Weatherby Dangerous Game Rifle

17 August 2001, 17:43

<30 cal>

Bill, to me I don't care whether a rifles a push feed or controlled round feed. Both will feed sideways, upside down, and at any other angle. I have always loved weatherbys for their feel, reliability, and power. Have yet to fire an in accurate weatherby. From .257 to .460 they've all been great. Never fired the .240 though im sure it will perform wonderfully. And so it can only hold 3 rounds. If 3 rounds of .378 cant take it out there aren't many things that will. I fired a .378 Mark V and from my experience its best to leave the brake on. Especially if your only 145 lbs. My new rule for the big weatherby's is it doesn't come out of the case without the brake on it! If you like a gun and can afford it why not go for it?

18 August 2001, 01:39

Nickudu

Bill,
The way I see it is that the Weatherby name is an American institution. Thousands of great hunters have used them over the decades. There is no way in the world Ed Weatherby would besmirch his family name by putting a piece of crap on the market ... especially when the model in question has been designated the "Weatherby Dangerous Game Rifle"!
The detractors will always be there, no matter which rifle you fancy, so you had best just get the one that tickles it!

Best .... Nick

18 August 2001, 04:28

500grains

I have never owned a Wby.

But a gunsmith friend told me 2 things about Wby rifles:

1. In the Mauser weatherbys chambered for 300 WM, there was a chronic problem of bolts getting set back in the receiver. He said it was b/c wby opened up those old mausers too much and they could not take the pressures of a 300 wm. Wby would gladly replace the receiver for a customer, however.

2. In the Mark V in 378 and 460, there were many feeding problems because of the magazine design. Other than feeding, he considered the Mark V a very reliable action.

18 August 2001, 08:00

Atkinson

Ed Weatherby openned up thoes action 100% in front and I doubt that any Mauser or M-70 can handle that..Holland & Holland, Westley Richards and a host of others that did it properly never had that problem..

I'm a desenter of pushfeeds and consider the term Weatherby and Dangerous Game Rifle an oxymoran...Sorry guys but he asked.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

18 August 2001, 13:39

KuduKing

Bill:

From the replies and comments It seems that you must have edited your message after the original post to remove some additional information and questions that others are responding to. I am guessing that you may have stated you are 145 pounds and that the gun has a removable brake.

I love Weatherbys. All the ones I've owned have been very accurate. None have failed in the field or at the range.

In a properly assembled push-feed, I've never had a problem feeding. The Mauser extractor is certainly workable, but a price: stiffer operation, 90 degree bolt lift and less-supported case head. In the Weatherby, I find the faster and smoother bolt operation, and the greater safety of the enclosed case head, a BIG benefit in fast and positive shooting. Now that is safety factor in hunting any game.

Remember the Mauser was designed when bolt-actions were new, well over 100 years ago. Since shooters weren't familiar with the operation, a controlled-round feed was needed to insure that the round would still feed if the bolt was mis-handled.

Modern shooters grew up on bolt-actions, and manipulating them is second nature. Perhaps if someone is a goof-ball who doesn't shoot much or at all and still wants to experience a hunt for dangerous game, he is better off with a controlled feed. That guy shouldn't be hunting anyway.

For the rest of us it's a non-issue. So long as the extractor is sturdy, there is no problem. That is were I take issue with Remington and Browning and some others. Those extractors are too weak-looking for my taste. Some of the hairy-chested controlled-round feeders may be automatically associating non-controlled-round feed with a weak extractor.

It is a false assumption. If you are nostalgic go ahead and enjoy the Mauser-clones. But they make no difference in the hunting field, and I find the slower bolt movement a hinderance. Those same folks probably also believe revolvers are more reliable defensive pieces than pistols.

The issue is like 3-9x variable scopes. Back in the old days (whenever that was), variables were considered bad because they were unreliable and considered too slow to use. Well if you were raised on iron sights and then given a scope, you had a hard time getting used to them. Therefore the preference for the silly 2.5x and 4x scopes, with the 6x considered a "long-range open plains" number.

What a joke. Anyone under the age of 50 grew up on scopes and acquiring a sight picture with one is second nature, and faster than with irons. So more power is usable and 3-9x is ideal for anything but dangerous game.

What's my point? Get the Weatherby, enjoy it and slay many animals.

[This message has been edited by KuduKing (edited 08-18-2001).]

18 August 2001, 13:50

<JohnDL>

I have no problem with Weatherbys per se for sport-hunting. In every trip to Africa I have taken one along-but not as a DGR. I have no problem with the push-feed whether it is Wby or Remington or whatever. As long as it feeds reliably its OK. My problem with the Wby is that it only holds two rounds down, with one in the chamber. This is OK for sport-hunting but not dangerous game. I also don't like the safety. It is a two-position safety. I like the 3 position safety on a DGR. I like to be able to put the safety in the middle position for loading and unloading. The safety is never off until the rifle is coming up to the shoulder. This sounds like a trivial thing but when you're as nervous as a gerbil in a Key West pet shop this is a good feature to have.

19 August 2001, 02:35

<500 AHR>

If you like the Weatherby buy it!! Push feeds have there limitations (ie cannot feed upside down or side ways), and the PH is the guy who is needs the big magazine as you pay him to correct the situation if you miss badly (or things go otherwise wrong).

Kuduking,
The mauser action extraction system was not designed because no one know how to handle a bolt gun. It was design to provide the most positive feed and extraction possible with a bolt gun to improve the reliability of the battle rifle. The M98 was preceded by many botl action rifles (ie the Lebel, Lee, Krag, Several other Mausers, Mosin Nagant, etc). The M98 was a hands down improvement in the reliability department of feeding and extraction. That is the reason by the way that all bolt action battle rifles after the M98 adopted the Mauser system. A sniper rifle by the way is not a battle rifle.

I do not see any major issue with using a push feed action for dangerous game. The reason being, as previously mentioned, you pay the PH to do two things:
1.) Take you the place the game is.
2.) Back you up if you need it. Therefore the PH needs a large magazine capacity and preferably a CRF rifle for reliability.
Many and I mean many of the hunters who go through a PH are not skilled riflemen and therefore need good backup as they may well be lucky to hit the broadside of a barn (shooting from the inside). I am not suggesting by the way, that anyone here is a bad shot.

Just my two cents worth. For the record I hunt only with CFR rifles. This is becuase I have had issues with rapid firing of the pushers. No I did not short stroke. It is just that if you work the action while in recoil the cartridge is prone to mislocating.

Todd E

19 August 2001, 04:09

Big Bore

There it is again, the often quoted untruth that push feeds will not feed upside down or sideways. They most certainly will. I've got mixed PF and CF bolt guns, and I've tried them in every position you can put a rifle in, and they all feed every time. I don't know why this mistruth won't die. Get one and try it. It will feed, at least the Remingtons and Rugers that I have that are PF feed every time, maybe not other makes, but these do.

Also stated that the Weatherby has only two rounds in the magazine and one up the tube. This said by people who would most likely argue the Double is the best DGR. No matter how I do the math 3 is still more than two. True, you can reload the double a hell-of-a-lot quicker than any bolt gun, but from what I have seen you can load and shoot six rounds of out a Weatherby as quick as you can shoot and load 6 rounds out of a double. Up to 4 shots, the double wins, after than it's a dead heat, providing both shooters know what they are doing. Hell, with my single shots I can keep up with a bolt gun up to three rounds, then I tend to fall behind.

This is just one of those subjects that once you develope a preference for one, damn anyone who tells you your choice is not the ONLY choice.

Bill, if you want the rifle, go for it. You only handicap you will suffer from getting it will be in the minds of those that are too closed to admit that there might be another choice besides theirs.

19 August 2001, 04:36

<JohnDL>

Todd, with all due respect, one does notalways get the chance to decide when and where things will go to hell. One can not always rely on the PH to bail you out. On the closest call I've had, both the PH and I emptied our magazines at a charging unwounded buffalo before the last shot stopped him. If he and/or I would've been using Weatherbys the biggest problem the buff would've had is deciding which of us to skewer.
I've never seen a full-time PH use a Weatherby rifle (no doubt there is some partime rancher/hunter in SA who does), but if it isn't used by the pros there must be a reason.

