Is the small, spring loaded I assume, tab on the inside of the normal extractor piece the current best solution for extraction of a rimless case?

Called a pawl by some, it does indeed fit into the groove of a rimless cartridge. I works OK on extractor doubles and may be prone to problems on ejector doubles. This is why rimmed cartridges are near foolproof in extraction and ejection. Just look at the area that actually grabs the cartridge. That said, many doubles have been made for rimless cartridges and they work--most of the time.
Cal

I have a Cz in 458 Lott,it is an ejector gun,In your picture & what Cal calls a pawl is what I have seen also on Heym's,but my Cz & also JPK' s gun have a different setup,it is a spring loaded arm that runs the entire inside diameter of the extractor arm,it slips over the belt & fits into the groove of the cartridge,it has a lot more area to grab the cartridge with than a small pawl,I have never had a failure to eject with this setup if the gun is properly maintained,I have taken a tuskless with this gun.

Bal, your CZ 458 Lott is a double rifle? Never seen one.

Scatulatus, As Cal says the very small pawls do work acceptably on a extractor double rifle, and are,IMO,just OK in a selective ejector double rifle.

The type pictured in your post is better than the other type that has a very thin BLADE that is fitted in a very thin recess in the extractor/ejector body. Both types can be caused to malfunction by dust and goo in the recess that sticks the Pawl in the down position, or in the case of the blade type be snapped off, or bent, because of the goo preventing the blade from going back in the recess when the rifle is closed.

The blade type has more purchase on the rim of the rimless cartridge but is more prone to damage than the plunger type shown in your picture, which has less engagement on the cartridge. Both present a major undertaking to clean out the recess when it becomes sticky with gum and goo.

If I had to live with either type it would be the one you posted, but I'd rather just have a rifle chambered for a flanged cartridge no matter if extractor or selective ejector!

Either type may serve you well, but if it doesn't pray it isn't when you need to re-load very quickly!

By the way the Merkel you pictured is a very nice upper grade rifle, most likely chambered for 375 H&H belted rimless round.
...................................................................................... good hunting! Mac

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
Bal, your CZ 458 Lott is a double rifle? Never seen one.

Please Bal, do not discuss this.

Jon, they made an over/under double rifle called "The Stopper". It was model CZ-589. I had one in .458 Win Mag that I sold to Bal. Poor decision on my part. They were a sharp looking rifle, not like the more recent vintage CZ doubles with no rib between the barrels, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
Bal, your CZ 458 Lott is a double rifle? Never seen one.

Biebs, that rifle is an O/U that was originally a 458 Win Mag. It belonged to Mike Jines who I think had it re-chambered for 458 LOTT.

Those CZ doubles are very strong, and I understand that one shot very well in 458 Win Mag and just as well after it was re-chambered to 458LOTT.

Bill beat me to that one, or it would have been my only O/U double rifle, as well as my only double rifle chambered for a belted rimless cartridge!

As far as I know CZ doesn't make that rifle anymore. I wish they still made that rifle chambered for flanged big bore cartridges!
........................................................................

I have a Merkel 140 in 375 HH that has these "pawl" works fine but this gun does not have ejectors, seems you may encounter a problems with a gun with ejectors.

I have a Krieghoff Classic in 375 H&H with similar pawls. It has performed very well so far… although I’m perfectly aware of the potential issues with rimless cartridges in doubles. I bought this one since I came by it by change, got to try it – and it was a real shooter! Besides, I did not intend to use this rifle as a Dangerous game rifle.

For fast reloading I usually break open the gun, use my middle finger nail and ring finger nail into the extractor grooves and virtually throw them out. With some practice this is not much slower than reloading an extractor double rifle with a flanged cartridge.

