Choosing a custom action

kthomas said:
I have ocean front property in Arizona to sell to anyone here that thinks they can shoot the difference between "action stiffness" from a bolt on rail to integral rail action.
Click to expand...

Exactly! I struggle to see how one is going to even be marginally better accuracy wise.
I’ve got the Cadex r7 with a .338 Lapua bolt face. It’s good for the price. Don’t care for the spring loaded ejector, but I’m sure it’s still more accurate than me...
also running an ARC nucleus v1. I’ve got 3 bolt heads to cover most cartridges when I decide to rebarrel. It’s ok too. Nothing special. Price is decent for what you get get.
 
Brutus said:
The proof is in my reply.
If it wasn't a problem then Mausers would still be on the NATO firing line. Obviously they are obselete.

If that's too hard for you I suggest we disengage now.
Click to expand...

First off, any military's support of a product has zero bearing on my selection of kit.

As to your notion that the CRF extractor causing case-to-chamber misalignment leading to reduced accuracy which is somehow tied to the military running push feeds only highlights a serious lack of understanding in basic physics and firearm design and operation. As others above have attested to, custom CRF actions can shot incredibly well! As to the mechanics of it all, a CRF extractor is passively resting around the case rim. The case will rest in the chamber as it is constrained by geometry and gravity. In the case of a push feed that utilizes an ejector plunger, the extractor is actively engaged with the case rim and is working in tandem with the ejector plunger to leverage the case within the chamber. The extractor and ejector system of a push feed is active and ever present. As stated before, some bench shooters and the like reduce the spring force or remove it entirely.

While I have heard arguments to the effect that plungers can impact accuracy, I have never seen them demonstrably rise to the point of overcoming the errors ( loss of precision) of all other factors (environment, ammo, shooter, build quality, etc.). Whatever minimal clearance that exists between the case and chamber (and this should be minimal with full length sizing and nearly zero with neck sizing) is forced into a 'misalignment' will be amplified by a push feed and minimized by any action not utilizing a ejector plunger.

My personal desire for the use of a CRF is because I reload and want to have my brass unscathed and in a nice neat pile. From my personal experience with a number of push feeds I own, they work wonderfully well when cycled at speed. But they throw the brass rather far and if cycled slowly can scratch and ding brass, though not always. Given that I my brass is upward of $4 a piece, I am happy to have them well taken care of so I can get the most bang for my buck.

As to the dings affecting reloading, I understand that cold working the brass during firing and maybe dents can eventually lead to cracks, pinholes and neck splits. Typically I have seen this more with repeated firings and not necessarily denting (though it is the exact same mechanism of work hardening), but that is just my personal experience. Even so, I do like to anneal the brass before running them through the FL sizing die to ensure longevity.
 
Bandits said:
First off, any military's support of a product has zero bearing on my selection of kit.

As to your notion that the CRF extractor causing case-to-chamber misalignment leading to reduced accuracy which is somehow tied to the military running push feeds only highlights a serious lack of understanding in basic physics and firearm design and operation. As others above have attested to, custom CRF actions can shot incredibly well! As to the mechanics of it all, a CRF extractor is passively resting around the case rim. The case will rest in the chamber as it is constrained by geometry and gravity. In the case of a push feed that utilizes an ejector plunger, the extractor is actively engaged with the case rim and is working in tandem with the ejector plunger to leverage the case within the chamber. The extractor and ejector system of a push feed is active and ever present. As stated before, some bench shooters and the like reduce the spring force or remove it entirely.

While I have heard arguments to the effect that plungers can impact accuracy, I have never seen them demonstrably rise to the point of overcoming the errors ( loss of precision) of all other factors (environment, ammo, shooter, build quality, etc.). Whatever minimal clearance that exists between the case and chamber (and this should be minimal with full length sizing and nearly zero with neck sizing) is forced into a 'misalignment' will be amplified by a push feed and minimized by any action not utilizing a ejector plunger.

My personal desire for the use of a CRF is because I reload and want to have my brass unscathed and in a nice neat pile. From my personal experience with a number of push feeds I own, they work wonderfully well when cycled at speed. But they throw the brass rather far and if cycled slowly can scratch and ding brass, though not always. Given that I my brass is upward of $4 a piece, I am happy to have them well taken care of so I can get the most bang for my buck.

As to the dings affecting reloading, I understand that cold working the brass during firing and maybe dents can eventually lead to cracks, pinholes and neck splits. Typically I have seen this more with repeated firings and not necessarily denting (though it is the exact same mechanism of work hardening), but that is just my personal experience. Even so, I do like to anneal the brass before running them through the FL sizing die to ensure longevity.
Click to expand...

The statement that CRF's cause misalignment and accuracy issues, and are not on NATO firing lines anymore as a result is the most entertaining thing I've read since the military figured out that 1:11.75 twist is the most effective and precise twist rate for .30/7.62x51.
 
rugbydave said:
The things people will obsess about in the quest to shoot "better" instead of practicing/training to shoot better...

Personally, I make sure that all my ammo is seated in a mag with the head stamp oriented the same way, you know, for consistency :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

when using CCI BR2 primers, do your orientate where the "B" is?????? You know it has an effect on the priming mixture. I actually line it up with the "S".... I shoot STARLINE brass.

Jerry
 
I hope you guys also orient your press North/South. Otherwise the magnetic flux imbalance will definitely throw things off. It has to be magnetic north too- none of that geographic north stuff...
 
cartwheel said:
I hope you guys also orient your press North/South. Otherwise the magnetic flux imbalance will definitely throw things off. It has to be magnetic north too- none of that geographic north stuff...
Click to expand...

I am more worried abou the scale cause it uses a magnetic based load sensor. However, I was assured by an expert that the scale is well insulated at our lattitudes... no northern lights so gamma radiation is low enough to not matter.

What he did suggest I keep an eye on is BAROMETRIC PRESSURE. Our scales are sensitive... very sensitive.. Fluctuating air pressure might be enough to move the scale ... and then you have an error in your charges from day to day.

If you account for ballistics with a Kestrel... better keep an eye on that scale too. Tracking DA at my home, I have already seen a change of well over 2000ft in just 2 days.

He may be on to something.....

Jerry
 
Last edited:
This thread reminds me of a story…

In 1980, I took an aerospace engineering job. About a year into that new position there was one particular part for the Boeing 767 that we could not successfully produce to the design requirement and as a result, we lost the contract to a company in Europe.

The Engineering Manager and Quality Assurance Manager had worked all over the world and had all manner of experience between them. When they shared the news of the lost contract with the Engineering Department they slapped each other on the back insisting they had tried all that could be tried and the part needs to be redesigned to make it more manufacturable.

They were confident between themselves that if they could not make the part, there was something wrong with the part design.

At that I put fourth that I knew how to make that part.

They laughed it off and confidently walked away shaking their heads in a chuckle.

Later on, curiosity got the better of our Engineering Manager, so he came around to ask how I would go about making the part…. Anyone could see he was really intent on showing me the error of my ways. Exactly what would you have done differently? he asked.

I won’t bore you with the details, but when I told him, his shoulders sunk in disappointment as he realized that what I said would have certainly worked. It was so simple and so obvious once I said it.

I tried to tell them sooner but the upper management egos would not allow them to consider the suggestion of someone so young at the time. Instead I took a step back and watched them fail.

A few years later I became the youngest man to become the Engineering Manager at that company and did so for several years. Four years after I eventually chose to move on, the company filed for receivership under the failed leadership of my replacement and the company was taken over by McDonnell Douglas to maintain delivery commitments for the F-16.

We are all free to prioritize the importance of factors based what we think matters.

We are free to dismiss influences that we don’t feel is of benefit to our particular objectives and standards.

We are all also free to strive to eliminate as many variables in our hand loading to make the ammunition as perfect as we know to be possible.

If you want to dismiss the relevance of dents in the case neck, that’s fine. You are simply justifying a lower commitment to quality and perfection than someone who is insightful enough to appreciate the difference, however subtle.

I know that if given a choice between 100 rounds that fit my chamber perfectly with 0.0005” runout and 100 rounds of sloppy fit ammo with 0.007” runout, I don’t have to think about it.

And yes, perfect ammunition will not make you shoot better than you can shoot, but bad ammunition will ensure that you will shoot worse than you can shoot.

