Push or Controlled round feed?

[M118LR]

What's on your shoulder?
It's been awhile since I faced a competitor with a controlled round feed Bolt Action.
Are push feed bolt's making an inroad into General Hunting Afield?
Is there a marked difference between Controlled Round and Push Feed for dangerous vice non-dangerous game hunting?
What's your experience or opinion.
Thanks for Y'all's input.

 

[mcb]

Push feed, especially a Remington style push feed with its three rings of steel for strength. Controlled feed will never be as strong. I am also not convinced that control feed is really necessary for even dangerous games. A properly designed push feed system will not drop a round on the ground without user error. Take a Remington bolt gun and turn it upside down, it will feed just fine. You also have the option of manually dropping a round direct to chamber with a push feed. YMMV

 

[Muddydogs]

I would say that 90% of the hunting rifles sold in the last 10 to 20 years have been push feed bolts so yes push feed is well established in the hunting community.

 

[Mauser lover]

You also have the option of manually dropping a round direct to chamber with a push feed. YMMV

You can do this with a controlled feed too.

As you can probably see from my user name... I like controlled round feeding. However... Push feed has pretty much taken over, because it is WAY cheaper to manufacture. And... sad to say it... controlled feed actions don't really give you that much of a benefit. I can't believe that I just said that.

What are you looking for?

 

[M118LR]

What are you looking for?

Has Jack O'Conner's influence faded with time?
Remember the "Rifleman's Rifle" ?
I'm awaiting the opinions of folks guiding other folks.

Has the Mauser Claw declined due to off the rack pricing?
Or perhaps the Mauser Claw is suffering from low cost options off the Rack?

If memory serves me: the first USMC M40's where Bull Barreled Winchester Controlled Round Feed Rifle's off the retailers rack?

 

[.455_Hunter]

Controlled round feeding guns don't give you any benefit until they do- whether that time is sitting in a deer stand or about to stomped by a buffalo, who knows...

It's not just the feeding that I would worry about. I would be very hesitant to hunt dangerous game with a gun like a Rem 700, where the only thing looking to extract the fired case is a tiny clip of spring steel. That being said, my current elk rifle is a left-hand 700 in .338 Win Mag, so I am not totally biased against the design.

 

[someguy2800]

I've hunted with both and it doesn't make the tiniest bit of difference to me.

 

[Mauser lover]

Has Jack O'Conner's influence faded with time?
Remember the "Rifleman's Rifle" ?
I'm awaiting the opinions of folks guiding other folks.

Has the Mauser Claw declined due to off the rack pricing?
Or perhaps the Mauser Claw is suffering from low cost options off the Rack?

If memory serves me: the first USMC M40's where Bull Barreled Winchester Controlled Round Feed Rifle's off the retailers rack?

I would say that Mauser's extraction system is becoming unpopular due to cheaper options off the shelf. Any new production Mauser types seem to be pretty decent quality, and therefore pricey.

I don't know Jack O'Conner, or his "Rifleman's Rifle", so you'll have to educate me on that if you feel like it.

Good (superb, maybe positive) extraction is what you get with a Mauser system. Which doesn't usually matter, because we hardly ever get stuck cases anymore! We clean out chambers with glee, we often polish them, etc. For a wartime conscript army? Absolutely, they will be shooting a veritable ton of ammunition between cleanings sometimes. They will be given low quality ammunition. Chambers are going to be machined as fast as possible. Their guns need to be absolutely bulletproof (ha). The average deer hunter who maintains his arms? Probably not so much. But... because anything CAN fail, a dangerous game hunter probably wants things to be bulletproof! Being trampled by a buffalo because of a chance stuck case is exceeding unlikely, but...

 

[mcb]

I would say that 90% of the hunting rifles sold in the last 10 to 20 years have been push feed bolts so yes push feed is well established in the hunting community.

I believe all or nearly all current US military bolt operate sniper systems are push feed. M24, M40, XM2010, MSR/PSR

 

[Muddydogs]

Has Jack O'Conner's influence faded with time?
Remember the "Rifleman's Rifle" ?
I'm awaiting the opinions of folks guiding other folks.

Has the Mauser Claw declined due to off the rack pricing?
Or perhaps the Mauser Claw is suffering from low cost options off the Rack?

If memory serves me: the first USMC M40's where Bull Barreled Winchester Controlled Round Feed Rifle's off the retailers rack?

Where have you been the last 10 plus years? I would guess not involved with firearms very much.

I would guess that most don't even know anything about Jack O'Conner but you are dating yourself mentioning him and the Rifleman's Rifle. Anymore the Rifleman's rifle is an AR or some other tacticool rifle and not the old bolt action wood stocked rifle. Jack O'Conner has been replaced by YouTube tacticool dudes spouting off there wisdom about all things tactical.

Mauser actions are a thing of the past for the most part unless your into building up a rifle, heck I'm not even sure what brands still offer a controlled feed bolt and would bet one would have a hard time finding a controlled feed rifle on most sporting good store shelves.

Anymore its all about the dollar and push feed bolts and actions are cheaper to make so the Mauser type action lost out to profit margins. Like others have stated for general purpose use and hunting a controlled feed action is of little benefit over a push feed.

 

[HankC]

"A properly designed push feed system will not drop a round on the ground without user error."
Except when you have to load and shoot in a hurry from out of position such as trying to chamber a round when rifle is side way. Controlled Feed has better control of feeding in such rare condition but just once is enough when you need it.

 

[Laphroaig]

Jack's pet rifle, the Win M70 has come full circle back to CRF. CRF is alive and well.

 

[mcb]

"A properly designed push feed system will not drop a round on the ground without user error."
Except when you have to load and shoot in a hurry from out of position such as trying to chamber a round when rifle is side way. Controlled Feed has better control of feeding in such rare condition but just once is enough when you need it.

Try it get a 700 and turn in sideways or even upside down. As long as the user does not reverse the direction of the bolt once its starts forward it will not drop a round on the ground.

 

[M118LR]

I would guess that most don't even know anything about Jack O'Conner but you are dating yourself mentioning him and the Rifleman's Rifle.

Anymore the Rifleman's rifle is an AR or some other tacticool rifle and not the old bolt action wood stocked rifle. Jack O'Conner has been replaced by YouTube tacticool dudes spouting off there wisdom about all things tactical.

Mauser actions are a thing of the past for the most part unless your into building up a rifle.
Like others have stated for general purpose use and hunting a controlled feed action is of little benefit over a push feed.

Jack O'Conner Rifleman's Rifle & YOUTUBE AR Tacticool Dudes in the same conversation?
But HEY, in Florigun you might have to be 21 to purchase either soon?

 

[Fleetman]

I'll take controlled with a dangerous rifle anytime!

Everthing I have from 300 Wea to 338 Win to 458 Lott is controlled, Mauser-style feed. At least (if) a jam occurs with the bolt almost completely open whereas a push-feed COULD hamper you straightening a cartridge out with only an 1" or 2" opening to work on. There's a reason some rifles are designed with controlled-feed.

I have a LAR 50BMG which is loaded via removing the bolt (bolt and rear of rifle) which, although s/s, is controlled-feed.

 

[mcb]

Some of us hunt with all of them.

Last year it was an AR in 450 Bushmaster. Unfortunitly I did not manage to introduce Bambi to Thumper but I keep trying. (AR are push feed too )



But I also own Jack's rifle and have used it to take deer.


My 1954 Winchester Model 70 chambered in 270 Winchester handed down from my dad.

 

[eastbank]

take a true crf like a 98 mauser and try to single round feed a round by simply slammimg it into the action and close the bolt on it. the true 98,s actions had to have the extractors,s modified to load single rounds as they were ment to be brough up thru the magazine. so the crf rifles of today are not truly crf. I have seen so few ejector-extractor failures in over 60 years of hunting, it the last thing on my mind when getting ready for a hunt and that includes five hunts in Africa. for me a dangerous game rifle would be a double rifle in a caliber suited for the animal to be taken

 

[SwampWolf]

I don't know Jack O'Conner, or his "Rifleman's Rifle", so you'll have to educate me on that if you feel like it.

Regarding Jack O'Connor's opinion on bolt-action rifle types of extractors, here's what he had to say in his book, The Hunting Rifle: "...Since World War II the basic Mauser-type action has undergone considerable "improvement," which has been sold to the consumer as strength. A feature of the Mauser-type bolt actions is a recessed bolt-face which encloses the head of the cartridge. The Mauser-type extractor has been done away with and a smaller (and cheaper to produce) extractor that takes less of a bite on the rim of the cartridge case has been substituted. The bolt-face is no longer slotted for an ejector. Instead an ejector of the plunger type is used.
"It is true that the new actions that enclose the brass head of the cartridge with steel are stronger, in that they will stand pressures far beyond those that are ever used. They are certainly stronger than such actions as the 1903 Springfield, the 1917 Enfield, and the pre-1964 Model 70 Winchester, as these actions all use a barrel with a coned breech that leaves some of the head of the brass case unsupported...
"Anyone buying an American factory-made bolt-action rifle today will get one of the "improved" actions (The Hunting Rifle was published in 1970; Mr. O'Connor may not have heard about the new at the time Ruger Model 77 bolt-action rifle, which did come with a Mauser-style extractor). Some have better extractors than others, but all employ those plunger-type ejectors that toss the fired case clear over second base. None of them controls the cartridge as well as the standard Mauser-type action. None is as simple or as easy to take apart as the classic Mauser, the Springfield, or the pre-1964 Model 70..."