19 August 2001, 08:04

KuduKing

quote:
Originally posted by Todd E:
The M98 was a hands down improvement in the reliability department of feeding and extraction. That is the reason by the way that all bolt action battle rifles after the M98 adopted the Mauser system.

Oh really? The Mauser CRF was designed in 1892 at a time when most armies were equipped with single-shot weapons. The Germans were the better businessmen and had no export restrictions, so the Mauser gained wide acceptance, especially with those armies that had no experience with repeaters.

The Lee, Moisin and Lebel rifles of other nations were all redesigned and modified in the early 1900s and again in in the post-WWI period. The French designed a whole new rifle. Guess what they all have in common? They retained the push-feed design, despite the alleged "superiority" of the pre-existing Mauser action.

In fact, the Lee-Enfield was considered the best bolt-action battle-rifle ever designed. Battle is more dangerous than shooting any animal, yet there were no complaints of unreliabilty of the Lee-Enfield or Moisin or P14, despite that "unreliable" push-feed.

True CRF has it's own problems, like not being able to drop a round into the chamber and close the action. If you want a quick 4th shot with that Weatherby DGR, just drop a round into the action and close the bolt. It will feed just fine.

Again, you people enjoy your CRF rifles if that's what you like, but don't claim they are essential. Push-feeds are no handicap, and in fact are faster to operate, unless you are a boob that should spend more time practicing the operation of your weapon.

19 August 2001, 09:35

Curtis_Lemay

I beg to differ but, one of the first repeaters was the 71/84 Mauser adopted in 1885 by Germany it was a BOLT ACTION repeater. To my knowledge only the US played around with lever-action designs for repeating rifles. In 1886, the French came out with the first smokeless powder small bore (relatively) cartridge the
8x50mm Lebel along with the Lebel rifle yet another bolt action repeater design. The Germans again, in 1888, came out with the 1888 Commission rifle in 8mm mauser the first to employ the Mannlicher magazine system, ie; the stripper clip it used was actually part of the magazine, thus if you lost the stripper clip, you had nothing but a single shot. In 1889, the Brits adopted the Lee Metford the predecessor to the
Lee-Enfield, yep a bolt action repeater too. 1889, 1890 and 1891 saw Mauser rifles (which was basically the famous 1891 Argentine mauser) for Belgium, Turkey, and Argentina respectively (although Spain did order some 1891s as well). Japan had the 1889 Murata with an eight shot tubular magazine (yep a bolt action). The Mosin was also developed for Russia in 1891 and the Carcano, likewise in 1891, for Italy. 1892, 1893 and 1895 saw 3 Mauser designs for the Spanish military. The US adopted their first small bore smokeless military rifle in 1892, the Krag-Jorgenson. Also in 1892, the French adopted the first of a series of Berthier rifles and continued devlopment of the Lebel. While 1894 and 1896 saw Mausers that went to Sweden. I forget when Norway developed their Krag-Jorgenson, but I believe Denmark developed their Krag in 1889. There were several other repeating arms, such as straight pull designs for the Austrian empire and others, but i will by pass them so as not to confuse the issue any further. Well over 10 years of military design had been done, some by Muaser himself, before the M98 came strolling into our lives. if you want to check me, go ahead. Bolt Action Rifles by DeHass is a good place to start.

19 August 2001, 11:48

Longbob

Winchesters and Weatherbys are my favorite rifles. It's kinda like blondes and brunettes. Winchesters are the smart brunettes and Weatherbys are the flashy blondes. And I hate redheads (Remingtons).

19 August 2001, 14:26

<500 AHR>

Curtis,

My point exactly. By the way, one very real reason that the Lee Enfield didn't die until NATO was that the British lacked the money and desire to retool it. This is why Pattern 14 (read mauser derivative) were made here in the States.

I would love to see a push feed rifle feed upside down. In order to do accomplish this feat the rifle has to disprove Mr Newton's Law of Gravity. There is nothing holding the cartridge in the action therefore gravity attracts it to the ground! I have owned many push feed rifles and I know how they work!!

