Cock on close- why not?


PDA






Dreamcast270mhz
April 16, 2011, 10:36 PM
A cock on close rifle IMHO is much better in terms of reliability and accuracy because:

Point of Aim is not as disrupted because you do not need to have a heavy force to cam a cocking piece AND extract a case.

As said above, case extraction is easier on COC

In addition it is cheaper and is easier to produce, no camming surfaces needed all is a good sear to make sure the cocking piece is properly seated.

As for lock time and all that other BS, I've witnesses an SMLE well shot but properly bedded shoot better than a new .338 lapua magnum in a ten-shot battle. Poor lapua owner's first bolt action and he knows nothing about accurizing.

If you enjoyed reading about "Cock on close- why not?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Onmilo
April 17, 2011, 12:44 AM
I disagree.
Requires more bolt shove to feed and cock an SMLE/Mk-l/Mkll or P14/P17.
An SMLE/Mk-l may cycle faster than a Mauser action, it won't outshoot one all other things being equal.

Only the Mk-ll offers a decent trigger set up, earlier Marks and the Enfields are horrible compared to most Mausers.

If a shooter isn't capable of handling the recoil impulse of the .338 Lapua, no action made will help that shooter group well with that specialized cartridge.

Nice try at an argument but your basis is marred by lack of knowledge and a hint of favoritism.

R.W.Dale
April 17, 2011, 12:51 AM
way back in the forgotten depths of time when folks actually made decisions based on what these yahoos say some gun writer arbitrarily deemed cock on opening to be superior.


Bottom line is IT DOESN'T MATTER there are dozens of far more critical factors that determine and have a baring on a rifles accuracy, performance and reliability than when the mainspring gets compressed

Screamin'Eagle
April 17, 2011, 01:17 AM
I prefer cock on opening, but your mileage may vary. Same with a bunch of other issues in the gun world and society in general. Not anything to get in a tizzy about.

ball3006
April 17, 2011, 10:58 AM
Ditto what RW Dale says...........however, I shoot left handed so a straight bolt cock on opening works better for me. I reach across the top of the action to work the bolt. I have several of both kinds of rifles and enjoy shooting each of them....chris3

Dreamcast270mhz
April 17, 2011, 10:59 AM
I've found that in rapid fire I can shoot more accurately w/ a cock on close, even an arisaka which has a awkward bolt handle (i learned on my Mosin Nagant, a straight bolt)

I find when shooting brass ammunition it is much easier to extract it with an SMLE than a Mosin Nagant (I plan on getting a COC bolt for it eventually) but with a Mauser it all depends on how clean the camming surfaces are. With ANY american bolt action I have trouble because they arent any good

Caliper_RWVA
April 17, 2011, 11:03 AM
I disagree.
Requires more bolt shove to feed and cock an SMLE/Mk-l/Mkll or P14/P17.
An SMLE/Mk-l may cycle faster than a Mauser action, it won't outshoot one all other things being equal.

Only the Mk-ll offers a decent trigger set up, earlier Marks and the Enfields are horrible compared to most Mausers.

Trigger setup and accurizing are separate matters from whether the bolt is cock on open or cock on close.

Remember, the Mauser 95 action was cock on close...

For most hunting/plinking, there isn't much difference. Just personal preference.

helotaxi
April 17, 2011, 11:09 AM
With ANY american bolt action I have trouble because they arent any good
I assume that you've shot them ALL then? If you're talking surplus mil rifles that's one thing, but that distinction was never made.

fireman 9731
April 17, 2011, 11:18 AM
I have handled a Spanish Mauser 95 and it was awkward to say the least. Maybe its just not what I'm used to but it seems like you have much more natural strength on opening than closing. The camming action of cocking on opening seems to require much less effort than trying to push an un-cocked bolt all the way forward, extend the main-spring, and then close it down while still applying forward force. It seems like it would be pretty easy to fumble in a tight spot.

BrocLuno
April 17, 2011, 11:55 AM
I've got them both and i see no big difference. When the critter is down range, you find the energy to cock that sucker one way or another :)

jkingrph
April 17, 2011, 06:17 PM
I have a bunch of Swedish Model 96, plus one Husqvarna 46 sporter, a pure sporter built on the 96 action, which all cock on closing.