 

[HankC]

take a true crf like a 98 mauser and try to single round feed a round by simply slammimg it into the action and close the bolt on it. the true 98,s actions had to have the extractors,s modified to load single rounds as they were ment to be brough up thru the magazine

All my controlled feed rifles are 98 mausers and only need to adjust extractor tension to push feed a round while still holding a round in extractor well. In an extreme case, my 7.62x39 built on large ring mauser. 7.62x39 has a smaller rim diameter and need to spread extractor further out if want to push feed. It still holds a round in extractor fine.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

I think CRF is a nice bonus but in no way a necessity.

I've never really heard a story of push feed failing like all the gun mags and blogs like to mention. It's all "I know someone who knows someone whose buddy had an issue hunting dangerous-rabid-squirrels in the Outback of Africa"

 

[jmr40]

There are a lot of misconceptions about CRF. They don't FEED any more reliable than PF rifles. Upside down or from any other position. The CRF advantage much more reliable extraction and ejection. Especially if the rifle is filthy. Under "normal" conditions most of us will never notice the difference. A PF rifle in pristine condition will function just as well.

I have both types. But if I'm hunting in a remote wilderness setting, possibly in harsh weather conditions, where the rifle could be dropped in mud, sand, snow, etc., I trust a CRF rifle to function much more than a PF rifle. If deer hunting, and my rifle fails to extract and eject I may lose a trophy at worst. But if hunting something that bites back I could lose my life. Either way, the harsher the conditions, the more I want CRF.

Years ago hunters went on weeks, or even months on long expeditions into wilderness areas. Today most of us spend a day in the woods and are never far from home and proper tools to disassemble and clean a rifle. CRF meant a lot more to the guy on a 2 week horseback hunt in Alaska or Canadian wilderness.

the crf rifles of today are not truly crf.

I'm gonna disagree. The early Ruger 77's with the tang safety had the large claw extractor, but the plunger ejector from a PF rifle. Those rifles did not allow the extractor to snap over the rim until the cartridge was completely in the chamber and the bolt closed Those were not CRF.

But the 77MK-II, Hawkeye, Winchester 70, and all of the older guns that have had the extractor modified to load straight into the chamber are still CRF. I've owned at least a dozen Rugers, Winchesters, MK-X's, and Kimbers with CRF actions. Every single one of them had the cartridge rim under the extractor with less than 1/8" of forward bolt movement. It's not like the old Rugers, or other PF rifles that didn't get the rim under the extractor until the bolt was closed.

And despite the Controlled Round Feed name, feeding the cartridge into the chamber was never the real advantage. It was always the extracting and ejection. The newer designs may need a tiny fraction of an inch more bolt movement to get the cartridge rim under the extractor, but that doesn't detract at all from the real advantage.

 

[cdb1]

I prefer CRF for the cool factor. For my uses though they have no practical advantage. I also read an article several years ago where they tried to get PF rifles to not feed by holding them upside down, etc. They always fed.

Current CRF rifles:
Winchester
Montana
Kimber
There are more

 

[Newtosavage]

I've gotten over the controlled round feed. I don't hunt dangerous game hanging upside down. I don't need it. I also got tired of jamming rounds into the chamber because I forgot and single fed them at the range. At least three times I had to unscrew my radio antenna on my truck to use as a ramrod to push a round out of my Ruger 77's. Never once had to do that with a push feed rifle.

I've hunted feral pigs with push-feed rifles for decades. I am not sure you can cycle a bolt faster than I've cycled one in the middle of a pack of pigs. No failures yet.

So yea, as much as like the idea of controlled feed, I simply don't need it and these days, no longer want it.

 

[Llama Bob]

What's on your shoulder?
It's been awhile since I faced a competitor with a controlled round feed Bolt Action.
Are push feed bolt's making an inroad into General Hunting Afield?
Is there a marked difference between Controlled Round and Push Feed for dangerous vice non-dangerous game hunting?
What's your experience or opinion.
Thanks for Y'all's input.

The ubiquity of M700s and clones in competitive shooting stems from the fact that once upon a time Remington had some of the best factory barrels available and a somewhat faster lock time. Now that's not even close to true, but once people settle on a design there's a lot of inertia. For any decent sized caliber, a square bottom receiver as with an M70 is an obvious improvement. For small enough stuff it doesn't matter. Target shooting has been moving to smaller calibers overall.

There's been a lot of push feeds in the fields for a long time. Can't say I own any though other than one M700 at the back of the safe that doesn't shoot for squat that I need to sell but can't sell to anyone I like. Not planning on getting any more either. Don't like their extraction or ejection.

I'm not going near any dangerous game with a M700. M70 or Mauser, possibly. Winchester 1886 or M71, sure. But not a M700 or anything that works like it.

 

[hillman23]

I have 2 dandy CRF rifles in the gun cabinet but I own and primarily hunt with a push feed rifle. However, it has a larger, more substantial extractor and also has a fixed ejector as opposed to the plunger style. Not that weaker extractors and plunger ejectors will fail but I simply feel more confident in the field with the set up I have. If I went to Africa (because I won the lottery) in pursuit of creatures more apt and capable of harming the shooter, I'd go with the reliability of a fine English double rifle...... or a CRF rifle.