Does anybody remember how Sako actions fared in the Zim PH tests. I remember? a post by Ganyana I think evaulating each rifle.

Using a Sako action for anything larger than a bobcat is like signing your own death warrant. Statistics indicate that something just less than 90% of the African hunters who use rifles with Sako actions never live to tell how sorry they are. To help rid the African conintent of these "suicide" rifles I have engaged a Federally Licensed Dealer to receive them from anyone, no questions asked, for proper disposal. His and my services are purely charitable and we ask nothing else in return. Send me a PM for the address to which you may send your hazaradous Sako to assure than no African hunter's life is jeopardized by it.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Using a Sako action for anything larger than a bobcat is like signing your own death warrant. Statistics indicate that something just less than 90% of the African hunters who use rifles with Sako actions never live to tell how sorry they are. To help rid the African conintent of these "suicide" rifles I have engaged a Federally Licensed Dealer to receive them from anyone, no questions asked, for proper disposal. His and my services are purely charitable and we ask nothing else in return. Send me a PM for the address to which you may send your hazaradous Sako to assure than no African hunter's life is jeopardized by it.

..........................

If you trust push feed actions the Sako is as good as a push feed action gets!

...........................................................................

Mac

Isn't that double a "push feed"???

how else do you get the cartridges in?





SSR

If you use a Sako and get killed by a buff, then ....

Oops, haven't you taken enough chances?

Will and Mac,

I got it. It was just an intellectual pursuit.

Years ago, I had several Sakos and thought I had arrived, now all of my DG rifles are CRF, some mausers but mostly Winchesters.

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
Mac

Isn't that double a "push feed"???

how else do you get the cartridges in?

SSR

All my DR's are CRF, my hand controls the cartridges being loaded into the chamber !!!

Butch, Quit kabitizing and trade that 470 in for a 500 and have a big boomer to shoot. Leave the bolt guns for plains game.

Mike

Retreever,

Noted. You stay on message for sure.

I hunted in Tanzania with a PH who sometimes used a .375 H&H Sako carbine. I was so impressed with it that I bought one as soon as I had the chance. Great little carbine.

I'll pay good money to see Butch tangle with that wounded Buffalo again, but this time with the .500 ! And then relate the story in the Comfort Inn again in January!

One of my PH's had one of the rare old L61 Magnum in 416 Rem and was very happy with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
Mac

Isn't that double a "push feed"???

how else do you get the cartridges in?





SSR

No sir it is a controled "DROP" feed, because I do the DROPPING only once for every four aimed shots and It has never been short stocked even once!

Taken a dozen head of dangerous game with my "Sako, heaven forebid" .375 H & H. With all the doom and gloom here about the Sako, glad those DG critters didn't know I was shooting a push feed Sako!!!

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

glad those DG critters didn't know I was shooting a push feed Sako

Otherwise, you'd be dead for sure!

The new(ish) 85 action is a controlled round feed. My .375 H&H will feed empties without a glitch. The 85 bedding system is different, but I have not heard of any failures.

quote:

Originally posted by Walter Prociuk:
The new(ish) 85 action is a controlled round feed. My .375 H&H will feed empties without a glitch. The 85 bedding system is different, but I have not heard of any failures.

Well, it's sort of a controlled round feed. I have one in the Bavarian model, 270 Win. The bolt face does not grab and hold the cartridge out of the magazine. It push feeds into the chamber. However, once you push it all the way into the chamber, the bolt face then grabs the cartridge without having to rotate the bolt handle down as is the case with a standard push feed rifle.

It is a hybrid CRF at best. A nice rifle no doubt, but not a real CRF.

I've had two .375 H&H rifles built on the old 691 actions. I really like them and have taken both to Africa. One was built for nasty weather in hard chrome and plastic and the other a fair weather version with wood, blue, barrel sling swivel and quarter rib. While I know it's absolute blasphemy to admit this in public - I've had less feeding trouble with them than my CRF Winchesters or Mausers. It also makes a lot of sense to me to be able to load the chamber out of my pocket and leave the magazine full - that's a pain with a CRF. Not only do they fed plenty positively for my purposes, but they feed more quietly than my CRF rifles. But YMMV.

I know this a really personal argument and there is no reason to try to change anyone's mind - but in my 20+ years of guiding (although not DG) I've observed a higher percentage of feeding issues with CRF rifles than push feeds. If someone knows what they're doing when they put together a CRF there is nothing finer. Maybe our 1,000+ clients over the years have just been cursed, but Mr. Murphy seemed to like hanging around a decent percentage of their less professionally pampered CRF rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by Kyler Hamann:
It also makes a lot of sense to me to be able to load the chamber out of my pocket and leave the magazine full - that's a pain with a CRF.

