designed to avoid them, one is double feeding, this is not the case with push feeds, that is real world performance that is solely based on the basic operating principles of a CRF action, weather Mauser, Winchester, Ruger, Sako 85, etc. etc. It's funny how in the last few years more and more companies are switching to the CRF action for all types of rifles, eg. Winchester went from CRF to push feed and now back to CRF again, Ruger began life as a push feed and now after so many years has gone to a CRF with the MKII actions, Sako went to the 85 which is CRF, Savage is now dabbling with CRF,McMillan now has a CRF action that is also available on the Tactical rifles, these are all major players in the firearms bussiness, clearly the shift is the other way, the market is shifting away from push feeds, too bad Remington is stuck with their three rings of steel! Their thinking for a lower cost alternative was great at a time when Winchester was pricing themselves out of the market with the Pre64 but not today, the 700 BDL Remmies are popping out at $900 and the Win. M70 Classic FTW is going for $800, there is something wrong with that picture!
IMHO
bigbull
I'll stick with using rifles that work, whether in spite of, or because of different designs. It's not like I haven't used and continue to use CRF rifles along with my pushfeeds. I've got CZs, M70s, one Kimber, a savage that claims to be CRF, have had Rugers that came about halfway to being CRF, parker hales that were lucky to feed at all and have used many others. I've also got a pile of pushfeeds that work, even upside down if you want.
It's not very hard to find a CRF that you can make double feed, and it's not very hard to find a CRF that will get a cartridge in front of the extractor then not jump the rim. When that happens, you are well and truly screwed.
They either work, or they don't.
There is no doubt that not all CRF actions function properly and for that matter Push Feeds also but that does not take away from a properly built and functioning one, I have to agree with you that there is nothing more frustrating than having an action that doesn't function properly wether it's CRF or not, it's just that the CRF was designed as a foolproof military action and should not fail under the most adverse conditions, war. Sadly the manufacturers do not devote the time to fine tune rifles like they did in years gone by.
bigbull
Perfect function and complete familiarity over an ideal any day.
I have CRF and other rifles that I play with, but when the going is serious I want my Remingtons please. After nearly 30 years of hunting and shooting there is nothing more instinctive to me.
If you have similar experience with Ruger, Sako, Winchester, or whatever.....That is really what you should bring!
FWIW that is my two bits.
Lord help you if is a Savage!
Happy New Year Gents!
I have CRF and other rifles that I play with, but when the going is serious I want my Remingtons please. After nearly 30 years of hunting and shooting there is nothing more instinctive to me.
If you have similar experience with Ruger, Sako, Winchester, or whatever.....That is really what you should bring!
FWIW that is my two bits.
Lord help you if is a Savage!
Happy New Year Gents!
That's UNPOSSIBLE!
I wonder if the Remington 798's action will be as reliable as their 700 action?Anybody have any expereince with them?It doesn't look like Rem. is building them any more as they are not listed on their site.
http://http://www.chuckhawks.com/remington_798_799_rifles.htm
http://http://www.chuckhawks.com/remington_798_799_rifles.htm
Basically one of the Eastern European 98 clones. Think the Daley Mauser et al. Good rifles, with the same strengths and weaknesses of any Mauser sporter. And I believe you are correct, Remington has stopped importing them. I'm sure someone else will pick them up again soon however, there always is a market for reasonably priced Mausers. - dan