I think Brown hit the nail on the head--not using a double chambered for a rimless cartridge for dangerous game. If the extractor (or ejector) fails on a whitetail or eland it is not as much of an issue comported to failing on a wounded elephant.
Cal

Gentlemen to be fair there are several people here on AR and other websites who do hunt dangerous game with double rifles chambered for rimless and belted rimless cartridges, and have had no problem at over a considerable time period JPK, and Bill to name two.
Having said that the whole idea of a big bore double rifle, for dangerous game, is that it rids the machine of just about everything that can go wrong. IMO, if properly made for dangerous game the double rifle, first off, should have two triggers, because it has two barrels the rifle should be made so it is accentually two single barreled rifles on a common stock. That alone makes the rifle into a working single shot if something breaks on one side.
Some say a single trigger that is mechanical is OK because if the rifle gets a misfire on the first shot, a second pull of the trigger will fire the other barrel. If nothing in the rifle is broke that is true. However if something in the rifle broke is the reason the rifle did not fire on the first shot, then once re-loaded that barrel will not fire again. Then the only remedy is for the trigger to be SELECTIVE, and once a barrel miss fires for any reason one should immediately select the other barrel to fire first then re-load the rifle.
Then a double should have a manual safety so it doesn’t automatically put the rifle on SAFE if opened for any reason once the safety is pushed to fire position. That is OK unless you are in a hurry to get the rifle back in action because the first two did not stop the animal.

A very wise man once said “To avoid things going wrong, one must eliminate as many possibilities for malfunction as possible!”

A double rifle with two triggers, a manual safety, extractors does exactly that!
..........................................................................

I want explain my original question. It was asked from a self taught machinist's/ engineer's and fairly new to the world of doubles point of view. Although my first 2 doubles meet the criteria stated above, I am in no way hinting of an opinion of any of the presented solutions, or the manufactures or owners of same. The journey towards the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" here is wrought with thin ice and thinner quicksand. hahaha One should ask always with no hint of judgment, to prevail.

How many reasonably-documented instances are there of hunters getting hammered by a game animal even obliquely attributable to using a rimless cartridge in a double in the last century?

Double triggers would seem vital to one of the premier advantages a double provides, the instant choice of either a soft or a solid.

I've seen debates about which action is faster for four shots, but none about how a whiz-bang with a bolt can extract a soft and insert a solid faster than you can switch triggers.

So this must be the double rifle version of the push feed vs CRF debate..........

It is the Old Testament version of Spin Cast versus Fly Fishing. During this Christmas season, we should all be thankful we can own any double rifle of our choice, including those that are rimless.

I have not had a failure to eject in my Chapuis chambered for 375 H&H. If I were hunting dangerous game, I would move up to a 450/400 or 450 NE just because.

Matt

As to pawl ejectors for rimless and belted rounds---
they are only bad when they go bad -

Then they go very, very , very bad--

The more "modern" guns have a better record as to failure to eject- and jams due to "pawl jump", leaving the case in the chamber trapped beneath the pawl ejector.

The "earlier"(50's, 60's) guns , particularly O/U guns appear to have the greater number of malfunctions-

I personally have experienced "pawl jump" on a Ferlach gun (O/U) and a Liege gun (SxS).

Two times were two times too many-in the field, for me at least-

I am certain someone has had "ejector jump" and suffered a jam with a flanged cartridge DR -
However-I will wager --far fewer flanged ejector than pawl ejector jams have been experienced --

I choose Flanged Cartridges in my hunting DR's-

There you go, experience talking. What Clan said makes allot of sense.

quote:

Originally posted by scutulatus:


I want explain my original question. It was asked from a self taught machinist's/ engineer's and fairly new to the world of doubles point of view. Although my first 2 doubles meet the criteria stated above, I am in no way hinting of an opinion of any of the presented solutions, or the manufactures or owners of same. The journey towards the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" here is wrought with thin ice and thinner quicksand. hahaha One should ask always with no hint of judgment, to prevail.

Bravo
You sir are a wise man


I have only seen & shot one rifle using pawls,it was a Heym in 375 H&H,we got to shoot it at one of our DRSS camps,it was the only rifle in camp that had a problem ejecting,the only other rifle that had a belted rimless case was a CZ 458 winmag O/U,this gun has never let me down & I am so glad that I was able to coax this gun away from my friend Mike
I might have to gift it back to my buddy one of these days since he misses it so badly lol.

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
So this must be the double rifle version of the push feed vs CRF debate..........

As to the above statement, in my case there is no debate at all! I simply will not use a push-feed bolt rifle on dangerous game! Others may do as it suits.
.....................................................................