After shooting with them for a bit, I am just as used to it as a cock on opening, and as far as operating the action, makes no difference to me. The only thing I can see is that the older action is not as advanced and has a much longer lock time than newer models.

4thPointOfContact
April 17, 2011, 06:52 PM
Back when things like that really mattered, the British took a hard look at what worked, what didn't work, and what was really needed to make a bolt action rifle work as a combat arm.

That's why they ended up with that oddly shaped pistol grip on the SMLE and the cock on close which took advantage of the muscles in the arm rather than the muscles of the wrist.

1858
April 17, 2011, 07:20 PM
I disagree.
Requires more bolt shove to feed and cock an SMLE/Mk-l/Mkll or P14/P17.

I prefer a 'cock on closing' bolt action particularly when shooting from prone. You have mechanical advantage and momentum working in your favor with 'cock on closing'. Two things you don't have with 'cock on opening'.

451 Detonics
April 17, 2011, 07:24 PM
With ANY american bolt action I have trouble because they arent any good

Comparing the various military bolt guns of WWII I think many would put the Springfield on the top of the list. And to compare the cock on closing milsurp guns to any modern bolt gun is going to be a losing battle.

This thread is heavily weighted with opinions and absolutes on the various favorite guns and severely lacking in facts.

Dreamcast270mhz
April 17, 2011, 09:27 PM
Your opinion. I have shot and operated that are American made: 1903, R700, Model 69A, R510, Model 70. I find that all took some getting used to, a lot in comparison to my Mosin Nagant and WWI G98 war trophy.

Thus far only the .22s of that are comfortable to operate. I have nothing against a good cock on opening (I have a great G98 and my brother a 1912 chilean) but from operating a T99 Arisaka, and shooting SMLE Mk3, Mosin COC mod and a Model 69 I can say I much prefer the COC mechanism due to it being easier to extract and during rapid fire, as it is less tiring.

35 Whelen
April 17, 2011, 09:34 PM
As for lock time and all that other BS, I've witnesses an SMLE well shot but properly bedded shoot better than a new .338 lapua magnum in a ten-shot battle. Poor lapua owner's first bolt action and he knows nothing about accurizing.

If it was the Lapua owners first bolt rifle, I'd say it probably wasn't the rifle's fault. Add to his inexperience the horrendous recoil of a cartridge like the 338 Lapua, and I can see that possibly the Enfield shooter could out shoot the Lapua shooter, but this would have nothing to do with the bolt system or the rifles. If I'm not mistaken, Lapua's are designed for precision, not speed.

Regarding cock on closing, I have nothing against it and I can see where it might be a tad faster than cock on oopening, but I can't help but think that the cock on opening system has been all but replaced by the other for a reason.
35W

Vern Humphrey
April 17, 2011, 10:56 PM
A cock on close rifle IMHO is much better in terms of reliability and accuracy because:

Point of Aim is not as disrupted because you do not need to have a heavy force to cam a cocking piece AND extract a case.
What you gain on one end, you lose on the other. With cock on opening, the heavy force comes at the beginning of the cycle, and you have plenty of time to recover. With a cock on closing action, the heavy force comes at the end of the cycle, just as you're trying to align your sights on target.

As said above, case extraction is easier on COC

Just the opposite -- the caming action of a cock on opening action breaks the case loose. Yet the prime reason for cock on closing is case extraction -- the British theory was that you didn't want to waste any muscle effort in cocking the mainspring as you were extracting the fired case.

They had their physics backwards.

In addition it is cheaper and is easier to produce, no camming surfaces needed all is a good sear to make sure the cocking piece is properly seated.
And that is the point. The cock on opening action lowers the bent onto the sear as the bolt is rotated closed. Very little sear engagement is needed, and it is easy to produce a good trigger pull.

With cock on closing, the bent is slammed into the sear (when operating the action rapidly) and a lot of sear engagement is needed to prevent a slam fire. That makes producing a good trigger pull more difficult.

Robert
April 18, 2011, 12:14 AM
I have a K98, 1903, VZ24, and a No1 MkIII. I have no difficulty running any of them and really have no opinion on which is easier. I will tell you the No1 MkIII is faster, other than that they all have their strengths and weaknesses.

WNTFW
April 18, 2011, 12:35 AM
On a rem 700 I find the force needed to open the bolt negligible. More so if you use the thumb across the back of the stock as pivot point and bring your hand up under the bolt handle. Try it that way if you have a tendency to upset the rifle position when opening bolt. I just kept the original bolt knob and didn't replace it with a tactical one. In prone I keep my head on the rifle which tends to weight it down during cycling.

Davek1977
April 18, 2011, 04:05 AM
With ANY american bolt action I have trouble because they arent any good Just......no. You are arguing that a Mosins action is better or smoother than that on my Model 70 or Remmy 700? REALLY? I don't know in what condition the 70 you shot was in, my &mm mag opens and operates FAR FAR FAR more smoothly and than any Mosin I've handled. Of course, given your previously disclosed disdain for American weaponry, I het there's more than a little bias behind that statement as well

Onmilo
April 18, 2011, 10:01 AM
While I can agree that modern American made factory bolt actions suck as a general rule, the O.P. has obviously not handled any custom made American rifles,,,,,

Broad statements are broad.

There was a reason the Mauser brothers started with cock on closing, it was all that was available at that time.
The benefits of cock on closing came later and the English were still living in the James Lee past when that happened.

Dreamcast270mhz
April 18, 2011, 10:43 AM
@Davek

I have handled and fired local guns at my range. They take care of their rifles but generally most of them have never cleaned the camming surfaces on the bolt, just oiled them which can aggravate the issue when we were using cheap brass. My brother and I keep our rifles religiously clean, every so often I scrub every contact point on the bolt to promote better movement. I showed the owner how his bolt wasn't necessarily dirty but where he could clean it to promote smoother action.

Whoever had the comment earlier about COC making use of arm muscles rather than wrist, thats what I'm getting at. To cock a COO with arm muscles, you would need to put your forearm perpendicular to your wrist, not good during rapid fire.

I have nothing against american bolt actions in general, just find every one I've used either too delicate or just not my cuppa tea. I have never had a good custom be offered for me to shoot, most of the custom rifles are Ar-15s and 10s anyways.

jkingrph
April 18, 2011, 10:53 AM
Quote:
A cock on close rifle IMHO is much better in terms of reliability and accuracy because:

Point of Aim is not as disrupted because you do not need to have a heavy force to cam a cocking piece AND extract a case.

What you gain on one end, you lose on the other. With cock on opening, the heavy force comes at the beginning of the cycle, and you have plenty of time to recover. With a cock on closing action, the heavy force comes at the end of the cycle, just as you're trying to align your sights on target.


Quote:
As said above, case extraction is easier on COC

Just the opposite -- the caming action of a cock on opening action breaks the case loose. Yet the prime reason for cock on closing is case extraction -- the British theory was that you didn't want to waste any muscle effort in cocking the mainspring as you were extracting the fired case.

They had their physics backwards.

That's strange, my Swedes, cock on closing have a caming action when opening to extract case.

BigG
April 18, 2011, 10:57 AM
I guess preferring an autoloader isn't cricket?

wally
April 18, 2011, 05:47 PM
I'm not much for bolt guns, but I've shot: Springfield '03, Enfield, Savage 10, Remington 700, Weatherby Vanguard, Mosin-Nagant & Manlicher-Schoheimer (sp?).

To tell the truth, unless these are all either cock on close or cock on opening, I never realized there was a difference in cocking mode to consider.

eastbank
April 18, 2011, 07:25 PM
i have and shoot a 1917 winchester full military and a rem. model 30 express and i like the rem 30 express alot better. better trigger and smoother bolt . eastbank.

