I fondled a new sako .375 H&H in stainless synthetic and also a winchester....the stock was nicer on the stainless sako than on the win stainless, and it felt much lighter...seemed to have a slim barrel. I wish the M70 .375 ss had the slim barrel and the sako synthetic stock.

It was such a nice rifle.....what a darn shame it's a push feed....just some thoughts.

Most of my rifles are Sako's, both model 75's and the prior Hunter Lightweight models, from 6PPC on the bottom end to 416 Rem Mag on the top end. What I like most about them is the stock design. There is a touch of cast off that helps align your eyes behind the scope/ iron sights. The fore-end is tapered like the old English express styled bolt rifles so you can control it easily. The slight Wundhammer swell on the pistol grip helps me also to control where the gun is pointed. The Monte Carlo is set at that compromise height where you are able to us either the iron sights or the scope without getting a crick in your neck. The slope of the cheek-piece tends to pull it away from my face in recoil, which I appreciate.

The irons consit of a single standing rear blade with a square notch, and a partridge style front blade. A shallow V rear and bead front might be incrementally faster, but the present set up is probably slightly more precise. The rear blade is thick, and pretty abuse resistant.

I like the trigger, which is adjustable. The receiver is milled to positively hold the scope mounting bases, which is nice. With a set of Talley bases mounted you can have two scopes pre-zeroed in Talley rings. I like the quick detachable rings with the Torx screw arrangement. (I tape a torx wrench to the spare scope, another to my box of ammunition, and a third to the top of the magazine floor plate [per Seyfried, Rifle #185, September 1999, pp52])

At the time I lived in Alaska I took the 416 when I was hunting in Bear country. At that time I was also naive and blissfully unaware of the great controlled versus push feed cat fight.

I now have a couple of Winchesters on hand (and one in 416 Rem Mag on the way). And also a couple of CZ's. Before I touch a Winchester or CZ it goes straight to the gunsmith to get worked over, smoothed out, and tweaked, as necessary.

In the end, no rifle is perfect, and all represent some type of compromise. If you can live with the stigma of a push feed, the Sako is the best of the lot.

Many of the posters on this forum have extensive experience hunting the ultimate dangerous game, enemy soldiers. At least 99.9% of that time they were carrying push feed rifles.

Good luck, and have fun with whatever rifle you ultimately choose.

JCN

So what if it is push feed? Do you know how many SAKOS and Weatherbys have been used in Africa successfully? I think some are really going overboard with this Controlled Feed stuff.

How would you compare and contrast a control vs a push feed action?

CRF reduces the likelihood of a) jams due to double-feeding under fast manipulation of the bolt, and b) broken extractors mucking things up; the claw on a CRF would require a LOT of effort to break.



Lots of big-bores (maybe even most of them) are purchased by people who have no intention of hunting DG, but like to fantasize about it, or declare their particular choice is the DG rifle par excellence .

For those shooters, a push-feed, single-shot, or lever-action is fine.



Push-feed is fine where someone's life is not on the line, and all a jam or broken extractor will cost you is range time or a 'wounded-and-lost' animal. It might even be fine most of the time on DG, especially if you rely on the PH to save your bacon.



Otherwise, I'll stick with CRF for my DG hunting.



George

"Former push-feed fan"

Did we forget my 264 Super Grade? See I got CRF

Gotcha!

George

GeorgeS,
So why is it that my CRFs give more feed troubles than my PFs? Seriously, I sorted out feed troubles in my Zastava 458WM and 3 years later its failing to feed again from the left side of the magazine, nothings changed but it just stops feeding properly all of a sudden. It's got a date with the 'smith again, who admits that he also gets more CRFs than PFs in the shop for "faulty" feeding. CZ550 in 458WM, same problem, although converting to the 458Lott sorted that out. My Rem 375s never ever give me trouble... so I'm converting one to a 470 Capstick. Sometimes I wonder whether CRFs are more fiddly to get set up properly?
Cheers...
Con

The sako would not be myu choice for dangerous game but it would make a great roo rifle.. with 260 gr Nosler BT's and a 3-9 leupold it would be quite flat shooting. I suppose what I am getting at is that I wish the win m70 had the slimmer barrel and the nicer synthetic stock. Other than the PF deal it really is a nicely balanced .375....in reality both the m70 and cz could be classed as a tad to heavy for a .375.

