I am still a bit baffled by your misunderstanding of Carmichael�s comments. Please give me more detail for my understanding of your comments. My understanding is this:

-The spring steel Remington extractor bites backwards into the brass case rim during extraction.
-Any extreme resistance from the case would, in effect, try to pull the extractor out the nose of the bolt.
-This occurs while it is being pulled against �the steel wall formed by the countersink� and biting into the brass rim.

If I understand you correctly, during extraction the backward-angled steel extractor expands outward and snaps back over the rim of a soft brass case? Can you be a bit more specific as to how that would happen? What force is applied to cause this? A brass case will withstand this? Do you have experience with this phenomenon?

That was only a half-page scan from Carmichael's book so there are a lot of things he did not say in that brief passage. He was talking about an extraction test therefore he did not address the expansion of the extractor which occurs at bolt closing on the feed stroke. What he actually said was �By comparison, the Remington 700 extractor and similar systems can�t easily override the cartridge rim. Being supported by the steel wall formed by the countersink, it can�t spring away from the case (during extraction, i.e, the extraction test).� I assume he qualified this with �can�t easily override� because anything mechanical can fail plus he was talking about the Remington and other PF systems.

Being supported by the steel wall formed by the countersink, it can�t spring away from the case (during extraction, i.e, the extraction test



That is the point, it is not supported by the steel "wall" due to the recess. Note the words "spring away" and "steel wall". I have enormous difficutyly getting that to refer to the metal in front of the extractor.



As to extractors sliding back over rims they will all do it to a greater or lesser degree with worn rims but in my own personal experience the Rem 700 has been the worse along with the Wby Mark V in the 378 based calibres. Undoubtedly extractor faces being worn also contribute and this wear does happen due to dust and I guess powder/primer residue.



It is also wrort remembering that the Rem 700 must be about the only action whereby replatement with another extractor system is regularly done. Some of those jobs will be simply because of how a Rem 700 extractor looks, but not all of them. One problem that does arise with some Rem 700 extractors is that the extractor sits a little too low and this makes sliding overt he rim on chambering difficult and in turn produces lots of brass shavings on the bolt face. A new Rem 700 extractor does not seem to fix the problem so I guess that the shape/dimensions of the bolt counterbore are the cause.



Mike

In reguards to the supposed "test" by the Remington engineers , I really have a hard time believing it ever happened .

Just look at the thickness of the materiel in either the M-98 or the Remington extractor and ask yourself if it seems adequate to hold "thousands of pounds" of pulling pressure , capable of stretching out a steel rod ? I gauruntee you neither part is built heavy enough for that .

And if Remington actually had pulled off such a test , I would think they would have broadcast the results to the skies , considering the amount of flack they have had to take for the M-700 extractor over the years ?

sdgunslinger,

Maybe they meant thousands of pounds of pressure. But that thought is cancelled by the stretching of the steel rod. I suspet the main thing Carmichael's article prooves is that gun writers at different times have an incentive to heap praise on some products

Both Rem 700 and Wby Mark V suffer because of catering to the "rifle blow up" stuff from all those years ago.

For example, the Wby Mark V would be a nicer action if it never had the bolt nose protruding beyond the locking lugs. That in some ways turns any cartridge into virtually a rebated rim. The heavy magazine spring Wby uses as a defence then in tuirn contributes to the bottom row of lugs (bottom,when both open) scratching hell out of those shiny cases. Although having said that if someone is using the Wby all of time, that is, not shifting between the 60 degree and 2 lug actions, then is perhaps one of the fastest actions to use. The very heavy bolt seems to almost produce a "flywheel" effect. I always find 2 lug actions awkward to use after using a Wby all of the time and the reverse also applies.

Mike

Gentlemen,

This exchange has solve a mystery that has plagued me all my adult life. I have alway wondered how Democrats "think".

Well Rogue1, just how to you interpret this:

Being supported by the steel wall formed by the countersink, it can�t spring away from the case (during extraction, i.e, the extraction test

Mike

The article is flawed right from the opening sentence. What in the world is a mauser-type extractor? It is either a mauser extractor or it isn't. I get the feeling some people think that every large claw on a CRF rifle is mauser extractor, when there is world of difference.