I'm not sure I buy this statement. Depending on your technique for loading the chamber with a CRF, it can be exactly the same. With a full magazine, you drop the chamber round on top of the magazine rounds. Right handed shooters: You press the loose round down a bit with the left fingers, slightly compressing the mag rounds down in order to prevent the bolt from stripping the top magazine round. Then slide the bolt forward with the right hand. With push feed, you push the bolt all the way forward and close the bolt. With CRF, you push the bolt forward, the rim slides under the extractor, continue pushing the bolt forward and close it. It is exactly the same motion with the exception of watching that the rim is grabbed by the extractor with the CRF. Takes no extra time and is no more complex.

But as you say, YMMV!

You can load a single round into the chamber of a CFR rifle just by dropping the round into the chamber and slamming the bolt closed.

The extractor pops over the rim of the cartridge and you can bang away as desired.

Don't give me a speech how that "is not allowed" with a CFR.

If you ever need to reload in a DG situation, as opposed to sitting in a 20' deer blind, your extractor better pop over the rim, or get it fixed so it will.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
You can load a single round into the chamber of a CFR rifle just by dropping the round into the chamber and slamming the bolt closed.

The extractor pops over the rim of the cartridge and you can bang away as desired.

Don't give me a speech how that "is not allowed" with a CFR.

If you ever need to reload in a DG situation, as opposed to sitting in a 20' deer blind, your extractor better pop over the rim, or get it fixed so it will.

Yeah, the failure to "snap over" is the big drawback with the Mauser-type long extractor. I've virtually never seen a military Mauser which would snap over a chambered round, and few commercial ones which would. The old Win 70 usually had its extractor beveled so that it would snap over without too much complaint, but the act of "snapping over" always takes extra force on the bolt and has been known to break an extra hard extractor.

There's nothing wrong with a good CRF action, but they do take a bit more fit and finish to make them function properly than does the push design. Regardless, it is pure fantasy be believe that a CRF is somehow going to save your bacon when a push feed would spell your death. Fantasize all you want; it just doesn't happen.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
You can load a single round into the chamber of a CFR rifle just by dropping the round into the chamber and slamming the bolt closed.

The extractor pops over the rim of the cartridge and you can bang away as desired.

Don't give me a speech how that "is not allowed" with a CFR.

If you ever need to reload in a DG situation, as opposed to sitting in a 20' deer blind, your extractor better pop over the rim, or get it fixed so it will.

Yeah, the failure to "snap over" is the big drawback with the Mauser-type long extractor. I've virtually never seen a military Mauser which would snap over a chambered round, and few commercial ones which would. The old Win 70 usually had its extractor beveled so that it would snap over without too much complaint, but the act of "snapping over" always takes extra force on the bolt and has been known to break an extra hard extractor.

There's nothing wrong with a good CRF action, but they do take a bit more fit and finish to make them function properly than does the push design. Regardless, it is pure fantasy be believe that a CRF is somehow going to save your bacon when a push feed would spell your death. Fantasize all you want; it just doesn't happen.

I was trying to kill off this buff I wounded and he wouldn't die. I had a push feed Mod. 700 in .375 and it jammed up solid.

Push feeds are not for me, ever again.

If the extractor breaks when trying to snap the hook over a case rim, chamfer the face of a new one or buy a different CFR!

Developing the habit of only loading a round in a CRF rifle from the magazine is a habit that could get you killed.

quote:

Originally posted by Kyler Hamann:
While I know it's absolute blasphemy to admit this in public - I've had less feeding trouble with them than my CRF Winchesters or Mausers. It also makes a lot of sense to me to be able to load the chamber out of my pocket and leave the magazine full - that's a pain with a CRF.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

I'm not sure I buy this statement. Depending on your technique for loading the chamber with a CRF, it can be exactly the same. With a full magazine, you drop the chamber round on top of the magazine rounds. But as you say, YMMV!

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
You can load a single round into the chamber of a CFR rifle just by dropping the round into the chamber and slamming the bolt closed.

The extractor pops over the rim of the cartridge and you can bang away as desired.

Don't give me a speech how that "is not allowed" with a CFR.

If you ever need to reload in a DG situation, as opposed to sitting in a 20' deer blind, your extractor better pop over the rim, or get it fixed so it will.

The fact is gentlemen no rifle that is not put together properly will feed properly regardless of type! The fact is push feed rifle that are properly put together will fail to feed simply because of the design if the operator isn’t very careful. Under stress of facing a dangerous animal at close range mistakes are often made, that a CRF feature will guard against.

IMO the feeding problems most have with a CRF action are in most cases actions that have been used to build a rifle for a larger cartridge than the action was factory made for. Like the 98 military Mauser action by simply re-barreling it to a larger cartridge head size, with no care taken to reshape the feed rails for the new cartridge.

On the single feed into the chamber even the unmodified Mauser will feed a round on top of a full magazine by simply pushing the top round in the magazine slightly so the bolt misses the top cartridge enough to catch the cartridge you are loading to go under the extractor. The PF must have the top round pressed down as well to feed a single round into the chamber if the magazine is full. If the military CRF extractor is properly modified there is no need for the new round to be place under the extractor but placed directly in the chamber and the beveled extractor snaps over rim when the action is closed just like the push feed action.

As far as I know all commercial CRF actions that have not been re-chambered for a different cartridge head and/or body size are designed to feed a single cartridge directly into the chamber.

It makes no difference what action you have if it is not properly set up it is likely to fail to feed properly. Assuming both CRF and PF are properly set up the PF is more likely to fail simply because of it’s design not being as fool-proof as it can be, and the fool that is operating it improperly!

IMO, no PF action should ever be chambered for a dangerous game cartridge!
................................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:


On the single feed into the chamber even the unmodified Mauser will feed a round on top of a full magazine by simply pushing the top round in the magazine slightly so the bolt misses the top cartridge enough to catch the cartridge you are loading to go under the extractor. The PF must have the top round pressed down as well to feed a single round into the chamber if the magazine is full. If the military CRF extractor is properly modified there is no need for the new round to be place under the extractor but placed directly in the chamber and the beveled extractor snaps over rim when the action is closed just like the push feed action.

Mac,

I was trying to say the exact thing as you. Your explanation may be a bit more clear than mine. With the CRF, just load the mag completely full, drop in another round on top, push it down just a bit so as not to strip the top round from the mag, move the bolt forward until the loose cartridge slips under the extractor, and close. I realize most CRF will snap over if just shoved forward hard enough which is fine under duress, but this method is easy on the equipment under normal loading conditions.

As we both said, the Push Feed action must also have the magazine cartridges pushed down while top loading to prevent striping the top round from the mag. That's why I stated the CRF and Push Feed load technique is the same for both actions, with the exception on the CRF to see that the rim goes under the extractor. Other than that, identical.

For that reason, I don't buy Mr. Hamann's statement about not being able to "load the chamber out of my pocket and leave the magazine full" with the CRF. Interestingly enough, I've met several hunters shooting CZ's and M-70's that don't know this technique. Most of those have been "new" to CRF actions but familiar with push feeds. As soon as someone shows them this technique, the reaction is usually ... "Duh"!

Todd,
I know this is "six one way and half-a-dozen the other" to argue the point among people who have made up their mind on what works best for them, but I never mentioned "not being able to" load out of my pocket using a CRF. If you read it again I said "It's a pain". I've used the various methods and FOR ME (and I've spent plenty of time carrying both Mausers and CRF model 70's on a couple continents) it's generally more of a hassle, louder and slower to load out of my pocket with a CRF.
With a PF there is no need to push down the top round in the magazine OR the round that's going into the chamber. The bolt doesn't need to be drawn back past the rear of the top round in the magazine. Simply draw it back most of the way and slip the extra cartridge in the general direction of the chamber and the bolt goes home quietly and quickly while not having to look down at the gun. No snapping over, hooking under, clicking, pressing, depressing, shucking, jiving or other gyrations required.
I've loaded countless times out of my pocket using various methods (including those mentioned above) with CRF rifles too, but in my experience it's more of a hassle and usually louder.

Loading out of one's pocket is only one small consideration for action choice so for those who are convinced no PF rifle has ever properly fed two cartridges in a row it's a moot point.

I don't care if I convince anyone else, I'm just offering my opinion. I'll continue to carry both types of actions as the mood and purpose dictates.

(Note to self - Go back to the practice of not opening threads about CRF vs. PF)

quote:

Originally posted by Kyler Hamann:


(Note to self - Go back to the practice of not opening threads about CRF vs. PF)

Hey, that one isn't so bad. Try opening one on bolts vs. doubles!! I've sworn off of that one!!

Sako is the ONLY European made rifle that I would think of hunting with.

The current trend of European gunmakers of trying to outdo each other to make some silly contraption is beyond me.

quote:

On the single feed into the chamber even the unmodified Mauser will feed a round on top of a full magazine by simply pushing the top round in the magazine slightly so the bolt misses the top cartridge enough to catch the cartridge you are loading to go under the extractor.

That is possible with some rifles, but not with others. It depends on how much "give" there is in a full magazine. On some rifles, the top round cannot be pushed down in the magazine far enough that the hand-fed round's rim will be low enough to go below the extractor's bottom lip.

Note to self: Resist mentioniong that the Sako magazine will take four magnums down plus one in the chamber, making it a five-shooter. Most Mausers will only take three magnums in the magazine, and if they won't single-feed a fourth round then they are three-shooters. There, good thing I'm not going to mention that issue and start more arguments.