WardenWolf
April 18, 2011, 08:50 PM
Cock on close really isn't faster, and it doesn't really "use the muscles better". The length of pull would have to be substantially longer to get decent leverage, and it's also much harder on the elbow joint, resulting in faster fatigue when shooting a lot. It also encourages pushing the rifle away from the shoulder, resulting in longer setup time for the next shot, and introduces forward stress on the rifle / stock relationship instead of only the typical rearward stress from firing. This can, over time, contribute to accuracy issues by loosening things up. The action tends to "set" backwards in its mounts due to the recoil, and the frequent forward pressure can prevent it from taking a set.

I own a 98-type Mauser, a Mosin Nagant, and an Arisaka 99 (cock on close). The cock-on-open actions are definitely easier and faster to work.

ball3006
April 18, 2011, 11:12 PM
The important thing is, to hit what your are shooting at with the first shot. Then however the rifle is cocked is immaterial..........chris3

shootr
April 20, 2011, 05:48 PM
Just like something else we all have, here's my opinion, FWIW:

I bought into the "cock on close" view because intellectually it made sense.

I own a beautiful little sporterized Swede Mauser that is a favorite of mine and I was using it on a deer hunt a few years back. Well... a deer came along at a trot and I shot him but he didn't drop. Instead, he took off, but headed down an open area.

I quickly racked another round and the second shot dropped him but that cock-on-close really threw me off. The muzzle came waaayyy off target and I sort of bounced around getting back on. I had shot that rifle a lot, but that was the first time I tried a fast follow up shot in the field.

Maybe with the adrenaline and excitement, I was just really cranking the bolt, I don't know. I do know I immediately swung to the "don't like cock-on-close" view and converted that fine little gun to cock-on-open when I got home.

Dreamcast270mhz
April 20, 2011, 05:51 PM
Converting a coc mauser to cock on open will weaken the cocking piece. I currently do not own any COC guns but as said I have shot an SMLE quite regularly.

WardenWolf
April 21, 2011, 01:40 AM
Just like something else we all have, here's my opinion, FWIW:

I bought into the "cock on close" view because intellectually it made sense.

I own a beautiful little sporterized Swede Mauser that is a favorite of mine and I was using it on a deer hunt a few years back. Well... a deer came along at a trot and I shot him but he didn't drop. Instead, he took off, but headed down an open area.

I quickly racked another round and the second shot dropped him but that cock-on-close really threw me off. The muzzle came waaayyy off target and I sort of bounced around getting back on. I had shot that rifle a lot, but that was the first time I tried a fast follow up shot in the field.

Maybe with the adrenaline and excitement, I was just really cranking the bolt, I don't know. I do know I immediately swung to the "don't like cock-on-close" view and converted that fine little gun to cock-on-open when I got home.
That's what I meant when I said slamming the bolt foward will push the rifle away from your shoulder. Requiring all that pressure to close the bolt is sure to mess up your aim. The extra effort and strain on your bolt arm sure doesn't help steady it afterwards, either. The cock-on-open designs require less force in any given direction than the force required to close the bolt on a cock-on-close design.

Art Eatman
April 21, 2011, 11:26 AM
Seems to me that personal preference is the control in this issue. And, if you use both types, remembering the difference can occasionally create a problem if haste in cycling the bolt is involved.

Anyhow, it was demonstrated just before WW II that the cock-on-close of the Enfield allowed the British team to be competitive with the US team's Garands in rapid-fire on targets. I don't recall the specific match, but there was quite a bit of startlement at the British competitiveness "at speed".

The lesser strength required to open the bolt of the Enfield was said to be the reason; it allowed a faster cycling.

GunTech
April 21, 2011, 11:30 AM
The camming action for primary extraction on Mauser type rifles comes from the angle cut in the receiver where the root of the bolt handle strikes. Cock on open or close has nothing to do with primary extraction.

longshot7.62x51
April 21, 2011, 12:15 PM
with any weapon the manual of arms differs and is subject to training a well trained german soldier would problely argue that his 98k was was easyer to use than his british counterparts enfield and vice verca but given equal amount of training in the manual of arms for both rifles one could achive the same level proficentcey.