As for what the military does, well if that's your top bar LOL, you better stay away from F-Class.

And when some of these intellectual giants post their condescending comments as they desperately cling to the lowest rung on the ladder in fear of getting dragged any higher, I just shake my head and laugh.

Now slap yourself on the back for me, and load your ammo any way you want.
 
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity … since I always get kit-envy when I go to matches … How do these actions stack up in terms of smoothness? I’ve cycled a Defiance Deviant (pretty sure) and it was both right and very smooth. Very nice indeed. I’ve owned a Cadex CDC-30 and the action was tight but not as smooth and you had to be very deliberate with the bolt. I’ve owned a TRG-22 and that action was very tight and smooth as well. The Defiance left me with the best impression. I don’t have hands-on access to any of the actions mentioned in this thread so I’m left wondering how they compare. Are some these 2000$ actions noticeably nicer than say a Cadex R7 or an Ultimatum?

I currently run Tikkas for all of my bolt action rifles. The actions are very smooth but when compared to higher end stuff, have a bit of slop / play in the bolt. Having said that, I really like the 60’ bolt throw and can’t see myself ever going to a 90’ bolt throw. I have less and less time to shoot lately so it’s tempting to focus my resources on one very nice rifle rather than several of various calibers. However, 1500$ get you a complete Tikka rifle, action and all. 1500$ also seems to be the opening price when it comes to actions. Is it worth it?
 
I think it's up to you if it's worth it. Tikkas are nice factory rifles without a doubt. I was tempted to build off of one but I couldn't get past the aftermarket support for Remington footprint actions. Also depends on the feature set you are looking for. If you like the short bolt throw, I would suggest looking hard at the terminus Zeus. It's supposed to be quite amazing in the 60 degree throw department. I have arc nucleus actions with 72 degree bolt throws. They are awesome. I think the Zeus is probably nicer but I'll never get rid of my nucleus setups
 
Tikka223 said:
Just out of curiosity … since I always get kit-envy when I go to matches … How do these actions stack up in terms of smoothness? I’ve cycled a Defiance Deviant (pretty sure) and it was both right and very smooth. Very nice indeed. I’ve owned a Cadex CDC-30 and the action was tight but not as smooth and you had to be very deliberate with the bolt. I’ve owned a TRG-22 and that action was very tight and smooth as well. The Defiance left me with the best impression. I don’t have hands-on access to any of the actions mentioned in this thread so I’m left wondering how they compare. Are some these 2000$ actions noticeably nicer than say a Cadex R7 or an Ultimatum?

I currently run Tikkas for all of my bolt action rifles. The actions are very smooth but when compared to higher end stuff, have a bit of slop / play in the bolt. Having said that, I really like the 60’ bolt throw and can’t see myself ever going to a 90’ bolt throw. I have less and less time to shoot lately so it’s tempting to focus my resources on one very nice rifle rather than several of various calibers. However, 1500$ get you a complete Tikka rifle, action and all. 1500$ also seems to be the opening price when it comes to actions. Is it worth it?
Click to expand...

Another action to consider that is under $2000 but very well constructed and very smooth is the Falkor 7EVEN. Relatively new to the market but we've had nothing but excellent feedback on them.
 
kthomas said:
Those look very intriguing to me.

Falkor makes quality stuff, I wouldn't hesitate to try one of their bolt actions.
Click to expand...

I'd like to handle one as well. I always have a hard time accepting high priced actions that are direct Remington clones. I'm talking plunger ejector, similar styled extractor. In that price point I like mechanical ejection and control round feed. It's not a criticism by any means, just how I feel about where my money is going. For the price of the falkor up here you are in tl3 and Archimedes territory.
 
laker415 said:
I'd like to handle one as well. I always have a hard time accepting high priced actions that are direct Remington clones. I'm talking plunger ejector, similar styled extractor. In that price point I like mechanical ejection and control round feed. It's not a criticism by any means, just how I feel about where my money is going. For the price of the falkor up here you are in tl3 and Archimedes territory.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this point. It’s hard to pay too dollar for little to know innovation … unless the quality really is that much superior, but again, ready specs sheets really doesn’t help evaluating that aspect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom