Well I like Rem 700s just not for DGRs. I have had a Rem 700 extractor break and good luck fixing it in the field. Probably more importantly to me at least there is the romance of a big bore CRF rifle when hunting dangerous game in a far away place. It's like my memories of the whistle of the wind over the barrels of my double rifle when walking down ele. It just wouldn't be the same with a Rem 700! Other than lack of nostalgia, I have no issues with any push feeds other than weatherbys! Flame suit on!

After shooting a Blaser
Asst summer, I could care less about push feed, pull feed, controlled feed. That Blaser action is flawless and simple.

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Well I like Rem 700s just not for DGRs. I have had a Rem 700 extractor break and good luck fixing it in the field. Probably more importantly to me at least there is the romance of a big bore CRF rifle when hunting dangerous game in a far away place. It's like my memories of the whistle of the wind over the barrels of my double rifle when walking down ele. It just wouldn't be the same with a Rem 700! Other than lack of nostalgia, I have no issues with any push feeds other than weatherbys! Flame suit on!

Well this has been hashed to death over the years. If your basic desire is to have a DGR that is capable of field repairs then I guess you have to go with a Mauser or a Mauser clone like a 1917 Enfield or M70 Win. With a few basic spares and a tool kit you can keep them running under most conditions.

There something special about sitting at a bench at the range and working the bolt of an old Win M70. You pull the bolt back and the round just dump out on the bench right next to the rifle.

Same with a crf Ruger, Kimber ect. Ect.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobster:

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Well I like Rem 700s just not for DGRs. I have had a Rem 700 extractor break and good luck fixing it in the field. Probably more importantly to me at least there is the romance of a big bore CRF rifle when hunting dangerous game in a far away place. It's like my memories of the whistle of the wind over the barrels of my double rifle when walking down ele. It just wouldn't be the same with a Rem 700! Other than lack of nostalgia, I have no issues with any push feeds other than weatherbys! Flame suit on!

Well this has been hashed to death over the years. If your basic desire is to have a DGR that is capable of field repairs then I guess you have to go with a Mauser or a Mauser clone like a 1917 Enfield or M70 Win. With a few basic spares and a tool kit you can keep them running under most conditions.

Now you do bring up an excellent point on Mausers and model 70's that I at least think is pretty important and really doesn't get talked about much. The ability to quickly and easily disassemble a rifle in the field without tools. It doesn't matter if it's hot & dusty or cold & icey sooner or later a gun will need to be stripped down to remove whatever is gunking it up or maybe fix what has broken.

I think too many modern designs put too much emphasis on accuracy at the cost of basic functionality. Accuracy is nice but functionality is final.

Yup, always carried a extra Mauser or M70 extractor as well as a few other small parts that might break on a hunt. Not going to fix a Rem 700 in the field. Simple triggers are another advantage if something goes wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
Gentlemen there is absolutely no way to convince a push feed shooter that there is anything amiss with his choice, and just as the CRF guy will not believe anything better than CRF............

Well, actually Mac that CAN indeed happen. Like most here I have been hunting and shooting for 40+ years. I became "serious" about hunting and shooting 23 years ago. I fell into Rem 700s at first. I mistakenly thought a Rem 700 was stronger and inherently more accurate than a CRF M-70. I acquired and shot a couple dozen plus different 700s, both factory and custom, from .223 to .416. I argued long and hard about how reliable they were and how well they fed and how superior they were to CRFs.

Then on day at the range one of my 700s left a case in the chamber. It wasn't a hot load and there was nothing abnormal. I just opened the bolt and the case didn't extract. I got to playing around and discovered that this 700 was fussy as to rim diameter. I don't remember the brand of brass, but it would periodically leave a case in the chamber if I used this particular brand of brass--which had a little smaller rim diameter. I swapped out extractors, but that was no help. I figured the inside of the bolt where the extractor seated was a tiny bit oversize.

I then obtained a certain 700 that wouldn't feed brass with larger rim diameters. I had to work on the extractor with a file just to get the bolt to close. Both of these first two issues are idiosyncratic with the design of the 700s extractor. It does not have a lot of flexibility in handling brass whose rims are on the min or max size. Normally not a problem.

I had an extractor break. It was the riveted in kind and it stayed in place, but it broke nonetheless. I had one 700 whose ejector spring was so strong that it would jam the shoulder of the case against the bolt lug on extraction and lock the bolt in place.

Well, I was happily putting up with the feeding and extraction issues I was having because they were pretty rare, and I was putting with with SS 700 actions being prone to galling and the AD issue (I did have one and I watched my dad have one too) because after all, 700s were stronger and more accurate than M-70s.

Then one day I had a custom 700 with a trued action, aftermarket stock professionally bedded, and a #5 Krieger barrel side-by-side with a SS M-70 Classic with a factory barrel in an aftermarket stock with my own bedding job. The M-70 outshot the 700. I am sure it was just a fluke, but that was the last piece that moved me away from Rem 700s as hunting rifles.

The CRF M-70 extraction is a little more reliable and the M-70s seem more durable overall. I have no issue getting as good of or better accuracy that I obtained with my 700s. The only 700s I have right now are a couple of budget grade target/varmint rifles.

So I DID go from being a pushfeed guy to being a CRF guy. Primarily because for me, a CRF M-70 is a just little bit more durable, safer, and reliable than the Rem 700s I have had.

I happen to like the tang safety Ruger 77's. I usually hunt with one if I am using a bolt action. I bought my 'set' in 1981,82 and 83. 458, 30-06 and 338. I have been happily hunting with the ever since, never a problem.... you would be very hard pressed to convince me a Winchester is better ( I have those in 300 H+H, 375 H+H and 470 Capstick).

there are several reasons why I've used crf (pre-64s) almost exclusively now for 30 years or so: I like everything about the way they work: their design reduces potential problems in the field: un-loading the rifle, sometimes after a hunt after dark, doesn't require fully chambering each round. Of course, with the middle safety position the rifle is on safe, an extra safety margin. As another mentioned, shooting off the bench, being able to just pick the case out of the action: working the bolt hard in reloading kicks the case very far out of the action: and of course, reducing the odds of a double loading in the chamber: and again as another mentioned: ease of firing pin removal without tools.

Re: parts failure, or lack there-of, and this is referring to pre-64s, I spoke several years ago to Middleton Thompkins, the 6 time national big bore champion: he used pre-64 actions for all those championships I believe. In those years he traveled from state to state thru-out the summer just shooting. I asked him about how many rounds he thought he'd shot thru some of his actions: he obviously didn't know the specifics, but kind of laughed, and said, "oh, probably 50,000 or so." What about parts failure on those actions? his answer was "I had one extractor collar break."

Finally, I've had the opportunity to re-search several rifles ( all pre-64 M70s in .375) used over many, many years in some of the world's harshest hunting environments by professional hunters ( Pinnell & Talifson from Kodiak Island, Alaska: Hal Waugh from Alaska, and Wally Johnson from Monzambique. ) This has included lengthy interviews with family members as well as guides who worked for or with these men. These rifles defined "rough condition." I've not been able to find one single indication of a malfunction or parts failure on these rifles. There may have been, but I've heard no mention of such. Quite a testimony of the toughness of these rifles I think.

There are other reasons why I like these actions: the 3 position safety that blocks the firing pin and a one piece bolt so no potential of handle falling off (yes, this happens).

So that's why I like crf in an action and specifically the pre-64s. Just my 2 cents worth.

The tool less disassembly of the model 70 and CZ 550 is nice. But all it takes to pull the fireing pin assembly out of a crf Ruger bolt is a pair of pliers or even a knife driven into a tree or stump or something ridged and stationary . The average multi tool works fine . So, not to start a feud about Winchester vs Ruger . They both are strongly prefered . And as to accuracy. Most people that cant get a crf Ruger to shoot Very well, cant get anything to shoot well.
Tho some Savages out shoot some Rugers. The same cant be said about the Model 700.
And Savages vreak down much more often than Rugers.

Accuracy is irrelevant when your talking about a animal the size of a buff or ele at 20 feet. The issue is reliability and the need for a absolutely reliable second shot under extreme stress! CRF or better yet the double rifle wins every time in that scenario unless your stupid! Of course you need to have been there and done that to Have a honest opinion! Wannabes need not apply nor those who believe their PH will save them. Push feeds are a great tool to improve the gene pool. Push feeds are fine for non Dangerous game in my opinion and better than a sharp stick but for A DGR no thanks! As always it's your choice and you can do as you please.

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:Push feeds are fine for non Fangerous game in my opinion and better than a sharp stick but for A DGR no thanks! As always it's your choice and you can do as you please.

Back when I bought my 460 Weatherby in Southgate, CA the guy behind the counter told me nine out of ten 460's never go to Africa. Not sure how he knew this but okay, I'll buy that. The reason I bought it because power is interesting and it was inexpensive to shoot compared to other rifles in the range. That's it.

I do believe that the primary reason for the 40 caliber Weatherby is for dangerous game and of course to comply with the laws that require that caliber. And if there were failures in the field for any reason the news would travel quickly.

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:
The tool less disassembly of the model 70 and CZ 550 is nice. But all it takes to pull the fireing pin assembly out of a crf Ruger bolt is a pair of pliers or even a knife driven into a tree or stump or something ridged and stationary . The average multi tool works fine . So, not to start a feud about Winchester vs Ruger . They both are strongly prefered . And as to accuracy. Most people that cant get a crf Ruger to shoot Very well, cant get anything to shoot well.
Tho some Savages out shoot some Rugers. The same cant be said about the Model 700.
And Savages vreak down much more often than Rugers.

Accuracy has absolutely nothing to do with whether a CRF is a better choice than a PF for a dangerous game rifle! Any rifle can be accurate, or not, but it has nothing to do with the feeding design!

The fact is most here simply are fixed on the strength of the EXTRACTOR of the two and that also is not the point.

The point is CONTROL of the cartridge and when the bolt takes control of that cartridge.

The push feed never has control of the cartridge till it is chambered and the extractor pops over the rim of the cartridge. then is when the strength of the extractor becomes a factor.

With a Control Feed system the bolt and extractor has control of the cartridge before the cartridge pops free of the magazine guides, and maintains that control till the cartridge is fired and extracted from the chamber and ejected from the rifle by a fixed solid ejector.

The push feed never takes control of the cartridge till the bolt is closed, and the bolt handle turned down. On extraction most PF system depend on a spring loaded ejector button that is not always reliable in dusty conditions.

Gentlemen there is a reason the word "CONTROL" is part of the CRF system!

.......................................................Of course this is a free country and everyone who is allowed to own and hunt with a rifle may make his own choice, as it is his butt that is on the line not mine! I will not use a PF rifle to hunt any dangerous animal.

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

You need a CRF system as you might have to reload upside down.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger:
The tool less disassembly of the model 70 and CZ 550 is nice. But all it takes to pull the fireing pin assembly out of a crf Ruger bolt is a pair of pliers or even a knife driven into a tree or stump or something ridged and stationary . The average multi tool works fine . So, not to start a feud about Winchester vs Ruger . They both are strongly prefered . And as to accuracy. Most people that cant get a crf Ruger to shoot Very well, cant get anything to shoot well.
Tho some Savages out shoot some Rugers. The same cant be said about the Model 700.
And Savages vreak down much more often than Rugers.

Accuracy has absolutely nothing to do with whether a CRF is a better choice than a PF for a dangerous game rifle! Any rifle can be accurate, or not, but it has nothing to do with the feeding design!

The fact is most here simply are fixed on the strength of the EXTRACTOR of the two and that also is not the point.

The point is CONTROL of the cartridge and when the bolt takes control of that cartridge.

The push feed never has control of the cartridge till it is chambered and the extractor pops over the rim of the cartridge. then is when the strength of the extractor becomes a factor.

With a Control Feed system the bolt and extractor has control of the cartridge before the cartridge pops free of the magazine guides, and maintains that control till the cartridge is fired and extracted from the chamber and ejected from the rifle by a fixed solid ejector.

The push feed never takes control of the cartridge till the bolt is closed, and the bolt handle turned down. On extraction most PF system depend on a spring loaded ejector button that is not always reliable in dusty conditions.

Gentlemen there is a reason the word "CONTROL" is part of the CRF system!

.......................................................Of course this is a free country and everyone who is allowed to own and hunt with a rifle may make his own choice, as it is his butt that is on the line not mine! I will not use a PF rifle to hunt any dangerous animal.

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

Mac , Rob , my point in mentioning accuracy is some think it is a choice between reliability and accuracy. My point is you can have absolute reliability AND extreme long range accuracy. In a controlled feed rifle.
A very good friend of mine has shot for his life with his 416 Remington Model 700. And it worked to perfection. He has tried to get it to jam on chambering. It wont jam . Other than 1 model 700 in 223 Rem . I've never had a feeding problem with a 722, 721, or 700 Remington. But extraction and ejection can be a problem. It doesn't matter at which point in cycling the action a failure occures. A failure to extract is just as bad as a failure to feed.

And to add data to the concept that CRFs require no sacrifice in accuracy:


338 Edge




7.5 lb with scope 300 WSM......





Pre 64 FWT 30-06......



416 Rem

Both work perfectly when set up properly.

They all work perfectly till they don't! Near absolute reliability and ease of field repairs is the reason I prefer a CRF for a DGR.

I own and have owned many rifles, both push feed and crf. Only 2 problems in over 50 years, 1 crf and 1 push feed both problems were found at the range.
Any advantage is theoretical IMHO.
I personally know 2 guides and 1 assistant I hunt with on occasion (old friends). These guys have been chasing bears since the 50's, 60's, and 70's.
One uses crf pre-64 winchester re-chambered years ago to 375 Weatherby. The other 2 use push feeds (300 & 375, all three prefer Nosler Part).

I believe this issue is more about:
"This is what I have and use so mines the best."

Like Chevy,Ford,Dodge.
No more than personal preference.

quote:

Originally posted by Akhutr:
Both work perfectly when set up properly.

AKhunter, Here is a little exercise you may try with a Rem 700, or in fact any push feed rifle.

Get on rough ground now fire a round and immediately take off running on unimproved ground while working you bolt to eject the first round, and re-loading the chamber for the second shot while running as you might when dodging a cape buffalo that is not down and is taking issue with you having shot him keeping your eyes on the target. Now when the bolt is closed immediately fire the second shot on the target. I think what you will hear, at least,
one out of five tries is a very loud "CLICK"!

The PF action doesn't have control of the round being loaded while running and dodging on rough ground till the bolt is closed, and the bolt handle is turned down.

Another example is we were on a bear hunt over bait shooting from tree stands. One of our group of four guys was shooting a Rem 700 chambered for 7MM Rem Mag. when we all got back in camp the first night, the 700 guy was very upset.

It seems he had just been dropped off and had just gotten into the tree stand and pulled his empty chamber, magazine loaded, rifle up on a line when a big bear walked passed his tree from someplace behind him. As the bear walked by, the guy backed up tight against the tree with the barrel pointed up with barrel in front of his face. While watching this bear and working the bolt to chamber a round very slowly to avoid the bear seeing him or hearing him. The bear went straight to the bait barrel. The guy lined up on the bear at about 25 yds very carefully and squeezed the trigger "CLICK"! the Bear bolted into the woods, never to return. While trying to load the chamber with the barrel pointed up keeping his eyes on the bear the round simply fell out of the rifle and was found on the ground below the tree stand. SIMPLY BECAUSE THE PUSH FEED RIFLE DID NOT HAVE CONTROL OF THE ROUND, the round did not reach the chamber.

In this case the guy just missed a shot at a very good bear, but in the exercise with dodging a cape buffalo, one absolutely must keep his eyes on the buffalo,and let his rifle do the control of the re-load. In this case it may well be his last hunt!
.........................................................................

I own PF and CRF rifles and cannot ever recall having ANY feeding or chambering issues with either, with one exception: my PF Mod 700 .338 needed a stronger follower spring to prevent double feeding.

I would say the ability to drop a cartridge in an empty chamber is a advantage with a DG rifle; I have done so on both buff and ele. I can do that with my Mod 70 but not with my M98 actions.

Saeed has shot more DG than anyone posting here and he uses a PF.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

quote:

Originally posted by Akhutr:
Both work perfectly when set up properly.

AKhunter, Here is a little exercise you may try with a Rem 700, or in fact any push feed rifle.

Get on rough ground now fire a round and immediately take off running on unimproved ground while working you bolt to eject the first round, and re-loading the chamber for the second shot while running as you might when dodging a cape buffalo that is not down and is taking issue with you having shot him keeping your eyes on the target. Now when the bolt is closed immediately fire the second shot on the target. I think what you will hear, at least,
one out of five tries is a very loud "CLICK"!

The PF action doesn't have control of the round being loaded while running and dodging on rough ground till the bolt is closed, and the bolt handle is turned down.

Another example is we were on a bear hunt over bait shooting from tree stands. One of our group of four guys was shooting a Rem 700 chambered for 7MM Rem Mag. when we all got back in camp the first night, the 700 guy was very upset.

It seems he had just been dropped off and had just gotten into the tree stand and pulled his empty chamber, magazine loaded, rifle up on a line when a big bear walked passed his tree from someplace behind him. As the bear walked by, the guy backed up tight against the tree with the barrel pointed up with barrel in front of his face. While watching this bear and working the bolt to chamber a round very slowly to avoid the bear seeing him or hearing him. The bear went straight to the bait barrel. The guy lined up on the bear at about 25 yds very carefully and squeezed the trigger "CLICK"! the Bear bolted into the woods, never to return. While trying to load the chamber with the barrel pointed up keeping his eyes on the bear the round simply fell out of the rifle and was found on the ground below the tree stand. SIMPLY BECAUSE THE PUSH FEED RIFLE DID NOT HAVE CONTROL OF THE ROUND, the round did not reach the chamber.

In this case the guy just missed a shot at a very good bear, but in the exercise with dodging a cape buffalo, one absolutely must keep his eyes on the buffalo,and let his rifle do the control of the re-load. In this case it may well be his last hunt!
.........................................................................

Sounds dangerous, running unnecessarily with a loaded rifle safety disengaged. Are you just trying to buy my rifles cheap :-)
I personally have never seen anyone running fast while working the bolt over rough ground with any rifle.

I would have thought the loaded round would have hit the tree stand he was standing on before it hit the ground. That would have been loud.

quote:

Originally posted by Akhutr:
Both work perfectly when set up properly.

quote:

Sounds dangerous, running unnecessarily with a loaded rifle safety disengaged. Are you just trying to buy my rifles cheap :-)
I personally have never seen anyone running fast while working the bolt over rough ground with any rifle.

Not nearly are dangerous as letting a Cape buffalo or elephant getting to work you over!

quote:

I would have thought the loaded round would have hit the tree stand he was standing on before it hit the ground. That would have been loud.

People are very often required to change locations while working a bolt rifle at the same time without looking at the rifle while keeping their eyes on the target especially when hunting tuskless cow elephant in tight jess! Top that off with the fact that a man cannot outrun any elephant or Buffalo.

Of course as I said earlier, the choice is yours!
.........................................................................Good hunting! Mac

I'd like to thank everyone who posted replies here. This was very educational and many points were made that never occured to me. I can't imagine any other place to go and read such a thorough discussion of the subject.

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Other than lack of nostalgia, I have no issues with any push feeds other than weatherbys!

No flame job from me. Just curious why you don't like Weatherby?

Well I'm all for crf type rifles but I have to play devils advocate here.

Any pushfeed rifle I've owned can and does load upside down, sideways or any other angle including running. The cartridge is halfway in the chamber before the the rails release the shell. It has no place to go but into the chamber as long as you keep pushing the bolt forward. It can't fall out unless the cartridge releases too early. The release point is also critical on a crf style rifle. So as long as either action does what it's designed to do all is well.

For me personally the reasons I like a Mauser or similar is they seem to feed a little slicker, have better extraction, are a bit more robust, easier to disassemble and more dirt tolerant then the average pushfeed. But mostly it's what I started with years ago when surplus Mauser military sporters where the cheapest way to. Than the Winchester model 70 bug hit and I still have several of them too. But if a pushfeed was all I had and it was set up correctly so be it. Though I must say the current Remington trigger safety, unlocked bolt system is a completely stupid design that I don't have much faith in.

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
Well I'm all for crf type rifles but I have to play devils advocate here.

Any pushfeed rifle I've owned can and does load upside down, sideways or any other angle including running. The cartridge is halfway in the chamber before the the rails release the shell. It has no place to go but into the chamber as long as you keep pushing the bolt forward. It can't fall out unless the cartridge releases too early. The release point is also critical on a crf style rifle. So as long as either action does what it's designed to do all is well.

I never saw a need to fire a rifle upside down so never experimented with it much however I read your post, got a couple of push feeds out of the safe and tried them. You sir are correct running/upside down they feed fine. Tried snap caps and dummy rounds I have loaded for OAL with different bullets(no Primers)

learn something new every day. Still keeping my CRF's too though.

I have been a range officer on a lot of Big Bore shoots.
All the shoots start off with an empty rifle whatever action type.

My observations for signs of trouble with a rifle has been the following:
1)Any custom rifle built on a Mauser action, there is usually a failure to feed under duress from the magazine. They often need some more gunsmithing to be absolutely reliable.
2)CZ/BRNO rifles in 458Win/Lott are usually not reliable feeders out the box, 375 are often fine.
3)If a shooter experiences trouble with his double he usually cant rectify it and is finished shooting for the day, I have been surprised at the amount of problems experienced with doubles...

One of the old greybeards remarked this weekend as a younster was working out his new Winchester Model 70 that the M70 is the best value for money - often just right from the box.

One rifle I have never seen a failure on is the Ruger no1, obviously not as many of them running as bolts.

Push feed vs CRF? Who gives a damn? The question is whether the rifle is reliable or not, I'l take either.
My personal favourite is a M70 in 416 Rem Mag.

Their is really no difference in reliability between properly set up push feed or control round feed actions.

Mac, that ain't fair, the push feed guys make up s--t!

First I have never hunted dangerous game. But I have had 3 remington 700 rifles with broken extractors, two broke when firing the first shot when hunting, and the third at the range the day before a moose hunt. Naturally I lost confidence in them even though I liked them. Doesn't matter for deer hunting but it sure would if hunting dangerous game

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Mac, that ain't fair, the push feed guys make up s--t!

Ray I doubt even one tenth of mod 700 users have ever been to Africa, or hunted anything more dangerous than a muledeer! I would bet if most have ever seen a dangerous animal it was in the local zoo! If they had they wouldn't be asking why anyone would have to work a bolt while running, and keeping there eyes on the animal.
.....................................................................
.....................................................................
.........................
...................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by bbell:
First I have never hunted dangerous game. But I have had 3 remington 700 rifles with broken extractors, two broke when firing the first shot when hunting, and the third at the range the day before a moose hunt. Naturally I lost confidence in them even though I liked them. Doesn't matter for deer hunting but it sure would if hunting dangerous game

I guess that all depends on where you hunt non dangerous game. And how much you have invested in the hunt. I'm and most guys I know that hunt are subsistence hunters. And its in that area that Ive seen so many push feed rifles fail.

Mac,

You stated:

quote:

With a Control Feed system the bolt and extractor has control of the cartridge before the cartridge pops free before the cartridge pops free of the magazine guides

I don't believe that is physically possible.

A CRF controls a cartridge when the rear of the cartridge releases from the magazine and "pops" (forced by the upward spring tension of the follower) under the extractor.

The case is not controlled until is out of the magazine.

Every CRF I have tested and granted it is limited to about a dozen of which 10 were customs, there is no "gradual" engagement of the case rim by the extractor. The rear of the case is either still being restrained by the rails or it has "popped" free and gone under the extractor.

If you want a real comparison:

CRF

Comments are below each pic



NO CONTROL



STILL NO CONTROL



CONTROL

PF



STILL SLIGHTLY CONTAINED BY RAILS, NO CONTROL



RELEASED FROM RAILS, NO CONTROL

and just how is this cartridge going to fall out? unless I pull pack on the bolt because I changed my mind.

and

just where is this cartridge going to other than in the chamber? unless I pull pack on the bolt because I changed my mind.

In my opinion the best system is a Push Feed and centre line or inline feed.

I grew up with M17s and most were rebarreled to the 270. A lot of brass in Australia back then was questionable, especially rim thickness.

Brass also gets knocked about when spotlight shooting.

In short a Sako 270 or M70 PF was the best. Rims to thick, rims with burrs on them, protruding primers will completely fuck up a CRF.

Having said that I think a CRF is just a nicer thing to watch working

As a side note the CRF extractor is much smaller in terms of the rim covered than it looks. A large part of the CRF extractor is for the feed in of the rim.

Overall I think the 303 SMLE wins and with a combination PF/CRF and with feed completely controlled by the magazine box, something a Mark V also does with the magazine.

If someone wants to try an experiment get a Mark V in 416 Wby and CZ in 416 Rigby and load both with 400 grain Hornadys loaded backwards and really belt the bolt forward. The Mark V wins but of course this not a PF Vs CRF issue but the plus of the inline feed of the 378 based Mark Vs.

Were goin ater now.

As much fun as this subject can be, in the end its kind of like argueing which came first the chicken or the egg. 0