Opinions, please, good or bad based on experience of the BSA CF2.

I'm especially interested in feedback on the bolt and its extractor/ejector system versus that of the conventional Parker Hale or BRNO ZKK or FN true/modified Mauser system of that same 1970s/80s period that we know.

Accuracy, spares, etc., etc., don't really interest me at all. Really what the action is like compared to a contemporaneous Parker Hale or BRNO ZKK or FN.

And is the magazine in 7x64 and or 270 a FOUR shot or a true FIVE shot? In other words can I load five rounds fully into the magazine and:

i) Close bolt taking the top round into the chamber and leaving four down in the magazine. Without any "trickery" such as having to hold the rounds down with the spare hand.

ii) Close bolt on an empty chamber leaving five down in the magazine. And if so will it on a later cycling of the bolt properly pick-up and chamber that top round so that I arrive at condition as in i).

Thanks to all that read and double thanks to all that reply.

I am not really qualified to offer an opinion.But, I have been trying to learn. My friend, who is almost encyclopaedic in his knowledge of firearms and a very competent gunsmith,once told me that the CF2 actions are the best of BSA actions.I will just quote him. ''Developed first as a short action ( in .22 Hornet and .222 Rem ) and then became the `ROYAL` when medium and long actions were added. The next version was the `MONARCH` with slight modifications and then later again the `MAJESTIC` with yet more minor modifications. The final version was the CF2........with even more modifications - basically the adoption of a Rem 700 type extractor instead of a Mauser type.....although these actually appeared sometime earlier. You might see variations named the `Viscount` and `Imperial` but these were variations within the particular models indicated - higher grades, etc.The calibre range is restricted but they were all very fine rifles. Certain people rate the earlier models more highly ( the `Royal` best of all ) but in real terms the rifles were continuously improved with the CF2 being the best of the bunch.''

Best-
Locksley,R.

I believe that it was a very good action. Many parkerhales were built on a santa barbara mauser action which is a little lacking. I have recently built a rifle on an FN Mauser action. that action is superb but finding an action with matching bolt is difficult. Some aftermarket bolt bodies are available for them though.

BSA were good, better than santa barbara, i don't think as good as a genuine FN mauser or a cz action (in my opinion)

I have owned a couple CF2 models - one a rebarrelled monstrosity 22 250 - also a 270win. Both were Stutzen stocked. Both very well made rifles with excellent double set triggers. If you have the opportunity of getting one, do go for it!

Beware the fool who designed a sling swivel attached to a barrel-band, caused me much grief before taking the easy option and mounting a further qd stud.

Can't recall detail regarding magazine capacity - but clearly remember the action as being MUCH smoother than the mauser action of the PH range.

A certain amount of specific information may be found here:

http://books.google.co.uk/book...&ct=result#PPA222,M1

Don't think it will cover capacity!

Rgds Ian

I came across the De Haas book in your link before and it doesn't give capacity. But thank you for the rest of the information which has all been helpful.

ES,
my experience has been good and bad! I had one of the first CF2's from the BSA. The rep for BSA at the time Rob Jowett delivered it personally as it was the first one off the production line..it was a heavy barrelled 222 with twin set triggers,the faults that kept cropping up were incredible so much so that BSA offered a free replacement and my money back..
On the other hand a late friend of mine had a CF2 in 308, the action was as slick as any custom and it cloverleafed @100yds.
There is no doubt that the action is excellent especially the earlier models ie the majestic and the monarch.There is no comparison against the parkerhale,parkerhale being the poorer of the two..
The great thing with the BSA's is that you can still get replacement barrels for less than £50.

regards
griff

My first stalking rifle was a CF2 in .308 Win, all I used for 16 years until I bought a Remy Sendero 2506, I was used to the weight of the CF2 so no problems with 26" of heavy barrel. Accuracy of CF2 was and still is outstanding, also it would happily shoot 20 rounds on the ranges without going off, due in the most part to the substantial barrel thickness. My only crticism (apart from its weight 9.5 lbs with scope) was the agricultural trigger, and my reason for change was because I wanted a different calibre. Bluing in these rifles is very good quality, must get around to re-finishing the stock on my CF2 and polish that rough old trigger.

quote:

Originally posted by griff:
There is no comparison against the parkerhale,parkerhale being the poorer of the two..

Not sure I'd put it as black and white as that with regards the P-H. They produced some very good rifles but all depended on the action it was based on..The Santa Barbara action was "average" at best, but some of the other actions used appeared to be very good quality. And thats is the main trouble with P-H, you really need to know a bit about them before you buy....

With BSA, I don't think you got such a variation in quality as pretty much all their rifles were good. One day, Id love to own either a Monarch or a Majestic, which if think still had the Mauser style extractor and are CRF???

Regards,

Peter

Both Parker Hale and BSA were/are not really common here; anyway here are 2 photos of my nice PH 1200 Safari Deluxe cal. 375H&H. It feeds and works OK, and it's quite accurate. I've installed a Timney trigger, a more modern safety and repainted the stock; I don't shoot much with it, since the 375 is a stout cartridge, especially the factory ones and that's not good for my cervical ache. Not a valuable gun but I like it.

Nice photos. Yours appears an ex-military action as were many of the P-H rifles I am told. Thanks for posting the pictures.

Yes, it's a M98 military action; it has probably been manufactured in 1964-1966.

pete e
Please PM Me with your source for the barrels! my Impression was that parkerhale and BSA barrels ran off the same bsa line, Is that the case?

uk swampy hunter

quote:

Originally posted by uk roe hunter:
pete e
Please PM Me with your source for the barrels! my Impression was that parkerhale and BSA barrels ran off the same bsa line, Is that the case?

uk swampy hunter

I suspect you mean Griff as he was the one who mentioned replacement barrels?

I'mm not sure who made the barrels for either company as I'd always assumed they were made "inhouse"...I'd heard that P-H had supplied Rigby with barrels and actions in the past, but how true this is, I don't know...

I can say that my PH rifle has a fairly good quality barrel, much smoother and easier to clean than several more modern rifles that I've owned.

yes maybe i meant griff, sorry. I have to say that when i embarked on my recent building escapade i was informed thear Parkerhale used excellant barrels, somewhat let down by sloppy actions (same can be said of many of us? !