AGAIN MY ANSWER TO THE ORIGINAL POST... IF THE WEATHERBY IS YOUR DESIRE BY ALL MEANS BUY IT AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT THIS *$@#.

To the poster who had a PH and himself empty magazines into a charging buffalo. I would recommend in the future shot it in the head. No brain no charge...peroid!

Todd E

19 August 2001, 15:49

Big Bore

Try it, you'll see. Sure, if you work the bolt so slowly that the round is released from the magazine with no forward momentum it will fall out, but who is so limp wristed, especially in a moment of high anxiety, that they work the bolt like an old woman? Work the bolt like it is ment to be worked, even at half speed, and the push feed will feed just as reliably as a CR, upside down, sideways, left up, left down, you name it. I've done in on three 700s (7mm-08, 7mm STW, 25-06) and two Ruger 77s (338 and 458) that were push feeds just to see if what I have heard said was true, it was not. I have found that most who say it won't feed, have not tried it, or try is so sloooowllly that they are intentionally inducing a malfunction. Maybe not all PF will do it, but I find it highly unlikely that I got the only five ever made that do.

20 August 2001, 01:15

<JohnDL>

After all this discussion, I wonder how many "Weatherby Dangerous Game Rifles" will, indeed, ever be used on dangerous game. I suspect that most of the people who actually buy them will never get closer to dangerous game than a Sullivan video.

20 August 2001, 02:24

<500 AHR>

Bigbores,

I did what you suggested and my 458 Win Mag (post 64 Win) and my 416 Remington (M700 Rem) both dropped the cartridge. Working the bolt really fast I was able to jam the cartridge between the breech cone and the bolt.

If your rifles do what you are suggesting you should contact the National Academy of Science and let them know that you have disproven Newton's Law of Gravity.

By they way, both of these rifles will jam in the same manner described above if you work the action while under/recovering from recoil.

Let me explain this to you since it seems obvious you have never done this.
1.) You fire the rifle.
2.) Immediately after the round fires you move you hand up and open the bolt. While this is going on your shoulder is moving backwards and the rifle's muzzle is climbing toward the sky (this would be recoil)
3.) You work the action while you pull the rifle back down out of recoil with your off hand (that would be the hand not on the bolt).
4.) Now the rifle is reloaded and returned to battery so that you can fire a follow-up shot.

If you are any good, with a big bore, you should be able to accomplish this feat in about 1.5 seconds or less. This can be very difficult with a big rifle (500 Jeffery, 505 Gibbs, 585 Nyati, etc). During this exercise the push feed rifles tend to jam because the inertia of the cartridge opposed the loading of the cartridge (this follows Mr. Netwon's Third Law an object im motion wants to follow that motion unless acted upon by an external force). The external force is not there with a push feed action. The external force is there with the extraction claw on the mauser type action.

That being said. The push feed action is perfectly suitable for dangerous game. One must realize however that it will not provide the optimum rate of fire. By the way, this is not a significant issue with the old push action battle rifles for several reasons.

I know what I am saying is true for two reasons.
1.) Been there done that. This means I have hunted dangerous game!
2.) The LAWS OF PHYSICS are on my side!!

1.) Recoil was much lower.
2.) The cartridge was shorter (less leverage)
3.) The bullet had less mass (less inertia)
4.) The extractor on many of these actions was on top of the bolt therefore providing some resistance to the cartridge flipping out of the action.

I also will not get into the mentality of some of the nations toward the survivability of their troops when it comes to the selection of arms. This mentality helps created the desire to retain the push feed action instead of retooling for something better. Personally I would rather have a Garand than a Mauser on the battle field any day.

Todd E

20 August 2001, 02:46

GeorgeS

If I recall correctly, Jose Simoes used a Weatherby .460Wby in Portuguese East Africa (now Mozambique).

Perhaps, George Hoffman can confirm this?

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

20 August 2001, 04:01

<allen day>

The truth is, there are scores of widely-experienced international hunters who have used Weatherby Mark V rifles for just about everything, including all species dangerous game. Some of these guys have literally taken hundreds of animals with these rifles, and with no malfunctions to report whatsoever. A few of these folks are gun nuts who swear by Weatherby rifles, others are a bit fuzzy on rifle mechanics (they like the Weatherby look & image, which is passe) but that doesn't seem to get in the way of their success as hunters!

Even so, in my estimate the Mauser 98 (numerous patterns, both old & new) and Winchester Model 70 controlled-feed actions are superior designs. Properly adjusted and reworked by a quality riflesmith who truly understands these actions and can refine them to get the very most out of them, there's no other system out there that combines practicality, quality, or absolute reliability nearly as well as these do.

For me, a performance-oriented custom job based on a Mauser 98 or Winchester Model 70 action, complete with a properly-designed classic-style stock represents the zenith of function and reliability. There's nothing I'd rather hunt with or trust my life to on any hunt anywhere in the world.

20 August 2001, 04:23

Big Bore

Much of what you say is true, but it does not discount the FACT that my rifles do feed from every direction/position. You may make childish and snide innuendoes about me lying, and the Laws of physics being on your side, but that is your problem, and your misapplication of physical laws to how rifles that are designed correctly function. In every single one of my rifles, the cartridge is not released completely from the magazine until they are well started into the chamber, thereby negating the force of gravity that wants to pull them down toward the Earth. It has nothing to do with the physical laws you mentioned, but by the machining skill of the craftsman, or in my case, the programmer of the cad/cam machine overcoming those laws. Apparently in your rifles, the feed rails are so loose as the cartridge pops up prematurely.

Also, I shoot bolt 458, 416 Rigby and 338, all of which recoil substantially, and in none, I repeat NONE of these rifles, do I end up the muzzle "climbing toward the sky (this would be recoil)." You claim you have hunted dangerous game, well, bully for you. That has nothing to do with the fact that apparently my rifles fit me better than yours do and do not climb toward the sky. Sure, they come back, and rise up some, but I have never had one climb so high as to need to be pulled back down, they do that on their own while I am working the bolt. I would wager that while I have not hunted dangerous game that I have shot big bore rifles at least as much as you have, maybe more. I know how to use them, and in spite of your snide remark "since it seems obvious you have never done this" I would put my skills up against yours or anyone else's when it comes the handling of big bore rifles. That said, I will not be drawn in any further into your childish way of thinking "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" and "nobody can have any different experience than myself." I said "Maybe not all PF will do it", but you resort to snide innuendo. You made the comment "I would love to see a push feed rifle feed upside down." I guess you don't believe anything you haven't seen and/or you don't have that much experience with different push feeds. If I had a digital recorder you would see it, but you most likely would say it was faked. I admit, my experience with PF is limited to those mentioned and a few more (but I never tested them), the rest of my rifles are CF, but these particular PF feed as reliably as the CF whether you want to belive it or not. Go ahead and live in your world where you are king and only you have the right to state a fact as only you interpret it. Like I said, bully for you.

20 August 2001, 05:36

<500 AHR>

Bigbores,

No the physical laws are not misapplied.

How are your cartridges started in the chamber before they exit the magazine? I am afraid that even the M700 has a forward receiver ring in which the bolt lugs lock. This receiver ring by the way is inbetween the magazine and the chamber. The push feed rifle allows the cartrige to tip up or side ways and come into contact with the lug raceways or the breech cone (both are before the chamber) and you jam the action as the cartridge is wedged between the bolt and the interference encountered in the receiver ring. Your rifles will do this also! They must by design.

Curious also, as to what push feed action you have chambered in 416 Rigby or is this one of your CRF rifles? The muzzle of your rifles lifts up under recoil that is all I meant by climbs for the sky. You must pull it back down again to reacquire the target for the follow-up shot. By the way the rifles you mentioned are not what I consider to be heavy kickers. I suggest you try the 500 A-Square, Jeffery or 505 Gibbs loaded hot. These rifles will push you back considerably more than the Rigby or 458 Win Mag and the muzzle rise is considerable if the stock is designed for the express sight use. Although my rifles are set up with Classic American style stock which have minimal drop at comb. This does reduce the muzzle rise.