Paul.

I have an earlier version (no bolt lock) of the Stainless/Synthetic M75 in 375 H&H. It is one of the most accurate rifles in my safe. I cleanly took a 41" cape buffalo and quite a few plainsgame with this rifle without a hitch. I really like the fit and feel of the M75 stock and I find the rifle very easy to shoot. I also found the detachable magazine to work very well in Africa. I would carry the rifle with a magazine full of 300 grain Swift A-Frames. If we got on the tracks of buffalo, I kept a soft in the chamber, dropped the magazine, and replaced it with a new magazine loaded with 4 300 grain Barnes solids.

With respect to CRF vs. PF, I am a big fan of CRF and own many CRF rifles. In fact, I have a Pre-64 M70 Supergrade in 458 WM as well as a Pre-64 M70 in 375H&H.

However, the Sako did everything I needed it to do in Africa without a problem. Its accuracy and easy handling characteristics probably had a lot to do with my hunting success (quite a bit of quick off-hand shooting). To top it off, my PH carried a Winchester M70 pushfeed 458 WM with a 22" barrel. It is a wonder we survived.

Pushfeeds will work 99.99% of the time, however, you have to decide if you are willing to risk that the slim .001% odds of failure may come up when you are staring down the barrel with a pissed off buff/ele/lion/hippo/etc. coming at you.

Tim

Guys,
But my experience to date has been that the PFs are 100% reliable and the CRFs are not. Perhaps because the PFs I've had have been in 30/06, 243 and 375H&H whilst the CRFs are 458WMs? The big wide noses on most soft 458 projectiles will often catch entering the chamber and I've seen a CZ550 in 375H&H do the same once. Perhaps its just horses for courses?
Cheers...
Con

Con,

I have seen failures with PushFeeds along the lines of hot(left out in the sun)/high pressure/improperly formed(both factory & handloaded)/etc. ammo being shot in the rifle and then failing to extract. You pull the bolt back and the fired brass remains in the chamber. I guess it could also happen to a CRF, but I have only seen this (twice) with PF's.

Proper feeding is not the only issue/failure to be concerned with. At least with improper feeding, you should know about it BEFORE you go hunting for Mr. buffalo/ele/etc.

I guess I should be in good shape on my upcoming buffalo/plainsgame hunt given the fact that I will be using a CRF rifle in 416 Rigby, shooting a 400 grain bullet at 2,400 fps (low pressure).

Tim

All metallic artifacts produced by the hand of man can, and do fail. I never went on a patrol, or a flight without going over my weapon(s) and gear with a fine toothed comb.
I had an expensive (to me anyway) custom ZKK Mauser in 416 Rigby that wouldn't feed right about 5% of the time. That was in pre-internet days. I couldn't find someone to make it work 100%, so I sold it to someone who was aware of the problem and was never going to take it hunting. If he ever decides to get rid of it I will buy it back and get it working perfectly or cut it up into little pieces. I pulled a bolt handle off of a Remington once (I'm not that strong, either). Now I have my Remington bolt handles welded or bolted down just to be sure.
The point of this is to remind everybody not to feel necessarilly more secure just because your rifle is CRF. Parts wear and corrode, springs take a set, all rifles can jam, and the weakest link, we humans, miscalculate and screw up a dozen times a day (before we get out of bed).
JCN

PC

I would have thought the Sako 75 would have been a tad light in 375? I shudder to think what it must be like in 416 Rem Mag.

I have a Stainless 75 in 9.3x62 but am thinking of selling it as I have just bought a Voere in the same. The Sako is excellent - probably my most accurate out of the box gun, but I have fallen for the CRF craze and I cannot justify three 9.3 x 62 rifles (or can I?)