Vern Humphrey
April 21, 2011, 01:02 PM
with any weapon the manual of arms differs and is subject to training a well trained german soldier would problely argue that his 98k was was easyer to use than his british counterparts enfield and vice verca but given equal amount of training in the manual of arms for both rifles one could achive the same level proficentcey.
The difference being that the British placed a high premium on rapid fire from rifles -- up until WWI, their rifles were equipped with crude "volley sights" designed to deliver mass fire out to 2,800 yards -- sort of a substitute for machine gun fire. And they put a lot of effort into training, developing some interesting techniques for rapid fire -- such as resting the rifle on a sandbag and shooting from the left shoulder, keeping the bolt handle grasped in the right hand.

The Germans were more oriented toward small group tactics and in WWI developed the rifle-and-machine gun group (called a "fire team" in the US Army and Marines). As a result, they placed less emphasis on rapid fire from rifles.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 21, 2011, 01:13 PM
I've shot both and I don't like COC, doesn't feel as smooth as a COO. Considering how COO is the predominate action nowadays I would have to venture a guess that its better than COC.

longshot7.62x51
April 21, 2011, 01:26 PM
Vern: i agree with that with the change in equipment brought about changes in tatics i was trying to express that with training one could expect to see a british soldier achive the same results with a Mouser as with an enfield and the same in reverse

WardenWolf
April 21, 2011, 02:55 PM
Indeed, Vern, and as such they were more focused on speed than accuracy. In this case, the source of that speed negatively affects accuracy.

Jubjub
April 21, 2011, 04:30 PM
I've always wondered why no one has made a bolt action rifle that cocks as you pull the bolt back. It seems like that would be the time to do it. The cocking effort would be pulling the gun into your shoulder rather than pushing it away.

WardenWolf
April 21, 2011, 04:33 PM
It's called the Swiss K-31, a straight-pull bolt action. The problem is that there's some strength limits on that type of action, unlike the Mauser design.

Ignition Override
April 21, 2011, 07:07 PM
If it has good iron sights, especially aperture, the cocking should make no difference.

jiminhobesound
April 21, 2011, 08:23 PM
I agree with fireman 971. Seems like it is easier to work the action on a cock on open. But, that is what I grew up with, standard american hunting rifles, so maybe it is just personal preference.

mshootnit
April 21, 2011, 08:54 PM
I had a SMLE rifle for awhile that I got rid of because I don't keep anything over 3 moa. That being said the SMLE action is the fastest cycling bolt rifle I have seen although I think the straight pull rifles are right there in terms of speed too. You can flip it (SMLE) open and back with the index finger and slam it back home with your thumb so fast folks can hardly see it move. Not kidding.

Jubjub
April 21, 2011, 11:39 PM
I was talking with my uncle a few years ago, who is a hunter and target shooter and collector of long experience. One of his buddies is a gun writer, and often my uncle has access to his demo guns. Uncle was talking about shooting one of the new T/C bolt actions, and he mentioned that he liked the rifle and found it very accurate, but that he would not recommend it because with the 60 degree bolt lift, and for whatever other reasons of it being a stiff new gun, he was unable to work the bolt with the gun shouldered. This from a guy who for many years shot high power matches with bolt guns, and who definitely knows bolt action technique.

It seems to me that a shorter bolt lift would be a valid design goal in a bolt action, but if the gun cocks on the bolt lift stroke, there is clearly a limit, and it's probably 60 degrees. And, having shot Swede Mausers, I'm not all that crazy about cocking on the forward stroke. It isn't anything like a problem, especially if you are stroking the bolt briskly so that the inertia of the gun is helping, but again there's probably a better way.

Cocking on the retract stroke would seem to me to be ideal. The lift stroke would only do primary extraction and unlocking the lugs. You could design a multi lug bolt with a 45 or even 30 degree bolt lift, which would keep the bolt handle well away from the scope and cut down on hand motion. As the bolt comes back, the cocking resistance would be countered by the shoulder. The forward stroke is just stripping the cartridge from the magazine, and then another short locking rotation.

It also seems that this approach would lend itself to a pretty straightforward fire control group. Use a hammer. There's no law that says that bolt actions need to be striker fired. Centerfire autoloaders get the job done just fine with a hammer.

Anyway, there you have Jubjub's rifle of the future, a bolt action AR. :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Cock on close- why not?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!