JUST FOR THE RECORD. I AM NOT ANTI PUSH FEED. IT IS JUST IMPORTANT THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE LIMITATIONS OF THEMSELVES AND THERE FIREARMS WHEN THEY PURSUE ANYTHING THAT CAN "BITE BACK". TO DO ANYTHING ELSE PLACES THEMSELVES AND OTHER IN POTENTIAL DANGER!

I also will no longer pursue this thread as I have nothing else to say. If some people want to believe the impossible is true so be it.

Todd E

20 August 2001, 05:46

Big Bore

Who ever want to notify the National Academy of Sciences may do so. I forgot my son has a digital camera that also does short videos. The 416 is CRF. The following link is to a video of the 458 Ruger m77, which is an older push feed, feeding three dummy rounds (loaded with inert powder of same weight) feeding left side, upside down, and right side down. Mechanics, not physics.

http://www.angelfire.com/gu/biggbore/index.html

[This message has been edited by Big Bore (edited 08-19-2001).]

20 August 2001, 06:57

Nickudu

Somewhere along the line it should be noted that a number of modern push-feeds do not make use of the common spring loaded follower but utilize a detachable magazine which serves to retain the cartridge until its' well on its' way up the feedramp. Browning rifles, for example, can chamber rounds in any position with complete reliability. No follower hangups or unequal spring tension problems come into play.
This is a variety of "controlled feed" which does NOT rely on the cartridge rim snapping briskly between bolt face and extractor, regardless of bolt speed. It offers the advantage of "constant presence", as a cartridge can not leave the magazine until physically released via forward motion provide by the bolt. Check it out for yourselves. It represents the most overlooked and unappreciated advancement in bolt action cartridge delivery in recent decades.

20 August 2001, 07:30

Big Bore

Nickudu;
I forgot that my son has a Browning A-Bolt in 12 Ga. I gave it a try and it too feeds upside down with no problem. Then I looked at the bolt. What the hell is it anyway, PF or CRF? It starts out chambering a round with a little tit at the 6:00 position pushing the round ahead of it, well in front of the extractor, like a push feed. As the round clears the magazine lips the rim of the 12 Ga. snaps up, back, and under the extractor, more like a CRF. My 416 and various Mauser 98, 48, 96...all have the rim slide up under the extractor as it leaves the mag and is never pushed ahead of the extractor, as it is in the Browning (I have no other Browning rifles so do not know if what I am seeing is specific to the 12 Ga. A-Bolt or common to all A-Bolts). Looks to be some kind of hybrid, but it really doesn't matter, the darned thing works and that is what is important.

20 August 2001, 08:57

Kent in IA

I tried it with my M700 300 Win Mag. It fed just fine upside down and sideways. By the way, a friend has a M70 pre64 and it wouldn't feed upside down. So I think Todd E should rethink his preference.

Kent

20 August 2001, 09:35

Nickudu

BigBore,
The A-Bolt 12 gauge may differ as the bases are rimmed. The centerfire bolt head shrouds the cartridge head 360 degrees and I'd still like you to review its' function and give me your opinion, if you get the chance.

Follow this please: Most sporting Mauser types are actually "PF's" until the cartridge pops up about halfway across the follower, by design, becoming "CFA's" only AFTER this, let's call it an acquisition, occurs.
In the detachable magazine rifles I have seen, the magazine release point is actually further forward than is the point of cartridge acquisition in the CRF rifle.
In reality, there is truly little to choose between them, from "controlled feed" perspective, as neither design controls the feeding cartridge full range. I have the utmost regard for the Browning design and I am not the slightest bit embarrassed in saying so.

20 August 2001, 12:30

Curtis_Lemay

ALF, I was mearly trying to maintain the point that the Mauser 98 was not the first bolt action repeater to be adopted by a miliatry, nore were the militaries of the world using single shots until the invention of the M98.

20 August 2001, 13:55

Atkinson

The Mauser is the finest bolt action DGR on the face of this earth and thats not based on reading too many gun magazines or listening to volumes of BS...