The Sako would make an excellent sambar rifle though in that caliber.

It's not bad in either caliber. It feels lighter than it is because it is well balanced. The stock design helps in the perceived recoil department, for me anyway.

JCN



PS Want to trade your Sako for a CRF rifle?

The paperwork shuffle would take a while, but I may get down your way in a year or two.

Con,

The problem you described in your last post is an incompatibility with certain bullets. I was referring to act of feeding rounds from the magazine into the chamber as a mechanical process.

George

I'm with Con on this issue I've had more problems with a MarkX action rifle built by P.O. Ackley than any push feed.

I was also under the impression that if the rim fails to go under the claw and chambers when the bolt is closed and the claw goes over the rim there is a chance of the claw breaking.
I have managed to get rounds in the chamber without being under the claw but to date have not broken a claw.

George S

Out of curiousity, is the trick to squeeze the side of the extractor at the same time as closing the bolt over an already chamberd round? I know that can be done with a model 70 but the only danger is it should be checked to see if the extracor has jumped over the rim?

In my opinion, if both a CRF and a PF are both as well set up as can be then the CRF will be more reliable. Being well "set up" also includes quality and dimensions of the brass.

In addition I think a CRF is a nice the thing. Just the fact that you don't have to turn down the bolt handle to extract a round where the bolt has being pushed fully forward.

HOWEVER, start to deal in lower quality and crappy ammo then the PF will win easily.

PFs also seem to often extract better and I think that is because the extractor is rotating with the bolt. Similar to twisting a cork as you pull it out.

From my personla point of view the choice between PF and CRF (and assuming a more exensiv than average rifle) would be determined by the calibre and that calibre's pesonality. For example, I would never want a gun that was above average to be a PF in 375 or 416 Rigby and of course 300 H&H and 404 Jeffery. On the other hand I would have a total lack of interest in a 30/378 or 378 being on some Mauser based action.

Mike

Con,

I have fallen to the crf craze to...but I hear what Mike says as a .338 Ultra Mag would be fine in a rem 700 but it would be odd to have it in a mauser based action.

I suppose what I am getting at is the fact that the M70 stainless synthetic could benifit from the sako .375's barrel & stock...then you would have the ideal stainless synthetic .375.

I think the push feed sako would be a great "Ute window" .375.

PC,
I hear what Mike and yourself are saying and totally agree. I've just picked up and am awaiting delivery of a ZG47 in 270Win. It will eventually be refurbished back to original condition and if the barrel is cactus rebarrelled/rechambered (bought it primarily for the action) probably for a 9.3x62, although I severely regret selling my 10.75x68 and would love to go that route again. If I choose anything but a metric chambering for this Mauser action feel free to tar and feather me.
Cheers...
Con

quote:

Originally posted by GeorgeS:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font>

---

<br />Pushfeeds will work 99.99% of the time, however, you have to decide if you are willing to risk that the slim .001% odds of failure may come up when you are staring down the barrel with a pissed off buff/ele/lion/hippo/etc. coming at you.<br /><br />Tim <br /><br />

---

</blockquote><font class="post"><br /><br />And that is it, in a nutshell!<br /><br />George

99.99% ? That's not too bad. I know CRFs don't feed perfectly 100% of the time, so what is their percentage of reliability? My duty weapon isn't CRF and I trust my life with it everyday.

Just for the record I own both. My favorite bolt guns are Sakos and M70s. I have found the M70s to be more temperamental when it comes to feeding. I have never a an ounce of trouble with my Sauers, Sakos or Weatherbys when it comes to feeding. Lou

I cut my Stainless Classic 375 to 22" and added a barrel band. It weighs a hair under 9 lbs. with 1.5x5 leupold. A touch heavy for a 375 but quite handy.

Dr. Lou,

You didn't have to dredge up a five year-old thread to restart the CRF vs. PF debate. You could have just started your own thread.

George