The CZ 550 I believe can be loaded by inserting a round into the chamber and closing the bolt.I think I read about it in the CZ website. Works fine with my rifle.

I don't understand these posts about loading.

I have a PF .458 and a CRF .375, both Model 70s. Each holds three in the magazine plus one in the chamber. It's as easy to load four rounds in one as it is in the other.

A client with a Sako action? Really? Just one more thing your PH will complain about.

quote:

Originally posted by lal:
The CZ 550 I believe can be loaded by inserting a round into the chamber and closing the bolt.I think I read about it in the CZ website. Works fine with my rifle.

Most commercial Mausers and CRF Mauser types can be loaded directly into the chamber and just like the PF only press the top round in the magazine enough so the bolt doesn’t catch it or simply do not pull the bolt that far back, place the cartridge in the chamber and close the bolt. The front side of the extractor is beveled so it snaps over the rim. As I said earlier only the military Mausers do not have the beveled front of the extractor.

..................................................................................

Ask Tony Makris or Johan Calitz about the new Sako rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by Walter Prociuk:
The new(ish) 85 action is a controlled round feed. My .375 H&H will feed empties without a glitch.

I'm not sure I would consider the ability to feed empties much of a bonus on a DG rifle as I prefer them to feed loaded ammo

The guide I hunted with in Kodiak used an old Sako in .416 Rem on its third or fourth coat of rustoleum- that ol Sako's been at his side for nearly 20(forgot how long he said) or so years. He said if he "ever had to shoot at a bear while hanging upside down from an alder he might look into a CRF." But til then he'll keep that Sako for as long as it holds together.

quote:

Originally posted by FMC:
The guide I hunted with in Kodiak used an old Sako in .416 Rem on its third or fourth coat of rustoleum- that ol Sako's been at his side for nearly 20(forgot how long he said) or so years. He said if he "ever had to shoot at a bear while hanging upside down from an alder he might look into a CRF." But til then he'll keep that Sako for as long as it holds together.

Of course push feed rifles feed just fine upside down proving this particular guide in Kodiak doesn't understand the question, not to mention the answer!

The issue between the two action types is really about having an action that will eject a cartridge that has not been shoved all the way into the chamber and had the bolt closed on it, (ie push feed extractor does not have a hold on the cartridge), thereby preventing striping another round from the magazine while the previous round hasn't been ejected yet, and thereby jamming the action by trying to shove two rounds into the chamber in a moment of duress. Of course, a CRF is no absolute guarantee against duress messing up the works during the heat of battle with a dangerous animal but for sure, two rounds at a time will jam the gun whether it is upside down or right side up!

If there was a real, noticeable cut and dried performance advantage between PF and CRF rifles we wouldn't be discussing which is better. But if both are well tuned and the user intimately familiar with their rifle the difference is mostly a matter of opinion.
But, that said, all the reasons that Paul Mauser decided to modify his PF actions to CRF still apply when they are still being used by humans under stress.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
If there was a real, noticeable cut and dried performance advantage between PF and CRF rifles we wouldn't be discussing which is better. But if both are well tuned and the user intimately familiar with their rifle the difference is mostly a matter of opinion.
But, that said, all the reasons that Paul Mauser decided to modify his PF actions to CRF still apply when they are still being used by humans under stress.

I agree with that Phil! They both work just fine under most circumstances. I was pointing out how we often hear that smirky comment about feeding upside down as the rebuttal to the CRF when in fact that is not what the perceived advantage is about.

Oh no. I agree. Even though there is often a difference between theory and practice......I prefer Pre 64/war mod 70s. Just pointing out that the Sako is a good PF action.

When the last big game PF other than my .22 caliber plinkers (a .270 Win) didn't pick up a cartridge I got rid of all my PFs and started a Pre War obsession. Oh and those .22s are single shots. Never again!

If it don't feed correctly properly universally the rifle is a POS, no matter what the action- CZ, '98, Remchester, et al.

I see that no one took the bait on five rounds vs. three (and to be fair, with most M70's and '98's you get 3 + 1). Regardless, the additional round you get with a Sako is not to be discounted. I've never hunted DG with a Sako (or any other action, for that matter), but I have had the experience of the fifth round in a Sako magazine being the difference in a deer on the ground and a lost, wounded animal. I believe that the Sako A-IV Safari model used a "perch belly" magazine that gave 5 +1 magnum rounds. According to some of the "hairy-chested, big balls" stories I've heard from hunters who claim to have seen their lives flash before them in a close brush with death a la Capstick, having six rounds of .458 Hofmann's available would have been a fine thing. Of course, those stories are virtually 100% bullshit, as is the difference in CRF and PF, but if you're going to invent fantasies like a 13 year-old playing video games, you might as well invent the fantasy that one or two extra rounds in your DG rifle will come closer to saving your bacon than the design of its extractor.