It is based on my actual field experiences and records kept.
I have seen more failures with pushfeeds than with control feeds by a considerable number, so based on that I will continue down this same road....If anyone wants to do otherwise I would bet dollars to donuts, sooner or later they change their mind because good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment...

There are three kinds of folks, the ones that learn by reading, thoes that learn from observation, and the rest who have to touch the fire to see if its hot and shoot pushfeed rifles.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

20 August 2001, 15:16

Nickudu

Bill,
If you like the Weatherby rifle you should buy it. Better to risk an error than to surrender your own judgement.

Nick

20 August 2001, 17:51

<Bill>

The feedback is appreciated, I made this post so I could share my observations about the quality of a product I was able to experience first hand. Others may have been looking for one and wondered what another shooter might think of it.

I intentionally stated in the original post that I was well aware of certain shooters lack of praise for the Mark V and the pushfeed design.

"I'm a desenter of pushfeeds and consider the term Weatherby and Dangerous Game Rifle an oxymoran...Sorry guys but he asked.

------------------
Ray Atkinson"

And Ray, I never asked.

[This message has been edited by Bill (edited 08-20-2001).]

20 August 2001, 18:47

Atkinson

Bill,
OK, I'll not commit on your post unless you ask, sorry. I felt is was a question and you wanted confirmation or non-conformation, otherwise why bother, thats what posting is all about, conversation...at least in my mind.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

20 August 2001, 19:33

<Matt77>

Another issue in crf versus pushfeed. You can easily field strip and repair a model 70/crf. To get a remington pushfeed apart requires a special tool.
You all have great passions, but let's not forget we're all on the same main side here, we all love hunting/shooting/sporting arms.

20 August 2001, 23:51

Nickudu

This was a fine thread with some darn good input, fellas. The Mauser design is pure genius and the great majority of savvy individuals prefer it for the basis of their
"DGR's". I haven't the slightest problem with this, as I use them myself and sell custom made rifles built, almost exclusively, on this action. However, I appreciate and acknowledge good engineering when I see it and I am not adverse to having one foot in each camp. I've witnessed far too many "Pros & Cons" in regard to BOTH action types to give full allegiance to either. While our fellow "Forumites" may run things by us to get our feelings on a given subject, I find they're already well aware of what they should be taking into consideration when contemplating a purchase.
It is now 2001. How many are we that hunt "DG" enough to have any real need to concern themselves with issues of such low probability? I suspect we make too much of this and arbitrarily exclude some excellent designs from serious consideration.

02 September 2001, 12:42

KuduKing

quote:
Originally posted by Atkinson:
It is based on my actual field experiences and records kept.
I have seen more failures with pushfeeds than with control feeds by a considerable number....

The cloud of BS in this post is so overwhelming as to require a hazmat suit while reading it.

The experience of the US military over the past 20 years or so with the push-feed Remington in their current sniper system is that the weapon works very well and is reliable in conditions far more severe and stressful than any hunting situation. The failure rate due to extraction/chambering is so low as to be unremarkable.

The widespread use of push-feeds in the military, in both bolt and automatic actions, should settle the issue. I think the intelligent reader will recognize the advantages of push-feed actions in modern rifles, and not be swayed by the bias and limited experience of particular hunters or "guides".

02 September 2001, 13:45

So Ross Seyfried knows not what he speaks? Having his favorite "working rifle" built by Brown Precision on a lousy ol' push feed Remington 700 in 416 Remington. Well what does Ross know... just a greenhorn anyway. Sorry folks, I do not buy it.

02 September 2001, 16:38

<Andy>

The most common malfunction with a bolt action rifle that I have seen in 25 plus years of practical rifle competition is bolt over base.

this is caused by being excited, trying to gain a fraction of a second on a stage (or saving your life), and not pulling the bolt all the way to the rear.

the time pressure of competition will divuldge the difficienceis of any creation.

The push feed is at a disadvantage here as it allows for short storkes that the controlled feed does not.

In defence of the Remington, so many people use them that they are more at risk.

the Rmeington trigger is not easily adjusted or maintained.

Also, the Remington requires special tools to disassembel the bolt for cleaning.

this from a guy who shoots 400-500 rounds a week in his bolt gun.

Andy