CRF vs Push Feed

I like CRF with the standing ejector as I can dump empties on the bench neatly. When I got my first Model 70 CRF Featherweight in .270 I fell in love with the rifle and the way it cycled cartridges smoothly and reliably. I like the simple design and takedown. Those rifles seem like more than the sum of their parts.
 
Claven2 said:
Short synopsis from a practical perspective:

- CRF was invented for military and dangerous game applications. The whole idea is achieving a mag-fed bolt action that will have very low FTF rates when the action is cycled in any position, including upside down, at all inclinations, etc. This is in case the shooter was being mauled by an animal, or in the grips of combat, etc. Of the two action types, this one will almost always feed more reliably.

- Push Feed pre-dates CRF as it is the simpler mechanism and was thought of first. In modern applications, like bench rest, it's thought that push feeds might shoot a smudge more consistently. I think the jury is out whether that is because of the feed mechanism, or some other design difference in the receivers themselves. Push feed is also a LOT cheaper to manufacture, hence why so many manufacturers offer push feed.

It's pretty simple really - CRF was a feature that was ADDED to the push feed rifles that existed first. It should be thought of as an option you can buy into if you have a need for a dangerous game rifle. Nothing more than that.
Click to expand...


Claven has described the essence of the difference and why there is a difference. :agree:

I never use my M70's for Dangerous game, nor on the battlefield, therefore I prefer the push feed over my CRF's. Why? I feel the push feed M70 for game animals who eat plant life and run away that I hunt or paper punching, is by far the smoothest bolt gun available. Rack the bolt on an older PF and feel your lightning strike. Now go buy a lotto ticket,...you never know..........
 
Last edited:
RememberTheSomme said:
Claven has described the essence of the difference and why there is a difference. :agree:

I never use my M70's for Dangerous game, nor on the battlefield, therefore I prefer the push feed over my CRF's. Why? I feel the push feed M70 for game animals who eat plant life and run away that I hunt or paper punching, is buy far the smoothest bolt gun available. Rack the bolt on an older PF and feel your lightning strike. Now go buy a lotto ticket,...you never know..........
Click to expand...

My Pre64 M70 feels smoother cycling rounds from the magazine than it does cycling empty. Improbable, I know, but that' show it feels to me.
 
My push feed m70 is much rougher than my crf m70. But it never fails to lock up because a cartridge fed ahead of the extractor like happened again yesterday with my crf 30 06 m70
 
Smoothest action I have ever handled, and I have handled almost every rifle available in Canada, is a Voere. It's the only rifle that will close the bolt and lock up just by lowering the barrel.
 
Claven2 said:
Short synopsis from a practical perspective:

- CRF was invented for military and dangerous game applications. The whole idea is achieving a mag-fed bolt action that will have very low FTF rates when the action is cycled in any position, including upside down, at all inclinations, etc. This is in case the shooter was being mauled by an animal, or in the grips of combat, etc. Of the two action types, this one will almost always feed more reliably.
Click to expand...

Yet virtually all military bolt actions used today are push feeds.
 
Superbrad said:
Tun theoretically,it should work..... By we aren't talking about extraction.... We are talking about feeding, and regardless of prf or Crf, a bad extractor is a bad extractor.......
Click to expand...

They are not the same and a good crf extractor can prevent feed but a good pf one wont
 
Remember that military choices include and are near top of the list, ease of manufacture, cheap to manufacture, ease of repair, cheap to repair, and last but not least, manufacturer has political favor. Which could be financial gain or influence.

Just because a modern military uses it, doesn't mean it is better in any way, shape, or form. Unless you include these factors.
 
Push feed was a specified design requirement for the rifles submitted to replace the Lee Enfield as the new Canadian Ranger rifle.


CANADIAN RANGER RIFLE: HUMAN FACTORS REQUIREMENTS VALIDATION

The basic and detailed technical requirements modules collected CR preferences on specific characteristics and features wanted in the new CRR. Results suggest the new CRR should be a manual repeater, short bolt action, push feed design of .308 Winchester / 7.62mm calibre. The new CRR should be shorter and weigh less than the current Lee Enfield. Right and left hand models as well as multiple stock sizes and adjustable pull lengths should be available. Each CRR should include two 10 round box style detachable magazines which the user is capable of loading five rounds in 5-10 seconds while detached. In addition it must be possible to open the bolt, insert a cartridge into the breech, and prepare the rifle to fire without the use of the magazine. Protected iron sights should be the primary sights, with provision for mounting an optical sight using a NATO standard rail or recreational scope mount. The trigger should be double staged, short stroke, with adjustable pull force and a fixed trigger guard. A two position safety system that is operable with gloves, cocking indicator, and trigger lock are necessary. The new CRR should have a stainless steel barrel and a recoil absorbing system (pads). A sling and hard case are necessary ancillary equipment. Further technical requirements are presented and discussed. Due to time constraints during workshops and expertise of CR participants, a smaller sample was achieved for the detailed technical requirements.
Overall, the results from these workshops indicate that the CR require a reliable, durable, and accurate rifle, with updated features that is lighter than the current Lee Enfield. Limitations and future work are discussed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom